|
MANCHESTER
BOARD OF EDUCATION
REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2006 |
|
|
M
I N U T E S
|
|
|
7:30
p.m.
Lincoln Center |
|
|
A. OPENING PRESENT: Crockett, Edwards, Hackett, Marcano, Pohl, Rizzo, Small-Miller, Stafford ABSENT: Huyler ALSO
Superintendent of Schools Dr. Ouellette, Director of Business A.1
Call to Order A.2.
Pledge of Allegiance Ms. Hackett asked for the observance of a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Edward Hachadourian, a former member of the Manchester Board of Directors, who passed away the previous weekend. Mr. Hachadourian had cared passionately about Manchester's residents and educational system. He had been a good friend to the educational system; dedicated; articulate, and quick witted. He would be sorely missed. A.3. Minutes of September 11, 2006 Ms. Hackett asked for a Motion to adopt the Minutes of September 11, 2006. MOTION: Rizzo/Pohl s.v. The Manchester Board of Education approved the minutes as printed. The motion carried 8/0/0. B. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mr. Milt Perlman, 3 Sanford Road, addressed concerns he had in connection with the purchase by the Board of a small piece of property in the amount of $1.8m, and the adverse effect this would have on middle income families by increasing their taxes. He thought it behooved the Board, as keepers of the budget, to be cognizant of the interest of our taxpayers. Mr. Perlman had heard some rumors about the unsatisfactory condition of the High School and distractions - possibly caused by ongoing construction work. He had not personally checked this out. Mr. Perlman made reference to a publication put out by the Youth & Family Services, South Windsor, which talked about a Family Awareness Day. He thought it would be nice to hold a Family Awareness Day in Manchester to give parents the opportunity to come to our schools to meet with teachers and staff and become involved. Mr. Tom
Stringfellow, 183, Hillstown Road, stated that as a follow up to Hispanic
Heritage month (September 15-October 15), the Boston Globe had reported
on the hire of the first Hispanic Superintendent of Schools in the Boston
area, Dr. Manuel Rivera. C. STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE'S REPORT Mr. Mark Moeremans said the biggest news he had to report dealt with the construction going on at the High School. School had commenced on September 6th when the main topic of conversation had been the major changes that had taken place. Removal of lockers from certain hallways had made a dramatic improvement. En route to class every day the extreme speed of the construction on the new wing was noticed by the students. Events
were reported as under: Mr. Edwards referred to public comments about the construction taking place at the High School and asked Mr. Moeremans if he had any sense about students' views on building improvements to date, e.g., ongoing construction and rumored distractions. Any information he could give would be helpful to Board members. Mr. Moeremans pointed out that most of the construction was taking place after school hours, which did not interfere with classes. Obviously there was heavy equipment in the background, which could prove to be a distraction for classes nearby. He personally was not affected by this. One doorway had been blocked off, but everything else had been re-routed so there was no problem. Overall, the students liked the changes, realizing the school was really old and change had become necessary. The school Principal met with the students ahead of time and asked what changes they would like to see, e.g., color schemes etc. Students particularly approved the modern red ceiling panels over the fire exits. Hallways were not as cluttered as previously. Mr. Moeremans was mindful that this was just the middle of the process and not the final product. The school had already improved, and improvements were continuing. Mr. Rizzo mentioned the enhancements resulting from the removal of lockers, which unfortunately meant that lockers could not be assigned to everyone. Mr. Moeremans assured him that all freshmen had received a locker. He had not heard of anyone being denied a locker, upon request. He and some other seniors did not use the lockers, so he did not see any problem. Ms. Hackett thanked Mr. Moeremans for his report and was pleased to get his feedback on the renovations. Board members had also liked the modern high tech ceilings. D. CONSENT CALENDAR Dr. Ouellette reported ten items on the Consent Calendar for Board's approval. D.1 Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $230,985 Adult Education Services D2. Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $147,943 Manchester Head Start Grant D.3. Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $96,986 Enfield Head Start Grant D.4. Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $107,618 Carl D. Perkins Grant D.5 Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $7,682 Tech Prep Grant D.6 Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $100,000 Early Reading Success Grant
- Washington Media Arts Magnet School D.7 Appropriation
