Does anyone else absolutely despise the iPad driven learning and all the “ed tech” software? My daughter is in second grade at Washington, and I can’t see a single value add for the applications she uses. Maybe there would be in high school, but elementary? Bring back books and paper/pencil!
I'm going to give them some promotion later this month when I publish my angry screed about YouTube. I think this is a good topic to bring up with Board members and I definitely will.
Are you sure they are organizing with relation to getting D65 policy changed?
I welcome that group, but the article seems to be more focused on pledges that families take individually with regard to smartphones rather than getting the school district to use age-appropriate tech.
I welcome anyone who wants to be sensible about tech in our lives, but I didn't get that vibe from the article that that was their focus.
Sensibility in EdTech is a major priority of mine, and our district leadership must provide clearer research-backed positions on how and when tech is used in the classroom in an age-appropriate manner. Tech solutions should provide a clear advantage over their "analog" counterparts, otherwise we should lean on the latter.
We're part of the Wait Until 8th movement, and I'm happy to see that gaining steam locally. ETHS adopted a strong stance around phones in the building, yet I don't recall hearing it brought up meaningfully by D65. As Miriam noted below (thank you for spearheading!), these efforts are interrelated in that they center around fostering a healthy relationship with tech for our kids.
Understandably, our EdTech adoption in D65 was accelerated by the unprecedented circumstances of Covid that forced full-time e-learning. That doesn't give us a pass on reevaluating our EdTech philosophies to ensure they align with our overarching values and goals that span BOTH academic and socioemotional sides of learning. When extra "iPad time" is given as a reward during free time, it robs kids of valuable opportunities to socialize and sharpen creativity skills.
Oh, and in the context of class sizes, I'd imagine there's a correlation between that and EdTech usage.
In thinking about D65’s embrace of technology such as iPads, I think it’s relevant to recall that it was never evidence based but was based on the achievement gap. The thinking was that because white kids had iPads and black kids did not (at least this was the perception), that giving everyone iPads would solve the problem.
I am one of the D65 parents featured in the article. Yes, one of the things we want to accomplish, in addition to encouraging families to delay giving their child a smartphone, is also to put pressure on D65 to have more community conversation about technology in the schools. If anyone would like to get involved, we'd love for you to join!
YES! The ipads and chromebooks for younger grades are horrible and I don't particularly love it for the older kids either. Word on the street is a lot of them are just watching youTube and other things all day. There are ways for them to have this technology available for media arts/typing papers etc that doesn't involve unlimited access. Also I will point out I have yet to see an adaptive test that they are using on these devices that I think is more valuable then pencil/paper. MAP test in particular is a disaster - thank goodness it is going away. I would be happy to be involved. I have a MS student and will have a kindergartner next year.
100%! There has to be a way to shift the default of these devices to be opt-in vs. opt-out in terms of controls over what can be accessed. Otherwise, it's difficult for parents and caregivers to establish foolproof settings their kids can't find a loophole around, and it's unreasonable to expect the staff at school to enforce these variable boundaries for all the students.
We had the school principal send a note asking us to remind our 8 year olds not to use their iPads on the playground before school as they were getting damaged.
I sent a response saying maybe you shouldn’t be giving iPads to 8 year olds and asking them not to send them home.
Her response was that we needed it at home in case we had to ‘pivot to e-learning.’ This was in April of last year— fine weather and the pandemic restrictions behind us!
Let’s also not forget the district is charging families for ‘technology insurance’ as part of the fees.
I too am absolutely appalled by the “tech” the kids use now. The iPads put a barrier between students and parents that is actually kind of dangerous at worst, misguided at best. It is impossible to monitor the work that is being done so I can guaje understanding of the material. I should’t have to have a IT background to help my kid with schoolwork!They don’t even know how to sign their names anymore! Are we reverting back to signing an “X” as a legal signature? I
I am very alarmed about what is going on. D65 wants to encourage families to delay use of smartphones but at same time make all schooling, even in the classroom, take place on electronics! Instead of discussions of the material in class, many classrooms are having kids watch videos on their iPads of child actors have fake discussions! While they all sit at desks next to each other! This is why they don’t have any social skills!!!
I must be from another planet because I didn’t even love school all that much but 1980-1993 were years when I KNOW Evanston offered an incredible educational experience to students.These iPads are hindering our kids…my 6th grade son says the options for research are very limited because everything is restricted. They don’t want them seeing “inappropriate” material. I will decide what is inappropriate for my kid thank you. I would rather he do an amazing, well researched report or project than have him limited by his education system!!! Kids by kindergarten already know how to get information off phones and internet better than any of us adults.
