2

Objectives for today

• Review the critical challenges we must address-Providing an excellent education for all kids-Stabilizing the District for the future

• Discuss our thinking behind current options for moving forward

3

Building on a tradition of excellence:

• PPS students outperform state averages

• 84% of children go to public schools

• A strong tradition of neighborhood schools within a system of choice

• A range of choices and options for students and parents

• Strong parent and community support

4

But – PPS student outcomes fall as students transition

Source: PPS State Report Card, 2004-2005

PPS performance (04-05): % of schools which scored in each category, by level

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Elementary Middle High

Unacceptable

Low

Satisfactory

Strong

Exceptional

57 18 10

5

Students improve throughout elementary, then drop in middle school

86% 89%80%

91%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Reading Math

Students in Gr. 3 (2003) Same Students Gr. 5 (2005)

81%76%

81%77%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Reading Math

Students in Gr. 5 (2002) Same Students in Gr. 8 (2005)

Source: PPS

Students in Same Elementary School Gr 3 & 5

Students in Same Elementary School Gr 6&8

6

Persistent “achievement gap” for minority students

Source: PPS State Report Card, 2004-2005

% Students meeting state standards inlanguage arts (04-05)

79%

81%

86%

91%

75%72%

77%

85%88%

70%

44%46%

67%

77%

42%

23%

36%

43%

63%

23%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

GRADE 3 GRADE 5 GRADE 8 GRADE 10

African American American Indian Asian American European American Hispanic American

+10 +7 +5 +3 +8+8 +4 +7 +3 +12

+2 +0 +4 +5 +1

+1 +2 +2 +4 +2

7

More than 30% of PPS families choose transfers

33 32

42

0

10

20

30

40

50

Elementary Middle High

Percent of PPS Students Not Attending Neighborhood School

8

Bold steps are underway to deliver results for all students…

Uniformly high standards

Enabled by district-wide curriculum and rigorous assessments

…And supported by intensive professional development for teachers

9

Rigorous Core Curriculum = Results

Similar focus on raising standards in…

• NYC District#2, • Charlotte Mecklenburg• Norfolk, VA • Long Beach, CA• Boston• Philadelphia

…Resulting in:

• 15-20 point gains in reading and math for all students

• Even larger gains for poor and minority students, shrinking the achievement gap

• Renewed focus on teaching & learning has resulted in…

- Across the board gains at levels in reading and math

- Significant gains for special populations

- K-1 investments demonstrating strong outcomes

Across the Country… Within PPS…

10

We must support student achievement,while stabilizing PPS for the long run

• Keep improving our schools so that all students have a full range of choices and opportunities

• Stabilize and strengthen the system so we can focus on educating children, not on managing short-term budget crises

• It’s counter-productive to put yet another short term band-aid on the problem

• We can’t just keep stretching resources thinner and thinner across all of our schools

11

Three steps to position PPS for future

1) Preserve core educational opportunities for our students- Rigorous and full curriculum for all students- Sustain emerging and successful reforms- Maintain reasonable class sizes and school year

2) Stabilize the district for the long term- Establish schools of size and scale to accommodate

core educational opportunities for all students- Live within existing resources- Address elevated cost of doing business: older, larger,

under-utilized buildings, rising health care costs

3) Increase the accountability and performance of central services.- Lean, highly responsive, and supportive central office- Focus every penny from taxpayers classroom needs

12

4 Areas of Cuts Under Consideration to cover $24M shortfall

• Central Office Staff and Services

• Support to Schools and Classrooms

• Reconfiguration of Schools

• Teaching Staff Reductions, Wages/Benefits

44

13

Staff cuts have outpaced enrollment declines

District FTE: 1991 vs. 2005

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Central staffand

administration

Special Ed,ESL

Teachers,principals,

school clericaland assistants

Total District

FT

E

1990-91 2005-06

-66%+29%

-26%

-30% Enrollment Decline:

1991: 54,900

2005: 47,008

% Change: -14%

14

Hard choices and tradeoffs to get to $24MExample Options

Source: PPS estimates

Area Option A Option B Option C

Central staff & services-Admin positions-Reduce travel, meeting costs, supplies-Close BESC on Fridays in July

$2.0 $2.0 $2.0

Supports to Schools-Reduce custodial-Reduce maintenance- Reduce programs & priority funds

-$5.0-$3.0-$5.0

-$3.0

-$2.0

-$3.0

-$2.8

Reconfiguration of schools -$3.0-(8-10 buildings)

-$1.2-(4-6 buildings)

-0

Teaching Staff Reductions -$4.6-(79 FTE)

-$9.0-(150 FTE)

-$13.3-(217 FTE)

Wages & Benefits-Wage increases-Benefits Caps

-Maintain 3%-$1.9

-$6.6 (freeze)-$1.9

-$2.2 (2%)-$1.9

Total Cuts -$24.1 -$23.8 -$25.2

15

If reconfiguration doesn’t save much, why

even consider it?

