At the Jan 11th SC meeting, Chair Sherry Marshall read a statement from Nancy Crossman expressing concern that Dr. Johnson’s budget proposal eliminated 1 of 10 High School, Social Studies positions and added 2 Literacy Teachers.
Marie Kangas then claimed by proposing the foregoing, Dr. Johnson’s actions were illegal because State regulations require Principals make hiring decisions, and because her budget created a new position without School Committee approval.
This lack of logic is incomprehensible!
1) This was a budget presentation, not a hiring dictum
2) The position is NOT new! We currently employ 9 Literacy Teachers. A new position requires creation of a new position description. Obviously, we already have one in use.
1) This was a budget presentation, not a hiring dictum
2) The position is NOT new! We currently employ 9 Literacy Teachers. A new position requires creation of a new position description. Obviously, we already have one in use.
You, Madam Chair, agreed with Ms. Kangas, making you appear even more irrational, given Dr. Johnson and SC members Killion & Susko pointed out the foregoing to you!
Ms. Kangas then referenced a future mandate that will require increased student, Social Studies proficiency at some unknown date. She advocated retaining the Social Studies position and adding 1 Literacy Teacher, claiming this would satisfy high school student needs. Simply put, students reading below grade level cannot enhance subject knowledge if they cannot fully comprehend the material.
Can you imagine how ineffective assignment of 1 Literacy Teacher, working with 1,000 high school students, would be? We currently have 1 Literacy Teacher for each 250 grammar school students.
Dr. Johnson stated a fair percentage of high school students read below grade level. She explained a Literacy Teacher’s role is not remedial in nature, but rather to instruct some classes and mentor fellow teachers (about 40 in the HS) to meet regulations requiring all teachers be competent in literacy intervention as well as their academic disciplines.
During the explanation I heard Ms. Kangas mutter to herself, “Not with my vote”. So much for her open mindedness and legal requirement that she consider public comment before budget approval!
Not surprisingly, Ms. Kangas didn’t mention that our Vice Chair’s husband, is a Social Studies teacher.
Dr. Johnson indicated 1 Social Studies teacher is pregnant and won’t be returning. What if she does return? Is Mr. Linehan’s job at risk? Is the union leadership fretting that a 10% Social Studies class size increase (now about 17) will negatively impact teacher workload?
To date, many grammar school students have been the recipient of the most effective Literacy Program in the Commonwealth. I say to parents here and those watching on TV, if we fail to effectively expand the Literacy Program into our High School, your children will be short-changed. They need effective reading and comprehension skills to better succeed, both in college and in life.
On Wednesday, Jan 26th, at 7:00 p.m., the SC will host a legally required, ‘Public Hearing’ on the budget. If you don’t attend and demand your children be afforded the same in-depth opportunity given to grammar school students, no one else will – and your kids will suffer the consequences!
----------------------------------------------------------------
We need to do something to get High School parents to attend the ‘Public Budget Hearing’, scheduled for Jan 26th, at 7 p.m., at the high school.
To my knowledge, this is the first time a School Committee has ever meddled with or tried to direct the School Administration with respect to strictly academic matters.
There is no question in my mind that the Teachers Union leadership is behind this ill-advised move!
After reading the above, please consider the following:
- The three SC members in question, Marshall, Kangas & Crossman (Linehan has recused herself) have absolutely no, direct academic experience. They are not teachers and were never school administrators. Hence, in this respect, they bring NOTHING to the table)
- The Superintendent, School Principals and related curriculum staff have 100 + years of such experience. For heavens sake, this is why we hired / promoted them.
- Kangas & Marshall’s reasoning and justification for trying to keep a Social Studies teacher and reduce assignment of a Literacy Teacher to the High School is illogical, irrational, inefficient, ridiculous, detrimental to and a disservice to high school students and their parents (I can’t find enough words to express how ludicrous and brazen this is).
If any of you have ready contact with high school parents, the high school PTA, or other educationally directed groups, can you please do one or any number of the following:
1. Ask them to watch tomorrow night’s SC meeting
2. Forward my comments to them
3. Ask them to attend the Jan 26th Education Budget Public Hearing
4. Ask them to support the reduction of one (1) Social Studies teacher and assignment of two (2) Literacy Teachers to the high school.
If this ‘Runaway School Committee’ gets away with this, God only knows what will be next! If they succeed, it will truly be a disservice to high school students!
17 comments:
In case anyone is curious, comments equivalent to "nah, nah, I know you are but what am I" are being deleted.
It's sad that the first response to this post appeared to come from a second grader. Unfortunately, that has come to characterize many of the Committee's discussions this year.
It was my understanding that Mrs. Booras said that reducing the history teacher would result in fewer course offerings. I think that is a legitimate concern. It could also be an issue for the NEASC accreditation process. However, if Mrs. Booras now feels that the impact of this will be minimal, I would have to defer to her judgement. I wish she had been asked to speak at last Wednesday's meeting during this discussion.
I have to take issue with Mr. Augustine's suggestion that this move is an attempt to protect Mr. Linehan's job. Mr. Linehan has been at the high school for many years now and I would guess that there are several much newer history teachers who would be ahead of him if this cut is made. If Mr. Augustine can provide facts that support his suggestion, then I hope he does it. Otherwise, in my opinion, including this in his post does little to further his cause.
I would assume that Mrs. Booras was involved in the budget discussion -- as the other principals seemed to be.
I also assume that the staffing change could impact Linehan's job (or at least his class size) -- why else would his wife recuse herself?