As for smartphones, how are kids supposed to get in touch with their friends now that nobody has home phones?they literally need phones so they can learn some autonomy. 14 is too old to start making your own plans with friends and keeping track of yourself. We already have data showing this but nobody seems to know that the “parenting” part of parenting will teach your child how to be responsible and respectful.
I have a couple of points to make here. The over-reliance of electronics in education is one reason we abandoned the sinking d65 ship for a local parochial school. 5th grade was the first time students had meaningful use of classroom chromebooks. They were assigned individually, but still racked until it was time to use them for whatever reason. Generally “research”. I like it this way because of exactly what you said- I need to see the homework. I need to see the work they do on scratch paper to make sure they aren’t using calculators. I need to see how handwriting is progressing. I need to see the syntax and grammar errors so I know where help needs to be concentrated. Plus, I have done the research and the research tells us devices in the classroom are overall a bad deal for kids. I don’t think the US educates its population well at all compared to other westernized nations, and this is just another lazy low budget way to prove it. I’m not saying Ed tech isn’t expensive, but it’s cheaper than smaller class sizes and individualized lesson plans. When you rely on curriculum loaded on an iPad, you can justify hiring young and inexperienced teachers for less money. What is stopping us from going full AZ and hiring anyone at all to be a teacher? If they are going to be a babysitter who directs students to a webpage, why need an el Ed degree at all? Maybe that is too dystopian a view, but I’m finding it hard to have a positive outlook here.
Kids do not need phones to communicate to friends, btw. Parents have a phone. You can use a million online methods of communication. You can get your kid an Apple Watch and a decent pair of headphones. Apple Watches are way better than Gizmo, albeit a bit more expensive. But there is no distraction with these, it’s easy to put them in school mode until 3 pm, and let’s face it. You KNOW it ain’t good to give your 8 year old a smart phone, right? Cmon.
Lastly, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t point out that Mary Lofghren is nuts. She’s like Professor Umbridge, her devotion to the corrupt Ministry and the Dark Lord (a reference to Voldemort, not Horton- to be clear) unabating, even when presented with proof she is wrong. That’s just an analogy from a parent of a young child getting into HP. But for real- her comments trying to defend her pals seem less about presenting evidence that the current BoE have actually done ANyTHING good at all and more about her refusal to admit that she was wrong and apologize for being a world class - er, bully, I guess is the polite term- online in that heinous d65 group all those years ago. She should be embarrassed to continue her feeble retort comments on the Roundtable. Thank you for putting her in her place with facts and data and not needing a screeching voice to do so. That is all.
Thank you for this. You have the first comment I've seen about how technology in the classroom affects the quality of teachers, not just the direct impact on kids. This is all curriculum-driven. The current math & reading curricula in elementary is about as teacher-proof as you can get. Everything must be done on devices. Of course this is terrible pedagogy, but it equalizes teachers to the lowest common denominator. Retention doesn't matter then - as we've seen with veteran teachers leaving in droves. Hiring new teachers who stay a year or two isn't such a problem. As long as someone is there babysitting, while the kids watch the instructional videos and do all the work online, quality teaching isn't necessary. I'm not saying there aren't still amazing teachers in the district - there absolutely are. However, with the curriculum the district has chosen, you don't have to be an amazing teacher. You don't even have to be a good teacher. Responsible technology belongs in the classroom, but d65 has jumped that shark with its curriculum choices and over-reliance on screens.
We have seen that the veteran teachers are MUCH better at minimizing screen time and working with parents to reduce the use of iPads, whereas the newbies are much more reliant on the iPads and more likely to say "its District policy" when you ask them to reduce exposure for your kids.
I chalk this up to the exodus of experienced teachers pushed out by Horton's poor leadership.
We talk a lot about the financial disaster that Horton and the Board have created. But we should also highlight the degradation of the District's human capital that they also created.
The Administration can babble on about how much they value teachers but they still don’t conduct exit interviews with younger staff who walk away and then push retirement incentives for those who did make a career in D65 so there are no mentors.
When I started my career in Evanston over 30 years ago, it was a coveted job; now it is very close to becoming what is the nightmare scenario for school stability in a community, a “starter district”. My wife worked in such a district in a suburb north of here but there it was admin instability combined with very low pay; to see this happening in Evanston where pay and benefits are quite good in comparison should scare parents. Teachers will start their careers here and, after a couple of years, look for their “real” job.
There are so many great options to allow children to communicate with their friends and families and build those social skills / communicate as needed without open access to the internet and the application store. The Wait Until 8th Website has some great resources on this.
On the internet restrictions - when some families are upset by the existence of Halloween you're going to have to work with the lowest common denominator. I don't know what research limitations there are but when I hear every day from my 7th grader about how they're putting together a list of every online gaming site that hasn't been blocked I think perhaps they aren't blocking enough. Or maybe they're not paying enough attention to what the kids are doing during the day.
