Sean C. Morgan
The District 55 School Board turned down a proposal Monday night that could have led to a five-day school week next school year instead of the four-day week currently in use and planned for next year.
Chanz Keeney moved to place the question under the action items on the board’s agenda. He received a second from Kevin Burger. They were joined by Mike E. Adams to send it to action items. Adams said he could discuss it further.
Voting no were Dale Keene, Jason Redick, Jenny Daniels and Mike Reynolds.
Jan Sharp and David VanDerlip abstained.
The motion’s failure meant the board would not vote on the question directly.
The board received public comment on the four-day week.
“Our family had some reservations at the start of it,” said parent Steven Hiett. In parent-teacher conferences since the four-day week started this year, he said, teachers told him they had concerns about the four-day school week.
He said that the adoption of the 2013-14 school calendar prior to the completion of a community survey about the four-day week is an unusual way to handle things.
“My hope would be input from the community would be taken into account prior to the settlement of the calendar,” he told the board. The board should listen to the voices in the community.
Those taking the survey, including parents, teachers, community members, classified staff members and administrators, a little more than 50 percent supported continuing the four-day week.
Jeanie Perry told the board she was a special education teacher in the district for 18 years, and she had a previous background with preschoolers and mentally handicapped adults.
“I have knowledge how people learn and specifically how children learn,” Perry said. She said the four-day week isn’t hurting some students, those who already excel, but it is negatively affecting students who struggle.
“I think there is always a portion of students in this community who are at risk,” she said, adding that retention and consistency are important parts of learning, and the four-day week is detrimental to long-term success.
High school teacher and parent Pat Davis, who is completing his master’s project researching the impact of the four-day week, told the board that his daughter has had three different schedules over the past three years, moving from the trimester to the semester system and then to the four-day week. Switching back to five days would give her a fourth schedule in four years.
He urged the board to wait until a second year of data is available at the end of next year, so it can make a better decision between the four- and five-day week as well as providing more consistency for high school students. More than 30 studies have shown that it takes two years before student performance data begin to show.
The district went to a four-day school week, primarily as a means to save money. The move was projected to save more than $400,000 originally. To go back to a five-day week would cost some $300,000.
Keeney wants the district to go back to five days, especially with the news that the district is likely to have more revenue from the state this year.
During his discussion of budget issues, Business Manager Kevin Strong said some districts will still have to make cuts this year, while others will be stable.
“I think we’re in the better group, able to do some add-backs,” Strong said. “If $6.5 billion (statewide funding) holds, I’m relatively optimistic for the district.”
Education funding isn’t set yet, he said, and it depends on upcoming forecasts and decisions by the legislature.
The district faces increases in expenditures too, Supt. Don Schrader said. That includes some $500,000 more in retirement benefit costs.
Redick wanted to clear up some misconceptions he has been hearing about the four-day week, he said. First, it was not initiated by the superintendent. It was initiated by the School Board prior to hiring him.
“It was not his process,” Redick said. “It was implemented by the board.”
Schrader came from Glide, a district with a four-day week. He opposed it when that district went to a four-day week, he said, but he warmed to it over time, noting that most issues related to it just took time to get used to.
Second, the four-day week wasn’t the only option the board considered, Redick said. The board had a list of other options with price tags listed next to them. The four-day week was the one the board decided had the least impact on students.
Budget numbers remain unknown as the legislature works on the next biennium’s budget, he said. And he expects lawsuits to challenge the Public Employees Retirement System reforms that are part of the proposed funding package.
Most importantly, Redick said, “this was not adopted because it was thought to be good for kids. We’d like to make it beneficial to the kids if we can.”
“When we voted, there was no sign of an increase at all,” Keeney said of last year’s decision. If the district knew funding would increase by 12 percent this year, he wondered if the board would make the same decision.
Funding for the 2011-13 biennium was some $5.7 billion statewide, compared to a proposed $6.5 billion for 2013-15.
The district really doesn’t have good information about revenue now, Adams said. “We kind of know.”
And the board must complete a budget before July 1, Adams said. “I think we’re all saying the same thing. The four-day week isn’t good for kids. The five-day is certainly better.”
But what does the district give up to get it? Adams asked.
Daniels took issue with the idea that the four-day week simply saved money, and during discussions last year, Schrader told the board that research shows students doing well or better four-day weeks.
Daniels said she supported the four-day week because it would give students more seat time than they were getting.
This year’s calendar has 36 weeks of four days, with two weeks of three days, Schrader said. Last year’s five-day schedule had several weeks with two days, three days and four days.
Based on metrics the district has available so far this year, the district is still seeing improvement in student performance, said Curriculum Director Tim Porter.
“We made gains,” Schrader said. “We’re hoping to see those when the state testing comes out. The kids are achieving and doing fine. I don’t think it affects students negatively.”
He won’t credit the four-day with student improvement either, he said. The district is doing a lot more to help improve student achievement.
Schrader suggested that perhaps the district might focus on reducing class sizes. One class at Hawthorne has 34 students. He also suggested that the district might restore music and PE programs.
Sharp told the board that the four-day week impacts some students more than others. She noted that the sports programs still run five days a week, not four, for a reason. The same reason applies to school.
With some looming one-time expenses, including textbook adoptions and gearing up for new standards and mandates, she suggested keeping the four-day week for one more year and then returning to a five-day week.
Sweet Home High School Principal Keith Wislow told the board there are big changes ahead, Common Core curriculum, the Smarter Balance test and new grade cards; and it will require a lot of professional development time next school year.
Every other Friday is used for professional development under the four-day schedule, and it’s “the time we need and use very, very well.”
It also provides students time to access their teachers for direct help on school work, he said. “These kidns of things on Fridays right now are invaluable to us.”
“My opinion is we just need to stay the course, get the right data behind us,” Redick said, and address it when the district isn’t still facing “a financial crunch.”
“If you’re saying you’re not sure the four-day week is what we need to be in, why would want to wait,” Keeney said. “How is it going to even be possible to go back to the five-day next year?”
The district is bargaining with its unions, and new contracts will be in place next year, he said. By next year, it will be nearly impossible to go back.
Some 60 percent of teachers who answered the survey and three out of nine administrators said they didn’t think teachers could cover all of the curriculum in a five-day week, Keeney said. “The community does not like the four-day week.”
The community says OK, though with no other options presented, without knowing that there is likely a 12-percent increase in revenue, Keeney said.
Only 38 percent of the 55 community members who answered the survey supported the four-day week, VanDerlip said.
“Quite frankly, the survey doesn’t mean squat,” Keene told Keeney. “It’s not even 1 percent of the population.”
More than 450 responded to the survey.
“It’s nice anecdotal information,” Keene said. “It’s nice to see, but it doesn’t say me one way or the other.”
“I imagine you’ll get a higher percentage that’ll say we can’t cover the curriculum in a five day,” Schrader said.
“I know for a fact that we can go on a five day,” Keeney said. The recession is fading, and “there will be more money. I think the five-day is best for the kids, best for the community. With the increase in our budget, I think we can absorb it.”
In other business, the board:
n Hired Oak Heights Principal Colleen Henry as principal of the Junior High. Principal Hal Huschka retires at the end of the school year.
n Appointed Celeste Van Cleave to the Budget Committee in the Cascadia position.
n Approved a contract with the Oregon Jamboree for use of district facilities.