Our group has identified two alternatives for the 2012-13 budget that would save our music programs:

Alternative #1: Avoid NEW positions.

Alternative #2: Add furlough days.

We know that several Board Members were not aware of certain specifics / effects of the budget. This is not a surprise and we cannot blame them given the date that the budget was delivered and the superficial level of explanation provided by the District.

Here is some background information that will assist us in framing simple questions for the School Board this Monday:

In the 2012-13 budget, there are 32.5 new Intervention teachers (note the description says ½ committed to student time and other to collaboration). There are 19.9 new Technology Instructional Assistants and one new Administrator for Elementary Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment. ***That is $4,750,000 of NEW positions with no track record of proven achievement.***

Intervention (a.k.a. RTI / “Response to Intervention”) was a new activity funded by federal stimulus dollars which have since dried up. There were no targets for improved results put in place when these programs were started and there has been no report of effectiveness-per-dollar since.

According to the 2009 Five Year Financial Report, the District has ‘purposefully spent down’ $40M in ending fund balance on literacy coaches and the collaboration (a.k.a. PLC / “Professional Learning Community”) strategy. Again, there were no targets for measuring success/value-per-dollar and no evidence or reports to justify continued expenditure.

Simple Question for Alternative #1 – Avoid NEW Positions.

“Dear Board Member, When you voted, did you know your vote FOR the budget was a vote for NEW positions at the expense of mitigating the damage to proven programs?”

Simple Question for Alternative #2 – Add Furlough days.

“Dear Board Member, When you voted, did you know that the extra furlough days had not been negotiated for with specific intent to avoid damage to proven programs?”

Simple follow-up Question:

“Dear Board Member, Now that you know these specifics, do you still feel the same way about your vote?”

JUNE 4TH

SCHOOL BOARD MEETING

RECAP

I’m seeing RED—and I couldn’t be happier!  Thank you to everyone who came out tonight, who made a sign, who delivered a speech.  This was exactly what we needed.  Even though the board didn’t vote our way, the they and superintendent were certainly moved by our presence.  It will not be easy forget our red shirts!  The board really responded to the students.  They mentioned how much it meant to see them there.  They represented us well with their eloquent, confident speeches along side those of parents and teachers.

Please read the attached letter entitled, “A Different Budget” by BSD budget committee chair John Burns (former Aloha High School band parent).  The budget committee is a group of 14 members including the 7 board members and 7 members at large (volunteers from the community).  John Burns was at our advocacy meeting last night to answer questions and he kindly submitted his public comment for today directly to the board via e-mail in order to yield more time for our organization to present during the limited public comment section (which was originally set for only 15 minutes).  Ultimately, the board let that part of the meeting run long so that more of us could be heard.  I wanted you all to be able to read John’s letter .  He has an extremely cogent argument for how the board should be handling the budget process and the budget itself.  The letter raises many questions about the need for so many cuts, and it is a good starting place for us to strategize our next moves over the coming days and weeks.  Most of all, John reminds us and the board that the budget is a year-round process, and that THE BOARD CAN MAKE CHANGES AT ANY TIME.

Here is something important that we all need to understand: the superintendent and central office administration answer to the school board, not the other way around.  It is the school board that receives the schools’ money directly from the state.  They are the true custodians and protectors of that money and of this district.  Let’s make sure the board does not forget that.  Let’s make sure they take the right action for our kids.  Sure, the legislature handed us a bum deal, but we can at least find the right way to spend those funds.  In that regard, the current budget is flawed.  I will elaborate more on that at Thursday’s advocacy meeting at Baja Fresh on 124th & Scholls, 7PM.

A few notes about the meeting as a whole:

While music and the arts are losing, “collaboration time” is winning.  The board is in the process of implementing a new late-start schedule to allow more collaboration time for teachers.  One of the major issues they discussed tonight was whether to move forward  more slowly with the implementation of those plans.  TIME IS MONEY.  The board knows this, so they and the district are working on the problem of justifying to the public the reason for the increase in collaboration time (and the decrease in instructional time that is the cost).  They believe collaboration time is useful and worthwhile, but they need a carefully-implemented communication strategy to get parents to agree with them and support it.

Why the board and the district think it’s okay for new programs like this to be implemented while we are experiencing severe budget cuts, I cannot fathom.  I believe the additional late-start is not necessary.  Here’s why: under the new budget and accompanying district-wide specials schedule, all elementary teachers will already gain an additional 45-minutes of weekly, administratively-directed collaboration time built into their schedule.  That’s because music and pe teachers will each teach classes of 90+ students once per day by taking all classes of one grade level to the gym for activities/rhythms/choir etc. (we are not yet sure what we will be asked to teach during that time.)  For example, in schools where there are three sections of each grade-level, the music teacher would teach three classes of students (90+ children) while being supported by two classified instructional assistants (the tech and media IAs) for 45-minutes while the classroom teachers have their PLC (professional learning community, aka “collaboration time”).  In schools with a six-day rotation, the music teacher would teach this combined class three days per rotation, and the pe teacher would do the other three days.

