|
|
 |
JOHN PETERSON AND KAMLOOPS SECONDARY SCHOOLS
POSSIBLE RECONFIGURATION
September 2002
Report for Public Discussion
PREAMBLE
During the Budget process that took place earlier this year the Board requested that staff present a list of facilities for possible closure or reconfiguration. This initiative was necessitated by the continued decline in enrolment experienced by the school district over the last several years. In addition, recent changes to the Financial Allocation System means that the Board will have to fund vacant or underutilized space out of the per pupil grant.
Included on the list of schools was a possible reconfiguration of John Peterson Secondary and Kamloops Secondary into one secondary school with the same grades eight to twelve configuration. A cursory examination revealed that there could be possible savings between 1.3 and 1.6 million dollars per year. In addition, there appeared to be the possibility of more course offerings or at the very least an increase in the number of sections of a course offering which would reduce the number of timetable conflicts. It was determined that a more detailed analysis was required before any decision could be taken by the Board.
However, before that detailed analysis was initiated it was determined that there should be a public meeting to allow parents to give their reaction to such a proposal and to determine the range of issues that should be considered through any detailed staff analysis. Staff have completed that analysis and the details are presented in the report that follows.
The analysis is focussed on two major issues. The first is the educational impact of combining the two schools into one facility. The second major component is the financial impact of a combination. Included as part of the discussion are the consequences of leaving the schools as they are presently as well as what it will mean to maintain the status quo in the context of declining enrolment. Also examined was any impact on Special Education Programs. An Appendix I to the report lists the questions raised at the Public Meetings along with the staff responses.
EDUCATIONAL IMPACT
The proposal to combine John Peterson Secondary and Kamloops Secondary has received compelling arguments from both those in favour of the combination and those opposed. Those in favour of maintaining the status quo argue that a mid-size secondary school offers a more student-centered program. The smaller school size lends itself to a greater sense of student belonging, less competition and more personalized learning, resulting in improved learning
outcomes for students. Those in favour of combining the schools argue that the combined population of these schools would allow for improved staffing levels so that students at all levels would have greater flexibility and more choices in their program/course selections. With a larger population base, teachers would have greater opportunities to teach and focus on their area of speciality/expertise, resulting in improved student achievement.
As a mid-sized school, John Peterson’s students have demonstrated excellent achievement on several measures of learning outcomes: Foundation Skills Assessments, Provincial Exams, and Scholarships. Kamloops Secondary has a proud history and tradition of academic excellence, which is being maintained even though their population has dropped from a school that at one time housed 1300 students. They too perform above district averages on the measures listed above. The size of the school population is not a sole determinant of student achievement.
PROGRAMS/COURSES/TIMETABLES
Diversity is one of the most prominent features of our public schools today. Our schools attempt to address the educational needs of learners ranging from young people who face serious intellectual/physical challenges to those who display advanced levels of intelligence/talents.
The types of programs, number of course offerings and timetable flexibilities are directly related to school size. The staffing/resources generated by a larger school makes it possible to provide a greater array of programming and course selection options for all students in both foundation and elective study areas. Advanced placement, Honours programs, Alternate programs, multiple classes of courses, Advanced Fine Arts/Music/Drama programs and Shop programs are some examples of possible program options that would be enriched in a larger school. As well, the resources generated by a larger school allow the possibility to create multiple timetables with some courses being offered on a semester basis and others on a full year basis.
Despite the diversity among our learners, all these young people want the opportunity to succeed. Choice, flexibility and access are all enhanced in a school that has a larger population base. The combined population base of John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary would result in a broader, richer and more equitable array of course options for students of all abilities.
Conversely, if the schools remain as they are it will not be possible to maintain the status quo as far as course offerings and choices are concerned. Secondary schools are staffed according to a ratio, which is based on the number of students enrolled. As the enrolments in both schools decline so will the number of staff assigned to each school. As the number of staff decreases so will the range of choices for students. To continue to provide staffing at the present level in the context of continued enrolment decline will produce inequities in the system. There is no doubt that we could continue to offer a quality secondary program similar to what is offered in schools of equivalent size in the District. However, the close proximity of these schools offers a unique opportunity not available elsewhere.
ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
Students may not always enjoy opportunities to develop all their talents and interests through their curricular activities. For some students, sports are what keeps them in school.
John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary field competitive teams in areas such as basketball, volleyball, football, rugby, soccer and field hockey. Because of the current population base of the two separate schools, most of the teams are tiered at the double AA level. The combination of these schools would result in some of these sports being reclassified at a triple AAA level. For example in Basketball (Boys) –226 or more boys in grades 11 and 12 will result in a triple AAA classification. While the level of competition would increase as a result of this tiering, the greatest impact will be on the total number of students that will be eligible to participate. As separate schools you have almost twice the number of students participating. For example, while currently you have two senior boys basketball teams, a combined school would have one senior basketball team, which would result in significantly fewer students being able to make the team and to play at this level.
Athletics and competitive sports is the one area that will be most noticeably affected by the combination of John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary. While the calibre and competition of play will increase, the opportunities for students to compete for team positions will decrease.
This being said, however, the combined school will provide an opportunity to expand intramural opportunities for students. In addition it is our understanding that students would be able to continue to play at the AA level within the district and on an invitational or exhibition basis. However, they would not be able to participate in regular league play or at the provincial championship level. If the board determines that this reconfiguration is to proceed significant attention will have to be devoted to providing opportunities to those students whose interest in athletics keeps them committed to their schooling.
FINE ARTS/DRAMA/MUSIC
Like athletics, some students find meaning in school through the opportunities provided in the fine arts, drama and music areas. Like the curricular areas, school enrolment determines to a large extent the opportunities available to students in these areas. For example, in a larger school the music program can be expanded to include various options for students (band, choir and composition) from beginning to advanced levels. The larger school enrolment would allow staffing to bring focussed expertise to the Music department and greater flexibility in meeting the diverse needs of learners. The same would apply to fine arts and drama. Again, the learner would benefit from improved choices and options. There is concern, however, that the number and nature of concerts, theatrical and music performances will be affected by the combination of these two schools.
SCHOOL CLIMATE
An argument can be made that a smaller school fosters a more positive school climate because the smaller numbers allow for the development of closer student/student and student/staff
relationships. In many ways, the current enrolments of John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary support this argument. However, school enrolment alone does not determine a positive school climate. A student’s sense of belonging is very much an individual experience determined by a student’s sense of self, motivation, aspirations, efficacy and view of the world. To a large extent schools that are seen as friendly, supportive environments, fostering the opportunity for students to develop their diverse talents and strengths give students a sense of identity with their schools, with their peers, and with the adults in their lives and an increased sense of belonging.
Whether the opportunities provided are curricular or extra curricular they are all important determinants in developing competitive spirit, sense of teamwork, school pride and belonging. Combining John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary will result in a school enrolment of over 1200 students. The staff and students of this size of school would have to work very hard to ensure that students of all abilities and backgrounds were valued and supported so that all students can achieve at their maximum potential. Historically, Kamloops Secondary has proven that these conditions can be created in this size of school.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The financial analysis below is based on several assumptions:
- That the student enrolment projections for the two schools will continue to decline as projected.
- That the Ministry funding framework affecting staffing will be maintained for three years.
- That the John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary school boundaries will not be changed.
The following staff cost savings result from the combination of JP and KSS:
Clerical:
- Projected reduction of 3.0 F.T.E. @ average budget cost of $43,935 equals $131,805. The original calculation included a boundary change.
Teaching:
- Original: (Changing Existing School Boundaries)
- plan with boundary changes projected a reduction of 15.17 F.T.E., made up of 2.0 F.T.E. principals and vice principals and 13.17 F.T.E. teachers.
- 2.0 F.T.E. principals @ average budget cost of $106,472 equalled $212,944.
- 13.17 F.T.E. teachers @ average budget cost of $77,660 equalled $1,022,782.
- SUMMARY
- Total education staff savings on original plan of 3.0 F.T.E. Clerical,
- 2.0 F.T.E. principals and 13.17 F.T.E. teachers equals $1,367,531.
- Revised: (Maintaining Existing School Boundaries)
- Revised plan projects a reduction of 9.68 F.T.E. educators. I assume this includes 2.0 F.T.E. principals and vice principals and 7.68 teachers.
- 2.0 F.T.E. principals @ average budget cost of $106,472 equals $212,944.
