|
MANCHESTER
BOARD OF EDUCATION
REGULAR MEETING MONDAY JUNE 27, 2005 |
|
|
M
I N U T E S
|
|
|
7:30
p.m.
Lincoln Center |
|
|
A. OPENING PRESENT:
Edwards, Lok, O'Neill, Rizzo, Robinson, Thresher ABSENT: Golas, Huyler ALSO Mr. Robinson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Robinson led in the Pledge of Allegiance. Revised Agenda June 27, 2005 Mr. Robinson asked for a motion on the Revised Agenda for June 27, 2005 MOTION: Rizzo/O'Neill s.v. The Board of Education adopts the revised agenda for June 27, 2005. (6/0/0) Revised Minutes of June 15, 2005 Mr. Robinson asked for a motion to adopt the revised minutes of June 15, 2005. MOTION:
Rizzo/O'Neill s.v. The Board of Education adopts the revised minutes
of B. PUBLIC
COMMENTS C. CONSENT CALENDAR Ms. Ouellette states there is one item on the Consent Calendar. There are 5 appointments, 24 teachers for tenure and 1 resignation for retirement purposes. 1.) Personnel Action Appointments Patricia Gibbons, English Teacher at Manchester High School. Ms. Gibbons received her Bachelor's degree in English/Secondary Education at University of Rhode Island. Andrea Lore, Chemistry at Manchester High School. Ms. Lore received her Bachelor's degree in Chemical Education at the University of California, San Diego. Regina Moye a Guidance Counselor at Manchester High School. Ms. Moye received he Master's degree in Psychology with concentration in School Guidance at Springfield College. Jennifer Pilkington, a Speech/Language Pathologist for Manchester Public Schools. Ms. Pilkington received her Master's degree in Communication Disorders at the University of Connecticut. Eric Tarnowicz,
a Guidance Counselor at Manchester High School. Mr. Tarnowicz received
his Master's degree in Business Administration at Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute. We would like to welcome them to Manchester. TENURE Under tenure the following certified staff members have successfully completed the required length of service to receive tenure as indicated by the Connecticut General Statute Section 151. Jenna Brohinsky, Bennet Middle School; Thomas Brophy, Manchester High School; Michael Brown, Bowers School; Marco Cancellieri, Manchester High School; Jessica Crudden, Verplanck School; Sarah Edwards, Nathan Hale School; Clyde Ettienne-Modeste, Illing Middle School; Tina Fioriello, Bennet Middle School; Regina Gatmaitan, Illing Middle School; Patricia Legault, Robertson School; Kevin Mack, Illing Middle School; Valerie Nobilio, Illing Middle School; Elizabeth Reilly, Bennet Middle School; Mary Ann Walsh, Verplanck School; Laura Williams, Manchester High School; Brianne Young, Waddell School; Sabrina Pasquarelli, Bowers School; Meghan Ramsdell, Nathan Hale School; Kathleen Mertel, Manchester Regional Academy; Coleen Litwin, Washington School; Joshua Lewis, Bennet Middle School; Wendy (Glatt) Landman, Manchester High School; Jennifer Janssen, Bennet Middle School; Mayra Frosti, Washington School. I would like to personally recognize these teachers and congratulate them or their outstanding job in receiving tenure. RESIGNATION George Sherry, Social Worker, Illing Middle School, has submitted his letter of resignation for retirement purposes. He has been with Manchester Public Schools since September 6, 1967. I would like to personally thank Mr. Sherry for his service to Manchester Public Schools. He has been an asset to Illing Middle School and his services will be missed. Mr. Edwards recognized Ms. Ramsdell, who was the fifth grade teacher for his oldest daughter, and also his wife, who have made tenure. MOTION:
Hackett/Rizzo s.v. The Board of Education adopts the items listed on
the
D. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT Mrs. Gejda is here tonight to present a CMT update to the board. She presented a comprehensive update on May 9th and it was asked that some items be brought back to the board at a future meeting to be reviewed. Some of the board members have submitted questions to Mrs. Gejda and there were some questions regarding data comparing grade 4 scores in the years 2000, 2002, 2004. Mrs. Gejda said she would present cohort data to the board this evening. Also joining us is Dr. Ann Richardson, Bennet Middle School Principal and Mr. Bo Cuprak, Illing Middle School Principal. Mrs. Gejda states that she would like to thank Dr. Richardson and Mr. Cuprak for being with us this evening. In May we discussed and presented some other results from the 2004 administration of the CMT. This evening we wanted to focus a little bit on the response that we made as a district regarding the CMT. Not only at the middle school level but at the K-12 level as well. When we measure student achievement, there are many pieces that are part of the picture. We look at daily work of the students, class and report card information. We also use district assessment, and data assessment such as the CMT and CAPT along with the national assessments such as the NAEP exam. When looking at student achievement from the CMT, the results are used by districts as well as the Connecticut State Department of Education. This information becomes more of a focal point as to what is happening in a district because of the NCLB legislation of 2001. The Connecticut State Department of Education uses CMT data to determine whether a school has made adequate yearly progress for their district. The proficiency targets the state has set for two subjects and one skill area are: Mathematics 65%, Reading 57% and Writing is 70%. Students must score at this level in grades 4,6,8. We look at CMT results for the past 5 years so that we can try to determine if there is a trend or a pattern