Two board members voted in our favor: Linda Degman and Mary Vanderwheele.  All others voted to approve the budget including cuts to music.  If you wrote a letter to the board members last week asking for consideration, please write them a follow-up letter by 9PM tomorrow.  We need to light up the board members’ inboxes tomorrow.  Repeat what you said in your testimony and add any responses you have based on what you saw and heard at the meeting last night.  If you are just coming in to this conversation, now would be a good time to send your first letter to the board.  (See talking points below.)  Plan to attend the next board meeting School Board Business Meeting, June 18, 2012, Administration Center, 16550 SW Merlo Rd., Beaverton, OR 97006, 6:30 p.m.  If we do these two things, we will have a chance at getting the board to revisit the budget this summer.  (The board does meet over the summer and there is time to make changes all the way up until the first day of school; remember, all of the board members who voted “yes” tonight did so holding their noses, so to speak.  I believe they can be persuaded.)  If we don’t do these two things, then the cuts will most certainly take place and the budget will play out as planned.  We need to keep blowing up the phones and stuffing the e-mail boxes!!!

— Site Administrator

Superintendent of Beaverton Schools
Dr. Jeff Rose  Jeff_Rose@beaverton.k12.or.us

School Board Members
Karen Cunningham  Karen_Cunningham@beaverton.k12.or.us
Tom Quillin  Tom_Quillin@beaverton.k12.or.us
Mary Vanderweele  Mary_VanderWeele@beaverton.k12.or.us
Sarah Smith  Sarah_Smith@beaverton.k12.or.us
LeeAnn Larsen  LeeAnn_Larsen@beaverton.k12.or.us
Jeff Hicks  Jeff_Hicks@beaverton.k12.or.us
Linda Degman  Linda_Degman@beaverton.k12.or.us

UPDATE ON MUSIC ALLOCATIONS
Total loss is now estimated at -17.55 positions

TALKING POINTS

Instructions

Write a polite, professional, high-character letter advocating for K-12 music programs in Beaverton and send it to these people by 10am Friday, June 1st:

Superintendent of Beaverton Schools
Dr. Jeff Rose  Jeff_Rose@beaverton.k12.or.us

School Board Members
Karen Cunningham  Karen_Cunningham@beaverton.k12.or.us
Tom Quillin  Tom_Quillin@beaverton.k12.or.us
Mary Vanderweele  Mary_VanderWeele@beaverton.k12.or.us
Sarah Smith  Sarah_Smith@beaverton.k12.or.us
LeeAnn Larsen  LeeAnn_Larsen@beaverton.k12.or.us
Jeff Hicks  Jeff_Hicks@beaverton.k12.or.us
Linda Degman  Linda_Degman@beaverton.k12.or.us

Budget Committee Members
Susan Greenberg  susangreenberg@comcast.net
Dave Bouchard  debouchard@comcast.net
Carrie Anderson  canderson.ie92@gtalumni.org
Carmin Ruiz  cruiz@beavertonoregon.gov
John Burns  jburns@trustlightpoint.com
Gerardo Ochoa  gochoa@linfield.edu
Cameron Irtifa  cmirtifa@gmail.com

You may also wish to use the same talking points in a clear, concise two-minute speech to deliver to the school board at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, June 4, 2012, District Administration Center, 16550 SW Merlo Rd.

Our Strategy
We are not asking for a compromise or partial reinstatement.  We are demanding that music be staffed at 100% of its current level.  That means full-time music specialists at each elementary school, and middle and high school choral and instrumental programs retained at current level.  WE NEED MORE MUSIC IN OUR SCHOOLS, NOT LESS.  The recommended national minimum is 90 minutes a week K-12.  Currently we are only averaging 60 min. per week at the elementary level.

Although other specialized programs in the district have been partially or fully eliminated, we need to be clear about our position to support and advocate for music.  Avoid confusing the issue by bringing in PE, Library etc.

Our Slogan “Music Makes a Difference”
This should be in the subject line of every e-mail message and in the conclusion — preferably the last sentence— of any speech or letter you write.  (The music advocacy audience has decided to echo this line each time it is delivered in a speech by one of our members on June 4th.)  You may wish to include a few additional words to vary the subject line of your e-mails to avoid having them interpreted as spam and deleted by junk-mail filters.

Overview

The Issue
The Beaverton School District is cutting $37M from the 2012-13 school year budget, which will reduce the music programs to critical levels.