- 7.68 F.T.E. teachers @ average budget cost of $77,660 equals $596,428.< li/>
- Total education staff savings on revised plan equals $809,372.
- SUMMARY:
- Total staff savings on the revised plan of 3.0 F.T.E. clerical, 2.0 F.T.E. principals and 7.68 F.T.E. teachers equals $941,177.
Continued operation of both facilities eliminates any potential operating savings of custodial, maintenance or utility costs.
SPECIAL EDUCATION
Potential negatives:
- A larger school size could increase the likelihood of individual students “falling through the cracks.”
- There may be mobility issues with regard to students with physical (and mental) disabilities moving between the two facilities
Potential advantages:
- An increased potential for more specialized educational programming, particularly around gifted education and minimum essentials or transitions programs
- This may be the opportunity needed to provide a work experience program on the south shore.
- Greater opportunities for the integration of special needs students, in that there will be more classes, more settings, to chose from
- Greater opportunities for peer tutoring, teacher assistant courses, and other student initiatives.
Special education services are designed to provide individual programs to students, with a wide assortment of needs, in a wide array of settings. In this district, special education programs currently operate in one room rural schools, in at least one school of over a thousand students, and in schools of every possible size and configuration in between. Special education services are, by definition, adaptable.
The negatives identified above would need to be addressed but this amalgamation has good potential for enhanced student support and programming in the general area of special education.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
There is case to be made that once a secondary school’s enrolment drops below 800 it is very difficult to offer a comprehensive curricular program. In this district, several of our high schools in the outlying areas are below this number and face increasing challenges in being able to offer foundation studies options to their learners. For 2003-2004, on the assumption that our projected enrolments for John Peterson and Kamloops Secondary are correct, John Peterson will have a student enrolment of 552 and Kamloops Secondary will be at 852 students. In the 2004-2005 school year this number will drop to 1338 students and it will continue to decline in subsequent years as outlined in Appendix II A & Appendix II B. The unique situation of having two schools with the same grade configurations on the same campus offers opportunities not available anywhere else in the District.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) It is recommended that the Board set the date for a public meeting regarding the contents of this report.
2) It is recommended that the Board consider this matter at the Board meeting of October 7, 2002.
APPENDIX I
QUESTIONS FROM PUBLIC MEETINGS
- What are the potential savings and how did we arrive at this estimate?
An outline of the potential savings is included in this document. The predominant savings result from a reduction in staffing. The physical plant would remain the same so there would be no savings resulting from maintenance, custodial etc.
While it is difficult to narrow down the savings to an exact dollar figure it is clear that savings will be significant. Our best estimate is between $900,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 per year without a change in the present school boundaries. There will be some Start-Up costs associated with the first year that will reduce the cost saving in that year. A list of these possible costs is included in Appendix III.
-
What costs have been identified and by whom?
The costs that have been identified to date have been ascertained through discussion among senior staff and are included in this report. Specific information has been obtained from the various departments and forwarded to the superintendent’s office for inclusion. It has not been the responsibility of any one individual to identify costs or savings.
-
Will the plan ensure that efficiencies are maintained and does it create new efficiencies? On what precedent do we base this opinion?
The cost savings that have been realized will carry over into subsequent years and be cumulative just as a decision to leave these schools as they are will carry over into subsequent additional costs. As the enrolment declines we will not be able to maintain the program as it presently exists without additional expenditures.
Combining two schools with two distinct cultures will present problems for the existing school communities that can only be resolved through significant planning and input. That is why it is important that any decision be made in a manner that will allow ample time for implementation.
We have not looked at any precedents.
-
Have alternatives been developed and analysed, and if so what were they?
No alternatives have been examined in any detail. A preliminary discussion has taken place with respect to other configurations, i.e. Middle School, Junior School, back to the previous configuration. However, on preliminary examination it appears that these alternatives will not meet the major criteria being considered which are significant savings while maintaining or improving the academic program presently being offered in both schools. In addition, the configuration of secondary schools within the district is a decision that has been made by a previous Board and all secondary schools in the system are now grade eight to twelve schools. This process was only recently completed.
-
What problems will such an undertaking create and how will we deal with them?