Augustine is pushing to get people involved now. everybody always saying they didn't know things were happening, he's giving them notice to pay attention.
look what happened last year when nobody got involved
I have been hearing of extensive film viewing in some social studies classes. They can watch movies at home.
I think that having kids who cant read or write well might be a bigger concern than getting another person to play movies in social studies. Teach them to read and write while their at school.
Bob just a side note its ok for AUGUSTINE to make nasty comments about sc direct academic experience but its not ok to question AUGUSTINE
motives and experience.Your blog doesn't side on reason or fairness.
How many teachers are needed to teach teachers in
the literacy program
It is my understanding that a child with needs, i.e. an inability to read at their class level, should have an IEP. If that is not the case, then many well educated, experienced educators have dropped the ball. If nothing else, these students should be getting some form of assistance with their disability. The 2 Literacy teachers, from what I understand, will not be dealing with 1000 students, initially when first mentioned, they would be "coaching" teachers on how to incorporate reading into their lessons. This was to vacillitate common core standards. Now these teachers seem to be SPED teachers that will "start" helping kids at the HS?! Which is it? I am sure the SPED program that is now in place is fine. No one up to this point has mentioned otherwise. Maybe a SC committee member should get an actual job description of these Literacy teachers and see exactly what the intention is.
5:03, What's nasty about pointing out that the people who want to override the Superintendent's recommendations have absolutely no experience with Educational Administration.
It also doesn't matter what Mr. Augustine's background is -- he's pointing out what anybody with common sense (and no outside agenda) is asking! What would be his motive? he has no family members on the payroll and no kids in the schools.
As far as Bob's blog siding on "reason or fairness" --- have you read the Cape Cod Slime, or the Emptyprize? Do you really think those rags paint an accurate picture of this Town?
Did the Committee members give any reason why they thought they knew more about this issue than the Superintendent?
What negative motive could the Supt have to swap a social studies teacher for a SPED teacher?
Also -- I've dealt with the SPED dept at the HS -- it is awful compared to the K-8's. Anything she can do there would be an improvement.
It might be helpful to stop discussing motivations and agendas (it’s distracting and gets ugly fast) and instead try to focus on actual outcomes, real data and other measurable objective facts.
The truth is that no one on the current School Committee is qualified (meaning licensed) to act as a School Administrator. And, I don’t think anyone on the Committee is qualified (meaning licensed) to teach at the High School level either.
So, how is it that un qualified, inexperienced political types are trying their hand at determining appropriate and reasonable High School staffing levels and prioritizing curriculum needs? Based on what data? What report? What measure?
It’s unbelievable that the same micro managing School Committee folks who have spent hours discussing printers, ink and whether to lock the fronts doors as a security measure now are meddling with academic policy. At least with discussions of printers and door locks they can’t do any real harm to the kids but the academic meddling is very troublesome. They are simply not qualified! Taxpayers like Richard and bloggers here are right to ask pointed questions and demand answers.
Does the Marshall coven have education degrees?
What gives them the idea they were elected to dictate, micromanage the administrative staff.
They reported that they attended MASC training so that training should have made it clear their duties as S.C. Member totals 3 requirements:
1. Approving Budget
2. Setting policy
3. Hiring or firing superintendent. they got the firing part, but failed to show causes why they fired Dr. Johnson = lawsuit
After 20 yrs on board Marshall still has not mastered how to lead, guide or coach the new members as to what their responsiblities are.
Marshall needs to rein them all in from the micromanaging the administrators.
Ladies: we hire the superintendant and administrators with PHD's and Masters in Education and Administration so they do the thinking, NOT YOU FOUR! STAY IN YOUR LANES LADIES!
Why is the discussion of the Supt search happening tonight before the TV cameras come on at 7 ? And, why is the Supt Search Update also not being discussed until AFTER the second public forum?
It appears they are intentionally blocking any public comment on this process -- sounds like something the new members campaigned against last year!
The Special Education approach at the High School is not fine in my opinion. Even with an IEP, kids are falling through the cracks and it seems like most involved in Special Education are just depressed about not having enough teachers. Having regular ed teachers do a better job of helping student who struggle would be a good thing in my opinion. I get the sense that no one really wants to deal with the kid on and IEP that really just needs extra help especially with executive function and organization. It wouldn't take much to make sure ever student got what they needed if the focus was really on the students and not on school politics. If Literacy can help teachers who are Special Ed deal more effectively with students who struggle that would be wonderful.
ok.....heres what would be nice....If the people on the school committee that are not experts in budgeting and school administration would shut up long enough to listen to the people that ARE!!!!! Put away your axe to grind Jessica and actually put THE KIDS FIRST!!!!!!
Well, did you catch the last part of their meeting when they announced that the public meeting to discuss the budget wasn't posted within the 7 days so they couldn't have it next Wednesday. So the alternative was the 31st or the 1st -- how much input do you think they plan to take concretely from the public anyway if they hold their public session on the 1st and have to have the budget to the BOS (per charter deadline) by February 1st. Exactly -- so why bother with the "public" meeting if they have no plan to actually listen to the public anyway. For the love of pete, Crossman actually phoned in her statement on the social studies teacher to be read at a meeting she couldn't attend, so her minds made up before public discussion. Either that, or she's at home listening to the whispering voices in her head, er I meant ear!
Anonymous 959......you are so correct....we do need two folks in May that have the interests of the kids at heart and not personal agendas. Unfortunately,people are not as of yet banging down the door to run. The pro kids side taking both seats and regaining control of the ship needs to be the main concentration for those of us who are fed up. It can happen....It has to happen
Post a Comment