The problem with phones is that parents either don't know how to or don't want to lock them down. It's pretty easy to set up a phone so that it's just a phone.
The issue is when parents give their third grader a phone and don't restrict anything on it.
There is no way whatsoever under any circumstance the District can save 4.4 million on bus/transportation. When it doesn’t materialize I can hear it already. “The price of gas went up. Buses are expensive. Bus drivers charge a lot of money. Insurance is super high. The roads are bumpy.” These things are all true right now!
If anything, D65 should be conservative and not liberal with their future bus costs.
Beep! beep! I don’t have time for more bus nonsense.
Yeah, pinning the future of the District's financial health on an extremely volatile cost center majorly impacted by external conditions is not a great idea! But it gives everyone plausible deniability.
Also! Don't forget in 2020 we actually bailed out one of the bus companies during COVID and never put any of their contracts for bid.
Some Districts own their buses. Of course D65 doesn’t and it’s too late to take that expense on. I think transportation services are better when Districts maintain their own buses and employ their own drivers. It’s nutty to me to contract for something so very serious where so much safety and precision is required. But hey, pass the accountability stick.
At Wednesday’s presentation I asked explicitly about whether the administration and board were paying attention to the specific triggers for a state takeover. The CFO (Tamara Mitchell) stated that she did not anticipate using any tax anticipation loans for FY25-26. Based on your reporting I’d like to follow-up with her.
And yes, phase 3 of the plan (school closures) is expected to be the first order of business for the new board.
I think it depends on the timing of a lot of things and how much tax revenue they collect in March/April. Otherwise, why the rush to make sure we don't have to get $950k off the books ASAP?
1. There are a number of areas which seem ... optimistic, especially given the District's propensity for blowing budgets. At $15M in cuts, they would need to hit approx. 90% of the savings to get to the $13M they want to save.
2. On the topic of tech being used, one thing I wonder about is whether it would be cheaper over the long run to get rid of some of the Ipads and go back to using books. I absolutely hate the SAAS model as a buyer of software. I liked it when I could buy Adobe in a box, install it, and use it until the computer died. Now, I pay for it monthly and it seems like it is infinitely more expensive.
I am no expert on what the District is spending money on, but if they are paying a bunch of money each year to software vendors for the programs that kids use on Ipads, maybe over the life of a textbook, we would save enough money to justify the cost of buying books and getting rid of the ipads, especially for the youngest kids.
3. I think that bonding out the lease certificates was an inevitability, especially once it became that the transportation savings was BS. The good news with the bonds is that 1) there is a separate revenue source for it (OK, not great news - it's property taxes) and 2) the length of the time that the bond is out can be extended so that the principal and interest payments are less. Plus the $3.25 million in payments is no longer being pulled from operating funds, and by extension, from schools and classrooms.
On Barry’s point that the bonding to bail out the lease certificate fraud will fall on property owners, can we assume that Biz, Joey, et Al will oppose this scheme?
From the RoundTable:
“ Board Vice President Elisabeth “Biz” Lindsay-Ryan explained the board is opposed to a referendum because the ensuing bond would lead to a tax increase.
“We really don’t want to price more people out of Evanston,” she said.”
I brought it up because it exemplifies the contempt with which they view the public and their cowardice in failing to admit that THE ONLY reason they were not following the sensible practice of putting it up on a referendum is because they didn’t trust their own leadership skills to make the case to get it passed.
I agree that there is an opportunity to revisit the role and cost of software in the classroom. Given the strong feedback from parents, this seems like a win-win.
My assumption, however, is that a majority of the software budget supports administration functions. And that would be harder to cut because we need robust systems for things like enrollment management and HR.
Tom - regarding bus savings. The major savings would be that they will no longer offer busing other than what is legally required which is 1.5 miles from school or more. This is the big change as would result in many children no longer having access to buses and families would be responsible for getting kids to school. I am sure there will be discussion about this shift, but wanted to offer that's where I believe the more significant savings would come from.
I didn't realize that districts can receive reimbursement from the state for distance and hazard bussing! Any one know how much they receive? I found many PDFs for how to calculate the reimbursements but I didn't delve into it.
From the district's bus eligibility map, the majority of the general ed bussing looks like it's for hazards, not distance. From the ISBE page it seems that the 1.5 mile distance for free bussing is automatic but districts have to have hazard routes approved. There's a whole PDF for how to calculate the hazard score but I can't imagine many (any?) of the hazards will have been reduced or that the district will be able to remove those routes entirely. Likely why they're talking about consolidating routes instead of eliminating them.
One area not mandated by law that they're looking to eliminate (that Tom didn't cover) is preschool bussing. No idea how extensive a service they're providing or how much cutting it would save.