Some problems are readily apparent. The timetabling of the school to allow for adequate time to get to classes on the campus, the scheduling of breaks, maintaining the personal connection with students in a larger school, the integration of two different school cultures into a new school culture, the supervision of students between classes etc.
If a decision is made by the Board to pursue this option a detailed plan will be developed to deal with these issues. Parents and students will be surveyed with respect to problems and solutions before a decision is taken.
-
What types of groups should be part of the planning and decision making?
Staff, parents and students would have to be involved in listing problems and developing solutions.
-
Will there be adequate funding for curriculum resources for any new configuration?
Since the class configuration is the same that exists now and enrolment is declining, that should not be an issue. The same level of support will apply as applies to other schools in the system. Resources will be provided for new materials resulting from system curriculum changes. If a reconfiguration is to proceed then it is anticipated that more material might have to be offered to provide more sections of a course at the same time in the timetable. It may be that additional resources may have to be provided in the start-up year.
-
What happens if a class size is two or three students more than one teacher is able to have as the ceiling for number of students in his/her class?
In a small school, some of the students would have to take another class
with very few options for selection. In a larger school, choice and
flexibility of programming is greater.
-
Will there be less counsellors looking after a larger number of students?
The counselling support will be determined based on an equitable formula
that will be applied to all secondary schools.
-
Will there be fewer scholarships available for a larger number of students?
Provincial examination scholarships are based on individual student
performance so the reconfiguration of the schools will not directly affect
the number of these scholarships. However, there are a few specialty
scholarships or bursaries that will be reduced. For example, each of the two
schools award a UBC entrance scholarship. If the two schools are combined,
one such scholarship would be awarded. There will also be greater competition
for the school-based top award winners
-
I would like to see on paper how keeping the same ratios break down to a 1.6 million savings.
Staff have indicated that a cursory examination revealed that the savings would be between 1.3 million and 1.6 million per year. However, those figures required more detailed scrutiny. A more detailed analysis is provided in this report. If the Board wanted to save the 1.3 million dollars or more initially forecast it would require a change in boundaries which staff is not recommending. Therefore, the best guesstimate would be between $900,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 per year.
-
If more electives can be offered if there are more students – how are we any further ahead?
The larger the population of the school the greater the range of course offerings to meet the full range of student needs. Students will have greater choice in class selection and fewer timetabling conflicts.
-
How do you feel this proposed amalgamation will impact the French immersion program?
There should not be any negative impact on the French Immersion Program. Any negative impact on the French Immersion program would more likely be due to a decline in enrolment in this and other programs that we are experiencing in the system. It is more probable that the impact would be positive because of the increased flexibility as a result of more options in the courses FI students take in English.
-
Is the process of saving some money worth all of the negatives involved?
That is what this process is about. The Board must measure the positives and the negatives and determine what, in the final analysis, is in the best interest of students in the system. While it is the budget issues that brought this matter to the forefront, it is the quality of program that must be considered in any final determination.
-
Will the students be surveyed to state the problems they can see with the merger of the two schools?
Yes students will have to be involved and their input will be sought through surveys as well as other means. These surveys should be structured as a problem solving exercise.
-
What was the original rationale in making both schools 8 to 12?
The original rational was part of the South shore Reconfiguration Plan to more efficiently utilize the space in the four south shore schools.
-
Is the Board considering making the schools a junior high school and a senior high school – one 8 – 10, the other 11 – 12?
No that is not being actively considered because it is expected that there will be very little if any savings in such scenarios. It would most likely cost more than the present configuration because we would revert back to two different programs, different timetables, different administrations, etc. There wouldn’t be the savings in staffing and there wouldn’t be the improvement in the course offerings.
-
Could you clarify the process of eliminating staff and classes and explain how these decisions will be made?
If the Board made a decision to pursue this option the first order of business would be to select a principal. The principal would be given his/her staffing ratios and then would proceed to determine how much staff would be needed to timetable the school. The staffing process would also have to comply with the terms of the Teachers’ Collective Agreement.
-
Would there be any change of school hours to accommodate students commuting from each school to attend classes in the different facilities? If so will parents be involved in this decision-making?
That will have to be determined through the timetabling process, which is the responsibility of the principal. We would expect that the principal would want to consult with the parents with respect to this and other issues that will arise as part of the planning process.
