MINUTES OF REGULAR & BUDGET MEETING –
PRESENT: Chairperson Anne Larner, Vice-Chairperson Susan
Albright, Gail Glick, Patricia Kellogg, Marc Laredo, Nancy Levine, Leslie Schneider,
Dori Zaleznik, Mayor Cohen
ABSENT: student representatives
Chairperson Anne Larner
called the meeting to order at
PUBLIC COMMENT
Allen Waxman,
Simon Waxman,
Jeremy Putnam,
Bill Milberg,
Michael Katserman,
Jimmy Hun,
Superintendent Jeffrey
Young announced that he has been in discussions with the principal about the
location of this course. Rather than
placing it under library/media technology, it might be more appropriate in the
art department. While he cannot confirm
anything tonight, they will be reviewing the situation.
Mary Clossey,
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES'
DISCUSSION
None.
RECOGNITIONS
The following recognitions
were acknowledged:
Adam
Brown, theater director at
incredible impact on the program
in his short two year tenure. The
recent production of Les Miserables is an example of his
ability
to include so many students in
the arts.
The following National Merit Scholarship finalists:
Ariav Amittay Phoebe
Anderson
Miriam Arbeit Joanna
Balme
Shlomiya Bar-Yam Marion
Guillaume
Daniel Bruckner Lauren
Honig
David Glod Adam
Katz
Alexandra Grassian Tali
Mazor
Rebecca Greene Aditya
Nochur
Suzanne Horwitz Julia
Shneyderman
Hannah Pepper-Cunningham
Yusheng Yang
Sarina Yospin
Gregory Yu
Hirut Fassil
APPROVAL OF SCHOOL COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
MOTION: It was moved to approve the following School
Committee meeting minutes: budget
presentation
- 3/3/03, executive session - 3/5/03, and special
budget meeting- 3/5/03.
(Levine
- Kellogg)
unanimous
REPORTS
Susan Albright summarized
the last three meetings of the Task Force.
New TV has been taping the meetings and the videos are available at the
library. At the first of the three
meetings, Sandy Pooler, Chief Budget Officer, presented a fiscal analysis
related to the funding of options and assumptions. The Task Force then took a straw poll on the
direction they were interested in pursuing.
The option with the most votes was the large hybrid, which would
maintain the central core facilities and build a large classroom addition.
At the second meeting,
they heard from Environmental Health Engineering (EHE), for a second opinion
regarding whether or not the building can be occupied while being
renovated. EHE identified concerns
including site safety, air quality, construction containment, hazardous
materials, asbestos, mold, ventilation, and noise. The company felt that with $4,000,000 for
safety measures (phasing, containment, staff monitoring) they could do the work
at 75% occupancy. Dick Amster, of Turner
Construction Company, expressed continued concern about occupancy during
renovation even with these measures. The
issues have to do with the effectiveness of the technical solutions, the
possibility of a breach, and the constraints associated with a public
construction project.
Tonight's Task Force meeting
involved a number of presentations. The
first was by Judith Malone-Neville, Assistant Superintendent, on research
conducted around other school systems' building projects. The second presentation was by Ricardo
Dumont, from Sasaki Association, on campus planning. The next was a presentation conducted by Nick
Parnell, Building Commissioner, and Ouida Young, Associate City Solicitor, on
the public bidding process. The final
presentation was from the two high school principals around problems associated
with having students on campus during renovations. She concluded her remarks by outlining the
agendas for the final two Task Force meetings.
The Committee had some
discussion about reimbursement under the School Building Assistance Program
(SBAP) and possible changes in percentages, as well as the grandfathering
clause for projects underway and the impact of making substantial changes to
the plans.
SUPERINTENDENT'S PERSONNEL
REPORT
There were no questions on
the report.
FY03 BUDGET UPDATE
Jeff Young announced that
eight months into the school year the FY03 budget projections remain
consistent. There is also the
possibility of receiving better reimbursements for the METCO program.
SPECIAL EDUCATION UPDATE
There were no questions on
the report.
CURRICULUM UPDATE
Mathematics
Carolyn Wyatt, Assistant
Superintendent for Curriculum & Instruction, stated that they will be
presenting this evening on the first year of the revision of the mathematics
curriculum.