for Education Special Projects - $1,325,164 Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) Grant D.8. Increase
in Appropriation for Education Special Projects - $74,833 Head Start D.9. Permission
to Apply for Education Special Projects - $17,027 Immigrant Children
and Youth Education Grant D.10. Extended Field Trip Request - Illing Middle School Washington, D.C. - 8th Grade Class Trip - May 16-May 18, 2007 Dr. Ouellette stated that Mr. Dan Bebyn and Ms. Seanna Francoeur, Field Trip Coordinators, Illing Middle School were present to take questions concerning the Field Trip. Ms. Hackett asked for a Motion to approve the Consent Calendar. Ms. Hackett asked Mr. Bebyn and Ms. Francoeur to answer a general question on the proposed Field Trip. Being aware that they had been responsible for the Field Trip when they were employed at Bennet, she wondered what the challenges, obstacles, or issues, if any, there were, in planning this at Illing. Her desire was to have an appreciation of all aspects concerning this Middle School reconfiguration. Ms. Francoeur reported that the trip had been embraced by all staff; the challenge was in hoping to bring 300 children with them, and raise the money to do so. Mr. Bebyn said the children were very excited at the prospect. Fundraising was due to begin: would include car washing and a Lasagna dinner. There would be no financial barriers for any child wanting to go on the trip. Ms. Hackett would welcome the opportunity to announce any kind of fundraising to get the word out. Dr. Ouellette requested Mr. Bebyn and Ms. Francoeur to notify her when the sponsorship was announced so that she could help. Ms. Hackett stated the motion for the adoption of the Consent Calendar was on the floor. MOTION: Rizzo/s.v. Pohl the Manchester Board of Education approved the adoption of the Consent Calendar, as outlined by the Superintendent of Schools. 8/0/0. E. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT E.1. Foundation for Manchester Public Schools Update - Chris Pattacini Mr. Pattacini
was accompanied by Ms. Lisa Kidder, Vice President of Public Relations.
The Board was given a Power Point presentation highlighting the mission and initiatives of The Foundation for Manchester Public Schools, i.e., "To enhance public education in Manchester with Educational Projects and Enrichment Programs." The good news was the Foundation had become a federally recognized "Not for profit Organization" and was eligible to accept tax deductible donations. Mr. Pattacini elaborated on slides outlining why there was a need for an Education Foundation; showing local Education Foundations were a growing trend, and mention of the Foundation's Mini-grant Program. He pointed out, particularly, that the Education Foundation addressed students' needs and offered opportunities outside the curriculum. The Foundation focused on public schools in Manchester. There were similar Foundations in West Hartford and Bridgeport. Mr. Pattacini summarized the Foundation's results, i.e., it had funded 17 grants in two years; awarded more than $10,000 in funds; grants had affected more than 3,250 Manchester students from Kindergarten through 12th grade. In closing, Mr. Pattacini explained how everyone could help: make a tax-deductible donation; utilize corporate matching gift programs; volunteer on committees; support and attend Foundation events; attend an NHS Spaghetti Dinner for FMPS at Manchester High School at 6:00pm on October 21; visit the website www.foundationMPS.org. Mr. Stafford expressed the opinion that the Foundation was going in the right direction and the Presentation had been marvelous. He had prepared three questions, but Mr. Pattacini had given the answers. He hoped every person would be encouraged to make a contribution to the Foundation, however small - to help put together programs for children. He was told by Mr. Pattacini there would be one seating for the Lasagna Dinner: capacity was approximately four hundred. E.2 & E.3 CMT Report & Student Achievement Data Collection Report - Dr. Ann Richardson Dr. Richardson was assisted by Dr. Gejda in the slide presentation, which gave an overview of the 2006 Administration Connecticut Mastery Tests. At the onset, Dr. Richardson made the point that this was the first spring administration in ten years. Preliminary district results had been released in August. Board members had already been provided with a hard copy of the slides, in their agenda packet, which outlined, in great detail, relevant background data compiled for the Tests. Dr. Richardson stressed it was important everyone understand that basically they were looking at data points that were of different generations: from 2002-2006 there were two generations - 3 and 4. At this time, Dr. Ouellette interposed that as Dr. Richardson had all the data in front of her the Board could review each individual slide if they chose to do so. Dr. Richardson emphasized the importance of making connections to students; consistency across the district; what was happening in the classrooms; curricula issues and environment. Dr. Richardson concluded by saying we should no longer set the ceiling at K-12. We wanted all our