WSPD - did anybody hear Kevin M show at 6?


I'm out of town, the connection I had was too slow to get the broadcast - but I heard that Darlene Fisher was on? Did anybody hear the broadcast? If so - would you let me know what you recall? Thanks so much -

No votes yet

One thing they talked about was the budget. I talked to a gentleman today who gave me some very interesting information.

Robyn Hage a TPS teacher has authored a book called "A Chance for Every Child." In the book is some very interesting data, which could account for spending patterns at TPS

This is possibly an interesting phenonmena:In 1962 there were 52,021 students and 2,760 employees. Presently there are 29,400 students and 3,932 employees, a 56% loss of students but a 30% gain of employees.

Is there anywhere we can go to check out your info?

Because your math is incorrect. 52,021 down to 29,400 is a huge loss, but not 56%. Im not gonna dig out my calculator, but you can just divide 52K in your head and see that 29K doesnt constitute even a 50% drop.

This is huge, and if true, needs to be made a huge deal about before we give TPS one more penny of our tax dollars - but the math has to jibe.

Also Found This interesting .pdf on Internet
Submitted by OldSouthEndBrdy on Sat, 2007-05-12 01:51. Bases some of its research on "A Chance For Every Child". One of the comments makes that statement that a lot of the "costs" are showing up with "administration" which seems to be growing out of control.

Ironic how the original figures are from 1962. 45 years from 2007, and the numbers for the percentage gain of employees and the percentage loss of students are each so close to 45 as well!!

So for 45 years, year in and year out, our student population has been dropping at nearly 1% per year - and all the while the number of people we've hired to work at TPS has actually INCREASED by roughly the same percentage???

This has been going on for decades, and nobody on the school board has figured this out??

And the superintendant they just hired for what, somewhere in the neighborhood of $160+000 per year has been part of this scheme for Thirty years???

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but it does make one think that it makes a lot of sense that they'd torpedo someone from the outside who'd look at these numbers and raise a flag right away, in favor of someone who's been part of this all for decades...

Can you find the TPS graduation rate 1962 vs 2007? Maybe we can do a little return on investment analysis.

Wow, that decrease in enrollment shocks me. I would never have imagined there'd be that much of a drop. The number of employees quoted- that's all employees, not just teachers, correct? If so, it'd be safe to consider that the evolution of technology, mechanics, etc. would lead to a need for more employees now than in the 60's. There weren't computers in schools in the 60's, therefore no need for IT departments and staff- today our schools have computers, there's a gain in employees. Also, hasn't TPS built more schoolbuildings since the 60's? That would also increase the staff numbers. Just brainstorming.

Westie, since when does an increase in technology mean an increase in employees? it generally spells a DECREASE in employees.

also, you asked if TPS has built more school buildings since the 60's in an effort to find an answer to the added employee role - if the student population is decreasing why would we need MORE buildings?

If we've decreased 40-45%, shouldnt we need a 40-45% smaller footprint?

Some might say it's because we've decreased class size to better serve the student. That's possible, that's why I asked about the graduation rate. If whatever we're doing our graduation rate is decreasing, then we're certainly not doing things right.

You'd think a smaller student population with a larger number of employees per student should equal a higher graduation rate, but where are we, at "continuous improvement" and they're telling us thats a good thing while every school system around us is doing better than we are??

Methinks SOMEbody's getting ripped off - actually, if you look at taxpayers and students, Im thinking EVERYbody's getting ripped off...

"also, you asked if TPS has built more school buildings since the 60's in an effort to find an answer to the added employee role - if the student population is decreasing why would we need MORE buildings?

If we've decreased 40-45%, shouldnt we need a 40-45% smaller footprint?"

Welcome to the club Billy.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

has plenty copies of this book. I am going to get a copy tomorrow.

This is a very interesting discussion regarding what we expect and what we think we are getting from our public schools. In Michigan they have something called Schools of Choice, where they have designated schools to accept students from any set of district borders and/or boundaries. Does anyone know any more about this concept? I just recently learned about this from some friends that live in Michigan but I haven't had time to research how its been administered. I'm not sure if it just certain areas of Michigan participating or what but the family I know moved their child from a C rated school to an A rated school and she's doing much better and set to graduate early now. Regarding the budget, since I've been on the Board I have asked for a sysnposis of our most costly items. Of course the majority of our highest cost is salary but there must be other areas that we can review and begin to ask questions of why those particular expenses are rising over a set percentage. With the district conducting its first round of zero based budgeting, I'm very interested to see the report of this work.

she is a teacher in Michigan. I'll ask her after school today.

I have a question which is NOT intended to be accusatory, something that took place several years ago but has been nagging me and comes up every time I think about the direction and drive of the school administration over a period of time.

Mrs. Fisher, I don't know if you can confirm, but I was told by an administrator who has since left to go to Cleveland with Sanders - that in 2003 our district did not purchase any textbooks. ??

I believe the reason this is bothering me is that it seems to me at times that the district has completely lost sight of the fact that we are supposed to be teaching the students. And that's the whole purpose of the entire system.

After observing the board at work for over a year, it seems to me that there is rarely a mention of any issues of curriculum.

I'd just like to know that the administration, board and support staff are all on target and have their priorities in line.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.,1607,7-140-6530_30334-106922--,00.html

The schools of choice provisions in Section 105 and 105c of the State School Aid Act are designed to allow local school districts to enroll nonresident students and count them in membership without having to obtain approval from the district of residence. Section 105 permits local school districts to enroll students who reside in other local school districts within the same intermediate school district. Section 105c allows enrollment of students who reside in school districts located in contiguous intermediate school districts. Local school districts may also participate in cooperative education programs with other local or intermediate school districts that permit them to enroll and count each other's resident students. Cooperative education programs are not governed by the Section 105 or 105c requirements.

Each local school district decides whether or not it will participate in schools of choice under Section 105 and/or 105c.

We don't remember days only moments...

Thanks Lisa Renee for that link. From that site this link was listed and is an interesting site where people are encourged to stay in public education but at schools they believe best suit their child's situation and that a district can choose to participate. There could be some advantage to this where specific programs are available just like the IB program situation recently in the news.

...29,400 is 56% of 52,021...but the loss of students then is 22,621 which is 43% of 52,021.

Billy you're right the number is a 43.5% drop. Nonetheless, this is still pretty big decrease. What is really interesting is how did they do it with so many fewer employees? I've seen the book mentioned and the 1962 numbers come from there. I'll see if I can find the source - I know someone with the book.

As to the recent numbers, I believe I they came from a Blade story. I know the enrollment numbers are correct and from the Blade as I used them in some analysis I did. The employment numbers look reasonable as well.

Never hurts to get a second source, but I believe these numbers to be accurate - at least in the ball park.

So, even off a bit the numbers still beg the question: why the big difference? In 1962 there were 18.8 students per employee - today it is 7.5 students per employee. WOW

I'm guessing some of this could be the dramatic increase in special education - much lower class sizes and of course the drive in the last 10 years to reduce class size, but it would be interesting if we could break out the employees by job classification today and in '62 and see where this increase has come from.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.