I was just about to email and ask about this. He disappeared right after I published his memo about the Foster School. But to be fair to him, he wasn't making very much money from D65 - he's probably their lowest paid consultant.
Is there a place Evanston residents can see in one place what consultants the District has hired and what they pay them? Or does it take sifting through old board minutes etc. It really occurred to me after the last board meeting when they were discussing (ahem, approving) millions to a California based staffing company, that it's not very transparent. (And that's where you, Tom, and the Roundtable, seem to come in).
I maintain a spreadsheet but it's a few months out of date because the District keeps changing the report format they use in the monthly reports. Here is SY2024
They also file an annual statement of affairs which lists all vendors and you can find it on the Financial page of the website. It's only updated annually though
The "Totals by Vendor" tab on that spreadsheet is where the money is at. You'll want to throw your computer out the window when you see how much gets thrown away to various software vendors or consultants for no bid work.
Example:
BLOOMBOARD, INC. $270,000.00
COURAGEOUS CONVERSATION LLC $62,407.50
MOSAIC EXPERIENCE $61,350.00
Or money related to failed internal projects like CREATE65
CHICAGO STATE UNIVERSITY $210,506.00
Or the attorneys
FRANCZEK RADELET $668,369.62
Meanwhile poor Dr. Grossi couldn't even top $50k despite being the only honest actor in the room half the time:
Correct me if I'm wrong but that seems like a lot of attorney's fees. In 2020 Franczek was billing partners out at 280/hour (don't ask). If we estimate that now it's gone up to 300/hour we're talking 2227 hours of partner billable hours in one year! I know they've had the union negotiations but is there a ton of other litigation going on that we don't know about?
It’s even crazier because they don’t even do all the litigation! For some of the bigger cases like the Deemar case, they are part of a regional liability collective that handles expensive litigation.
good analysis and reasonable reduction strategies.. II. too question the transp. reductions if they are tied to reduction of students or school closings or services at Rice, etc.
Yeah I think they need to be more transparent on this number. I'm sure it's possible but I'm not sure they have demonstrated good skills at managing transportation costs.
I wish we could look at a breakdown of students taking buses with aides. I understand busing the students from the Rice Center. I can understand students being bused to Park school. I don’t understand the significant number of students identified as SPED (special education). Are that number because of significant behavioral issues? Are they students with learning disabilities? How long does the busing go on? Is there a Special Education Team that monitors this or does the busing just go on? In an IEP there are goals written with timetables to reach the goals Is anyone watching? A good question to ask is “ How can we service all our students here? “
Transportation is considered a related service. Each IEP team determines if the student is eligible for transportation. Not every student with an IEP receives transportation services. It’s determined on a case by case basis
Yes I understand that having been part on an IEP team for many years My question is how many students does the district have to bus somewhere? If the IEP is for learning disabilities can we provide services here vs sending students out of district? If the IEP is for behavioral disabilities can the team develop an intensive care plan with the family to help the student manage his/her emotions and behaviors? Rather than have so many administrators especially in “communications “ can we have a more thorough IEP team or Special Education Team or Student Support Team?
The district self reported 66 outplaced students at the beginning of the year, which I know has fluctuated by now. I can imagine a lot of those parents would love to have their children be a part of their neighborhood school and community and not have to be in a cab 2 hours a day. But as it stands now, this district needs to do a lot of work on itself to make this a safe and functioning learning space for most of those kids. The district needs to invest in a ton of PD around neurodiversity, trauma, multiple learning disabilities, behavior as communication, etc. etc. Once a major effort is made to invest in overhauling these issues, less kids will need to be outplaced and could thrive in the district. But we can’t bring them back if there is no plan in place and no investment in creating appropriate spaces for them.
Does anyone else absolutely despise the iPad driven learning and all the “ed tech” software? My daughter is in second grade at Washington, and I can’t see a single value add for the applications she uses. Maybe there would be in high school, but elementary? Bring back books and paper/pencil!
There's a parent group that is organizing around this right now:
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2024/12/03/wait-until-8th-evanston-pledge-supports-delayed-smartphone-use/
I'm going to give them some promotion later this month when I publish my angry screed about YouTube. I think this is a good topic to bring up with Board members and I definitely will.
My plan is to try to ask a few of them about this at the Jan 30 meet and greet.
Are you sure they are organizing with relation to getting D65 policy changed?
I welcome that group, but the article seems to be more focused on pledges that families take individually with regard to smartphones rather than getting the school district to use age-appropriate tech.
I welcome anyone who wants to be sensible about tech in our lives, but I didn't get that vibe from the article that that was their focus.
I think so, but we'll find out - I'm going to ask them to write one of the questions for the questionnaire that I'm giving out to candidates.
