NEWTON SCHOOL
COMMITTEE
MINUTES
OF REGULAR MEETING –OCTOBER 23, 2000
EDUCATION
CENTER, FRAZIER ROOM, 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairperson
Verne Vance, Vice-Chairperson Anne Borg, Susan Albright, Rodney Barker, Susan
Heyman, Anne Larner, Nancy Levine, Andris Vizulis, Talya Bock, student
representative – Newton North High School
ABSENT: Mayor
David Cohen and student representative, Newton
South
High School
OPEN SESSION
At 6:00 p.m., it was
announced that the Committee would entertain a motion to convene in executive
session.
MOTION: It was
moved, by roll call vote, to convene in executive session for the purpose of
discussing matters related to collective bargaining and conducting strategy
sessions
in
preparation for negotiations with nonunion personnel.
If
passed, the Committee will reconvene in open session at
7:30
p.m.
(Vizulis
- Levine)
unanimous
ROLL CALL VOTE BY WARD:
Ward I, “yes” (Vizulis);
Ward II, "yes" (Albright); Ward III, "yes" (Larner); Ward
IV, "yes", (Levine); Ward V, "yes" (Heyman); Ward VI, “yes”
(Barker); Ward VII, "yes" (Vance); Ward VIII, “yes”, (Borg); Mayor
David Cohen, “yes” (present for executive session only)
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Verne Vance
called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
He noted that Anne Larner has left for City Hall to represent the School
Committee at the Finance Committee’s meeting, where they will be addressing the
issue of the budget gap. She will
rejoin the Committee later this evening.
PUBLIC DISCUSSION
Verne Vance outlined the
process for public discussion, noting that speakers should state their name and
address and be seated while making comments.
He reminded the public that Committee members do not respond to
speakers, but listen to their issues and take them under advisement. He also noted that speakers should be
respectful and address the Committee in an appropriate manner for a public
setting.
Adam Maleson, 336A
Lexington St., Auburndale, disrupted the meeting and did not follow the process
as outlined by the Chairperson.
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES’ DISCUSSION
Talya Bock read a proposal
that was submitted to the Student Faculty Association (SFA) requesting that the
current grade point average system be transformed to an unweighted grading
system.
Superintendent Jeffrey
Young told Talya that he will ask the principals and Assistant Superintendent
for High Schools & Operations to look into the matter. He then announced that the preliminary
enrollment figure at the high schools is 3,490 students, up from 3,396 last
year. This total is within 8/10 of 1%
of projections, confirming the accuracy of the estimates and the need to
address overcrowding issues.
RECOGNITIONS
Jeff Young noted the
retirement of Diane Antonellis,
Executive Secretary at Newton North High School. Diane is a friendly, warm, and caring individual and one of the
first friends he made upon coming to Newton.
James Marini, Assistant
Superintendent for High Schools & Operations, former Principal of Newton
North, stated that Diane had an incredible impact on students and a sixth sense
about their needs. She was extremely well
organized and, while he was Principal, she was the one who actually ran the
school.
Jennifer Huntington,
Principal of Newton North High School, echoed Jim’s comments. Diane had a way of making people feel
special and she will be sorely missed.
Verne Vance announced that
the Department of Education has appointed Rodney
Barker to the History and Social Science Curriculum Framework Review
Panel. On behalf of the Committee, he
congratulated him on this opportunity to make contributions to this important
endeavor.
APPROVAL OF SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
MOTION: It was moved to approve the School Committee
regular meeting minutes of 10/10/00.
(Heyman
– Levine)
7 – 0 – 2
Absent
for vote: Larner
Absent: Mayor Cohen
ACTION ITEMS
VOTE ON SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS
Rodney Barker questioned
the lack of emphasis on academic challenge in the plans.
Carolyn Wyatt, Assistant
Superintendent for Curriculum & Instruction, stated that academic challenge
continues to be infused across the curriculum in all schools. The Academic Challenge Coordinator has
created four focus schools and is working with staff on special projects in
those buildings.
