Is There a Need for a New Huntley High School?

Board member Larry Snow was rather polite at making his points at last Thursday night’s District 158 board meeting.

The topic was high school student capacity and cost alternatives.

Snow pointed out that the justification for spending a minimum of 13.8 million dollars was the assumption:

15% of the high school classrooms have to be kept empty throughout the entire school day. (Click to enlarge the page.)

When I went to high school the scheduling was good enough that there was rarely an empty classroom.

What about when you were in high school?

Snow explained that, if scheduling was done so that only 10% of the classrooms were empty, then the capacity for the current high school would increase from 2,856 to 3,194 students.

Snow’s point was that this is well within the range of capacity needed for 10 years or more.

The highest need capacity shown in the administration report is for 3,039 students in 2016-2017. The following year less capacity is needed.

Snow didn’t have to come up with these numbers. The District presented these numbers to the Village of Huntley joint meeting on January 29th. They are online (page 37 of 48) at this link. (See above.)

Another assumption in calculating capacity is having 7 classes per day at the high school.

Wouldn’t you think administrators would use current facts and point out how for this year there are currently 8 class periods per day? But this might increase “capacity“ calculations.

What was not written down in the administration’s report to the Board were a couple of interesting enrollment facts.

Since the end of September there are now 46 (2.3%) fewer students at Huntley High School.

The report sent to the Board for the February 5th meeting had high school enrollment at 1,933 students.

What is interesting is as of January 31st, the actual high school enrollment was 1,901 or 31 fewer students. The administration decided to use a higher number for the report and not update the report for the Board with the lower total.

In case you think this was entirely the result of 12th graders graduating in mid-year, you might want to consider that there are 19 fewer students in Huntley High’s 11th grade now than at then end of September.

One presumption, and a very large one, is that if you have a class size of, say, 632 students in 7thth grade that the class size two years later for 9th grade will be at least 632 students.

But what the District 158 administration omitted to point out to the Board was how one anomaly is currently happening.

In 2007 (end of January), there were 479 9th graders at Huntley High. Two years later you might expect at least as many 11th graders.

Interesting enough there are 34 fewer students (435) two years later in the 11th grade.

Is there a high school capacity need for 2013-2014 in Huntley?

Probably not.

District 158 is planning to conduct a citizen survey about the need for a new high school.

Left out is the possibility that respondents might not find any of the answers acceptable.

No “None of the above.”

Board member Mike Skala and the board majority decided that residents must select from a list of four “spend millions of dollars” options in a survey to be sent out to residents.

Snow’s suggestion that residents may feel no additional capacity is needed for the foreseeable future and “None of the above” is applicable, was rejected by Skala and the board majority.

Unfortunately for Snow, Skala has the support of the teachers union, who wants Snow out of the way come time to vote on the results of the current Teachers Compensation Committee proposal.

The teachers want guaranteed six percent per year raises in the four years before they retire.

Those are the years’ salaries upon which their pensions are based.


Comments

Is There a Need for a New Huntley High School? — 9 Comments

  1. Do you really trust the calculations of someone who doesn’t take the time to double check their math?

    On the Campaign Contributions and Expenditures report that Larry filed (late) with the Illinois State Board of Elections, he ADDED his expenditures, instead of subtracting. Then he signed it, attesting that to the best of his knowledge, it was true, correct, and complete.

    Do we really want or need a financial watchdog who can’t fill out his own paperwork correctly? Even Larry’s buddy Cal didn’t catch this one when he did his story on Larry’s PAC last month.

    Personally, I need the “facts” from someone with less political motivation.

    http://www.elections.state.il.us/CampaignDisclosure/CommitteeDetail.aspx?id=19420

  2. That’s because there was no analysis. There was a question, “What if scheduling was done so that only 10% of the classrooms were empty?” There is no plan on how to schedule this, nor any information on if this is even feasible.

    Was the administration given the opportunity to respond to this “proposal” before you published Snow’s propaganda?