established. We also compare results with other districts that are similar to us. These would be districts in the same ERG (Educational Reference Group). CMT results are broken into different categories to ensure that all children are achieving academically. Until the No Child Left Behind legislation we looked at our progress as a district, now we look at how all students are performing individually. The categories used are gender, race and ethnicity, free/reduced lunch and special education status. All students must be proficient by the year 2013 to 2014. In 2003 there were no longer out of level tests given to students except for a very small group. All students took the CMT on grade level. In grade 4 we noticed most students scored similarly to others in the ERG for Math, Reading and Writing. Writing has been the strongest. In grade 6 Manchester students were scoring 2 to 6% below state results and again writing was the strongest area. In 2004 our numbers were dropping and again we have a higher population with a higher number of students taking the test. In Grade 8 students were between 5 and 6% below the state results. The trend seems to be that writing is the strongest area in all three grade levels. We have developed a program called Courageous Conversations. Included in that group are administrators, teachers and community members. They are developing a dialogue to include the effect that racism may have in instruction, teaching and learning. We are making sure that we are providing opportunities for all students to learn. The School Improvement Plans have been looked at during monthly meetings and we have been trying to make sure things are moving in the right direction. The District Improvement Plan also addresses student achievement in the CMT's. We have looked at the last 5 years regarding CMT data. Beginning next year there will be a new generation of CMT's. We have the EdSmart program in all buildings so that they may access student data. In addition to the CAPT and CMT data we have been identifying by ongoing assessments which are done quarterly and the Reading Assessment which is done monthly. This information can be put on an excel spreadsheet and uploaded to EdSmart for easy access to student data. Data Driven Assessment workshops have been given in each building. In August a reading comprehension workshop will be given to help classroom teachers and special ed teachers in their classrooms. There will be a math record this year, which will stay with the student. There is a new Math textbook in grade 3 and we will adopt the same textbook for grades 4 and 5. A discussion is ongoing regarding moving data from elementary schools to the middle schools. At the middle school level we have been identifying Math assessments and these assessments are done on a quarterly basis. Dr. Richardson will address some of the changes that are being made. Dr. Richardson stated that the CMT Focus Groups at BMS through data to drive decisions identified students who were not proficient both in Math and Language Arts. We were able to provide time during the day, several times during the week to tutor students in specific strategies on how to take the CMT. The CMT is not a standardized test; it is a Criterion Reference Test. While performing proficiently on these tests we are getting students ready for high school and helping them to build on skills at the high school level. Proficiency standards were identified. We have made presentations to all staff in small groups as to what it means to be proficient. In addition to quarterly assessments, additional writing prompts were given to strengthen writing. We called it stop, drop and write. Strong gains were made especially in the special education area, and the learning disabled areas. Students had gone up 3-4 points. Professional Development was also ongoing in differentiated instruction. On June 14th teachers volunteered to return for a one-day workshop on differentiated instruction. A portfolio was developed that included writing projects in all subject areas. There were 25 strands in Math for the CMT and we took the 7 power strands and aimed our instruction at this particular area. All key objectives were met with the School Improvement Plan. Next year we would like to establish a looping program with 7th and 8th grade students. The teachers would move with the students from one year to the next. Students were exposed to "Algebra For All" program. It gave students the opportunity to take Algebra I, some over a two year period and also Pre-Algebra. We would like to pilot a Pre-Algebra program for all students at the 7th grade level. Mr. Cuprak stated that 2 years ago we took the data received and began processing that with grade 7 students. The 2004 CMT focus groups identified a core group of students in grade 8 who needed assistance. Students were asked to participate in a morning or afternoon session to reinforce the skills they were weak in. There was a breakfast program or afternoon snack program for the students. Most of the students identified and notified did attend. During the CMT testing sessions specific strategies were given out to all staff so students in grade 6 and or 8 had constant information. Students at IMS tested at goal in Math and Writing and exceeded the state goal in Reading. The CMT focus groups did pay off. Quarterly assessments were completed across all areas of the curriculum. Rubrics were established as well as different strategies. Teachers were asked to go over data during the summer months and be ready to address the needs of the students when returning in August. EdSmart training has been offered to teachers as well. 83% of the students who attended CMT help groups scored at proficiency. Communication is the key and making sure all the correct information gets to the staff. Mrs. Gejda stated we have a lot of different students in the classrooms now and we have co-teaching with a regular ed and a special ed teacher. The CMT will be given in the spring next year as opposed to the fall and it will be given in grades 3-8. It will be a new generation of the test. Math proficiency will be 75%, Reading will be 67%. Also in 2008 there will be a Science CMT in grades 5 and 8. 