HomeMy WebLinkAboutSchool Comm Minutes 6/21/2011MANSFIELD SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING
7:00 PM Open Session
Adiourn to
�r CE
rM')N OFFICE
N 2 try 1 ti P 2: 21
{ nr
s i
EXECUTIVE SESSION - 7:01 PM - Superintendent's Office
Adiourn to
OPEN SESSION - 7:30 PM - Room 3 A& B
7:01 PM EXECUTIVE SESSION
AGENDA
1.) Collective Bargaining Strategy / Update / Grievances
Food Service, Little Hornet Daycare, MEA, Para Prof., SPED
Drivers negotiations & review of any existing grievances
7:30 PM OPEN SESSION
AGENDA
7:30 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7:35 CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
7:40 SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT
1.) Spotlight on Students
• Rayna Freidman & Students
2.) Personnel
• High School Principal Update
• QMS Assistant Principal Update
8:00 APPROVAL OF WARRANTS Enc.
8:05 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.) Executive Session Minutes of April 12, 2011
2.) School Committee Minutes of April 12, 2011
3 .) Executive Session Minutes of April 26, 2011
4.) School Committee Minutes of April 26, 2011
8:10 OLD BUSINESS
1.) FY ` 11 Budget Update
2.) Mathematics Program K - 5
3.) Joint Strategic Plan / Town & School
8:30 NEW BUSINESS
1.) 2010 — 2011 QMS Schedule
2.) Measles, Mumps, Rubella Requirements
3.) School Committee Meeting Dates — 2011— 2012
4.) Superintendent's Evaluation
5.) Audit Committee
CITIZENS COMMENTS
9:00 SCHOOL COMMITTEE NEW BUSINESS
OTHER
Mansfield School Committee Meetine
Minutes for Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Town Hall, Room 3B & C
An Open Meeting of the Mansfield School Committee was held at the Town Hall on Tuesday,
June 21, 2011. After returning from Executive Session the Open Session meeting was reopened
and called to order by Chairman, Mr. Michael Trowbridge at 7:35 PM.
Motion U.C. 5 - 0
Members Present —roll call vote to open meeting;
Mr. Michael Trowbridge, Chairman;
yes
Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz, Vice Chairman;
yes
Mrs. Jean Miller,
yes
Mrs. Kiera O'Neil
yes
Mr. Jim Perry
yes
Also Present:
Mrs. Brenda Hodges, Superintendent of Schools
Mr. Edward Vozzella, Director of Finance
CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED
A thank you letter was read by Vice Chairman, Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz from Michael A. D'Ortenzio, Jr.,
Chairman of the State Student Advisory Council who visited the district along with the
Commissioner of Education on Monday, May 23, 2011. Michael is a senior in high school and also
a voting member of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.
SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT:
The Superintendent introduced the children of Ms. Friedman's third grade class whose stories and
artwork were published in HUTCH magazine, a children's creativity magazine. Mrs. Hodges then
presented a Proclamation from the State House in celebration of Ms. Rayna Freidman's distinction as
being named Teacher of the Year.
APPROVAL OF WARRANTS DONE
The following warrants were presented and accepted by the School Committee on June 21, 2011,
Good & Services, # 2011 - 1049 dated 5 -3 -2011 in the amount of $231,841.70. Salary & Wages,
#2010 -24 dated 5 -13 -2011, in the amount of $1,339,626.33; Goods & Services #2011 -1051 dated 5-
17 -2011 in the amount of $145,195.45; Salary & Waees, # 2011- 25 dated 5 -27 -2011, in the
amount of $1,320,860.99 ; Good & Services # 2011 —1057 dated 5 -31 -2011, in the amount of
$758,617.20.
Chairman Michael Trowbridge asked for a motion to approve the warrants. A motion was
made to approve the warrants 1st by Mrs. Jean Miller, 2 "d by Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz.
Motion U.C. 5 — 0
SCM
Page 2
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Executive Session Minutes for April 12, 2011 were approved.
Motioned by Mrs. Jean Miller, 2nd by Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz.
Motion U.C. 4 — 0 -1
The School Committee Minutes of April 12, 2011 were approved.
Motioned by Ivlr. Jim Perry, 2 "d by Mrs. Jean Miller.
Motion U.C. 4 — 0 -1
The Executive Session Minutes for April 26, 2011 were tabled.
The School Committee Minutes of April 26, 2011 were approved as amended.
Motioned by Mr. Jim Perry, 2 "d by Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz.
Motion U.C. 3 — 0 - 2
OLD BUSINESS
FY' 11 Budget Update:
Mr. Edward Vozzella, Director of Finance & Operations, spoke to the End of the Year closing of
accounts and the tremendous amount of work to be done in the next month. Mr. Vozzella stated that
we were in good shape and felt that there should not be any unforeseen issues.