Sensibility in EdTech is a major priority of mine, and our district leadership must provide clearer research-backed positions on how and when tech is used in the classroom in an age-appropriate manner. Tech solutions should provide a clear advantage over their "analog" counterparts, otherwise we should lean on the latter.
We're part of the Wait Until 8th movement, and I'm happy to see that gaining steam locally. ETHS adopted a strong stance around phones in the building, yet I don't recall hearing it brought up meaningfully by D65. As Miriam noted below (thank you for spearheading!), these efforts are interrelated in that they center around fostering a healthy relationship with tech for our kids.
Understandably, our EdTech adoption in D65 was accelerated by the unprecedented circumstances of Covid that forced full-time e-learning. That doesn't give us a pass on reevaluating our EdTech philosophies to ensure they align with our overarching values and goals that span BOTH academic and socioemotional sides of learning. When extra "iPad time" is given as a reward during free time, it robs kids of valuable opportunities to socialize and sharpen creativity skills.
Oh, and in the context of class sizes, I'd imagine there's a correlation between that and EdTech usage.
Well said, Peter.
In thinking about D65’s embrace of technology such as iPads, I think it’s relevant to recall that it was never evidence based but was based on the achievement gap. The thinking was that because white kids had iPads and black kids did not (at least this was the perception), that giving everyone iPads would solve the problem.
This is 100% true. It is interesting to note that zero actual research on student learning went into the decision to roll out the technology.
And the initial funding for the pilot program came from tech industry foundations like those of Gates and Zuckerberg.
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2018/05/02/school-district-65-introduces-access-to-innovate-technology-program/
I am one of the D65 parents featured in the article. Yes, one of the things we want to accomplish, in addition to encouraging families to delay giving their child a smartphone, is also to put pressure on D65 to have more community conversation about technology in the schools. If anyone would like to get involved, we'd love for you to join!
YES! The ipads and chromebooks for younger grades are horrible and I don't particularly love it for the older kids either. Word on the street is a lot of them are just watching youTube and other things all day. There are ways for them to have this technology available for media arts/typing papers etc that doesn't involve unlimited access. Also I will point out I have yet to see an adaptive test that they are using on these devices that I think is more valuable then pencil/paper. MAP test in particular is a disaster - thank goodness it is going away. I would be happy to be involved. I have a MS student and will have a kindergartner next year.
100%! There has to be a way to shift the default of these devices to be opt-in vs. opt-out in terms of controls over what can be accessed. Otherwise, it's difficult for parents and caregivers to establish foolproof settings their kids can't find a loophole around, and it's unreasonable to expect the staff at school to enforce these variable boundaries for all the students.
We had the school principal send a note asking us to remind our 8 year olds not to use their iPads on the playground before school as they were getting damaged.
I sent a response saying maybe you shouldn’t be giving iPads to 8 year olds and asking them not to send them home.
Her response was that we needed it at home in case we had to ‘pivot to e-learning.’ This was in April of last year— fine weather and the pandemic restrictions behind us!
Let’s also not forget the district is charging families for ‘technology insurance’ as part of the fees.
Sonja, let's connect! You can DM our instagram account and I'll reach out to you that way: https://www.instagram.com/waituntil8th_evanston/
I too am absolutely appalled by the “tech” the kids use now. The iPads put a barrier between students and parents that is actually kind of dangerous at worst, misguided at best. It is impossible to monitor the work that is being done so I can guaje understanding of the material. I should’t have to have a IT background to help my kid with schoolwork!They don’t even know how to sign their names anymore! Are we reverting back to signing an “X” as a legal signature? I
I am very alarmed about what is going on. D65 wants to encourage families to delay use of smartphones but at same time make all schooling, even in the classroom, take place on electronics! Instead of discussions of the material in class, many classrooms are having kids watch videos on their iPads of child actors have fake discussions! While they all sit at desks next to each other! This is why they don’t have any social skills!!!
I must be from another planet because I didn’t even love school all that much but 1980-1993 were years when I KNOW Evanston offered an incredible educational experience to students.These iPads are hindering our kids…my 6th grade son says the options for research are very limited because everything is restricted. They don’t want them seeing “inappropriate” material. I will decide what is inappropriate for my kid thank you. I would rather he do an amazing, well researched report or project than have him limited by his education system!!! Kids by kindergarten already know how to get information off phones and internet better than any of us adults.
As for smartphones, how are kids supposed to get in touch with their friends now that nobody has home phones?they literally need phones so they can learn some autonomy. 14 is too old to start making your own plans with friends and keeping track of yourself. We already have data showing this but nobody seems to know that the “parenting” part of parenting will teach your child how to be responsible and respectful.
