"America's K-12 public education system has experienced tremendous historical growth in employment, according to the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics. Between fiscal year (FY) 1950 and FY 2009, the number of K-12 public school students in the United States increased by 96 percent, while the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) school employees grew 386 percent. Public schools grew staffing at a rate four times faster than the increase in students over that time period. Of those personnel, teachers' numbers increased 252 percent, while administrators and other non-teaching staff experienced growth of 702 percent, more than seven times the increase in students.
"That hiring pattern has persisted in more recent years as well. Between FY 1992 and FY 2009, the number of K-12 public school students nationwide grew 17 percent, while the number of FTE school employees increased 39 percent. Among school personnel, teachers' staffing numbers rose 32 percent, while administrators and other non-teaching staff experienced growth of 46 percent, 2.3 times greater than the increase in students over that 18-year period; the growth in the number of teachers was almost twice that of students."
I noted several decades ago, when I was stationed in Alameda, California, that the largest and most heavily staffed building in the school district was an administrative building in which not one student was educated.
It is bizarre to compare a 59 year span with the expectation of applicable data to learn from.
"Between FY 1992 and FY 2009, the number of K-12 public school students nationwide grew 17 percent, while the number of FTE school employees increased 39 percent."
It is possible NCLB Act played a role. Public schools are being held accountable for actual learning.
Locally, I would challenge these numbers for the last decade, because budget cuts have created a reduction in staff.
"Locally, I would challenge these numbers for the last decade, because budget cuts have created a reduction in staff."
How many administrators do we have locally, compared to the number of teachers? How many did we have ten years ago? Twenty years ago? Forty years ago? It should be easy enough to find out. A simple search of the yearbooks might help.
The 1950s and 1960s saw the consolidation of the schools from the smaller one-room schoolhouses and neigborhood schools of the 1940s and prior in many areas. It makes little sense to compare data before that time, as the post-war era saw an entirely different scholastic system than the pre-war era.
"A simple search of the yearbooks might help."
I do not think so. Few Elementary and Middle do have "yearbooks". Nor would the board office administration be included in a "yearbook".
"How many administrators do we have locally, compared to the number of teachers? How many did we have ten years ago?" I stand by my claim that local Missouri school districts have actually reduced staff and administrators. Feel free to verify.
That would be an interesting and relevant discussion. Comparisons past a decade, would be a pointless waste of energies. Things change, for example, in 1950 schools were still segregated.
"I stand by my claim that local Missouri school districts have actually reduced staff and administrators. Feel free to verify."
Sounds like the claim is nothing more than a SWAG. And it is someone else's problem to verify if or not the assertion is correct.
", for example, in 1950 schools were still segregated."
And you need more administrators for an integrated school?
For starters, here's a directory. Note that each school has at least one principal and one counselor, several schools having more than one, plus asst. principals.
And here's a list of jobs in the 'job descriptions' section of the website:
Chief Financial Officer
Director - Alternative
Director - Special Services
Director Assistant,Career & Technology Ctr
Director Career & Technology Center
Director of Admin Services
Principal Assistant - High School
Principal Assistant - Junior High/Middle
Principal - Elementary
