Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teaching Load topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union objects to district proposal to cut alternative-school planning time; district says students need more face-to-face instruction
Summary
JCEA told negotiators that HD Carnes alternative-school teachers require 80 minutes of planning and multiple preps; district said alternative settings require more face-to-face instruction and proposed different scheduling modeled on elementary planning blocks.
The union and the district disagreed over a district proposal to reduce planning time at the alternative school (HD Carnes) from 80 minutes to 60 minutes and to align planning scheduling with an elementary-style model.
Union members who teach at HD Carnes described daily realities of the alternative setting: many students enter multiple grade levels behind, have behavioral and self-regulation needs, and require individualized instructional scaffolding beyond what a computer program can deliver. One teacher said (in the meeting’s union presentation) that alternative-school teachers use planning time for student interventions, to work with students who are in behavior rooms, to set up one-on-one supports, and to prepare multiple lessons for students working on different Edgenuity content.
Union position and district reply
- The union declined the district’s proposal to reduce plan time to 60 minutes and asked that alternative-school teachers remain under the secondary standard of a 300-minute teaching load cap (the union’s position is that the alternative school should be treated as secondary for purposes of planning time and teaching-load protections).
- District negotiators said they view alternative-school staffing as secondary in some respects (noting secondary workdays around winter breaks) but proposed alternative scheduling and additional planning days modeled to be consistent with the district’s recently proposed elementary structure. The district argued that some students at the alternative setting need more face-to-face teacher time, and that staffing and schedule changes could be structured to provide that time.
Why it matters: teachers at alternative programs frequently manage smaller classes but greater individual needs that require specialized planning and more frequent one-on-one interventions. Changes to planning time or required in-person instruction could affect instructional quality for students who are often several grade levels behind.
Ending
No agreement was reached. The union declined the proposal and requested that the alternative school be treated under the secondary teaching-load protections; the district defended the scheduling adjustments as part of a broader realignment and said it would continue the conversation.