I have a couple of points to make here. The over-reliance of electronics in education is one reason we abandoned the sinking d65 ship for a local parochial school. 5th grade was the first time students had meaningful use of classroom chromebooks. They were assigned individually, but still racked until it was time to use them for whatever reason. Generally “research”. I like it this way because of exactly what you said- I need to see the homework. I need to see the work they do on scratch paper to make sure they aren’t using calculators. I need to see how handwriting is progressing. I need to see the syntax and grammar errors so I know where help needs to be concentrated. Plus, I have done the research and the research tells us devices in the classroom are overall a bad deal for kids. I don’t think the US educates its population well at all compared to other westernized nations, and this is just another lazy low budget way to prove it. I’m not saying Ed tech isn’t expensive, but it’s cheaper than smaller class sizes and individualized lesson plans. When you rely on curriculum loaded on an iPad, you can justify hiring young and inexperienced teachers for less money. What is stopping us from going full AZ and hiring anyone at all to be a teacher? If they are going to be a babysitter who directs students to a webpage, why need an el Ed degree at all? Maybe that is too dystopian a view, but I’m finding it hard to have a positive outlook here.
Kids do not need phones to communicate to friends, btw. Parents have a phone. You can use a million online methods of communication. You can get your kid an Apple Watch and a decent pair of headphones. Apple Watches are way better than Gizmo, albeit a bit more expensive. But there is no distraction with these, it’s easy to put them in school mode until 3 pm, and let’s face it. You KNOW it ain’t good to give your 8 year old a smart phone, right? Cmon.
Lastly, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t point out that Mary Lofghren is nuts. She’s like Professor Umbridge, her devotion to the corrupt Ministry and the Dark Lord (a reference to Voldemort, not Horton- to be clear) unabating, even when presented with proof she is wrong. That’s just an analogy from a parent of a young child getting into HP. But for real- her comments trying to defend her pals seem less about presenting evidence that the current BoE have actually done ANyTHING good at all and more about her refusal to admit that she was wrong and apologize for being a world class - er, bully, I guess is the polite term- online in that heinous d65 group all those years ago. She should be embarrassed to continue her feeble retort comments on the Roundtable. Thank you for putting her in her place with facts and data and not needing a screeching voice to do so. That is all.
Thank you for this. You have the first comment I've seen about how technology in the classroom affects the quality of teachers, not just the direct impact on kids. This is all curriculum-driven. The current math & reading curricula in elementary is about as teacher-proof as you can get. Everything must be done on devices. Of course this is terrible pedagogy, but it equalizes teachers to the lowest common denominator. Retention doesn't matter then - as we've seen with veteran teachers leaving in droves. Hiring new teachers who stay a year or two isn't such a problem. As long as someone is there babysitting, while the kids watch the instructional videos and do all the work online, quality teaching isn't necessary. I'm not saying there aren't still amazing teachers in the district - there absolutely are. However, with the curriculum the district has chosen, you don't have to be an amazing teacher. You don't even have to be a good teacher. Responsible technology belongs in the classroom, but d65 has jumped that shark with its curriculum choices and over-reliance on screens.
We have seen that the veteran teachers are MUCH better at minimizing screen time and working with parents to reduce the use of iPads, whereas the newbies are much more reliant on the iPads and more likely to say "its District policy" when you ask them to reduce exposure for your kids.
I chalk this up to the exodus of experienced teachers pushed out by Horton's poor leadership.
We talk a lot about the financial disaster that Horton and the Board have created. But we should also highlight the degradation of the District's human capital that they also created.
This is the saddest of all developments - took decades to build and only a few years to undo
The Administration can babble on about how much they value teachers but they still don’t conduct exit interviews with younger staff who walk away and then push retirement incentives for those who did make a career in D65 so there are no mentors.
When I started my career in Evanston over 30 years ago, it was a coveted job; now it is very close to becoming what is the nightmare scenario for school stability in a community, a “starter district”. My wife worked in such a district in a suburb north of here but there it was admin instability combined with very low pay; to see this happening in Evanston where pay and benefits are quite good in comparison should scare parents. Teachers will start their careers here and, after a couple of years, look for their “real” job.
There are so many great options to allow children to communicate with their friends and families and build those social skills / communicate as needed without open access to the internet and the application store. The Wait Until 8th Website has some great resources on this.
On the internet restrictions - when some families are upset by the existence of Halloween you're going to have to work with the lowest common denominator. I don't know what research limitations there are but when I hear every day from my 7th grader about how they're putting together a list of every online gaming site that hasn't been blocked I think perhaps they aren't blocking enough. Or maybe they're not paying enough attention to what the kids are doing during the day.
The problem with phones is that parents either don't know how to or don't want to lock them down. It's pretty easy to set up a phone so that it's just a phone.
The issue is when parents give their third grader a phone and don't restrict anything on it.