Principal - Junior High/Middle
Principal - Secondary
Vocational - PTA Program Director
Vocational - Student Services Director
And here is the 'certified staff' listing:
oordinator - At Risk
Coordinator - State/Federal Programs
CTC Program Coordinator
Gifted - Secondary
Grant-Default Management Specialist
Special Services - Cross Categorical
Special Services - ECSE
Special Services - Educare Director
Special Services - Emotionally Disturbed
Special Services - English Second Language
Special Services - LEA Stipend
Special Services - Learning Disabilities
Special Services - Mental Retardation
Special Services - Other Health Impaired
Special Services - Psychological Examiner
Special Services - Sign Interpreter
Special Services - Speech Pathologist
Special Services - Transition Coordinator
Special Services - Visually Impaired
Teacher - Elementary
Teacher - Secondary
Vocational - ABE Instructor
Vocational - Adult Supervisor
Vocational - Assessment
Vocational - Automotive Technology
Vocational - Design Drafting
Vocational - Electronics
Vocational - Offset Printing
Vocational - Practical Nursing
Vocational - TV/Radio Broadcasting
Vocational - VRE
Vocational - ABE Coordinator
Vocational - ABE Instructor
Vocational - Auto Collision
Vocational - Aviation Instructor
Vocational - Business Technology
Vocational - Careers In Health
Vocational - Child Development Instructor
Vocational - Commercial Foods
Vocational - Computer Technology
Vocational - Construction Technology
Vocational - Embedded Math Instructor
Vocational - Electrical Technology Instr
Vocational - Emergency Medical Services
Vocational - Financial Aide/Adm Counselor
Vocational - GED Options Program
Vocational - Guidance/Placement
Vocational - Horticulture
Vocational - HVAC/R
Vocational - Instr for 2-year LPN program
Vocational - Machine Tool Technology
Vocational - Marketing
Vocational - Medical Ofc Spec Instr
Vocational - Missouri Options Instr
Vocational - Nursing Coordinator
Vocational - Physical Therapy
Vocational - Respiratory Therapy
Vocational - Welding
Vocational - Work Keys Service Tech
Vocational - Workforce Develop. Coord.
Vocational-Cabinet Making Instructor
And here are the 'classified staff':
Accounts Payable Specialist
Administrative Asst I
Administrative Asst II
Administrative Asst III
Bookkeeper - Federal/SPED Programs
Coordinator - Technology Engineer
Coordinator, Nutrition Services
Custodian - Head
Facilities Asst Supervisor
Human Resource Specialist
Library Clerical Assistant
Library Media Assistant
Nutrition Services Cook
Nutrition Services Manager
Parents As Teachers - Educator
Public Relations Coordinator
School Nurse - Head
Technology - Information System Specialist
Technology - Network Specialist
Technology - P/T Support
Technology - Systems Specialist
Technology Support Specialist
And here are the 'extra duty stipends'
After School Detention
Band Asst Director
Dept Chair - Secondary
Grade Level Chairperson
Level A Stipend
Literacy Coach Stipend
Mentor - Elementary
Mentor - Secondary
Sponsor - Yearbook CHS
Sponsor - Academic Comp Team Asst CHS
Sponsor - Beta Club LJS
Sponsor - Central Light
Sponsor - Cheerleading CJHS
Sponsor - Cheerleading Freshman
Sponsor - Cheerleading Head Varsity
Sponsor - Cheerleading Varsity CHS
Sponsor - Dance Team
Sponsor - DECA CHS
Sponsor - FBLA (9-12)
Sponsor - FCCLA (FHA) CHS
Sponsor - FFA CHS
Sponsor - Marching Band Color Guard
Sponsor - National Honor Society - CHS
Sponsor - Newsletter CMS
Sponsor - Newspaper
Sponsor - Pep Club CHS
Sponsor - Red Daggger
Sponsor - Renaissance CJHS
Sponsor - Science Olympiad/Science Fair
Sponsor - Speech & Debate Asst
Sponsor - Speech and Debate
Sponsor - Student Council CJHS
Sponsor - Student Recognition
Sponsor - Student Senate CHS
Sponsor - VICA CHS
Sponsor - Yearbook CJHS
Technology Tech - Support
Technology Tech - Web
Vocal Director - CHS
Wrestling Coach - 7th/8th
Now. How many of those positions do you suppose did not exist ten years ago? Twenty years ago? Forty Years ago?
How many of them have little or nothing to do with the actual education of students?
