Fewer students translates into fewer teachers needed. Period.

MOCO 428 "Less kids in a class is always a better learning environment, why not keep them and reduce the class sizes. If there is a reason not to then let's hear it."

Not to debate, but where is the evidence that fewer kids is always a better learning environment? The reduction of these teachers will have little impact on class sizes and the board asked SEVERAL times about the need for these teachers. The administration assured the board that there would be no additional burden on existing teachers and class sizes may increase slightly...there are 259 less students - divided by 6 sounds like the board and administration IS being cautious.

Studies have NOT shown that smaller classroom sizes necessarily make better learning environments (good teachers make better learning environments)- if you have other studies, please share.

So enrollment is down but keep the teachers? Why? Do you want another tax increase to cover the extra payroll, since the state gives the school district money based on enrollment and attendance days? Why do you think the kids have to make up snow days? Because the state will not grant the districts their allotted amount of $$$ if the students do not make up the minimum days of attendance.

Same goes for too many teachers on the payroll for the amount of students attending. Do you want to "adopt" a teacher? Go for it. I for one think it is a smart decision when enrollment is down. Ebb and flow, ya know?

Story says ..." laying off 6 teachers." BS, again. Keep the teachers and make the classes smaller. I can't believe the teacher's Union would reject keeping teachers and making classes smaller. If the school board and school district wants to take this as an excuse to start chopping teacher's heads, screw 'em. My taxes were increased, AND PAID, on last year's enrollment #s. Do I get a refund for the teachers laid off;NO! Keep the teachers. What's the problem with this moronic community treating teachers with the disdain that they do of autoworkers?! This is the educations of the chidren, not General Motors! Duh!

I say close the money sucking Janesville ice arena and use the million or so dollars the city wants to spend on it to keep the teachers. WHAT MAKES SENSE? Are we drinking leaded water in Janesville? How about we pay for a tunnel under a street and waste more hundreds of thousands of money that way? Oh, thats right we are going to!

MOC - from what I heard last night Dr. Schulte is doing two jobs for the price of one. She is eliminating her former position of Director of Student Services but still doing the work - with the help of some of her managers. Seems to me she might be saving us some money here.

I fortunately was able to watch the meeting last night. Too bad some of you didn’t watch as well. What it sounded like to me was that because of declining enrollment the district simply could not keep as many teachers as they had this past year. I have a feeling that because the middle and high school students already got the chance to register for classes next fall there simply were not enough students wanting to take certain classes to keep a teacher busy all day. I bet if they had decided to keep those 6 people on and they didn’t have enough work to do, many more people would be crying that the JSD was wasting taxpayer money. I found this chart on the JSD website that shows Dr. Schulte’s recommended cuts. I’m sure it will surprise some of you but there are administrative cuts – to the tune of over $500,000… Take a look for yourself…
http://www.janesville.k12.wi.us/LinkClic...

I believe Mrs Schulte has proposed several hundred thousand dollars of administrative cuts, Athletic Director, Director of Student Services(her former position), Math and Science Coordinator etc, in order to balance the budget, and yes it appears as well as some teaching positions. School finance law still is one of the most complicated items contained in the state budget and little to few people really understand it. One person who does is Doug Bunton who is retiring. His position is extremely critical to the financial health of this district and requires a competent and experienced replacement.

My understanding is the student/teacher ratio is a product of the union agreement and must be adhered to. This could be an increase or decrease in teachers based on enrollment. If my understanding is correct, then this has nothing to do with meeting budget. When you agree with a union contract you must take the good with the bad.

I think the point was made about the student to teacher ratio. Less kids in a class is always a better learning environment, why not keep them and reduce the class sizes. If there is a reason not to then let's hear it.

Mrs. Schulte, I'm still waiting for you to publicly turn down your bonus that you will be getting! As I stated in another article that was written over the weekend, if there are cuts to teachers or even administration, then no one has a right to a bonus. The board writing that into her contract made a huge mistake. I understand it is only $6K or $10K but it really looks bad at times like this. Bank CEO's are getting bonuses off of our taxes and we have it happening at a local level as well. Shame on everyone involved with her contract and shame on her if she indeed takes the money.

Fire the former Superintendent two months early...do a search for new Superintendent ($20K)....give new Superintendent $20K raise...equals 1 teacher. Sure makes sense during these economic times doesn't it?