children to have the opportunity to move on to quality education beyond high school. She referred back to the initiatives highlighted in her presentation under the headings "Connections" and ""Consistency" and said we were putting forth a strong initiative to make a difference in Achievement - closing the Achievement Gap was our priority! Mrs. Hackett thanked Dr. Richardson for her first major report to the Board. A lengthy and involved discussion, involving all Board members ensued. Mr. Edwards congratulated Dr. Richardson on her report, appreciating that she had taken the time to explain the meaning of the numbers. He referred to the scores being flat and reflected he had been on the Board five years and the scores reflected five years of data. He noted what the districts had done and thought it was important the fact be recognized that changes had taken place in the number of students taking the tests; participation rates had gone up; demographic and socioeconomic shifts had taken place in the town, all of which did not change the fact that the scores were flat. He found it refreshing that the report had brought this out into the open. The Board would be remiss if they did not also point out that the largest piece of the issue here was closing the achievement gap. He had personally just decided, in view of the information, which had emerged from the report, to make this issue his #1 goal. At the same time, he reminded the Board of their accountability to the public and that this should be an intensive process in the coming year. Ms. Small-Miller said the current situation had gone on far too long: it was an embarrassment, and something should have been done to correct it before now so that they would not be sitting now looking at these figures. History would not show that black and Hispanic students failed: it would be the Manchester School System. They must do whatever was necessary to resolve the issue and she suggested more black and Hispanic teachers in the schools acting as role models for the students, quoting "If they can do it - so can I!" Mr. Pohl said he was struggling to interpret the numbers. The report talked about Proficiency and measuring children against numbers. The abstract for him was when we looked at scores like this - what was the education level of our students in comparison to the State average? He thought one of the things the Board should strive to do, especially for him personally, would be to get an understanding of the real meaning of the numbers, in terms of what our children knew, versus what they did not know. What have they learned along the way? What level are they at? What types of things are they able to do? Were they going to be able to move on from our educational system to college? These were probably the biggest questions the community would be asking. He had heard it said that Connecticut was #4 in terms of excellence, so when we measured our students against students in other states, where were we? In other words, where we need to be and where we are. His interpretation of the numbers appeared to be "We are not very good." He did not think this was the case in view of the commitment of the teachers and the Administration in Manchester. He agreed with Mr. Edwards' comments that there was a need for parental help with their children's education. He would like to understand more clearly where we were falling short. At this point in the discussion Ms. Hackett said she would like the Administration to hold a "Student Achievement Workshop" to take an in-depth look at the data. This would provide an opportunity to address Mr. Pohl's questions. Mr. Rizzo stated that Dr. Richardson had been the first person to talk about the cohort data - which had proved to be really disappointing - and really spell it out. He requested the slides be made available to him for further perusal. It had always been his hope that the cohort data would show better results. We needed to pinpoint exactly where students in our system were falling behind. He believed the cohort data was not flat and that disturbed him. He reflected on the amount of time spent in the past on school buildings, etc., but agreed with Mr. Edwards' view that their #1 priority now should be to find out what was going on in the classrooms, and how the Board could help. Steps were needed to address the problem, specifically, and he approved holding a Workshop - this was a good beginning. Mr. Stafford said it appeared we were trying a lot of different things, such as decision-making at the high school and elementary schools. When would we start to see results? Would there be changes in the upcoming year? He thought we should be able to monitor things, instead of waiting three months, six months, or a year, to get the data. We should be getting the data straightaway! He shared the view of other Board members that he wanted to see changes; see the grades go up, and was willing to do whatever it took to get there. Mr. Crockett thanked Dr. Richardson for her first impressive presentation. He said the Board would get to work to help fix the problem and wished her good luck with her new responsibilities. At Ms.