There is no way whatsoever under any circumstance the District can save 4.4 million on bus/transportation. When it doesn’t materialize I can hear it already. “The price of gas went up. Buses are expensive. Bus drivers charge a lot of money. Insurance is super high. The roads are bumpy.” These things are all true right now!
If anything, D65 should be conservative and not liberal with their future bus costs.
Beep! beep! I don’t have time for more bus nonsense.
Yeah, pinning the future of the District's financial health on an extremely volatile cost center majorly impacted by external conditions is not a great idea! But it gives everyone plausible deniability.
Also! Don't forget in 2020 we actually bailed out one of the bus companies during COVID and never put any of their contracts for bid.
Some Districts own their buses. Of course D65 doesn’t and it’s too late to take that expense on. I think transportation services are better when Districts maintain their own buses and employ their own drivers. It’s nutty to me to contract for something so very serious where so much safety and precision is required. But hey, pass the accountability stick.
*future bus cost savings*
At Wednesday’s presentation I asked explicitly about whether the administration and board were paying attention to the specific triggers for a state takeover. The CFO (Tamara Mitchell) stated that she did not anticipate using any tax anticipation loans for FY25-26. Based on your reporting I’d like to follow-up with her.
And yes, phase 3 of the plan (school closures) is expected to be the first order of business for the new board.
I think it depends on the timing of a lot of things and how much tax revenue they collect in March/April. Otherwise, why the rush to make sure we don't have to get $950k off the books ASAP?
A few comments:
1. There are a number of areas which seem ... optimistic, especially given the District's propensity for blowing budgets. At $15M in cuts, they would need to hit approx. 90% of the savings to get to the $13M they want to save.
2. On the topic of tech being used, one thing I wonder about is whether it would be cheaper over the long run to get rid of some of the Ipads and go back to using books. I absolutely hate the SAAS model as a buyer of software. I liked it when I could buy Adobe in a box, install it, and use it until the computer died. Now, I pay for it monthly and it seems like it is infinitely more expensive.
I am no expert on what the District is spending money on, but if they are paying a bunch of money each year to software vendors for the programs that kids use on Ipads, maybe over the life of a textbook, we would save enough money to justify the cost of buying books and getting rid of the ipads, especially for the youngest kids.
3. I think that bonding out the lease certificates was an inevitability, especially once it became that the transportation savings was BS. The good news with the bonds is that 1) there is a separate revenue source for it (OK, not great news - it's property taxes) and 2) the length of the time that the bond is out can be extended so that the principal and interest payments are less. Plus the $3.25 million in payments is no longer being pulled from operating funds, and by extension, from schools and classrooms.
On Barry’s point that the bonding to bail out the lease certificate fraud will fall on property owners, can we assume that Biz, Joey, et Al will oppose this scheme?
From the RoundTable:
“ Board Vice President Elisabeth “Biz” Lindsay-Ryan explained the board is opposed to a referendum because the ensuing bond would lead to a tax increase.
“We really don’t want to price more people out of Evanston,” she said.”
https://evanstonroundtable.com/2022/03/09/district-65-looks-at-lease-certificates-to-pay-for-new-fifth-ward-school/
They were opposed to a referendum because they didn't want to risk having the vote fail. They have been raising taxes at the max allowable rate.
Asking taxpayers for the money is yet another disagreeable task that another Board will be left with.
Oh I know that’s the REAL reason.
I brought it up because it exemplifies the contempt with which they view the public and their cowardice in failing to admit that THE ONLY reason they were not following the sensible practice of putting it up on a referendum is because they didn’t trust their own leadership skills to make the case to get it passed.
I really think it would’ve easily won in a 2021 Evanston electorate
I agree that there is an opportunity to revisit the role and cost of software in the classroom. Given the strong feedback from parents, this seems like a win-win.
My assumption, however, is that a majority of the software budget supports administration functions. And that would be harder to cut because we need robust systems for things like enrollment management and HR.
Tom - regarding bus savings. The major savings would be that they will no longer offer busing other than what is legally required which is 1.5 miles from school or more. This is the big change as would result in many children no longer having access to buses and families would be responsible for getting kids to school. I am sure there will be discussion about this shift, but wanted to offer that's where I believe the more significant savings would come from.
I didn't realize that districts can receive reimbursement from the state for distance and hazard bussing! Any one know how much they receive? I found many PDFs for how to calculate the reimbursements but I didn't delve into it.
From the district's bus eligibility map, the majority of the general ed bussing looks like it's for hazards, not distance. From the ISBE page it seems that the 1.5 mile distance for free bussing is automatic but districts have to have hazard routes approved. There's a whole PDF for how to calculate the hazard score but I can't imagine many (any?) of the hazards will have been reduced or that the district will be able to remove those routes entirely. Likely why they're talking about consolidating routes instead of eliminating them.