Fortunately the board actually thinks in terms of specific positions and specific staffing needs based on numbers of students and class sizes, instead of stupid, fuzzy, broad categories like "administrators OR teachers". If there are fewer students in the district, it is pretty obvious that we need fewer teachers.
.
PeopleRStupid: You are aware that the school district budget is entirely separate from the city budget, right?

If I understand this correctly, the layoffs are a result of declining enrollment NOT an effort to save money or re-prioritize district goals. If there are not enough students to fill the special area classes (especially electives) then a layoff seems prudent at this point.

Funny how they never make cuts to the programs that raise money for the schools. i.e. new football uniforms, etc.

I hate to say it but I told you so. These cuts are only the start of a drastic change to our schools. Families are starting to leave Janesville and soon we will only need one high school and fewer feeder schools. Janesville is already seeing a change in population and the census of 2010 for Janesville will be shocking.

But we have money for an ice rink - go figure!!

Now I could be wrong but I thought I read on here that they were going to be able to make budget without laying off teachers?

I thought we (taxpayers) just added onto and improved the art and phy. ed. areas at our local high schools by voting YES for the referendum. Now we are cutting teacher positions? Why did we bother to spend our money on these areas then? It now seems that our children will not even be able to take some of these classes considering that there will be fewer teachers available to teach the classes. This makes no sense to me.

Very sad. I will say that I think the school board definitely has their work cut out for them. I know some of the members, and can assure everyone that they are not stupid, etc. These decisions are very difficult to make.
+
I wonder what will happen over the summer in terms of enrollment? I know my sons school has already had some families leave...and that was in the middle of the school year, I can only assume that more will be trying to get out of Janesville over the summer.

B.S.. Make the student to teacher ratio smaller, and IMPROVE the quality of the education. No, the JSD would not do that would they?!? Maybe they [JSD] can find these teachers jobs with Cullen, who has their money from all the school renovations and additions we "needed".

Come on Gazette, let's see a story on that process of the millions funneled to Cullen for these school building contracts and ALL the players involved in that waste of money.

getting rid of teachers should not be an option! there are plenty of places to make cut backs. people say it's hard to find good teachers,but that's a lie. the school district lets good teachers go all the time while hiring inexperienced young teacher assistants with no credentials. when the school takes things away from the students they don't give you a tax break for it they just consume more and more. teachers paying for supplies out of pocket, what the hell is wrong in this country that we allow our basic education to be undermined.

I am sure that the teachers know who they are. There is a specific point system based upon their status. It's always sad to lose good young teachers during tough times.

It was nice of Salerno to not reveal the names of the teachers. However, I'm sure every foregin language, phy ed, art and music teacher at the middle and high schools is on edge right now! Probably could've done without that descriptive info too!!

Stop jumping to conclusions. They aren't "getting rid of" art, music, or P.E. They are saying that we simply have too many teachers in those positions for too few students. Every student who wants to take those courses will be able to and the teachers who remain will still be working within the districts agreed upon student/teacher ratio. The administrative cuts will more than likely be coming. They were discussed last night and will be up for a vote at the 5/12 meeting. Karen Schulte did not yet get rid of her old position - that is one of the positions up to be cut at the next meeting. Those of you so anxious to jump on these blogs should get informed - attend the meetings or at the very least, watch them on tv. Then you can make intelligent, informed comments.

The staffing plan is based on enrollment, not the budget. If student numbers decline, fewer teachers are needed. There are deep cuts in administration/ESC this year.

Eliminate teaching positions? Why not some over paid administrators? Did we really need all those sports related improvements? Which is more important school board,Sports,or EDUCATION?Unbeleviable the decisions this board makes.OH wait I forgot all the "perks" they get,its easier to cut teachers so the remainder get larger "piece of the pie".IDIOTS

IDIOTS!!! Take away the things the kids love, want, and need?! Get rid of the administration instead. Get rid of a phy-ed teacher? And they wonder why we have so many overweight/obese children today. Karen Schulte was on the right track - She eliminated her previous position once she was hired as superintendent.

What is wrong with this board? I'm sorry but administrative cuts should be much more of a priority before teacher cuts!

Will this be in addition to normal attrition?

Very Sad.. What about laying off administration instead? Why start with what will hurt the kids the most? They might want to remember why schools are there, why they get tax money. Its not to employ administrators.