Hackett's request, Dr. Richardson elaborated on the manner in which
the scores were reported this year compared to the past. Tests were
reported by the State Department of Education, and by the Media, differently
to the way in which every school across the State actually reviewed
the scores. Basically, what was reported in the local newspaper was
surrounding towns' overview of comparison. There was consistency over
time, in order to have the data make sense. We needed to look at Proficient
and above. These were solids. Dr. Ouellette reminded the Board of a previous Presentation given by Dr. Gejda regarding the DERG in Manchester, when she had stated we would not be reporting out any type of Achievement scores with the Demographic Reference Group and, therefore, the media had opted to compare us to the surrounding towns. Ms. Hackett reiterated it was important for people to understand that the numbers were being reported differently. Further, every school, and every student, should have their goals and she would like to speak seriously about goal setting. Dr. Ouellette assured Ms. Hackett that there were school improvement plans that did have benchmarks with regards to student achievement. She considered that what Dr. Richardson was trying to convey to the Board, and the public, was the Accountability piece; the new template where we are having review sessions with the Superintendent and the Central Office team to dissect and look at the data. This was a very new model. Last year they were working on it, as a Team, and it had been shared with Administration, who were now ready to move forward with student achievement. Ms. Hackett
discussed the continual decline in 8th Grade scores and everyone's concern
about the transitioning to 9th Grade. She viewed the 8th Grade as a
very problematic area. F. NEW BUSINESS F.1. Textbook Adoption - Ann Richardson Dr. Gejda introduced Ms. Susan Sernoffsky, Manchester Science Department Instructional Leader, and Mr. Andrew Rockett, Grade Level Principal, who were present to answer Board questions. Dr. Gejda explained the reasoning behind the request to the Board's Curriculum Subcommittee for the adoption schedule of Chemistry and Science books. (Copies of the Chemistry Textbook Pilot Results were tabled.) Two copies of the textbooks were circulated to Board members for their perusal. Dr. Gejda explained that the Chemistry curriculum for Manchester High School had been revised in 2003 and Proficiencies that complemented the Chemistry Curriculum had been developed, and would continue to develop over time. Chemistry teachers in the department were looking for a more compatible resource, as well as acknowledging American Chemical standards. Two texts had been selected from the several that were reviewed and, based upon information received from teachers, students and parents, the Committee recommended that the Board adopt Glencoe Science "Chemistry: entitled "Matter and Change" for use with students in the honors, CP and PSP classes. Board members had been given a revised price quote for the text. It was also learned that an electronic version of the text was available. The text was bulky but Dr. Gejda was happy to inform the Board there was a CD disk, free of charge, available to students. The quote given to her, by the representative, included over $50,000 worth of free teacher and supplemental materials. The revised request for the Board's adoption, which included shipping and handling, was for $34,634.25: monies that had already been budgeted for. Dr. Gejda informed Mr. Crockett that the online price was $87.96; the volume price being $65.97, which was quite a discount. She pointed out that it was rare to be given five complete packets of the teacher/ancillary materials. Ms. Hackett stated that the matter would come back as "Old Business" at the October 11th Board Meeting. Mr. Edwards was assured that the price was locked in. Dr. Gejda said the Board was additionally being asked to consider a textbook for the Math Applications 1 course at the High School. Mr. Mazzotta was present to answer questions. The Board had already received a copy of the Report to the Board of Education Curriculum Subcommittee. Dr. Gejda pointed out the focus for this particular request was to ensure that students taking the course had opportunities to work with resources that focused on applications of the skills within the course. Seventy textbooks were required and the price quoted for these was $3,464.23: already in the budget. Mr. Crockett spoke highly of the textbooks, which had been circulated. Dr. Gejda referred the Board members to the Textbook Evaluation Rating Form for the Psychology Book "Thinking about Psychology", which they had already received. Board approval was sought for the purchase of the book: already in the budget. Dr. Richardson discussed a variety of high interest reading novels made available for Board review. In addition to these, there were other titles. The package provided a rich overview of what high interest materials of contemporary issues at that age level were being looked at to discuss and review. Ms. Hackett complimented the Administration; staff at MHS, and the English Department. It was important that reading material was current and relevant. They had always done a great job of trying to find good literature, with which students could relate. They had made some good selections. Mr. Edwards had already read six of the books and encouraged parents to read them to ascertain if they had any reservations about the content. He understood that substitutions were allowed. He considered some of the themes could potentially be an issue for some parents. Dr. Richardson said the books would be in her office for a short period of time and parents would be welcome to avail themselves of the opportunity to review them there. Mrs. Hackett restated the Board's policy that parents could opt to have their children given alternative choices. G. OLD BUSINESS G.1. Board of Education Self Evaluation Ms. Hackett reported that on August 