Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-06-30 School Committee MinutesREADING PUBLIC SCHOOLS Reading, Massachusetts SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Call to Order 227 JUNE 30, 1987 Chairman Cliff Allen called the regular meeting of the Reading School Committee to order at 7 :30 p.m. on June 30, 1987 in the Superintendent's Conference Room at 34 Gould Street. All members of the School Committee were present, with the exception of Mr. Shannon, who arrived late. Also present were the Assistant Superintendents, Robert J. Munnelly, and Ronald A. Winslow, Dr. Mark Piechota, Principal of Reading Memorial High School, Don Farnham, Principal of Joshua Eaton School, parents, and a reporter from the Chronicle. Approval of Minutes of June 16, 1987 A motion was made by Mr. Nissen, seconded by Mrs. Philbrick, to approve the Minutes of the Meeting of June 16, 1987. Carol Lyons stated she thought that the minutes should have stated that the letter that was to go to the finalists in regard to the Birch Meadow Principal's vacancy was to have been given to the School Committee members before it was sent out. She asked if it had been sent out. Dr. Munnelly stated it had, and perhaps there had been a misunderstanding, but he would get a copy of it to the School Committee. A voce was taken on the motion, and it was unanimously approved. Billc.. and Payrolls Warrants for bills and payrolls were approved as follows: Pavrolls July 9, 1987 - Teachers - $109,277.95 7uly 2, 1987 - Weekly - 24,536.45 July 10, 1987 - Weekly - 20,134.07 Citizens' Input Mrs. Kendra Cooper asked to be recognized and stated in the Min,ites of June 16, 1987 she felt that in the report of the discussion on the Birch Meadow Principal a great deal of detail READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 2 JUNE 30, 1987 was given regarding comments made by the committee members, but there was only a general comment made in regard to remarks by parents, and wondered why? She stated she felt there should have been more detail given in regard to parent's comments. Mr. Nissen stated that the purpose of the Citizen's Input was to permit discussion of items that were not on the agenda and did not feel it was a reason for quorum for questioning of items on the agenda. He stated he felt this issue had been thoroughly discussed at previous meetings, and because of the busy agenda he would like to go forward with those items. Mr. Shannon stated although he .knew in the past the committee had felt it should be the spirit of the meeting that should be recorded in the. minutes, rather than a verbatim account, he did think it inappropriate to ask the question. Mr. Coco stated he agreed with Mr. Shannon and also felt the committee should never worry about the length of the meeting. He stated he felt a well- informed citizens' group was something to aim for in regard to committee matters. Mr. Nissen stated he did not want to get into a lengthy discussion of the issue, but the Agenda describes items to be covered and in what order. He stated the minutes were discussed and voted on and i-f a citizen has a concern with such items, it can be expressed to the Chairman after the meeting, before the meeting, or when a discussion on the item takes place. He stated his comment referred only to the item "Citizen's Input ", and its _purpose. Mr. Nissen stated if the committee wanted to change the intent and purpose or the name of this item, that could be discussed, but he wanted to stay with items as they came up on the Agenda, and saw no benefit in discussing this issue again. Mr. Roy Welsch a member of the audience asked if there would be periods of discussion for citizens in regard to items on the Agenda. Mr. Cliff Allen stated there would be opportunity for input by citizens on any items that were on the Agenda as they came up. Revision of Policy on Selection of Principals and Citizens Screen Committee. Dr. Munnelly pointed out that each committee member had received a packet of materials on this item, which included a letter written to the MASC by the administration asking for an interpretation of the Mass. Law in regard to Selection of Administrative Personnel and their response, which stated if the School Committee wanted an opinion, they should have a 2 /3rds vote for this request. 229 READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 3 JUNE 30, 1987 A general discussion was held between the Administration, the School Committee, and the audience on the fine points of the proposed Policy. Mr. Nissen made a motion, seconded by Mr. Shannon, to direct administration to provide the School Committee with a modified draft of the Administrative Search Guidelines to reflect clearly the following changes: (1) that internal candidates be guaranteed a first interview with the Screening Committee; (2) that the Screening Committee present at least six (6) candidates to the Superintendent and /or School Committee as appropriate, such six (6) including at least one (1) in -house candidate; and (3) the School Committee would have the option of interviewing the 3 finalists identified by the Superintendent. Mr. Nissen stated he wanted to clarify the fact that the inclusion of an in -house candidate did not exclude any of the candidates the Screening Committee might want to include to make the number 6, and the in -house could, if desired, be the seventh candidate. Mrs. Philbrick asked if this policy applied to all positions except the Superintendent, and should it be made specifically relative to Principals. Mr. Nissen stated the problem was that the committee was modifying a guideline and a policy for all administrative positions including the Superintendent, although one article to be included, interviewing the final 3 candidates, only applied to Principals. He noted perhaps at a later