-
What consideration is being made in regards to traditions of both schools?
Each school has a separate and distinct culture. Each student body has a loyalty to their school. That is to be expected as a lot of time and energy has been expended in building these cultures. However, what will have to occur if this decision is made, is the creation of a new school with a new culture, a new identity. Students presently attending both schools along with their parents will have to be involved in the creation of this new culture. Once a new school is in place it should not be an issue for new students coming into the school. The difficult period will be for those students presently in attendance at both schools.
-
How will the name be chosen for a one-campus school?
The School district has a policy for the naming of schools. Any school name would have to be developed consistent with that policy.
-
Are there sufficient funds for starting up a one – campus school?
Funds would have to be provided to allow this to occur if the decision is taken to proceed. There would be some impact on this year’s budget but other expenditures would have to be included in next years budget. The major expenditure this year would most likely be for an
additional administrative salary for a least a portion of the year along with some clerical support. (See Appendix III)
-
Is there enough time to address all the concerns? Should we wait one more year?
If the decision is taken now that should not be a problem. If the matter is deferred to a later date then that could become an issue. It is expected that it will take a full year to be implemented properly.
-
How can we maintain 1.3 million dollars in savings every year?
We are basing our costs on what actually exists this year compared to future years. If we leave the configuration as it is, then the money will not be saved each year and as the enrolment declines it will cost additional funds to maintain what presently exists.
-
Have you factored in all the cost that will result from the changes?
We expect that there will be additional start-up costs that have not been anticipated at this point. We have included that as part of our analysis. However, what is apparent is that the savings will be significant regardless.
-
Is the only reason we are dealing with this issue money?
No. Money is certainly the issue that brought the possibility to the attention of the Board and staff. What makes the matter of interest is that we have an opportunity to improve the program for less money within an existing facility without changing the boundaries or having to place students in other facilities. That opportunity does not exist with our other secondary schools.
-
Is the reduction in cost due to the decline in enrolment?
Partly. The reduction in cost is due to the combination of the facilities in the context of enrolment decline with the resultant cost saving in staffing
-
What will happen to sports at J.P.? Can a school compete in both AA and AAA?
At the junior level a combined school will continue to compete at the
same level as the other secondary schools in our district. For senior
sports, double AA or triple AAA status will determine the league provincially.
The option for some exhibition games involving an AAA school and AA school is
possible. Participation at both Sr. and Jr. levels of sport will be affected by the combination of these schools.
-
Are scholarships based on population? Why would we loose scholarships?
Scholarships are not based on population. They are based on individual
student achievement.
-
If they were left separate could there not be joined classes?
That is a possibility and there may be some saving. However it would be minimal. Also there is the question of how that could be done unless there was a fully integrated timetable, an integrated discipline code, integrated staff meetings, opportunities for staff discussion around reporting etc. Any saving would probably be reduced through additional cost in some other areas.
-
Would the principal be paid more because of a larger school?
No, the principal’s salary is established in contract.
-
How will Muffie’s store handle identical breaks?
That would be determined through timetabling. It may mean that not all students have identical breaks.
-
What are the projected enrolments for both schools for the next four years?
See Appendix II A & Appendix II B
-
How many teaching positions would be lost if the schools merged?
The analysis is included within this report.
-
How many teaching positions would be lost without merging but due to declining enrolment?
See Appendix IV.
-
What about incidental costs in regard to letterhead, Report Cards, Signage, Teaching Materials etc.?
A list has been included in Appendix III regarding such costs.
-
What is the detailed breakdown of 1.3 million dollars?
The analysis is included in this report. The 1.3 million can be obtained if there is a boundary change. Staff is not recommending any changes in boundaries.
-
Why can’t one Principal and oneVice- Principal manage the two schools without a merger?
Logistically it would not be possible for two administrators to administer a school of this size with two buildings.
-
How are the students going to move from one building to another in all climates?
Movement will be determined by timetable and location of classrooms. For example, some classrooms could be configured in modules around certain teachers or according to grades. The configuration will determine the movement. Or put in another way the movement can be determined by the timetable and the way the school is configured.
-
How much time are we going to allow students to do this and what would a causeway cost?