David Castelline,
Principal of Underwood Elementary School, spoke about the need to set specific,
so as not to get overwhelmed with the myriad of issues that come along
throughout the year. He also mentioned
that they have spent a great deal of time focusing specifically on academic
challenge and this year it is more integrated in all that they do rather than
being a specific topic.
Susan Albright asked if these
reports are used as planning tools.
John Jordan, Principal of
Countryside Elementary School, stated that the School Improvement Plans and Systemwide
Goals are very important documents, particularly in terms of the new teacher recertification. Teachers’ professional development plans
have to tie into these reports.
Jeff Young mentioned the
recent special education audit by the Department of Education, which commented
favorably on Newton’s alignment between the Systemwide Goals/Mission Statement
and the School Improvement Plans.
Andy Vizulis asked about
the process for developing the plans.
Vivian Swoboda, Principal
of Lincoln-Eliot Elementary School, explained that the plans are developed with
outreach to the faculty, parents, and community at
large. Groundwork is laid at the end of the school
year for the following year and often the initiatives continue for several
years.
Susan Albright mentioned
that the elementary reports seem to be more substantive.
Jennifer Huntington,
Principal of Newton North High School, stated that standards-based education is
fairly new to the secondary schools, so they are not as far along as their
elementary colleagues in this respect.
While the report may not seem substantive, there is a lot of work behind
it and she believes an appropriate place to show that would be in their end-of
the-year report on the goals.
Paul Stein, Principal of
Day Middle School, has purposely shortened his improvement plans because he
wished to move toward a more clear vision statement and not a lengthy list of
items which could cause people to lose sight of the main goals. It was a conscious decision to put together
a more sparse but focused plan.
Judith Malone Neville,
Principal of Brown Middle School, agreed with Paul’s comments that they are
attempting not to have too much on their plate simultaneously because it can be
distracting. The goals represent the
items that they can accomplish during the year.
Marie Doyle, Principal of
Bigelow Middle School, stated that the pared down version of the systemwide
goals has been helpful to the community, because it is a more user-friendly
document. The document is also not
stagnant, but a working tool. Academic
challenge and inclusion continue to be major goals, but a great deal of the work
is imbedded into making that a reality that can be managed by staff within the
year.
Susan Albright suggested
that it would be useful to see some specific action steps to depict how the
goals are being met at the secondary level.
Anne Borg mentioned that
because something is not listed in the School Improvement Plans does not mean
it is not happening in the schools, but that a limited number of items are
focused on in a given year. For
instance, academic challenge may not be at the top of the list in one school in
a given year or it may have been infused in such a way that it does not have to
be listed as a separate goal.
Verne Vance added that it
is not surprising that the plans are different for each school because each proceeds
at a different pace in an area that has been determined to be important for
that community in a given year. The
reports have
become more useful and
precise over the years, driven by the requirements of Education Reform and the
work of the administration.
MOTION: It was moved to approve the 2000-2001 School
Improvement Plans, as presented.
(Heyman
– Borg)
7 – 0 – 2
Absent for vote: Larner
Absent: Mayor Cohen
VOTE ON 2001-2002 SCHOOL CALENDAR
Rodney Barker asked if
there will be any discussion among members of the Education Collaborative
(EDCO) with regard to changing the school calendar.
Susie Heyman will ask at
the next EDCO meeting if there is any interest in discussing this topic and
will report back to the Committee.
MOTION: It was moved to approve the proposed
2001-2002
school calendar.
(Borg
– Vizulis)
8 – 0 – 1
Absent for vote: Larner
Absent:
Mayor Cohen
VOTE TO ACCEPT DONATION
MOTION: It was moved to approve the donation of
$1,000 from the Newton Center Branch of
Fleet
Bank, to the Burr Elementary School.
(Levine – Barker)
8 – 0 – 1
Absent for vote: Larner
Absent:
Mayor Cohen
REPORTS
REPORT ON SUMMER CURRICULUM
Carolyn Wyatt stated that
more than 400 teachers participated in the 80 workshops that were held this
past summer. The systemwide goals of
standards-based education and respect for human differences permeated the
selection process for choosing the workshops.