22nd the Board of Education members had begun the evaluation process to determine its strengths and weaknesses. Using a scale of 1-5, with 1 representing the lowest, and 5 the highest, Board members rated the Board's performance in the following seven functional areas: Board Relations; Policy; Superintendent Relations; Community Relations; Staff and Personnel Relations; Instructional Program and Fiscal. The Board's score for this Evaluation period was 4.51 points, out of a possible 5. The Board's score in each area, ranked in descending order was: Superintendent Relations: 4.83; Policy: 4.64; Instructional Program: 4.57; Board Relations 4.55; Fiscal 4.48; Community Relations 4.32, and Staff and Personnel Relationships 4.21. The results of this Evaluation tool would be used to help the Board improve its performance. Over the next several months Board members would review the Evaluation data and identify priority performance areas that needed improvement. Board members had also been asked to review the Evaluation instrument that was used this year to provide feedback on any questions or items they considered should be revised, removed or added, the following year. Ms. Hackett thanked each Board member for their interest and engagement in completing the survey, and demonstrating a desire to improve how the Board operated. She considered 4.51 a great score and would ask some of the Board members to look at areas where improvements were perhaps necessary; provide goals; ways to demonstrate mastery of the goals, and know that they had been met. She expected the Board would be working on this matter for a little while. G.2. Superintendent of School's Evaluation Ms. Hackett prefaced her remarks by letting the Superintendent know that the Evaluation covered the period through June 30th 2006. However, by reason of vacations, business trips, etc., the Board had been late with its discussion. Statutorily speaking, this was one of three main responsibilities of the Board: to hire and evaluate a Superintendent. She viewed this responsibility very seriously and this was the main reason she had asked for the delay to ensure all Board members were available to complete and discuss the Evaluation. She thanked the Superintendent and the Board members for their patience and for making it possible to come to closure with the Evaluation. Ms. Hackett read aloud her letter to the Superintendent: September
25, 2006 Dear Dr. Ouellette: The Manchester Board of Education has completed its evaluation of your performance as Superintendent for the period ending June 30, 2006. Board members rated your performance using evaluation criteria of one (1) for unsatisfactory performance to five (5) for outstanding performance in the functional areas of: general administration, instructional leadership, professional leadership, personal leadership, board relations, community relations, and achievement of goals. Board members' individual ratings of your performance were averaged and incorporated into a composite evaluation. It is my pleasure to inform you that the Manchester Board of Education has determined that your overall performance rating for this evaluation period is 4.37, which exceeds the "very effective" rating and approaches the highest possible rating of "outstanding." As a result of this performance rating, the Manchester Board of Education has determined that you have earned a raise in your base salary equal to 3.5% of your current base salary. In addition to this merit increase, the board also wishes to recognize your completion of a doctorate degree of education earlier this year by providing you with the doctoral stipend currently paid to district administrators. The merit increase and stipend are effective and therefore retroactive to July 1, 2006. Your efforts to move Manchester Public Schools toward continuous improvement have been far-reaching and significant. Your implementation of a plan to renovate Bennet Middle School for use as a 6th Grade Academy, reconfigure our middle schools, create appropriate elementary swing space for the two year construction period, and begin construction of a new freshman wing at MHS was extraordinarily challenging and executed extraordinarily well. Your thorough analysis of and focus on student achievement, coupled with your high professional standards and vision for this district will continue to ensure that Manchester's students are successful in their education and the years beyond. Sincerely, Ms. Hackett asked for a Motion to approve the Performance Evaluation. A motion was made by Mr. Rizzo and seconded by Mr. Pohl. The Board, individually, spoke eloquently of Dr. Ouellette's Performance since her appointment as Superintendent. Mr. Rizzo wanted the public to know that the public schools were in very good hands. He had every confidence that the initiatives, leadership and effort she put in, on a daily basis, would take the school district to places it had never been before. She was a team leader. Mr. Pohl said although he had spent only a brief time on the Board he had been greatly impressed with the Superintendent, who obviously cared a great deal about the district and had put together a great team. There was no one he would have more confidence in than Dr. Ouellette. Ms. Small-Miller caused a chuckle when she made a reference to Dr. Ouellette "rolling out the red carpet". She had every confidence that Dr. Ouellette would make every effort to close the Achievement Gap. Mr. Marcano complimented Dr. Ouellette on appointing a great staff and believed that with them behind her she was going to achieve some wonderful things for Manchester. He was happy she was our Superintendent. Mr. Crockett related some humorous anecdotes concerning Dr. Ouellette prior to her becoming Superintendent. Mr. Stafford thought everyone on the Board had summed it up: Dr. Ouellette cared deeply for children and their success. He had witnessed this during her time as Principal of Bennet; her drive for success; for the school system; her dedication and perseverance