Mary Eich, Coordinator of
Mathematics K-8, provided copies of the presentation she recently gave to the
Education Collaborative (EdCo) Board of Directors. She began by talking about the 1983
report "A Nation at Risk" from
the National Commission on Excellence in Education, where the United States
ranked 17th out of 34 countries. This
led to the development of
Curriculum and Evaluation Standards in 1989 (revised in 2000) by
the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). At the same time, the National Science
Foundation funded research and development of curriculum, which resulted in
various programs such as Everyday Math and the Connected Math Project. In 1993, the
She then went on to talk
about how the math curriculum is different from the education that people in
her age group received and provided some specific examples. In the traditional system, math did not
involve a lot of reasoning to figure out a word problem, but was mostly
computation and skill based. There was
little connection between what one was learning in the early grades to more
advanced math in later years. By the
time one got to high school, the understanding of how math relates to concrete
daily activities got much thinner. The
reformed math has five content strands (number sense and operations, pattern
relations and algebra, geometry, data analysis/statistics and probability,
measurement) and five process strands (problem solving, reasoning,
communication, connections, representation). The "No Child Left Behind"
legislation requires that all children be mathematically proficient at each
grade level. She then gave examples of
their definition of proficiency using grade four as an example. She talked about misconceptions that have
been used as general rules to make math easier, which turn out to be
problematic in the middle schools. For
example, parallel lines never meet. This
is true as long as one is doing plane geometry, but not so when working with a
globe. Another example is that
multiplication always makes things bigger, which is true only with whole,
positive numbers. Today's math tries to
take mathematical concepts and turn them into something that has real life
meaning for students and that they can understand and explain rather than just
applying formulas and pure computations.
She cited some specific examples from the MCAS test which attest to the
fact that reading and writing are far more important in today's mathematics.
Dori Zaleznik asked if
there are any plans for early intervention, similar to what they have been
doing with reading and the literacy programs.
Mary Eich stated that the
research base in math is not nearly as extensive and well developed as it is
for early literacy acquisition. This
need was brought to the forefront at the recent NCTM convention. The need is real to begin synthesizing and
building upon each other's research so that the work can be developed into a
cohesive body of knowledge that is commercially available.
Anne Larner asked what has
been learned in mathematics from MCAS and how it has changed teaching.
Mary Eich responded that
one major item that arose from MCAS was the realization that children were not
experienced enough in writing. This
raised the question of whether they were comprehending
the questions properly and able to explain their thinking coherently and
organize their thoughts on paper. She
has been working in conjunction with the science and language arts departments
on a project funded by the Newton Schools Foundation, where teachers in grades
2-5
will be developing questions for their curriculum
unit/grade, reviewing the responses, and making appropriate changes where
necessary.
Anne Larner asked about
professional development for teachers, many of whom may not have strong
training in mathematics.
Mary Eich acknowledged
that teacher's content knowledge is a critical factor in children's
success. Research is focusing on what teachers
need to know in order to teach math to elementary-aged children. Even math majors, who may have taken numerous
courses in linear algebra in college, are not necessarily going to make good
elementary math teachers. They are not
alone among school systems in their search for models that will help find the
best way to deliver content. They will
be focusing on this as they work through the mathematics curriculum review.
Susan Albright moved the
discussion to the secondary level and, in particular, the pros and cons of
tracking at the middle schools.
Mary Eich stated that
students come into the middle schools with varying degrees of mathematical
proficiencies, which is why they are tracked in grade 7. Tracking occurs in most school systems,
although some do not do it until the 10th grade. In a system where parents have very high expectations
for their children, it is very difficult to change this method. One alternative is differentiated
instruction, but she is not certain about its practicality. She believes the long-term solution has to do
with intervention and identifying gaps at an early age. Of particular concern to her is the number of
minority students in lower level classes.
However, while she agrees that tracking may increase inequities and
options for college,
Carolyn Wyatt added that
parents who can afford it will provide private tutoring for their children, so
it is difficult to determine how much of the positive results are solely the
direct outcome of classroom teaching.
Gail Glick asked about the
connection between middle and high school mathematics.
Mary Eich stated that
similar to the transition from the elementary to the middle schools, there can
be gaps in particular math units when transitioning into the high schools and
these have to be addressed in the classroom.
The larger question has to do with the transitioning between levels. This is going to be something that they will
work on during the review, because she is not sure they have a sufficient
handle on the process and improved communication is needed.
Dori Zaleznik asked if she
anticipated another series of standards revision in MCAS.
Mary Eich replied that the
mathematics portion of MCAS has not changed a great deal since 1998. However, some people in the Department of
Education do not agree with the NCTM standards and want to put more emphasis on
procedures vs. understanding the process.