She mentioned several highlights:
1.) workshops for regular
education teachers to strengthen and support world language in the classroom,
2.) workshops on writing standards for the curriculum for high school English teachers, and 3.) a
workshop on revamping the mentor program.
Rodney Barker was pleased to
see that the workshops have evolved into very concrete proposals that relate to
the curriculum. He asked about the
alignment of the 9th and 10th grade history in light of
the changing Frameworks.
Carolyn Wyatt stated that
when the first set of social studies revisions were developed, they were
comfortable in that the curriculum in
place in Newton was developmentally appropriate and rigorous. Therefore, they did not move immediately to
align to the changes at that time. They
will wait to see what revisions come out of the current process before making
any decisions. They are confident that
the coordinator and department heads will develop an appropriate sequence of
material that will prepare children to pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive
Assessment System (MCAS) exam.
Verne Vance asked if in
the teaching of history, there is an attempt go beyond telling a specific story
to talking about possible biases of the sources.
Carolyn Wyatt explained
that standards-based education requires students to develop critical thinking
skills about content, so that they ask pertinent questions of all the material
they review and learn not to accept everything on face value. This was one of the reasons they rejected
the revised social studies Frameworks, which were mostly a litany of facts and
dates. They want students to be able to
transfer these skills across all bodies of knowledge.
Susan Albright mentioned a
project involving Malden, Everett, and Medford, where teams of teachers work
collaboratively around technology in a particular curriculum area. She feels something like this is worth
exploring for Newton.
Carolyn Wyatt noted that
they have done similar work with Louise Thompson on standards-based education,
involving teams of teachers from four school districts. Training is provided so that teachers can return
to their schools as models and provide on-site professional development
opportunities in their own
buildings. The area of technology would work well in this
type of model.
Andy Vizulis mentioned
that the database they have accumulated from these workshops should allow them
to tap into a wealth of expertise in the school system and be able to draw upon
in the future.
Rodney Barker asked if at
some future point the Committee could have a discussion regarding
multiculturalism, which would be helpful to him in his work on the History and
Social Science Curriculum Framework Review Panel.
discussion items
discussion of low
enrollment classes at high schools
Jim Marini explained that the purpose of tonight’s
discussion is to talk about the various factors involved in the scheduling
process and the balances and tradeoffs that have to be made. In January, they will be able to relate
tonight’s discussion to specific numbers in the Class Size Report.
Jennifer Huntington stated
that the three key components of scheduling are students’ needs, depth and
breath of program, and budget and staffing resources. A lot of complex and in-depth discussions occur before decisions
are made.
Michael Welch, Interim
Principal, Newton South High School, stated that he was not in his current
position last spring when scheduling decisions were being
made, so his perspective
comes from living with the reality of those decisions and the adaptations that
are necessary to respond to students’ needs.
He brought with him a voluminous stack of papers to give people a sense
of the amount of scheduling changes that have occurred since the opening of school,
when they were averaging 2,000 changes per week. This has since tapered off to 258 last week. This level of accommodations for students has changed the original projected
enrollments in certain courses and caused disparities in class sizes that were
not anticipated. The Committee will see
this more specifically in the Class Size Report. The workload this puts on teachers, schedulers, guidance staff,
and support staff is enormous and something that needs to be addressed. Curriculum I courses offer multiple sections
many periods a day, which allows for more flexibility. The most difficulty occurs in the course
offerings for very high achieving students or those who need additional
assistance, because there are fewer options.
Susie Heyman noted that
another issue that adds to the complexity of the problem is the fact that the
classrooms are near 100% utilization.
She believes that scheduling decisions need to be building-based and feels strongly about the importance of maintaining
breadth of program. She suggested
investigating
various
strategies for addressing this problem.
One might be to offer some courses every other year. This would require careful planning, but
would be less drastic than eliminating courses entirely.
Nancy Levine
asked if the number of changes that Mr. Welch outlined is normal or an anomaly
and whether they are comparable at Newton North. She also wondered if two mid-sized high schools might mitigate
these issues.