If reconfiguration doesn’t save much, why

even consider it?

The Question

16

We’ve been tackling this problem for years…

Let’s find a solution this time…Let’s find a solution this time…once and for all!!once and for all!!

8 Buildings Closed since 1995

EdwardsApplegateSmithKentonWhittaker LakesideWilcox*GlenhavenFoster SPED facility

Multiple Task Forces Held• 2001- Best Use of Facilities Task

Force

• 2002-Portland Schools Real Estate Trust Development sponsored by Innovation Partnership

• 2002-Long Range Facilities Plan

• 2003-04 Capital Bond Task Force

• 2003-Westside Boundary Process Task Force

• 2003 Eastside Educational Options Task Force

• 2006 Long Range Facilities Plan Update in Progress.

….From a “Facilities Perspective”

* Leased to Columbia Regional Programs

17

Let’s use an “Educational Perspective”

Educational Benefits of Reconfiguration

- Stronger, more varied programs - Ability to offer a core curriculum that includes art, music, wellness

- Lower class sizes

- Fewer transitions for kids

- Stability and continuity of parent involvement

- More comprehensive access to student supports-Equitable configuration of ESL, SPED, social services, after school programs, etc.

18

School configuration models under consideration

4. Expand: School expansion

Eg. K-5 to K-8

5. Reconfigure:Two schools of different levels

merge to form a new configurationEg. K-5 + 6-8 = K-8

2. Close/Reassign: School closed and students reassigned to one or more other schools

3. Merge: Two schools of same level

occupy larger of two buildings

1. Status QuoNo schools close

19

School mergers can increase strength of programs

Example: Edwards -> Abernethy

28

23

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Edwards Alone CombinedEdwards-Abernethy

Class Size

Program

FTE

Edwards 2005-06

Combined Edwards- Abernethy 2005-06

PE 0.5 1.0

Music 0 0.6

Library 0.13 0.33

366 students

178 students

20

Larger schools fare can offer PE/Music/Art, with reasonable class sizes

Enrollment 600 400 300

Staffing ratio 23.5 23.5 23.5

Classroom teachers

25.5 17 12.8

Librarian .4 .4 .4

Counselor .4 .4 .4

PE/Music/Art 3.0 2.6 2.0

Total Additional FTE

3.8 3.4 2.8

Average Class Size

27.6 29.4 30.1

Example: Elementary School – Current Staffing Ratio

21

Larger schools also fare better if staffing ratio is increased

Enrollment 600 400 300

Staffing ratio 25 25 25

Classroom teachers

20.2 12.6 9.2

Librarian .4 .4 .4

Counselor .4 .4 .4

PE/Music/Art 3.0 2.6 2.0

Total Additional FTE

3.8 3.4 2.8

Average Class Size

29.7 31.7 32.6

Example: Elementary School – Staffing Ratio increased to 25:1

22

No relationship between PPS school size and performance

Example: Size of Elementary Schools by Performance Rating

201

669

271

538

254

558

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Exceptional Strong Satisfactory

Smallest Largest

23

K-8 model is re-emerging as educationally sound – particularly for high needs kids

• Better suited to needs of young adolescents Fewer transitions Reduced social pressures Higher parental engagement More individualized attention from teachers

• Studies show that K-8 students fare better than middle school peers on multiple dimensions Feel safer Have higher self esteem, sense of belonging Higher involvement in extra-curricular activities Perform as well and often better academically

e.g., in Baltimore, Cleveland, New Orleans, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Oklahoma City

Academic improvement especially strong for students in high poverty, high minority schools

24

K-8 Model is not new to Portland

6 K-8s planned for 2006-07

Skyline (?)Ockley GreenBeachBoise-EliotVernonKingAll elementaries in Jefferson cluster by 2007-8*

4 Existing K-8 Schools

Sunnyside Environmental (Strong)Winterhaven (Exceptional) Sabin - Access (Exceptional)Hayhurst - Odyssey(Strong)

PPS was a K-8 district until converting to middle schools in the 80s

* With the exception of Chief Joseph

25

Considerations for school configuration decisions

• Academic and instructional integrity and benefits

• Preserving neighborhood relationships

• Current and Projected Enrollment • Geographic balance • Accommodating district wide programs (e.g.

special needs classrooms)

• Building Size, Amenities, Condition and Operating costs

• Consistency within clusters

26

Where we plan to go from here

• Solicit more public input into the choices we face

• Budget Forums and facilitated discussions- March 21 (Lent) and 22 (Wilson)

• Budget Tools- Priorities Zoomerang Tool- Budget Calculator Tool

• Public Testimony- March 23 – Board workshop and public testimony

• Budget recommendation for $24M cuts - (April 3)

• Public review of and feedback on recommendation (April)• 4 Quadrant testimony hearings• Hearings in each building recommended for closure

• Define outstanding issues and the process for resolving them (April – May)

• Develop two-year implementation plan, with community input (April – June)