There is nothing in anything being proposed that she views as better
than what is in place now in
DISCUSSION ITEMS
DISCUSSION OF FUNDING OF
LANGUAGE LAB AT
Anne Larner noted that the
three competing interests for the $640,000 in the technology account for next year
that have been discussed at previous meetings are: 1.) the second phase of the Newton South High
School project; 2.) the second year of the five-year plan for K-8 technology;
and 3.) the leasing plan for Newton North High School. The Newton South language lab is before the
Committee tonight because a funding source has to be identified for this
shortly if it is to be up and running with the completion of that part of the
renovation project. The current lab will
not withstand another move.
Jeff Young stated that
tonight's discussion is to educate the School Committee about the language lab,
as well as how that would impact on funding the other competing interests.
Anne Elliott Holmes,
Foreign Language Coordinator at
Anne Larner asked about
the cost.
Jeff Young replied that
they are projecting between $225,000 and $250,000.
Anne Larner noted that the
original expectation was that funding would come from capital money for the
project rather than the system's operating budget.
Marc Laredo commented that
he needs to hear more about what they will be sacrificing at the elementary and
middle schools prior to making a decision.
Anne Larner added that
while this is a significant piece of Newton South's technology, it is not the
entire package.
Fran Zilonis, Director of
Information Technology, talked about the plans for the elementary schools,
which include a wireless mobile lab with 10 computers, a printer, and LCD
projector for every school. These will
be available for teachers to borrow, which provides more flexible options than
one computer per classroom. In addition, she is attempting to utilize grant
funding through Title V funds to create mini labs in each elementary library
and hopes to have 10 running by next year.
Leslie Schneider asked why
they are purchasing computers vs. laptops.
Fran Zilonis stated that
the cost of a laptop is double that of a computer. In order to get a critical mass in place, the
decision was made to purchase the latter.
Dori Zaleznik asked if
there is designated space in the smaller school libraries that would allow for
a librarian to be conducting a class while other students are using the
designated computer space.
Fran Zilonis stated that
this cannot occur at all schools.
Marc Laredo asked for her
professional opinion about what they should choose to fund given the competing
interests.
Fran Zilonis replied that
while she feels it is important to have a sequential K-12 use of technology, if
they are not able to fund it in the manner in which they would like, they need
to focus on the high school first. It
seems to be unfinished business to have the network in place with no
appropriate technology. It is difficult to renovate the high school and not fit
it appropriately. There are tremendous
expectations from the community that high school students need to have
appropriate computer knowledge, learn how to do presentations with the
software, utilize technology, and access the Internet to the fullest extent
possible in order to be prepared for college and employment.
Susan Albright asked the
Mayor about possible assistance in funding this area through a request to the
Board of Aldermen.
Mayor Cohen stated that
this is not something he had given any thought to and would not be prepared to
respond at this point, but will give it some consideration.
Nancy Levine commented
that this is a difficult choice that no one wants to make. Funding of technology has been a major
problem in
Susan Albright asked when
they would be making decisions regarding the remaining funding if this piece is
approved.
Anne Larner stated that it
would be reasonable to do so before the end of the year, since they will be
spending the money during the next fiscal year.
Marc Laredo asked about Newton
North's language lab.
Fran Zilonis stated that the
current lab at North is of the same age as that of South's but, if it is not
moved, it should be workable until the new facility is in place.
Marc Laredo asked whether,
if they were able to purchase a similar lab for Newton North now, it would be
able to be moved during renovations.
Fran Zilonis would not
recommend committing to something of this magnitude when they do not yet know
the specifics around the room configuration and specifications of the lab.
Anne Larner added that
there were discussions around this at the design team meetings. People involved in school construction
strongly recommended against setting a new lab in a temporary situation and
then breaking it down to move.
Dori Zaleznik stated that
ACTION ITEMS
None.
COMMUNICATIONS
Anne Larner and the Mayor
commented on the Day on the Hill at
the State House and the pessimistic local aid situation.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Reenie Murphy,
Fran Zilonis admitted that
the progress they have been able to make at the elementary level has been a
direct result of the generosity of parents. However, they will never get to
where they want to be, particularly since under the "No Child Left
Behind" legislation Newton is considered a "have" community and
grant funding will primarily be targeted to the "have not"
communities. Without a continuing source
of revenue, it is very difficult to plan.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned
at