95 participation rate must be met. Parents and community members can look up information on the website CMT.com or the government site for No Child Left Behind legislation. Mr. Robinson asked are there any other questions from board members? Mrs. Lok stated she would like to thank both middle school principals for being at the meeting and for the separate and very distinct presentations. In response to what both of you are doing in regards to the test scores, I have a hypothetical question which is "If I am a student currently at BMS and not at proficiency and moving to IMS where do I fit into the improvements that you are looking at"? Dr. Richardson stated that both programs are using data to drive instruction and that is where decisions are made. Mr. Cuprak stated 28 students did move from BMS to IMS and we looked at data, met with each student and as a team we spoke to teachers. A variety of strategies were in place and we were able to pick out specific areas because of having this data. An individual plan was established for each student. Mrs. Gejda stated we have district wide curriculum and that both schools along with the curriculum specialist meet constantly to make sure that we are all on the same page. In grade 6 Science there are modules that are followed, not necessarily in the same order, but the same material is covered in its entirety throughout the district. Mrs. Lok 's stated her second hypothetical question, "If we moved the BMS population to IMS and move IMS to BMS am I going to see improvement in test scores, not just in the movement, but based on the steps for improvement you have in place regardless of who the students are? Dr. Richardson stated that if you use student data in order to drive instructional decisions then you would see the improvement regardless of the population. Strategies may change but basically using that key and looking at a student whether it is written or test data should be the guide to what program you would set up. Mrs. Lok stated, that a statement had been made that "We do not take ownership for the 6th grade scores". I understand that in the last few years we have made tremendous strides in looking at our program as a K-12 program. We do not have that separation of lack of ownership for 6th graders at the middle school and 9th graders at the high school but are we actually planning as a district K-12? Mr. Cuprak stated that when students enter as 6th graders they almost immediately are administered the CMT. We do not have the opportunity to focus on specific things and needs. They are performing not based on what they have learned in grade 6. Next year they will be taking the test at the end of grade 6, end of grade 7 and end of grade 8. The teachers will have almost an entire year and the test will reflect prior teaching in the grades and the reinforcement that has also been done. Mrs. Gejda stated there were several conversations going on in the district this year with grade 5 and grade 6 teachers meeting together. This fall we also will have all grade 5 students using a planner, which they are expected to keep. The same types of things are happening with the 8th and 9th grade teachers meeting also. The high school has provided grade 8 teachers with expectations to help them better prepare students for the high school. Superintendent Ouellette stated that these kinds of things are discussed at the monthly administrator meetings and there has been such a dialogue between secondary and feeder elementary schools in regards to reviewing student work and data. The meetings will be held bi-monthly instead of monthly. Mrs. Lok asked is teaching Algebra helpful to students who need to reach proficiency in Math? Dr. Richardson stated that Algebra is the single predictor for college level and it is a personal belief and a belief of the district that the earlier they are exposed to the concepts the more successful they will be. The CMT test does derive critical thinking as one of the elements of key aspects threaded through all the math questions. Mrs. Lok asked in what grade does Algebra appear on the CMT? Dr. Richardson stated that there are some strands of it in the 6th grade. Some people are advocating it as early as 4th grade. Mrs. Lok asked, I am interested in your thoughts about World Language expansion and this boards belief at the time that we worked toward expanding World Language offerings that this would result in perhaps improved reading skills? Dr. Richardson stated that the more exposure to language, even in Kindergarten level is a wise way to go. The dilemma at BMS is the amount of time to devote to specific skills. Math is also a good communicator. Mrs. Lok asked is the decrease in proficiency proportional to students taking the test? Mrs. Gejda stated that the decrease is a factor that we need to pay close attention to. We have a varied population. We are working closely with Jenifer Tait, Special Education Director and Monica Giglio, English Language Learner Director. Mrs. Lok stated that it seems that it is harder to write than it is to read and I wonder why