The amount of time will be determined by the amount of movement required. Movement from building to building can be reduced through the timetable or increased through the timetable. A cost for a connection has been included as part of the estimated start up cost if it is determined it is needed.
-
Is it possible to predict that these two schools will have declining enrolment?
Yes. Enrolment will decline into the foreseeable future. Data is included with this report in Appendix II A & Appendix II B.
-
Does the provincial government make decisions regarding school boundaries?
No. These decisions are local decisions and are made by the District
-
How do we maintain the quality of education in these schools and still remain fiscally responsible?
We can leave these schools the way they are and still provide a quality program to the students in both. We would continue to provide the program and choices that we provide to students attending schools of similar size in our District.
In the matter under discussion we are able to provide a better program at less cost because of the physical proximity of the two buildings and because they have the same grade configuration (Grade 8 – 12). This opportunity does not exist with our other secondary schools.
-
Geographically it makes sense to combine the schools, but have other options for the district been looked at, such as using the buildings during the summer months?
No. We have not yet examined the issue of year round schooling.
-
How much money do you have to save due to declining enrolment?
The province has indicated to School Districts what their revenue will be over the next three years. This District has embarked on a three-year plan, which shows a deficit next year of approximately $4,000,000.00 and the following year of approximately $2,000,000.00. The District must reduce its expenditures to meet the expected revenues.
The Board has to determine alternatives for doing this while maintaining the quality of service. This alternative is one way to reduce costs. If it is determined to maintain the status quo here then the costs reductions will have to occur in other areas of the budget.
-
Why don’t we just eliminate some of the administration, combine the timetables and still call them two schools so we can maintain all the sports opportunities, scholarships and leadership opportunities as well as taking advantage of the financial savings?
This may realize some cost savings but will most likely produce other issues that will make the cost savings a lot less than the alternative being considered. Some of those issues are referenced in other parts of this report
-
Why can’t we celebrate a merger by combining two good schools and make one great school for both academic and athletics?
If a decision is made to proceed it is very important that it be based on strong educational grounds for both the students in these schools as well as the students in the District. It would be best if such a decision could be implemented in a positive manner
-
Is one library large enough?
The best utilization of the learning/library resources of the school should be determined by the staff and administration. It would make sense to utilize the strengths of both libraries rather than having to go to one building to do one's research.
-
How much money does it take to tie these schools together?
An estimate of the start up costs is included in Appendix III.
-
Shouldn’t other schools be amalgamated as well as these due to declining enrolment?
Staff have developed a list of schools to be considered for possible closure based on enrolment projections. This year we have three situations where principals have additional schools to administer. However, distances would prohibit integration of timetables at the secondary level. Transportation costs alone between schools would be prohibitive. This configuration offers a unique opportunity within our District due to proximity of facilities and similarity in grade configurations.
-
Will there be a tunnel?
A cost has been provided in the start up estimates for a connection between the buildings but that remains to be determined.
-
Are you going to lengthen the school day because of moving back and forth?
That may be a possibility. However that will be determined by how the school is timetabled as well as the location of various classrooms.
-
Declining enrolment? What about years 5, 6, and 7? Do they show an upswing?
The enrolment projections we are using show a steady decline in years
5,6, and 7. See Appendix II A & Appendix II B.
-
Is the 1.3 million – 1.6 million all in staffing?
Almost all of the savings would be due to reduction in staffing.
-
What about combining Brock and Norkam? One administration?
The sizes of the schools and the distances between them would make such a combination imprudent. We have situations where we have one principal administering more than one school (Barriere, Logan Lake, Clearwater – Blue River). In all these situations the schools being annexed are much smaller than those considered here and there is no integration of timetables.
-
Will it be more impersonal if it becomes larger?
There is certainly a risk of that occurring which is one of the negatives that must be considered in this decision. There are ways to address that issue that are being applied in various high schools in Canada. For example, the school could be divided into modules, there could be certain staff and administrators assigned to different groups of students who would stay with them throughout their tenure at the school, etc. There are other options as well that could be explored to reduce the negative aspects of this factor
-
Did the administration bring this forward?
The Board requested administration during the budget process to bring forward a list of schools/facilities for possible closure and/or reconfiguration. This is one of the possibilities that was placed on the list. However, all District facilities are under review.
-
What kinds of programs are possible and how will students access them?