Staff Impact
• Reduction of music teachers: 19 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions will be eliminated.
• Remaining staff could be inappropriately placed in positions; i.e. a general elementary music teacher could suddenly be faced with maintaining a high school band or choral program. That individual may have seniority with no experience or desire for the new position.  Moving teachers around like this is against best-practices.  Learning is maximized by having the right teacher in the right position.
• Most positions (including high schools) will be reduced to half time.

Program Impact – Short Term
• Inexperienced overworked instructors placed in new positions.
• Instruction in combined classes that will not allow for growth and maximum potential.
• Most instructors will be required to teach at more than one school – focused attention, after school help/practice, and competitive programs will all be affected.
• Teacher turnover in music impacts the participation of current students who become uncertain and potentially drop the program reducing classes even further.

Program Impact – Long Term
• Reduction of elementary music has been shown to lead to reduced participation at the middle school level, which will eventually lead to the reduction/elimination of participation at the high school level.
• The caliber of music education will significantly if not completely eliminate the ability for students to continue on a career path in the arts. These reductions will not allow students to be adequately prepared to enter competitive universities.
• Student uncertainty can be life-altering. Students who drop the program can not easily rejoin once the situation stabilizes.
• Reducing music programs isn’t cutting them; it is a path to eliminating them.

Resolution
• The BSD cuts to the music program total just over $1M. One additional Budget Reduction Day (aka Unpaid Furlough Day) would save the BSD $1M.
• The BSD needs to preserve current funding for music programs.

Arguments and Talking Points

Music is not an “extra,” it is an essential.
Music is core curriculum K-12.  It covers Fine Arts standards mandated by the State of Oregon.  It should be taught by a full-time specialist at each elementary school, with a full-time instrumental specialist and a full-time choral specialist at each middle and high school.  Music is not an extra-curricular endeavor; it is a discipline, a craft and vital to our society as a whole.  Music is an important part of achieving our District Goal (2010-2015): All students will show continuous progress toward their personal learning goals, developed in collaboration with teachers and parents, and will be prepared for post-secondary education and career success.

Return on Investment
Studies show that there is a tremendous return on investment when a music program is fully articulated K-12.  Students having consistent access and participation at an adequate level is what leads to the value of having music in our schools.  Elementary programs provide the foundation to prepare students to access middle and high school programs.  Additionally, the benefits of imagination, communication, confidence learned in elementary music follow a child even if (s)he does not continue into a middle or high school music program.  We must support full-funding for music programs at all levels K-12.

Relative to cuts in athletics and the general teaching population, cuts to music are disproportionately high.
• 30% of music teaching positions will be eliminated (19.0 out of 60.0 FTE).
• 19 music teachers will be laid off with a few being reassigned to a general classroom if they happen to have that additional certification.  That’s 14 from 34 elementary positions and 5 from 26 middle and high school positions.
• Of the 33 elementary schools, only 6 will retain a full-time music teacher at their school.
• 6 of 8 middle schools (not counting the options schools) are losing FTE.  Only Cedar Park will remain intact.
• 4 of 5 high schools are losing FTE.
• Regarding athletics, only golf and water polo were cut.

One additional Budget Reduction Day (a.k.a. unpaid furlough day) could save all threatened music positions across the district.
• Each day cut saves the district $1.2 million
• Saving 19 music teachers would cost approximately $1.3 million

The cuts to music are not “sustainable.”
The district often talks of making “sustainable” budget cuts, that is, permanent cuts that do not have to be made again the next year.  If cutting music is what the district considers to be “sustainable,” then are we to assume they plan to continue underfunding programs into the future?  What is the plan to reinstate the programs?  When and how?

We argue that cuts to our music program are not “sustainable,” but rather they are fatal to our programs.  As we have seen in the past in other districts, cutting music to the levels proposed will not work.  The high school programs will be dead within a few years.

Once programs are cut, they rarely return
Case in point: Music program cuts were made in the early 1990s due to Measure 5.  Before those cuts, our district was home to an orchestra program that boasted 1700 fourth and fifth grade string students and 5000 elementary band students.  All of the high school band programs were staffed with full-time directors who also had assistants.  In addition to band and choir, there was a full 30-40 piece orchestra at each high school.  Those programs were cut in 1993 and have never returned.  Hardly anyone even remembers them anymore.

The proposed budget adds new programs and staff while cutting music programs and staff.
In order to cut costs on covering elementary teacher plan time, the district will institute two new “classes” that will be offered to every elementary student district-wide: media class and technology class.  These 45-minute sessions (delivered on approximately half of the students’ school days) will be supervised by instructional assistants who do not have a teaching certificate (some may not even have a college education).  No new material will be introduced by the instructional assistants during these sessions.  They amount to a study hall in the library and a study hall in the computer lab.  This proposal is akin to warehousing and babysitting students.  The IA’s are less expensive to employ, and thus save the district money.  While they are very nice people, they are essentially scabs for certified positions, and they are not providing education to students.  Having students spend instructional time being supervised at school by non-teachers is in conflict with the District Goal (2010-2015): All students will show continuous progress toward their personal learning goals, developed in collaboration with teachers and parents, and will be prepared for post-secondary education and career success because it does not help prepare them for post-secondary education and career success.  Only certified teachers can do that!