we do better in writing than we do in reading? Mrs. Gejda stated that skill comprehension has many, many different facets to it. It is ongoing. We have a new writing program in the district and it has been very successful. I believe that reading comprehension is much more varied and complex. It requires many things. The writing process helps us in the thinking process. If you are writing in Math, Science or Social Studies it helps bring content along. My experience is that reading comprehension is much more complex. Mrs. Lok asked what a writing prompt might be? Dr. Richardson stated that the prompts are usually done in scenario form and the directions are usually 3-4 steps. A prompt might be, pretend you are running for student council, and describe your campaign and particular issues you might project to the student body. That was an actual writing prompt and it is biased to economical status because if you did not have any experience running for student council or if you did not have that particular opportunity in your classroom you would not have any clue as to how to answer that. The State deliberates carefully on making sure that it is a fair prompt. Mrs. Lok stated she did not plan to use the word ownership, but that she does feel in fact that we do take ownership for these test results. I am proud of our students and I would like to see our test scores improve because that means that their academic success is improving. Mrs. O'Neill stated she is glad to see Algebra pushed back to earlier grades and I figure it is the dreaded word problem that stumbles some students in Math. What percentage of students attended the voluntary focus groups? Mr. Cuprak stated that between 40-75 students attended and these were students who had been identified and letters were sent home. Mrs. O'Neill asked how many invited vs. how many that actually did attend? Mr. Cuprak stated between 80 to 90% and that was a very high percentage. Mrs. O'Neill asked if transportation was made available? Mr. Cuprak stated that in the morning parents were responsible for getting students to the school, but that in the afternoon we had a late bus. Mrs. O'Neill asked if the same thing happened at BMS? Dr. Richardson stated that at BMS the Focus Group took place during the day and the percentage was about the same. Mrs. O'Neill asked Dr. Richardson if she could find out why students did not attend and if there might be something we could have done to better accommodate them? Mr. Cuprak stated that it is early in the morning or after school and some students did not want to give up that free time. It was very structured and the students that did attend felt they were making progress. Mrs. Gejda stated there is also a summer program from students going from grade 5 to grade 6 for students who were not proficient. Transportation and snacks are provided for these students. The program has 6th grade teachers from both schools as well as grade 5 teachers. Mr. Edwards stated that in regards to Algebra in the early grades I am a strong supporter of this. My oldest daughter in 4th grade received problems solving for "x" and this surprised me because I do not think I was exposed to this until the 8th grade. Of the 28 students that have been moved from BMS to IMS how will we track these students? Mr. Cuprak stated that 28 students came to IMS and took advantage of our programs. We tried to match them with similar programs that were at BMS. Mrs. Gejda stated that the dialogue across the district is helpful in keeping students on the right track. Keeping communication open helps. Mr. Edwards stated he did not mean to imply that the students who attend BMS would do any worse than students attending IMS. It is really no different than any other student who goes from one middle school to another. If there is nothing special to study from these 28 students that is ok. Mr. Rizzo thanked Dr. Richardson and Mr. Cuprak for coming to the meeting and states that the things that were discussed have encouraged him a great deal. Linda you have hit the nail on the head with your statements about keeping everyone informed about our students' progress. Using the data and keeping staff informed is great. Test taking strategy skills are great to teach the students. Identifying weakness through data and getting rammed up for people to be able to use that data is also helpful. Using the focus groups is so impressive. It is wonderful to see students wanting to participate in these focus groups. There is a lot of critical thinking that goes into Algebra. I see that a lot more focus on that kind of thinking and learning helps along the way. Are there any major changes for next year? Dr. Richardson stated that she has told her staff that the scaffolding is up and we need to read the data and plug in adjustments. Looping is one thing that is exciting at BMS and the idea that Pre-Algebra is going to be offered in the 7th grade. Mr. Rizzo stated he is excited as well in regards to the looping. I would like to hear your thoughts at the end of the year as to how that played out. Mr. Cuprak stated that student achievement is everyone's responsibility. Everyone recognizes that responsibility and they are very excited. To see the feedback and activities during, before and after school reinforces that learning is for all students. Superintendent Ouellette invites Mrs. Gejda back to present the District Improvement Plan. Just to review with the audience, the NCLB legislation requires districts that are identified in need of improvement to develop a district improvement plan and present it to their Board of Education. Manchester was identified as a district in need of improvement based upon their Connecticut Mastery Test of Fall 2003 and the Connecticut Academic Performance Test Spring of 2003. Letters were distributed to parents and guardians of each student in the district. Mrs. Gejda is going to present an update on this. Mrs. Gejda stated that this was presented to the board subcommittee for Curriculum and Instruction several times during the last few months. We wanted the full board to see this. Based upon CMT and CAPT results we were cited in several areas. Participation rate for CAPT of 95% was not met. There were two objectives in putting this plan together. The first was student achievement in Mathematics at the middle school level to meet the proficiency of 75%. Second was to improve student participation to a minimum of 95% in the CAPT and CMT. There were