date, it might be helpful to separate these two issues into different policies. Carol Lyons stated she was not comfortable about including a specific number of in -house candidates which must be included in the finalists, although she basically agreed that in -house candidates should be interviewed. Carol Lyons made a motion, seconded by Barbara Philbrick, to amend the original motion to delete the words "at least one (1) in -house candidate must be included" in regard to the number of finalists which must be received from the Screening Committee. Mr. Shannon stated he was in agreement with excluding this sentence, because there could well be six in -house candidates, if their qualifications were what the committee were looking for. Mrs. Philbrick stated she had two concerns, one about having a secretary take notes for the Screening Committee meetings, and the second was the issue of having recommendations for candidates from members of the Screening Committee. Dr. Munnelly stated there could be support provided for the secretarial duties for the screening committee, and the other issue could be avoided by having a Screening Committee appointed as recommendations are coming in. 230 READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 4 JUNE 30, 1987 Mr. *Shan on stated he recalled that the problem was that some recommendations were written after the Screening Committee members had been' appointed. He stated perhaps it could be required that the recommendations be dated prior to the date of the candidates filing for the position. Dr. Munnelly stated this could be part of the instruction to the Screening Committee. Cliff Allen stated he thought the School Committee being allowed to interview the 3 final candidates would prove helpful to the committee members as they would have some contact with the finalists before having to decide on a recommendation. There was a vote then taken on the amendment to the original motion, and the amendment was approved on a 5 -0 vote. F vote was taken on the original motion, with the approved amendment, and it was approved on a 5 -0 vote. Mr. Shannon asked if there had been any contact with the two finalists on whether they were still available? Dr. Munnelly stated he had been in telephone contact with both, and after consulting with whomever he could contact from the Screening Committee on choosing additional candidates, he would set up interviews for the additional finalists as quickly as possible, in order to make a recommendation to the School Committee. Elementary Report Card Review Dr. Munnelly stated there were a number of teachers and school administrators who had been meeting to work on changes on the elementary report cards, one that would serve parental purposes and provide information on their children's progress. He noted out of those meetings had come a proposed new report card, and he called upon the committee to review it with the School Committee. Mr. Don Farnham, Chairman of the Report Card Committee, then introduced the people who were with him: Jane Giacalone, Janet Levy, Anne Saurman. Mr. Farnham stated there were eight people on the committee, four parents, and four teachers each representing a school. Mr. Farnham stated it was Dr. Munnelly who got the principals and parents concerned with the report card together and he then introducted Mrs. Jane Giacalone. Mrs. Giacalone stated in September she had written a letter to Dr. Wells stating she felt there were problems with the present report card and also that she felt there should be a survey of the parents, as most of whom she had spoken to had negative feelings about it. Mrs. Giacalone stated there was a Principal's meeting of Oct. 14th which she was invited to attend and it was decided to go forward with the survey. She stated there were 450 replies out of 1231 families which was approximately 36 1/2%; and out of that number, 115 liked the system, 273 did not. She stated the committee was then formed from that group of people. READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 5 231 JUNE 30, 1987 Mr. Farnham stated there were a series of compromises in the discussions on the proposed new report card. He stated the survey indicated that a large number of parents and teachers felt the report card was too negative, and also that 2 report cards were needed for the School System, one for Grades 1 and 2 and for Grades 3 to 5. Mr. Farnham stated most felt the Kindergarten reporting system was good, so the committee did not revise it. He noted that some wanted the ABC method, some wanted percentages, there were discussions on conferences being more frequent, and there were also recommendations from specialists. Mr. Farnham stated that people on the committee were excellent in their attendance at meetings, willingness to express opinions, but at the same time, were willing to compromise when necessary. Mrs. Giacalone stated the committee felt the present report card did not motivate the child, especially those functioning below grade level. She stated on the new report card, you can look at it and know where your child stands. Mr. Farnham stated the Principals would meet with the parents as a group before the first marking period to go over the new report card and answer any questions. Carol Lyons asked if there was any concern about the children understanding the marking system. Mrs. Levy, a parent, stated the committee felt there was too much pressure on the 1st graders to receive an A, B, or C, but, at the third grade level they were more able to handle competition and could deal with grades. Mr. Shannon stated he hoped that the instruction on the new report card would be very clear, as he felt with all the changes in the past years in report cards, it might create confusion. Dr. Munnelly stated there was another process yet to work out in