Oh, I forgot to paste the directory:
Central Administrative Office
301 N. Clark Ave
Elementaries ALMA SCHRADER 573-335-5310 573-334-3871
Ruth Ann Orr, Principal
Julia Unnerstall, Counselor
1829 N. Sprigg
Barbara Kohlfeld, Principal
Lainie Bohnsack, Counselor
2880 Hopper Road
Sydney Herbst, Principal
Sue Cook, Counselor
1550 Themis St.
Rhonda Dunham, Principal
Debra Rau, Counselor
520 S. Minnesota
Crista Turner, Principal
Rebeka Wright, Counselor
Middle CENTRAL MIDDLE 573-334-6281 573-334-1557
Rex Crosnoe, Principal
Rae Ann Alpers, Asst. Principal
Melissa Monia, Counselor
Robin Huffman, Counselor
Junior CENTRAL JUNIOR HIGH 573-334-2923 573-332-8746
205 Caruthers St
Carla Fee, Principal
Alan Bruns, Asst. Principal
Karen Gleason, Counselor
BUBBLE Swimming Pool 573-335-4040
High CENTRAL HIGH 573-335-8228 573-334-1114
1000 S. Silver Springs Road
Mike Cowan, Principal
Craig Hayden, Asst. Principal
Nancy Scheller, Asst. Principal
Josh Crowell, Asst. Principal
Katy Andersson, Counselor
Nita Dubose, Counselor
Amy Sutterer, Counselor
Other CAREER & TECHNOLOGY CENTER
1080 S. Silver Springs Road 573-334-0826 573-334-5930
Rich Payne, Director
Dean Whitlow, Asst. Director
Kathleen Clayton, Workforce Development
Adult Education & Literacy - GED 573-334-3669 573-335-1820
301 N. Clark
Becky Atwood, Director
ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION CENTER 573-335-5939 573-335-6041
301 N. Spring Ave
Scott McMullen, Director
COTTONWOOD TREATMENT CENTER 573-290-5888 573-290-5895
1025 N. Sprigg St.
PARENTS AS TEACHERS
301 N. Clark
EDUCARE 573-651-9171 573-651-1367
301 N. Clark - Upstairs / Room 217
EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAM
520 S. Minnesota - Jefferson Elementary
Get Directions 573-339-1201 573-334-1159
1829 N. Sprigg - Blanchard Elementary
CAPE GIRARDEAU PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION
Get Directions 573-651-0555 573-335-1820
Mrs. Amy McDonald, Foundation Director
FIRST STUDENT BUS COMPANY 573-335-2510 573-335-2897
Employment | Related Links | Contact Us ©2011 Cape Girardeau Public Schools | Privacy Statement
'extra duty stipends' This list are teachers who are being paid for extra work, not a new phenomenon, it has been done for decades. The atheltic director is a teacher. These are not administrators.
Your "vocational" list are also teachers, with the exception of two administrators.
When comparing apples to apples, there were more administrators and teachers 10 years ago. Both have been reduced by attrition due to budget reduction. (With the exception of technology departments, that have grown over the last two decades. Another exception could be Special Services, which has one director, but several specialist.)
Do you have a list for ten years ago?
They have expanded the schools several times in the past decade or two, including a considerable number of new athletic facilities.
But, you are missing the bigger point of the article: school administration and teaching staff have both been growing at a much faster pace than the student enrollment.
"When comparing apples to apples, there were more administrators and teachers 10 years ago."
Can you prove that?
I can find the Cape Public Schools budget online, but I can't find the historical budgets for comparison purposes.
I found the attendance history of interest. Cape School attendance was declining from 2005-06 through 2007-08, and began increasing after that. This year is the first year that attendance numbers have exceeded the 2005-06 attendance.
Thus, while employment may have decreased in the past decade so, it seems, has enrollment, meaning the pattern would still appear consistent with the article's claims. That is to say, it is not so much budget cuts as declining enrollment that justified the decline in administrative positions of which flourish45 claims.
If the school exists to educate students, then less students would justify less expenditures and less staff.
I believe part of the justification for the construction of the new school buidings - Cape Central High and the Vocational/Technical School, was to lure back to the public school some of the students they had been losing to the private school system. Part of the competitive process included the expansion of offerings, as well as new facilities for sports and other programmes.
Expanded facilities and services usually entails expansion of support staff to maintain them - more groundskeepers, more custodians, and so on and so forth. As they say in the Bronx: "That crap ain't free". This is why I question the idea that there have, in fact, been reductions in overall staffing. There have likely been realignments - a new custodian in one place with no new funding means a job loss somewhere else.