  3. I believe we need to separate the issues from unsubstantiated rhetoric.

    Classroom availability when I, or anyone else, went to school is largely irrelevant. The current teachers contract for District 158 has provisions that require admin/planning time for teachers. As such, they need room to do this. If they can be provided this time AND be given other room to do this, the district could then, theoretically, make more use of the class space.

    In terms of 7 versus 8 classes, it should be pointed out there are 7 classes and 1 period for lunch. In effect, the lunch room handles a portion of the capacity throughout the day. 7 appears to be more correct than 8 (in terms of capacity planning).

    To that end, capacity planning is a statistical exercise. There is no way of guaranteeing exact enrollment in any class. As such, to identify the smaller 11th grade class size as an “anomaly” is correct. Anomalies are not trends, and as such, should not affect the outcome of the capacity plan. The current housing slowdown and economic crisis is an established trend. As such, the capacity figures presented by the board reflect that trend. The 3,039 estimate for 2016-2017 reflect the lowest of 3 statistical models.

    Therefore, to draw the conclusion of “probably not” at this point in the study/survey process is a bit premature. If the “probably not” conclusion is based on the arguments presented in the blog, the conclusion would be irresponsible for the students of District 158.

  4. Let me see.

    A whole classroom should remain empty so a teacher can use a desk?

    Is that what you are suggesting?

    When I last spoke at Cary-Grove High School, I met the teacher in a room with at least six desks. That’s where they did their non-teaching time work.

    Might not such an alternative be a bit cheaper that scheduling 15% of the classrooms to be without students?

    And, of course, there is always the possibility of year-round schools, an idea pioneered by Mary Liebman of Bull Valley.

    The kids are in school the same length of time, but the utilization of the building is so, so much more efficient.

  5. Cal,

    Employees of the corrupt and protected education industry (BIG ED for short) do not care about efficiency.

    They don’t care whether they deserve their greedy 6% raises or their fat pensions and perks.

    Like any organization with lots of clout and cash, they want it all.

    Build the un-necessary school. Hire more un-needed teachers, pay for the obscene benefits packages for a class of useless administrators.

    Just shut up and pay!!

    If you are a regular Illinois tax payer, it is time for you to STOP believing the lies of the education industry.

    If you want a solution to education and taxation problems in Illinois, go here.

    http://extremewisdom.com/wp-content/uploads/fundamental_execsumm.pdf

  6. What I would say, at this point, is that the classroom needs to be used by the teacher for their planning time ONLY because there have been no alternatives discussed to date.

    As a single topic, the teachers’ use of classroom space (be it 10% or 15%) will not single-handedly address the capacity issue. So my other concerns are still valid.

    If year-round school is an option, we should discuss that as a separate topic, of which capacity utilization can be considered. However, year-round school is a radical change that raises additional challenges.

    If your suggestion is to adopt year-round schooling to resolve the High School capacity issue, I think it is irresponsible to present this argument without running the numbers and looking into the feasibility of this.

    Are you suggesting that the district should investigate the feasibility of year-round schooling, along with surveying the district on the topic, BEFORE the board proceeds with the survey on capacity alternatives? And as such, if the alternative is feasible (operationally and financially), are you suggesting it be added as an alternative to the survey for capacity planning?

  7. Capacity at the High School isn’t just a matter of classroom space – additional students also need additional accommodations for the cafeteria, learning center, extracurricular activities, special needs, gifted education including honors classes and AP classes, theatre, music, sports and clubs.

    Theresa Darby (parent, volunteer, educator, illustrator)

  8. Year-round schools should certainly be investigated.

    It would increase capacity by, what, one-third?

    (Four quarters divided by the three that the schools are now open.)

    The next time one of my Crystal Lake school districts asks for additional tax dollars to build more space, I shall certainly advance the idea of year-round schools.

    I feel sure Mrs. Liebman would be happy to speak to the school board.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *