NEWTON SCHOOL COMMITTEE
MINUTES
OF REGULAR MEETING – FEBRUARY 24, 2003
EDUCATION
CENTER, FRAZIER ROOM, 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairperson Anne Larner, Vice-Chairperson Susan Albright, Gail Glick,
Patricia Kellogg, Marc Laredo, Nancy Levine, Leslie Schneider, Dori Zaleznik,
Mayor David Cohen, Annie Levine, student representative – Newton North High
School
ABSENT: student
representative - Newton South High School
Chairperson Anne Larner
called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Julie Weisman, 8 Jenison
St. and Leezie Magruder, 28 Billings Park, Copresidents of the Newton North
High School Parents, Teachers, Students Organization (PTSO) addressed the issue
of the need to upgrade the technology at Newton North now and not delay the
process. This needs to be a top
priority. One of the consequences of
the current state of affairs in the building is the fear of losing their
ability to attract and retain experienced staff. It is imperative that they provide people with the necessary
tools to do their job. The PTO will do
all they can to help support this effort.
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES' DISCUSSION
None.
RECOGNITIONS
The following recognition
was acknowledged:
Kelley Gangi, K-8 Science
Coordinator, for participating as a Key Leader in the Building a Presence for
Science in Massachusetts initiative; a two-year project endorsed by the
National Science Teachers Association and funded by the Exxon Mobil
Foundation.
APPROVAL OF SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
MOTION: It was moved to approve the School
Committee
executive session meeting minutes
of 1/29/03.
(Levine - Kellogg)
8 - 0 - 1
Absent
for vote: Mayor Cohen
REPORTS
NEWTON NORTH HIGH SCHOOL TASK FORCE UPATE
Susan Albright talked about
a request that was made by an Alderman for a study by the Dept. of Public Health
re: C02 and radon testing, in response to questions and concerns about air
quality at Newton North. The architect
reiterated the reasons why he felt the building could not be renovated while
occupied and he listed the specific safety concerns. The engineer from DRA's consulting firm displayed plans and drawings
on the mechanical structures. In terms
of the design forum that was mentioned in past presentations, the firms
responding to the Response for Proposal (RFP) had no experience with School
Building Assistance Bureau (SBAB) and were not familiar with their rules and requirements
as they relate to schools in Massachusetts.
The subcommittee working on this felt that given this situation, whatever
designs were developed would not be doable and, therefore, it was not practical
to move forward in this regard. The
next meeting will be held at Newton South High School and will involve a tour
of that building.
HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING PROJECT UPDATE
Nicholas Parnell, Building
Commissioner, talked about the success of the move that took place last week
into the new Wheeler and Goldrick Houses.
The electricians are working on the language lab and hope to have that
running within a few days. Some
demolition work was begun in the cafeteria that was found to be unacceptable in
terms of proper protection. The
custodial staff did an admirable job of cleaning it up and they are working
with the construction company around this concern.
OPERATIONS STATUS REPORT
Superintendent Jeffrey
Young noted Bob Daley's retirement last month, after 41 years in the school
system, most recently as supervisor of custodians. His expertise and knowledge, as well as his friendship, will be
sorely missed. He also thanked Michael
Cronin, Chief of Operations, for his ability to look ahead to address issues
before they become problematic. His
work in the area of environmental management, particularly in team development,
source reduction, and the mercury recovery program are some examples. The custodians have also played an important
part in the recycling and source reduction projects.
Nancy Levine is pleased to
finally see a positive balance in the use of school buildings fees
account. She thanked Barbara Sauro,
secretary, who played a large role in this area.
Mike Cronin agreed that
Barbara's Herculean efforts in sending the bills and collecting fees are to be
applauded.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
DISCUSSION ON TECHNOLOGY PROPOSAL FOR NEWTON
NORTH HIGH SCHOOL
Fran Zilonis, Director of
Information Technology, began the discussion by noting that this is a wonderful
opportunity to upgrade the technology for teaching staff at Newton North. The materials in tonight's packet outline
the various components of the proposal. The first part deals with I-books and laptops, which will be
provided to every teacher, similar to the experience at Newton South. The next piece deals with training, which involves
a two-day summer workshop for 80 teachers on the use of the laptops, LCD
projectors, and software, also similar to the program offered at South. The third piece involves 30 multi-media
carts, which will be distributed throughout the departments for teachers to
borrow to use in the classroom for specific assignments. There will also be two cyber-cafes (teacher
work stations) on each floor and one on the fourth floor, where technology can
also be accessed. This will be especially
important to staff who do not have their own cubicles and require a quiet,
professional environment. The network
infrastructure needs significant upgrading and Sam Mayanja, Network Specialist,
will discuss this in more detail.
Jeff Young stated that
understandably this project is not as extensive as the one at Newton South,
since it is a short-term solution.
However, he asked if it still provides sufficient tools for teachers.
Fran Zilonis responded in
the affirmative. Teachers were very
involved in the discussions around this topic.
The proposal at Newton North is the same policy that was used at Newton
South, i.e., teachers will receive laptops.
What it does not provide is an LCD projector, video cassette, and DVD
player in every classroom. Instead, the
mobile carts will provide this technology on a shared basis.
Sam Mayanja talked about
the network, which is not powerful enough to sustain more equipment and is the
reason for the need to upgrade. Their
plan is to
use a combination of
wireless technology and hard cable, because currently the wireless does not
perform well on Mac School.
Jeff Young commented that
originally it was thought that approximately $85,000 of infrastructure costs
would get sunk into the building and would not be portable. However, at a meeting last week with the
Building Commissioner, architects, and others from the project team, it was
learned that only $25,000-$30,000 will be permanent.
Sam Mayanja concurred and
noted that all the equipment that is being put in place is portable and can be
reused in either a renovated or new building, as well as moved to another
school and will not be obsolete for at least five years.
Annie Levine asked if the network
at the two high schools will be compatible.
Sam Mayanja replied that
there is a systemwide network that is compatible and allows for the ability to
connect to other schools, but they also have some separation for security
measures.
Leslie Schneider asked if
they had discussed leasing vs. purchasing and what their expected timeframe is
in terms of putting this program in place.
Jeff Young stated that
leasing is under discussion, as part of the financial component. They would like to install the network over
the summer provided the funding is in place.
Ideally they would prefer to purchase the laptops in the spring, so that
they are available for summer training.
However, they can work around this, if necessary, as they had to do at
Newton South.
Jeff Young asked if Ms.
Zilonis could speak to how this technology will help teachers in their delivery
of the curriculum in the classroom.
Fran Zilonis explained
that teachers can download materials off the Internet onto their hard drives,
to then share with the class off-line.
This will be accomplished through a software program called Web Whacker.
Anne Larner asked what
proportion of the teaching staff would be using the carts at a given time.
Fran Zilonis stated that
they will most likely be in use at all times and, if she had less of a sense of
financial constraint, she would be requesting more. However, 30 is a good starting point, as there are still a number
of teachers who are not comfortable and/or familiar with the technology, who
will need time and training before they are ready to utilize the tools.
Jennifer Huntington,
Principal of Newton North High School, noted that the new cart in the science
department is utilized each block every day.
The 30 carts distributed to the five major departments will allow for
minimal access.
Gail Glick asked how the
carts will be distributed.
Fran Zilonis replied that
it will be based upon the size of the departments. All will get at least on, but some as many as three. They will also review usage once they are in
place and will reconfigure, if necessary.
Nancy Levine questioned
the number of printers being purchased and why they are top-of the line models.
Fran Zilonis responded
that they have a much longer lifespan, stand up to more wear, and use cheaper
toner supplies. Therefore, in the long
run, they produce cost savings. The
need for 21 printers has to do with their location, which are spread throughout
the building.
Patty Kellogg commented
that the frustration on the part of teachers in not having access to technology
is also shared by parents, who find it difficult in terms of communication. This is a very sound proposal. She asked why there are different prices for
the laser jet printers.
Fran Zilonis stated that
the more expensive, heavy-duty printers willl be for departments where they
will get a great deal of use. The less
expensive models will be located in areas where only a few people will have
access.
Dori Zaleznik asked why
Mac School does not work well in a wireless setting.
Sam Mayanja explained that
Mac School requires a lot of bandwidth and feed and the computers share that
access. Using wireless technology for
this program causes it to run very slowly and/or lose connection.
Fran Zilonis added that
teachers will be doing attendance on Mac School and the more access the system
is able to provide, the less inefficiencies they will experience.
Marc Laredo asked how they
are planning to pay for this technology.
Mayor Cohen stated that they
are exploring several areas, in which they could phase this in over three
years. One is the $140,000 in the
general fund that the school system turned backed to the City. There is also $60,000 available in e-rate
reimbursements. There is a possible
third area, but the funding may not be available until FY04. He would suggest they not make a decision on
this until they hear further regarding the Governor's budget. If the rumors of significant cuts in local aid
are realized, they may have to look at using every bit of money available
simply to sustain next year's operating budget. In addition, any more snowstorms could impact their free cash.
Jeff Young stated that
approximately $275,00 would be needed for the first year of the phased-in plan.
Marc Laredo commented on
the difference between the cost of the program vs. what is available and
wondered how they would address that problem.
Jeff Young mentioned that
they are exploring a leasing arrangement.
Mayor Cohen added that
this would have to be approved by the Board of Aldermen.
Jeff Young noted that the
professional development piece would have to be dealt with in their own
operating budget and would not part of the leasing plan, but the network
infrastructure would be included.
Marc Laredo asked if
technology funding was included in the original capital budget for the
renovation of Newton North and whether they could tap into those funds.
Mayor Cohen replied that
funding was included but he would not recommend tapping into that at this
point.
Jennifer Huntington
thanked the Committee for their support of this project. There is a whole generation of young
teachers for whom this is their mode of operation. It is the way they are used to communicating and gathering
knowledge and information. This will
only enhance their teaching and working with students. It will also boost staff morale, who will
feel as if they are on par with their colleagues around the City.
DISCUSSION OF "NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND" (NCLB)
LEGISLATION
Carolyn Wyatt, Assistant
Superintendent for Curriculum & Instruction, stated that this legislation
is going to impact all public education in the 21st century. Newton is ahead of the track because of its
preparation and the work of a great many people. The program is going to be tied to accountability, flexibility,
and scientifically based research.
John Fernandes, Grants
Manager, outlined the specifics of the program using a Power Point presentation. He provided some history on the NCLB
Act. This legislation arose out of
concerns around standard-based education, national teacher shortage, needs of
the 21st century labor force, under performance of
minority and limited
English proficient children, and school violence. Newton is one of 120 school districts in Massachusetts invited to
participate in the first cohort of strategic planning, working with both local
data assessments and data from the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment
System (MCAS) testing. Connecticut, Massachusetts,
and Texas have been cited at the national level as having evidence of
successful education reform. This has
allowed for some early release of grant funding to these states. The Act covers every possible aspect of
education and is looking
for high expectations for all students, with emphasis on literacy and language
arts acquisition. It also demands clear
criteria in reference assessment, accountability, a mix of public and private
sector initiatives to raise student achievement, and a long-range strategic
plan. Newton has developed a 10-year
plan in order to meet all of the performance goals, with specific goals set for
varying intervals. Fortunately, the
goals of the legislation are the same as those of the Newton Public Schools, so
they have already been focused on these for a number of years. The grants are tied to the Commonwealth's
expectations of performance and there is a very lengthy application process
involved. All federal and state funds
are now inherently connected to NCLB and applicants will have to demonstrate
adequate performance, improvement, and sustaining of quality.
Carolyn Wyatt added that
the tracking and monitoring of student progress will play an important role in
this process, which ties into their earlier discussion around technology.
Carol Daynard, Assistant
Superintendent for Pupil Services, stated that Newton received 18% in
additional money this year as part of the NCLB funding. There are still several other funding
sources based on eligibility and poverty rates, as well as funding from new
legislation in this area, but eventually it will most likely all be blended together
as an integrated grant. The legislation
also deals with English language learners, who now must be tested and counted
towards the annual yearly progress, whereas in the past they were exempt for
the first three years. This holds true
as well for minority students and children with disabilities.
Carolyn Wyatt completed
the discussion by stating that the most powerful aspect of this process has
been the economy of resources coming together to meet the needs of all students
and provide professional development for all staff to achieve this goal. They are ahead of the pack in this area and
now must meet the challenge of focusing on identifying adequate yearly progress
and continue their trajectory towards success.
Gail Glick asked about the
consequences of not being able to reach an annual performance goal.
Carolyn Wyatt replied that
the examples to date indicate that the State will insist that under performing
communities show just cause as to why they are not
meeting the goals. Withholding funds might be one
consequence. However, the State will
offer technical assistance or other methods to help systems improve.
Carol Daynard added that after
two years of under performance, the State will allow parents to choose to
change to a performing school within the district based upon space
availability. After three years, the
system is entitled to $1,000 per student toward tutorial and/or remedial
programs. Continued under performing
schools could be taken over.
John Fernandes noted that
the State has just issued a program that is exclusive to schools that have not
met their annual yearly progress. It
sets aside specific funding targeted for consultants, tutoring, remedial work,
or whatever children require in the under performing schools.
Gail Glick asked about
accountability measures.
Carolyn Wyatt replied that
there will be some type of MCAS assessment every year in grades 3-10. At the same time, districts are being
encouraged to put in place local assessments, which they have done in their
literacy initiative.
Gail Glick asked how they
ensure that proficiency is consistent in every state.
Carolyn Wyatt replied that
the Act requires every state to have a comprehensive assessment, which much comply
with state rules and regulations that relate to curriculum and instruction and
which define adequate progress.
However, these are different in every state because the focus is on
accountability rather than commonality.
Nancy Levine commented on
the fact that so many state and federal mandates are issued without supporting
funds and require additional time and effort by staff, as well as
administrative costs.
Anne Larner wondered about
specific cohorts that might be under performing and if they will have similar
access to the supports and services offered to schools.
Carolyn Wyatt stated that
if cohorts were under performing, the school would be identified. In some respects this is all new to them, as
Newton has not had to deal with this situation. However, she believes it starts at the school level and then
moves to cohorts.
Carol Daynard explained
that they disaggregate their data into several specific cohorts that are
tracked by the federal government, in order to be sure that these students are
achieving and have an adequate support system in place to pass MCAS.
Susan Albright asked if
focusing on specific cohorts helps all students.
Carolyn Wyatt responded in
the affirmative. The curriculum is now reasonably
consistent across the grades. Regular
and special education teachers will receive professional development training
together and are learning the same pedagogy, skills, and strategies for
identifying students' needs.
Dori Zaleznik commented
that despite the success they are realizing in Newton, there are very few
districts that can afford to put together this type of program, particularly as
funding becomes increasingly scarce.
Carolyn Wyatt stated that
while this may not be perfect, it has shed a light on districts that need
improvement, which can only help students.
Anne Larner asked if there
will be policy issues associated with this legislation that the School
Committee will be required to address.
Carolyn Wyatt believes
that there will be policies issues involved connected to graduation
requirements and certificates of attainment, as well as implications for expenses
associated with the program.
Gail Glick asked how they
are preparing teachers.
Carol Daynard stated that
the assessment piece is critical and is the area in which most teachers need
training. They will need to be sure
these opportunities are available.
Carolyn Wyatt added that
while some people may speak disparagingly of assessments as taking up time, they
drive instruction in a standards-based environment and have to be data-driven
rather than intuitive. The teacher-training
program is not as extensive as presumed and they cannot always be assured that
new staff has had the kind of training necessary in this area. Also, this is new for veteran teachers, who
require the training to increase their repertoire of skills. This is a great challenge but one that has
to be taken seriously. They have
already begun work on this in the rewriting and training of staff around the new
Individual Educational Plan (IEP) document.
Anne Larner thanked them
for the beginning of what will obviously be many discussions about this
topic. This is a very complex issue and
they have set a good framework.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION/VOTE ON GRADE ONE ENTRANCE
POLICY
Jeff Young noted that
there is a slight revision to the wording of the policy. Dori Zaleznik, who helped with the revision,
will explain.
Dori Zaleznik noted that omitting
the phrase "in rare cases" from the policy makes it clear that they
are not discouraging families from discussing their specific situations with
principals, but that there is a general expectation that children will be six
by August 31st in order to enter 1st grade.
MOTION: It was moved to approve the Grade One
Entrance
Policy, as outlined in the
2/19/03 memorandum
(Attachment E), with the
elimination of the phrase
"in rare cases."
(Zaleznik
- Kellogg)
unanimous
CONTINUED DISCUSSION/VOTE ON EMPLOYEE
CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY
Jeff Young noted that this
topic was discussed at the last meeting and, if there are no further questions,
he recommends the Committee vote its approval.
MOTION: It was
moved to approve the Employee Confidentiality Policy, as outlined in the
2/10/03
memorandum (Attachment G).
(Levine - Zaleznik)
unanimous
COMMUNICATIONS
Nancy Levine mentioned an
email she received regarding the gutting of the Title 9 Program, which mandates
equality in sports for females. She
encouraged
people to contact their
representatives about supporting the maintenance of this program and will be
happy to share information with anyone who is interested.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Roger and Cheryl Matthews,
40 Summit St., are pleased to see that there is now an opportunity to discuss
their personal situation with regard to their daughter's entrance age, which
was denied to them last year when she was entering kindergarten. They believe she is both academically and
socially ready. She would have been of
age prior to the first day of school.
However, they were not
even given the opportunity
to appeal. Now they find they are faced
with the same situation as she is about to enter first grade.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned
at 9:30 p.m.