One area not mandated by law that they're looking to eliminate (that Tom didn't cover) is preschool bussing. No idea how extensive a service they're providing or how much cutting it would save.
Issuing a debt service bond to service the debt on lease certificates for new school construction that were not approved by referendum? Seriously?
I hope the candidates weigh in on this during the campaign.
what happened to Dr. Grossi? Did the board decide they didn't like hearing bad news and just get rid of him?
I was just about to email and ask about this. He disappeared right after I published his memo about the Foster School. But to be fair to him, he wasn't making very much money from D65 - he's probably their lowest paid consultant.
Is there a place Evanston residents can see in one place what consultants the District has hired and what they pay them? Or does it take sifting through old board minutes etc. It really occurred to me after the last board meeting when they were discussing (ahem, approving) millions to a California based staffing company, that it's not very transparent. (And that's where you, Tom, and the Roundtable, seem to come in).
I maintain a spreadsheet but it's a few months out of date because the District keeps changing the report format they use in the monthly reports. Here is SY2024
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hFNKxrlCPBPS69B1_lqq-0d3ozZLP3Hj3L2JHsaQWHg/edit?gid=398942198#gid=398942198
They also file an annual statement of affairs which lists all vendors and you can find it on the Financial page of the website. It's only updated annually though
Thank you for all this labor!
The "Totals by Vendor" tab on that spreadsheet is where the money is at. You'll want to throw your computer out the window when you see how much gets thrown away to various software vendors or consultants for no bid work.
Example:
BLOOMBOARD, INC. $270,000.00
COURAGEOUS CONVERSATION LLC $62,407.50
MOSAIC EXPERIENCE $61,350.00
Or money related to failed internal projects like CREATE65
CHICAGO STATE UNIVERSITY $210,506.00
Or the attorneys
FRANCZEK RADELET $668,369.62
Meanwhile poor Dr. Grossi couldn't even top $50k despite being the only honest actor in the room half the time:
ILLUMINATE, INCORPORATED $49,000.00
Correct me if I'm wrong but that seems like a lot of attorney's fees. In 2020 Franczek was billing partners out at 280/hour (don't ask). If we estimate that now it's gone up to 300/hour we're talking 2227 hours of partner billable hours in one year! I know they've had the union negotiations but is there a ton of other litigation going on that we don't know about?
It’s even crazier because they don’t even do all the litigation! For some of the bigger cases like the Deemar case, they are part of a regional liability collective that handles expensive litigation.
Sheesh, you're right, I forgot. I believe Franczek still is the attorney but the insurance pays for it.
I think it’s both, I FOIA’d the attorney bills on the Dept of Ed Civil Rights case and it was some hot shot federal guy. But locally might be Franzcek
It’s interesting though because one can find who they paid what but then you have to still hunt for what it is for
good analysis and reasonable reduction strategies.. II. too question the transp. reductions if they are tied to reduction of students or school closings or services at Rice, etc.
Yeah I think they need to be more transparent on this number. I'm sure it's possible but I'm not sure they have demonstrated good skills at managing transportation costs.
I wish we could look at a breakdown of students taking buses with aides. I understand busing the students from the Rice Center. I can understand students being bused to Park school. I don’t understand the significant number of students identified as SPED (special education). Are that number because of significant behavioral issues? Are they students with learning disabilities? How long does the busing go on? Is there a Special Education Team that monitors this or does the busing just go on? In an IEP there are goals written with timetables to reach the goals Is anyone watching? A good question to ask is “ How can we service all our students here? “
Transportation is considered a related service. Each IEP team determines if the student is eligible for transportation. Not every student with an IEP receives transportation services. It’s determined on a case by case basis
Yes I understand that having been part on an IEP team for many years My question is how many students does the district have to bus somewhere? If the IEP is for learning disabilities can we provide services here vs sending students out of district? If the IEP is for behavioral disabilities can the team develop an intensive care plan with the family to help the student manage his/her emotions and behaviors? Rather than have so many administrators especially in “communications “ can we have a more thorough IEP team or Special Education Team or Student Support Team?
The district self reported 66 outplaced students at the beginning of the year, which I know has fluctuated by now. I can imagine a lot of those parents would love to have their children be a part of their neighborhood school and community and not have to be in a cab 2 hours a day. But as it stands now, this district needs to do a lot of work on itself to make this a safe and functioning learning space for most of those kids. The district needs to invest in a ton of PD around neurodiversity, trauma, multiple learning disabilities, behavior as communication, etc. etc. Once a major effort is made to invest in overhauling these issues, less kids will need to be outplaced and could thrive in the district. But we can’t bring them back if there is no plan in place and no investment in creating appropriate spaces for them.
We agree on that. Of course the district would then have to hire a ton of consultants to tell them how to do it .