Residents and educators urge Sparta board to protect English staff as cuts loom

At the start of the public‑comment period, several residents and district staff warned the Sparta Area School District board that proposed staffing changes would worsen teacher turnover and narrow academic opportunity.

Lisa Olsen, who identified herself during public input, said teachers who invest time in relationships produce strong student outcomes and that recent proposals to reassign or split positions would increase workload. She said a 20% increase in workload would “come at a cost academically, socially and emotionally” and criticized the decision to split Cole Chapel’s former job between social studies and English as “not an acceptable solution.” Olsen also told the board she was concerned that, if veteran teachers leave, there may be no one certified to teach AP English.

Cheyenne Halberg said AI tools can assist with administrative tasks but cannot replace one‑on‑one instruction or the relational work teachers provide. Halberg said attempts to use AI for grading produced significantly incorrect scores in her experience and argued that reducing teacher contact time is “morally inadequate.” She said several colleagues are considering leaving and that increasing class time demands make a teaching career unsustainable.

Linda Cororum, who spoke as both a parent and a substitute teacher, said cuts already taken have narrowed course options and raised class sizes. She urged the board to weigh the long‑term cost of losing courses such as AP English and the academic opportunities they provide.

Student Samantha Cororm, who will be a junior, told the board that eliminating Mr. Chapel’s position would raise per‑teacher student loads and could eliminate AP English because, she said, only Miss Hallberg is currently certified to teach that course.

Those commenters asked the board to prioritize classroom instruction in budget decisions and to explore alternatives to eliminating core teaching positions. Board members acknowledged the concerns and agreed to continue discussions about budget trade‑offs, including a more detailed review of co‑curricular and academic program spending at an upcoming meeting.

The board took no formal action during public comment; later in the meeting it approved a preliminary 2026–27 budget that includes position reductions and directed administration to provide more granular co‑curricular cost data.