regard to the report cards with parents and teachers, at which time all these concerns would be discussed and hopefully, resolved. Mrs. Philbrick stated as a parent she applauded the committee for increasing conferences, but would suggest that conferences be scheduled after each marking period in Grades K -12, and not just for first 3 grades. Mr. Allen thanked the committee for their report. Briefinq on R.M.H.S.'s Planning for 1991 Dr. Munnelly stated Dr. Piechota, Principal of R.M.H.S., had been working with the staff regarding the decrease in student enrollments and its implications on the school's staff, curriculum, and space requirements. Dr. Piechota then addressed the committee and stated it was approximately one year since he had reported to the School Committee as Principal, and he wanted READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 6 232 JUNE 30, 1987 to say that he felt that R.M.H.S. was a good and strong school. He stated that last summer Dr. Munnelly had discussions with him on some of the issues at the High School, one of them being this issue, dropouts, and veteran staff. He stated there were many complicated issues to think about for meeting the needs of students going into the 1990's. Dr. Piechota stated he had many discussions with Department Heads regarding what their departments might look like with an enrollment of 900 students, and also had ad hoc committees dealing with specific issues. He stated he discussed these issues with PTA, students, advisory counsel. Dr. Piechota stated each submitted a vision of their department in 1991, and the document that the committee had was a gathering of all that information. Dr. Piechota stated the continuation of this process covered four areas, one of which was dropouts. He stated that in 1985 -86, 60 students dropped out, but this figure went down to 39 in 1986 -87. He noted although this was a significant drop, there was still work to be done and progress in finding out what makes students drop out. Dr. Piechota stated he felt a focus alternative school was a good direction in which to go, or perhaps a teacher - mentor program, which would have a few teachers become an at -risk student's personal counsellor. A second area of concern is consolidation of space. He noted that basically the proposal was to vacate the right wing of A building, and populate the 1954 portion. He stated A building has a lot of problems in respect to management of students and also there are some renovations needed. Dr. Piechota noted that the third area of concern was budgetary, for reason that as we move into the 1990's we must become technologically aware and invest some money for equipment. He also noted he was concerned about the appearance of the building, the interior and exterior, which needed to be repaired to enliven the atmosphere. He noted there are some maintenance concerns, such as more maintenance personnel. Dr. Piechota stated he had involved Dr. Munnelly in his thoughts on staff development which needs to be continued in order to encourage staff to pursue new avenues. Dr. Piechota stated the fourth area of concern was reduction in staff. He stated in March he had to make some very difficult staff decisions on this issue. One question he had was if RIF's could be delayed in lieu of expected retirements, in order not to lose some very excellent young teachers. Dr. Piechota stated he felt the High School had a strongly committed staff, who are involved in school improvement and vitality. Mr. Shannon asked what follow -up was in place for drop -outs? Dr. Piechota stated very often a student who drops out in October will come back in January, and leave again in February and, they have found students who remain dropouts usually come from difficult personal circumstances. He stated they are working hard at middle schools to find possible at -risk students and following them through the grades to try to identify why they did or did not make READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 7 233 JUNE 30, 1987 it through high school. Mr. Coco asked how we compared with other communities, and Dr. Munnelly stated there were no statewide comparison figures available on drop -outs. Dr. Piechota noted that drop -outs are experiencing a much more difficult time finding a place in the community, because even enlistment in military service, a haven for a lot of drop -outs in past years, requires a high school diploma. Dr. Piechota then briefly discussed with the School Committee his plan to vacate the A building and occupy the 1954 portion of the building at the High School. Mr. Allen stated perhaps it was time for the School Committee to take a walking tour of the school. Dr. Munnelly stated the committee would be getting into that when the Town Manager's plan is presented for additional office space at the High School. Mrs. Philbrick stated perhaps the committee should wait until that time. Dr. Piechota noted according to a letter he had received from the Town Manager, he presently plans the move in the summer of 1988. 