several action steps: We also forwarded the plan to the Connecticut State Department of Education for their review of this plan and they were satisfied with it. They suggested that we incorporate the action steps into the Strategic Plan. We are not required to submit this to the state but to have this on file and we will do so in case there is further discussion. Mr. Robinson asked do board members have questions or comments? Mrs. Hackett thanked Mrs. Gejda and as chairperson of the Curriculum and Instruction Committee I would like to publicly recognize the role that you have played in this district as Interim Assistant Superintendent. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed. You have demonstrated in your tenure great adaptability, flexibility and teamwork especially in the face of change. In light of the many mandates coming down from the federal government and No Child Left Behind you have taken on a tremendous amount of work to report to us as a district, state and federal government. Your thorough analysis has helped us to drive our decisions to the full board. You espouse the district goals and make sure that we meet these goals. Prior to taking this position you were the Math, Science and Technology Supervisor and you have to take over the whole curriculum during your tenure as Interim Assistant Superintendent. Superintendent Ouellette stated that Attorney Libby is here tonight to provide the board with an update on the search for a new Assistant Superintendent. Attorney Libby stated that at Mrs. Gejda's request she is returning to her previous position as Curriculum Supervisor for Math, Science and Technology. We are in the process of conducting a search for a new Assistant Superintendent. I am very please to tell you that we have found another exceptional Interim Assistant Superintendent who is our retired, previous Curriculum Supervisor for Language Arts Department, Dr. Peter Tognalli. We are very happy to have him in this position. In regards to the Assistant Superintendent search we have advertised the position and then extended the search and have several excellent candidates. We will be meeting with them on Tuesday, July 12th. The committee is comprised of parents, community members, administrators, teachers and board members. We will interview 6 or 7 candidates and will recommend 2 or 3 to the Superintendent for her to meet with and make her decision. By the end of July this process should be complete. However, depending on the position that this person is in, we do not know how much notice will need to be given by that person. Superintendent Ouellette thanked Dr. Tognalli for accepting this interim position. I am looking forward to working with him. Mr. Robinson welcomed Dr. Tognalli and thanked Mrs. Gejda for all her work. We are indebted to you for coming into this position at such a time of transition and to be able to provide that kind of seasoned continuity has just been essential to the operations. We are very thankful for that. E. OLD BUSINESS 1. Bennet
and Illing Middle School Educational Specifications Mr. Jokubaitis stated that Mr. Trombley is unable to attend this evening. We did meet last week with the permanent building committee and had some discussion about the educational specifications and there were some suggestions made and those have been incorporated into a third draft. I believe we have sent along a copy of the various changes on each of the pages as well. We stand ready to work with you to ensure that these specifications clearly articulate what it is you hope to accomplish at BMS and IMS. We will continue to work with you until the projects get well underway with your design professionals. Mr. Robinson thanked Mr. Jokubaitis for coming this evening. Board members the document we are going to consider tonight is dated June 24, 2005. Mr. Robinson asked for a motion on the education specifications. Mr. Edwards state he just wanted to recognize the work of the consultants and our staff that have gone into this document. It is very comprehensive. One or two paragraphs were read out of the Bennet Educational Specifications. I, as a board member, am very happy with the way these documents worked out especially in the technology area. We are going to be getting completely renovated learning spaces for the children. MOTION: Rizzo/Hackett s.v. The Board of Education adopts the educational specifications for the Bennet and Illing Middle Schools. (7/0/0). F. COMMITTEE
REPORTS A brief
discussion of the states reimbursement of the town architects fees was
held. Manchester The drafts
of the BMS and IMS renovations were presented and the committee G. COMMUNICATIONS H. PUBLIC
COMMENT 2. Tom
Stringfellow, 183 Hillstown Road 3. Mary
Angeli, 65 White Street I. ITEMS
FOR FUTURE AGENDAS Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. |
|