The greater the number of students in a school, the broader the range of
subjects that can be offered to meet the range of student needs. As well, in
a smaller school you may have the choice of single blocks of Foundation
subjects which may in fact conflict with other foundation studies courses. A
larger school has the staffing to offer several blocks of the same
subject at different timetable blocks allowing students greater flexibility
in the choice of subjects important to their program of study.
-
Is this an economic issue? How can we do a statement of impact with the short timeline?
The issue came to the fore as a result of budget challenges. It is one way to save money. However, when the financial issues were examined it was clear that we could offer the
same program with significant cost reductions and further that we could offer a better choice of options for less cost.
-
Will the savings be realized? Will you be able to offer a better program compared to what we have now?
We expect that there will be considerable discussion about the dollar numbers involved in the savings. However, what is clear is that there will be significant yearly savings and there will be improvements in the options presently being offered students should this reconfiguration proceed.
-
Wouldn’t we have more savings by having a junior and senior campus?
There probably would be savings if the schools were combined in this manner under certain conditions. The savings would be limited according to the degree of integration of the timetables. Restricting students to one building according to grade level could have a financial effect. However, that would have to be examined in the context of the delivery of the program and the savings that would accrue. It would not be as efficient as the alternative under consideration.
-
If we improve the program wouldn’t we have other students who would want to attend from outside the boundary?
That would most likely be the case and that is why staff is recommending that the boundaries remain as they are. To do otherwise would undermine the programs in our other high schools
-
What is the capacity of the two schools?
School Capacity: JP-750, KSS-975
-
How would the other schools be able to compete in sports?
Other district schools will continue to compete in their appropriate leagues.(Jr. and Sr.)
-
Is the concept of a Middle School being considered for this campus?
No, not at this time. A true Middle School would most likely cause additional expenditures without the savings. This reconfiguration does not prohibit some tenets of Middle School philosophy being applied like module groupings, exploratories etc.
-
Why not go back to the way it was? How was the 1.3 million figures arrived at?
Neither the anticipated savings nor the improvements to the program could be realised in the context of declining enrolments by a return to the past.
-
There are problems with course conflict now. How will that be affected when schools are smaller?
These types of issues will be further exacerbated as enrolment declines. It will take more of our resources to be able to sustain the programs that presently exist in both schools. That would be difficult to defend while we are reducing choices in other secondary schools in the system due to declining enrolment. There is an opportunity here that does not exist elsewhere to reduce the amount of course conflict by providing a greater number of sections per course at the same time in the timetable.
-
How long will it take to have schools drop down to 1250?
By 2005-2006 the combined enrolments of these two schools will be very
close to 1250.(See Appendix II A & Appendix II B)
-
How many teams will not be able to be formed, as there will not be enough kids to play on them?
The larger the school population, the higher the possibility of fielding a team. With declining enrolments fielding certain sports becomes a challenge. Student and coach interest are important ingredients in student recruitment for team play.
-
Will you be surveying students and parents on this issue?
We are doing that through this series of public consultations. We will do a survey on the issues before a decision is made. If a decision is made to pursue this option there will be a process identified for further consultation and input.
-
Will the proposal for a Fine Arts School be considered in all of this?
There has been some discussion by staff but it is not considered prudent for this configuration. We must maintain the viability of our other schools while offering a broader range of choices.
-
Is the affect on the other schools being considered in this plan?
Yes. It must be a major consideration in any decision on this plan.