Music instruction will be extremely inequitable for students across the district.
All elementary students will have a 45-minute music class.  However, some will get music once every 4 days, while others will get music every 5, 6 or 8 days.  This plan is unacceptable.

Our community supports 10 Budget Reduction Days.
At meetings at every school during the month of February, the district collected information from parents and staff regarding how they would solve the budget crisis.  Survey results published by the district showed parents and staff overwhelmingly supported the notion of cutting ten days from the school year in order to preserve programs and teachers.  http://www.beaverton.k12.or.us/pdf/ci/ci_Budget%20Teaching%20Sessions%20Summary.pdf  (page 12)

Arguments for using Budget Reduction Days to balance our school budget
• Budget reduction days are unpaid furlough days, meaning that teachers take a pay cut to help the school system running.
• Budget reduction days preserve the educational integrity of a school system retaining teachers and important school programs.
They reduce the chaotic “bumping” of school staff that happens after layoffs, helping schools stay efficient and connected to their parent community.
• Budget reduction days are easy to replace when funding for schools goes back up.
• Budget reduction days encourage the public to put pressure on the legislature to FIX THE WEAK TAXATION AND APPROPRIATION POLICIES THAT CREATED OUR BUDGET SHORTFALL IN THE FIRST PLACE.
• Budget reduction days mitigate or prevent increases in class size.
• Budget reduction days keep school staff employed, so that they continue to contribute to state tax revenues that fund schools.
• Budget reduction days make school cuts noticeable by the general public.  They communicate the importance of funding schools properly in order to get the results we need.

The process of adding Budget Reduction Days (BRDs)
BRDs require negotiation with the Beaverton Education Association (teacher’s union).  The BEA membership recently accepted a contract with the district that proposed only five BRDs for 2012-13 and four for 2013-14.  Any additional BRDs would need to be negotiated and approved by the BEA.  This requires the School Board to take action on June 4th by rejecting the current budget proposal and insisting that central administration pursue additional BRDs with the union.  It is the school board’s duty to protect the school system.  They have said that these cuts are terrible, so why haven’t they done everything they could to mitigate them?  Adding five additional BRDs is an obvious choice.  The community supports it, and so do most teachers.

The district is purchasing new laptops for every teacher?!
The district plans to spend nearly $450,000 in 2012-13 to purchase a new laptop computer for every classroom teacher.  This expenditure had been deferred in the past to mitigate layoffs, but not this year.  The laptops are not needed!  This purchase can wait until funding levels improve.  Use the savings to retain more teachers!

Music is Cultural   Music is a unique means of transmitting our cultural heritage to succeeding generations. Music is a language that all people speak; it cuts across racial, cultural, social, educational and economic barriers, and enhances cultural appreciation and awareness. Through music students come to a better understanding of the nature of mankind as well as the diversities and similarities among cultures.
Music is Creative  There are infinite ways in which children can express themselves in a music class. Creativity is an essential element of music-making, composition, improvisation and performance. In this technological age, music education provides students with opportunities to use their imagination and think outside the box whether they are working alone or in groups. Music education has changed from the model of 40 years ago. Today, children learn in multiple modalities singing, dancing, playing instruments, creating, composing, improvising, moving freely, dramatizing, listening and evaluating music.
Music is Key to Brain Development  Music education profoundly affects brain development engaging all four parts of the brain and provides children opportunities to learn spatially, aurally, visually, kinesthetically, musically, interpersonally, intrapersonally, linguistically, and logically. Music has its own powerful language and symbol system which, when taught, requires students to analyze, compare, contrast, sequence, remember, and problem-solve. When children perform, they receive immediate feedback and opportunities for reflection. There is no doubt that the study of music improves academic achievement, enhances test scores, attitudes, social skills, critical and creative thinking.
Music is Life Skills  Music promotes character development and leadership in students. Musical experiences can boost self-esteem, reinforce positive social behaviors, promote teamwork and discipline.
Music is Community  Music teachers are essential leaders in school communities. They have contact with all children and their siblings. They often lead assemblies and host music programs which build a sense of community bringing families together to celebrate the arts, various traditions, and those experiences which build confidence and promote self-expression in children.
Music is Integral  Music Education integrates math, language, geography, history, science, social studies, art and physical education. Some students may struggle with regular classroom subjects yet find the joy of success in music.
Music is Fun  Music is the heart of the school, promoting school spirit. raising voices in song, and helping students to reach their potential through creativity and self-expression. Music enhances the quality of life integrating mind, body and spirit.