There would also, again as noted in the article, be an increase in education staff. Expanded sports programmes means more coaching staff. Thus, again, I question whether an overall reduction has actually happened.
I've long been known on here to rail against the growth of what I term 'warehouse schools' - those massive gymnasiums-with-attached-classrooms that have come about since the end of World War II.
The argument for them was the same as the one used today: the demands of the post-war industrial era called for a better-educated workforce. And who, they reckoned, was better to educate them the government? Why, no one, of course.
Fueled by ample post-war-growth tax revenue and the growing prosperity of the tax base, we set about the consolidate all those little one-room school houses that brought us the great minds of the past - the homes of scholars and mathematicians and scientists - and combined them into the sports complexes that became the homes of the Lions and the Tigers and the Bears (Oh! My!). The gymnasium became the largest compnent of the complex, and the name of the team was emblazoned upon it, along with a picture of the team mascot. Their role as educational facilities began to become secondary to their roles as sports venues.
Massive amounts of land were needed to support these schools. Not for the purpose of building classrooms, those could be crowded into any particular corner of the land, but to provide room for the baseball, football, soccer, and track fields that were needed to support the role of these sports-training facilities. Nor was that enough. As the sports complexes became more elaborate and more expensive, they needed separate practice fields to train on, so they didn't damage the expensive playing fields which had to be reserved for actual play. Millions and millions had to be spent on bleachers, lights, fake grass, and other costly features for a structure that was used one night a week for a part of the year. And, of course, a full-time staff was needed to keep it in tip-top shape for those nights.
Those who do not participate in the sports hype are shunned as 'geeks' and 'losers', walking the halls like lepers. There are homecoming celebrations and sports banquets and other tributes to the sports heroes, while the state-recognized math whizes might get an announcement over the intercom congratulating them, and a 'scholar' pin at the end of the year. Do they even get a pep rally before they pack off to a weekend of mathematical competition? I've not heard of it if they do.
This is what our educational system has become, as I see it. I look at the new Central High School Complex and I see the gymnasium and I see the football fields and the baseball fields, the track and the tennis courts and all the other sporting venues surrounding the classrooms, which appear kind of nondescript in the midst of it all.
"Don't local citizens vote up or down regarding new school bond issues to pay for any expansions?"
Yes. And I'm not blaming the federal government for this. They may have pushed for the consolidation, and their funding mechanism apparently rewards the 'bigger is better' school approach, but it is state and local decision-makers that decide what kind of schools they will have, and it is taxpayers that agree or disagree to build them.
The people have been sold a bill of goods, in my humble opinion. Our schools are bigger, but are they better? As the original article notes: bigger schools mean more administrators and, yes, more services. But do those services all benefit our students? And do they serve all of our students? What percentage of the student body is served by a new football stadium? Is it a wise use of resources?
"Plus , does the Dept. of Education match a certain percentage ?"
You'll have to ask someone in the education funding business.
Perhaps someday parents will see the advantages of home school, private schools, and Internet based learning that reside beyond the reaches of state socialism.
-- Posted by BCStoned on Tue, Apr 23, 2013, at 11:55 AM
Had you told me 8 years ago that home schooling would be effective I would have questioned it. When my youngest daughter announce she was home schooling her two children, I was apprehensive, thinking they are not going to get the social contact they need with other children. Over time I learned, it was not just about sitting in the living room doing your classwork and homework every day. There are so many social and group learning activities between the various home schooled children as to make you weary just watching it.
A week or so ago, on speaking with my Granddaughter, who was working on drawing a freehand map of Africa and entering in and naming the various countries, and who will be in Junior High next year (7th grade), she tells me about this one class she will be taking next year. Her final in this test will require that she free hand draw a map of the entire world with the various countries and their capitals from memory, and she will be given at most an hour and 15 minutes to accomplish this.
As a language course next year she will be studying Latin.
My mind is at ease on the quality of education in home schooling vs government schools.
Posting a comment requires a subscription.