1987 -88 Daily Substitute Rates Dr. Munnelly stated the administration was recommending a $46.00 daily substitute rate for the 1987 -88 year. He noted that this rate was comparatively in the middle of rates in other surrounding towns. Mr. Coco made a motion, seconded by George Shannon, to approve the daily substitute rate at $46.00 for the 1987 -88 school year. The vote was unanimous. Bids Alterations to Readina Memorial High School Mr. Winslow reviewed the bids received for the alterations at R.M.H.S. with the School Committee and stated that the bid had originally been estimated at $110,000, but came in $10,000 over that figure. He noted this was due to a change in the building code. Mr. Winslow stated in order not to hold this project up, he would hold back on other projects, until this project was finished. He stated the administration was recommending the low bidder, Ferrazzani Const. Co., Inc., in the amount of $118,459.00. A motion was made by Mr. Coco, seconded by Carol Lyons, to award the contract for alterations to R.M.H.S, to the low bidder, Ferrazzani Const., Co., Inc., in the amount of $118,459.00. The vote was unanimous. Mr. Winslow then reviewed the bids for a pickup truck, and noted that only one bid was received out of 8 sets of specifications that had been sent. He noted he had tried to find out why and had received only 2 letters back which stated they did not bid 234 READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 8 JUNE 30, 1987 because they were out of stock on trucks, and would be until September or October when the 1988 models would be in. Mr. Winslow stated the administration was recommending the bid received from Crest Buick, for a Nissan E Model Pickup, in the amount of $7,432.00. Mr, Nissen made a motion., seconded by Mrs. Philbrick, to award the contract for a Nissan E Model Pickup to Crest Buick, in the amount of $7,432.00, and that the truck would be marked with the Reading School Department decal. Mr. Coco stated he felt uncomfortable about it not being a domestic truck. There was a brief discussion on that issue. A vote was taken on the motion, and it was unanimously approved. Mr. Winslow then discussed bid for the electrical work to be done as part of the EOER Grant. He stated the total amount of the grant was for $34,180.00 and the lowest bid received was $36,830.00. He stated he had found that the low bidder, Willard Electric, was ineligible to bid as his certification by the Exec. Office of Energy Resources had expired. He noted this left the next lowest bidder, Pappy's Electric, in the amount of $42,000, leaving a shortfall of $7,000. Mr. Winslow stated the savings in the utility bill which would be experienced from having this work done was approximately $10,000 per year. He stated he felt this shortfall could be made up from that savings. Mr. Shannon asked how the savings was determined. Mr. Winslow stated it was determined by the Engineer who did the Energy Audit 2 years ago. Mr. Nissen asked if this savings had been taken into account in this year's budget, and Mr. Winslow stated it had not _'Deen. Mr. Shannon made a motion, seconded by Mrs. Philbrick, to award the contract for electrical work under the EOER Grant to Pappy's Electric, in the amount of $42,000, as outlined on Enclosure B- 3 -c -3. The motion was unanimously approved. Summer Bids -)r. Munnelly stated this approval was given each year in order for Mr. Winslow to award the low bid contracts without having to wait for the School Committee's approval. He stated it was only for the summer months so that work would not be delayed. He noted that the information on the bids would be brought to the School Committee at the next earliest meeting. A motion was made by Mr. Shannon, seconded by Mr. Nissen to direct the administration to award contracts that do not exceed the amounts recommended to the low bidders for the months of July and August. The vote was unanimous. 235 READING SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES 9 JUNE 30, 1987 Planning for AIDS Prevention Education Dr. Munnelly stated he was looking for the School Committee's assistance in laying plans for AIDS Prevention Education Program. He stated if we followed the Surgeon General's advice, we have to deal with students at an age younger than middle or high school. He also stated that before this program is put into place, administration would like to have the community involved and in giving advice to curriculum committees. Carol Lyons stated she had done a lot of thinking on this subject and had written to the Surgeon General for a booklet on AIDS that was available. She passed one to each member of the committee and administration. Ms. Lyons stated she agreed that input should be received from citizens, teachers, and parents on the issue. She stated she had also been in contact with the State House where a curriculum was being worked on and would be sent to all School Departments when completed. Cliff Allen stated he thought a member Of the Clergy should be included on such a committee. Dr. Munnelly stated perhaps in talking with the newspaper, it should be mentioned that we are interested in forming a taskforce for this purpose. Mrs. Philbrick stated she felt there should be some general discussion that might outline some broad strategies or approaches for seeking volunteers for a taskforce. She stated she was concerned with how they would broach the subject. Carol Lyons stated she agreed with Mrs. Philbrick, and she felt the committee should read the Surgeon General's report and submit suggestions at a later meeting. Mr. Nissen stated perhaps Carol would like to prepare a draft charge for the committee together with Dr. Munnelly on this issue. Carol agreed that she would prepare a draft. Mass. Assessment Report Dr. Munnelly stated this report had to do with Coolidge Middle School's low Science scores on the last testing. He noted after studying the problem, it was decided to retest the students. Dr. Munnelly stated they had to agree to take the whole test again, and the pupils did very well. By a wide margin, students exceeded State and kind -of- community averages in Science, reading and math. He stated the students had moved up a couple of points in comparison scores, and in fact, it showed 26% of students were interested in science, as compared to 10% on the last test. Dr. Munnelly stated he felt this was good news and concerns about Science at Coolidge have been relieved. Summer Meeting Schedule Dr. Munnelly discussed with the School Committee a future date for interviewing candidates for the Birch Meadow Principalship and for