| |
| SCHOOL |
GRADE ENROLLMENT AS OF DEC.31/00 |
| |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
Sp. Ed. |
|
|
| KAMLOOPS SECONDARY |
|
|
164 |
192 |
164 |
199 |
157 |
14 |
|
|
| ABERDEEN |
78 |
82 |
63 |
76 |
86 |
95 |
67 |
|
| R. L. CLEMITSON |
39 |
38 |
52 |
52 |
52 |
46 |
64 |
|
| SAVONA |
11 |
13 |
11 |
10 |
16 |
12 |
16 |
|
| |
|
|
Sp. Ed. |
PROJECTION |
YEAR |
| TOTAL IN GRADE YEAR |
128 |
133 |
126 |
138 |
154 |
153 |
147 |
164 |
193 |
164 |
199 |
157 |
14 |
890 |
CURRENT |
| |
147 |
164 |
192 |
164 |
199 |
|
14 |
880 |
2001-02 |
| |
153 |
147 |
164 |
192 |
164 |
|
14 |
834 |
2002-03 |
| |
154 |
153 |
147 |
164 |
192 |
|
14 |
824 |
2003-04 |
| |
138 |
154 |
153 |
147 |
164 |
|
14 |
770 |
2004-05 |
| |
126 |
138 |
154 |
153 |
147 |
|
14 |
732 |
2005-06 |
| |
133 |
126 |
138 |
154 |
153 |
|
14 |
718 |
2006-07 |
| |
128 |
133 |
126 |
138 |
154 |
|
14 |
693 |
2007-08 |
APPENDIX II B
JOHN PETERSON SECONDARY ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS
| |
| SCHOOL |
GRADE ENROLLMENT AS OF DEC.31/00 |
| |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
Sp. Ed. |
|
|
| JOHN PETERSON SEC. |
|
|
117 |
120 |
126 |
163 |
109 |
10 |
|
|
| LLOYD GEORGE |
43 |
35 |
38 |
54 |
42 |
46 |
47 |
|
| STEWART WOOD |
22 |
17 |
26 |
16 |
13 |
12 |
16 |
|
| F.I. ARTHUR HATTON |
12 |
17 |
12 |
13 |
11 |
13 |
11 |
|
| F.I. MARION SCHILLING |
18 |
15 |
12 |
14 |
15 |
9 |
8 |
|
| F.I. SOUTH SAHALI EL. |
39 |
21 |
15 |
14 |
17 |
23 |
23 |
|
| |
|
|
Sp. Ed. |
PROJECTION |
YEAR |
| TOTAL IN GRADE YEAR |
134 |
105 |
103 |
111 |
98 |
103 |
105 |
117 |
120 |
126 |
163 |
109 |
10 |
645 |
CURRENT |
| |
105 |
117 |
120 |
126 |
163 |
|
10 |
641 |
2001-02 |
| |
103 |
105 |
117 |
120 |
126 |
|
10 |
581 |
2002-03 |
| |
98 |
103 |
105 |
117 |
120 |
|
10 |
553 |
2003-04 |
| |
111 |
98 |
103 |
105 |
117 |
|
10 |
544 |
2004-05 |
| |
103 |
111 |
98 |
103 |
105 |
|
10 |
530 |
2005-06 |
| |
105 |
103 |
111 |
98 |
103 |
|
10 |
530 |
2006-07 |
| |
134 |
105 |
103 |
111 |
98 |
|
10 |
561 |
2007-08 |
| Administration Transition Costs-VP and new principal for six months |
$100,000 |
| Basic Office Supplies - Stationary, Course Booklets, etc. |
$ 10,000 |
| Athletics: Logo and new uniforms senior level |
$ 15,000 |
| Building Connection (if required) |
$150,000 |
| Learning Resources |
No costs |
| Name Change, Signage, etc. |
$ 5,000 |
| Year-end awards |
$ 10,000 |
Communications:
Telephones, Networking, Fire Alarms, Security Systems |
TBD |
APPENDIX IV
SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 73 (KAMLOOPS/THOMPSON)
Enrollment/Staffing Projections
Kamloops Secondary and John Peterson Secondary
| |
2002/03 |
2003/04 |
2004/05 |
2005/06 |
Kamloops Secondary |
| Projected Enrollment |
877 |
852 |
810 |
777 |
| Staffing Allocation |
47.84 |
46.7 |
45 |
43.84 |
John Peterson Secondary |
| Projected Enrollment |
603 |
552 |
528 |
520 |
| Staffing Allocation |
36.7 |
33.93 |
32.93 |
32.5 |
| |
| Total Staff for Both Schools |
84.54 |
80.63 |
77.93 |
76.34 |
| |
| Combined Projected Enrollment |
1480 |
1404 |
1338 |
1297 |
| |
| Staffing Allotment for Combined School |
76.28 |
73.12 |
70.35 |
68.63 |
| |
| Difference |
-8.26 |
-7.51 |
-7.58 |
-7.71 |
| (Between Individual Allotments & Combined Allotments) |
|
|