and ability to get things done had amazed him. Mr. Edwards humorously suggested that if Dr. Ouellette had a fault it was her ability to take compliments. He pointed out that Dr. Ouellette had had a great year; not only because of her doctorate but also for many other reasons. She was willing to go to any lengths to ensure the safety of our children, which was the Board's number one job. She had proven, beyond a shadow of doubt, that she was up to the task and he thanked her for the work she had done. Ms. Hackett added that Dr. Ouellette had done a significant amount of work to improve our district. Since taking over her role as Superintendent, she had looked at accountability in the district. Dr. Ouellette did not accept status quo. She met with every principal and reviewed every student's data; she had analyzed many programs and looked at repackaging them to serve students better. Ms. Hackett expressed her utmost confidence that Dr. Ouellette was the leader that Manchester needed to take on the challenges. Dr. Ouellette had done a lot to move the achievement and culture of Bennet School, and she was pleased that she was our Superintendent, with high professional standards; compassion and caring. Dr. Ouellette said it was a pleasure to work with the students, parents, community and especially the Board of Education. She believed they had only scratched the surface on where they needed to go. The Board had been extremely supportive. She looked forward to another year, and thanked the Board for all their comments. MOTION: Rizzo/Pohl s.v. The Manchester Board of Education approved the adoption of the Superintendent of Schools' Performance Evaluation. 8/0/0. H. COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Hackett reported that she had received a communication from Linda Grames, a former teacher at Bennet Middle School, and now a 6th Grade teacher at Martin School. Ms. Grams thanked the Board of Education for recognizing her 25 years service with the Manchester Public Schools. Dr. Ouellette had recognized the service award at the August 31st Opening Ceremonies. Ms. Grames said it was a pleasure to work for a school system that treasured its children and supported its teachers with integrity and respect. COMMITTEE
REPORTS Mr. Pohl
clarified some misleading information given out earlier in the meeting
when Mr. Perlman had stated that one house had sold for $1.8m. This
information was inaccurate. Mr. Pohl said it should be borne in mind that renovations were still going on and the meeting he was reporting had taken place almost two weeks ago, i.e., September 14, 2006. Mr. Epstein had updated the Committee on construction projects. Martin Elementary School's had a temporary certificate of occupancy. There was some delay as teachers had requested more fluidity before moving into some of those classrooms. The requests had been carried out since then. Buckley:
- in the process of installing some computer lines. Furniture for Waddell - order incomplete. The contractors had walked off the site the previous week; the reason being unclear. The vendor was having the contractors return to complete the assembly of the remaining items. Bowers front doors needed to be changed - a locking/buzzer system would be installed to enhance security. Construction
at Manchester High School - carried out, as scheduled. There was discussion of modification plans for the Keeney and Buckley bus loops with the possibility of having them included in the Town's Capital Plan. A discussion took place on the progress of the new Head Start Project and the need for a letter from the DSS confirming that money was still available. The next meeting of the Building & Sites Committee was scheduled for September 28 at 5:30pm in the Central Office Board Room. I.2. Curriculum
& Instruction Committee Representatives were present from their respective departments to discuss, with the Committee, textbooks for the Science - Chemistry Course; Math - Life Skills Math Course; Social Studies - Psychology Course and English. The Committee voted to send all the textbooks to the next meeting of the Board of Education for approval. The next meeting of the Curriculum & Instruction Committee was scheduled for October 30, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. J. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mary Angeli, 65, White Street, extended congratulations respectively to Dr. Ouellette and Dr. Richardson, on the Performance Evaluation and the appointment to Assistant Superintendent. Ms. Angeli anecdotally reflected on the years she had been acquainted with Dr. Ouellette. Ms. Angeli qualified Dr. Ouellette's numerous qualities: she was a doer; she was concerned, and she listened to people. Ms. Angeli said that she had taught school in Hartford and, thereby, was aware of Golden Band students, who were close achievers. Those students had been tutored, before school, about three mornings per week. After school tutoring included all students. Golden Band students had been asked to arrive at school forty-five minutes early, so this indicated there were ways to improve achievement. Ms. Hackett suggested that if Ms. Angeli desired to put her comments in writing, the Board would be happy to take a look at them. Mr. Tom Stringfellow, 183, Hillstown Road, expressed his support for items 1, 2, 7, 8 and 9 on the Consent Calendar, and applauded the efforts of the Foundation for Manchester Public Schools on an excellent presentation. Recommended
reading: Mr. Stringfellow concluded by saying it was everyone's business to see that children succeeded and he was pleased to note that the Board planned to hold a special Workshop. Ms. Hackett made a clarifying statement that the proposed "Student Achievement Workshop" would be held publicly. K. ITEMS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS No items were proposed for future agendas. Ms. Hackett asked for a Motion to adjourn. MOTION:
Pohl/Rizzo s.v. The Manchester Board of Education adjourned Respectfully submitted, Michael
Rizzo, Secretary |