A quick and dirty analysis of the county points to some very disparate inefficiencies, economies of scale and other glaring deficiencies. Rather than pointing specifically to any one school, I have arbitrarily numbered the districts.
CONSOLIDATION is a dirty word to educators, or, should I say Superintendents. When I talk of consolidation, I am not talking about consolidating schools/ students, initially at least. I am talking about consolidating administrative overhead. I am of the opinion that there should be only one county superintendent for the whole system. Seminole County, one of declining population and student enrollments, is a perfect example of this most urgent need.
I will provide some examples of these aforementioned deficiencies and diseconomies of scale. School 2 on my list falls well below both the state averages AND county averages of students and teachers but well above the county and state average Superintendent’s total compensation. I have a management background so I will give you my quick assessment. If I removed just the salary of the District Superintendent in this case, I could give each teacher in that district a $7,277 raise or, a $464 increase per student. Think about that. This compares to the most efficient economies of scale in School 7, whereby I could still provide a teacher raise of $1,281 or $72 increase per student. This is one of the disparities I spoke of; even within this county, there are very unevenly distributed dollars and cents.
In Seminole County, the averages are: 521 students, 32 teachers and salary/ benefits for the Superintendent of $96,478. There are only two school districts that meet or exceed that average of 521 students and 3 school districts that meet or exceed 32 teachers. Again however, there are 5 districts that pay above the county average superintendent salary and benefits of $96,478.
What happens in Seminole County when I put my MBA/ Management experience to the task and fully consolidate the school system, starting with Superintendents? I will automatically provide there will be one Superintendent for the entire county system. I immediately incur a savings of $975,000 to spread out for teachers raises of $3,066 annually or for a per student increase of $188, however you wish to present the savings. I have done this without one additional dime from the Legislature.
I will now put on my other hat; as an advisor to the Governor. I will not put $1 more into the local school system, including the issuance of State G.O. or State Revenue Bonds, until two things are accomplished. 1—Consolidation, beginning with one County Superintendent, abolishing District Superintendents. 2—Local funding will return to 2/3 of the total funding for local schools, to be accomplished incrementally or otherwise, as it was as recently as 1983.
Consolidation of infrastructure or students need not even enter into the conversation. That conversation can take place as infrastructure has outlived its useful life and the County Superintendent/ County Board of Education determines that either students are absorbed into a nearby school[s], or a new structure needs to be financed. This is accomplished by attrition, not by a forced cause of action. Assuming both 1 and 2 above have been accomplished, State G.O. or Revenue Bonds can be put to a vote of the County for new or rehabilitated infrastructure.
It is guaranteed that this will “fix” local schools in Oklahoma. Do we wish to fix the schools or bitch at the Governor/ Legislature for something that WE, at the local level, did to break the system? The SHS building is not broken; it is the system that is broken. It is dollars and sense and nothing but.
No comments:
Post a Comment