Michael Welch
stated that the number of changes in schedules is comparable and perhaps even
higher at Newton North, given their larger population. One possibility they might wish to explore is the elimination of similar programs
between the two schools. Transportation
could then be offered between the schools during lunch periods. This might be an effective solution for
keeping the breadth of program while not duplicating it in small classes.
Rodney Barker
is not convinced that they can afford to retain the breadth of courses
currently offered. Perhaps they could
explore the possibility of students taking them at local universities and
colleges for credit or they may have to simply be taken at the college level.
Susan Albright
brought up the possibility of distance learning.
Roberta
Dollase mentioned that they offered a course several years ago using this
method and it was moderately successful.
Given the changes in technology since that time, this is now a much more
real possibility.
Andy Vizulis
asked how often new courses are added.
Jennifer
Huntington explained that the Academics Standards Committee reviews all
proposals for new courses. Sometimes
the proposals replace courses that are outdated or require changes and other
times they are additions. The Committee
has to consider whether another course needs to be dropped in order to add the
new one and staffing and scheduling issues have to be addressed as well.
DISCUSSION/VOTE ON MASC CONFERENCE
RESOLUTIONS
Verne Vance
noted that there are several resolutions that will come before the annual
conference of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees (MASC) that
will require action by Rodney Barker, the School Committee’s voting delegate. The Committee needs to give Mr. Barker some
direction on these issues this evening.
Nancy Levine
would like the Committee to support Resolution #2, which takes the high stakes
nature of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System
(MCAS) as a
graduation requirement out of the equation.
She does not believe a single measure for graduation is
appropriate.
Anne Larner
cannot support Resolution #2 or Resolution #1, although she would be more
inclined to support #1 with revisions.
While she believes MCAS is flawed, she also believes it has some
positive benefits. She would prefer
that the graduation requirement piece be suspended for a period of time until
alternative assessments have been developed, so that students can demonstrate
their skills through another type of instrument, if necessary. There are also issues around special,
bilingual, and technical-vocational education that need to be addressed. She does not believe there has been adequate
time statewide for all schools to align their curriculum for the two upcoming
exams.
Rodney Barker
also cannot support Resolution #2, but has some suggestions for amending
Resolution #1. The students who will
most benefit from MCAS are those who are in deprived communities and not
receiving a good education. They cannot
return to the disparities in high school diplomas, where a student coming out
of the Newton Public Schools has one standard, while a student from another
district may be barely literate. The
public is not going to allow continual funding for Education Reform if there
are no performance standards. Rather
than do away with MCAS, he believes it needs to be improved.
Andy Vizulis
cannot totally rule out some type of graduation requirement at a future point,
but believes it is too early to do so now.
MOTION: It was moved to amend
Resolution #1 (MCAS)as
follows:
Whereas the MASC recognizes the need to set high
standards for all students in the Commonwealth
and to establish a system of accountability that
ensures all school systems are preparing their
students for an increasingly complex world...and
whereas
we believe that the current MCAS has
problems
that need to be addressed; therefore,
be
it resolved that that the legislature and/or the
Department
of Education (DOE) suspend MCAS
as a graduation requirement for
two years, allowing
time to address the following
critical issues:
1.) the particular MCAS problems facing students
in
special, bilingual, and technical-vocational
education.
2.) appropriate time has been allowed for alignment
of
Frameworks and curriculum for all school
systems
in areas being tested.
3.) alternative assessments for those students who
have
failed MCAS, yet appear to have met the
standards,
be approved by DOE.
(Larner
– Barker)
Discussion:
Susie Heyman asked how they would demonstrate that expectations
have been
met within the two year period.
Anne Larner stated that
the resolution is a lobbying mechanism for the State legislators and DOE rather
than a specific action. Having
alternative assessments available by the end of the two year period would be an
expectation.
The Committee had further
discussion about whether or not to include a statement about problems with the
test document itself. It was decided
that the statement about aligning to the curriculum suffices.
Vote on motion to amend Resolution #1: 8 – 0 – 1
Absent:
Mayor Cohen
The Committee had no
discussion with regard to Resolution #2, as it was covered in their previous
comments.
MOTION: It was
moved to not support Resolution #2 (MCAS
Graduation Requirement).
(Barker – Albright)
8 – 0 – 1
Susie Heyman felt that
Resolution #3 (Special Needs Cost Sharing Formula) should be placement neutral
rather than only for students who are tuitioned out of a system, so that the cost
sharing of the instruction occurs wherever a student is placed.
There was no discussion
with regard to Resolutions #4-6, since these would be helpful in obtaining
additional funds for Newton.
MOTION: It was
moved to support Resolutions #3 (Special Needs
Cost Sharing Formula), #4
(Support Services Funding),
#5 (Medicaid Reimbursement
Funding), and
#6 (Funding Formula), with the following amendment
to
Resolution #3:
to delete out-of-district references from text,
(i.e., that
cost should be placement neutral), but with the
direction that the delegate
support the resolution as
it stands if this amendment is
voted down.
(Barker
– Albright)
8 – 0 – 1
The Committee continued
discussion around the request from MASC to discuss ballot questions 4 and
6. They agreed that the passage of
these questions would erode the financial gains of Education Reform and any
future hope of obtaining more funding for communities like Newton. In addition, it was felt that all areas of
human and social services would be negatively impacted by the passage of these
questions and that organizations will be competing against one another for
limited dollars.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF FY02 BUDGET GUIDELINES
Susie Heyman provided an
overview of the draft of the Budget Guidelines, which the subcommittee prepared
from the discussion at the last School Committee meeting.
There was some discussion
around maintaining vs. reducing class size and balancing that with other needs
in the system that have been raised.
There was also discussion around the need to develop a policy around this
issue prior to the approval of the guidelines.
Jeff Young stated that the
budget would include a dollar amount but still provide flexibility in terms of
how to utilize those funds and to look at some creative and innovative ways of
addressing class size.
Verne Vance wondered if
they were being overly optimistic in the number of initiatives that can be
funded.
Susie Heyman suggested
that rather than fully funding all the initiatives in one year, a long-term
plan could be developed for some items, similar to the textbooks initiative.
Jeff Young agreed with
Susie’s comments and noted that technology would be one area where a long-term
plan will be essential. He then
mentioned that it would be helpful if the Committee could prioritize the list
at some point.
Andy Vizulis asked if the
technology piece could be rewritten to emphasize staff support needs rather
than hardware and software.
Susie Heyman stated that
they could request sufficient staff support for technology in the guidelines
and then ask the Superintendent to take the next step in moving forward with
funding for hardware and software, which could come from several different
sources, i.e., operating budget, capital improvement plan, and some other
creative methods, such as a public/private partnerships.
Anne Borg asked the
Superintendent to review the middle and high school guidance ratios and prepare
a recommendation.
Anne Larner asked if
someone could elaborate on the request for examining the support structure of
the schools.
Jeff Young stated that the
addition of Pentamation, particularly at the elementary schools, where the
secretary is the sole person in the office, has added stress and an increased
work load. They want to look at the
possibility of providing some
part-time support in the
schools for this purpose. In terms of
the custodians, more support appears to be needed, as additional space is being
added to schools.
Anne Borg asked for
clarification about the elementary pilot programs.
Jeff Young stated that he
wishes to evaluate the programs that were approved last spring, to determine if
there needs to be changes, additions, or deletions.
Susan Albright wished to
clarify that her request for information in the area of performing arts was for
theater and drama.
COMMUNICATIONS
Anne Larner reported on
the meeting earlier this evening, where the Finance Committee of the Board of
Aldermen approved placing the budget gap funds into reserve. Chairperson Coletti voted against the motion
because he felt the school system should receive the money directly and
Alderman Ciccone abstained because he had questions with regard to the legality
of placing the funds in budget reserve.
Chairperson Coletti stated that he would not want any money moved out of
budget reserve until sometime after February.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no members of
the public who wished to address the Committee at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned
at 10:50 p.m.