Mathematics Program K — 5: .
The CIP approved, along with the PAC and MESA group assistance, the purchase of the Smartboards
for the Jordan Jackson School.
Mrs. Teresa Murphy brought the Committee updates on the New Math Programs, Envision Math and
Go Math. The programs are both Common Core Programs but the Go Math Program does not fully
support our needs and was only 50 — 60% aligned to the Common Core. The majority of the teachers
at the Jordan Jackson and the Robinson endorsed the Envision Mathematics Program.. In February
we sent out a survey to the teachers to find out what they felt was important for a math program.
Listed as very important / important were: differentiated instruction, home school connection,
technology and response to intervention. On the March 11, 2011, district wide Professional Day, the
two elementary schools hosted enVision Math and Go Math and were given an overview of both
programs. The meeting was videotaped by members of the National Honor Society in case someone
was not able to attend this meeting. During the spring they continued to host at both schools the
consultants who have come to support us. At the Robinson, all teachers have met in small groups
with Go Math consultants as well as enVision consultants. At JJ we have had several teachers at each
grade level who took on the responsibility of utilizing and implementing some of the materials of
each of the programs so that our training and extra training, with consultants went specifically to
those teachers. The beauty of that is not only did we have people who were using the materials, but
depending on recommendations and approval, we could have people who have already been using
materials be able to support us. In April, elementary principals and Mrs. Kalinowski created a
textbook evaluation checklist. We did this using the Scott Foresman text book checklist which we
used very successfully, a couple of years ago. We added the key components in math. In April, at JJ,
our grade level meetings allowed teachers to come together within their working groups. They
evaluated and/ or provided feedback on the materials, for of both companies. These materials were
laid out for them to access, make comments and use their checklist. In May the Robinson staff did
the same. The math vertical team, under the direction of Mrs. Kalinowski, created the analysis of the
data they collected and created the Quantitative Summary of Positive Comments. The Vertical Team
then went back to the original surveys that the teachers responded to as important, very important.
Not only did they use the rubric 1,2,3,4 but they also included the comments for those teachers who
took the time to write a comment, so each of components of the program were tabulated. Those
results were sent to Superintendent Hodges. She did communicate to our faculty today that she
would be making a recommendation to the School Committee. As administrators, we do recognize
that professional development is the key component to fully implementing a quality program, and to
that end, we will begin immediately with training for our teachers. During the summer, if approved,
we would like to implement a program that has been very successful in other districts, train the
trainer. This will assist use in creating grade level experts to support the staff with implementation of
the program. The consultants will continue to work with the staff. Mrs. O'Neil wanted to know if
other schools in the area are using this. Mrs. Murphy replied that both of the programs are very
popular items right now. The Everyday Math is going to be adopting a component of the common
core later down the line, but the majority of districts in our area are really going with one of the new
programs that are Common Core based. Mrs. O'Neil then asked if this was a brand new program
they were rolling out. Mrs. Murphy replied "no," these are programs that have been in existence
and are being revised to meet the common core standards. Mrs. O'Neil then wanted to know if the
school districts that are using these current programs are successful on their math MCAS. Mrs.
Murphy commented that what we are hearing is that most of the districts are purchasing this, this
area was very popular for the Everyday Math and districts are moving away from that and moving
toward Go Math or envision and the reason is mastery and spiral curriculum. Mrs. O'Neil asked if
the districts now using or have been using these programs, have they been doing well? Mrs.
Murphy said that the area districts are going to the enVisions math because the program is going
deeper and deeper into the common core standards. So, in answer to your question, are the districts
that are adopting the common core standards being successful, it's all new. Mrs. O'Neil wanted to
know if the districts currently using envisions in their old state, are they successful. Mrs. Murphy
said we are hearing great things about enVisions math. Mrs. O'Neil wanted to know if we had heard
from any specific things and have you talked with other districts and Mrs. Murphy said we have,
yes, but again, most of the districts we are talking to are now adopting these programs. Mrs. Hodges
then interjected to say that there are some districts using it but there is a pretty big "tweek" of the
program, going towards the Common Core Standards with all programs. Those that have used
enVision, for instance, are finding that they're going to the new updated programs as well. We have
heard good things about it, but do I know enough to say how are their scores compared to our scores,
they have done better than us, how much better, I really don't have that data. Mrs. Hodges wanted to
let the School Committee and the community know what the teacher's selection was. Mrs. Murphy
stated that once again in terms of utilizing the feedback and the evaluations tools by the teachers, they
all sat down with all of the materials and were more positive toward the enVision math. We heard
that it had all the criteria they were looking for, opportunities for differentiated instruction and the
home school connection. It was ranked very highly at both Robinson and JJ. The technology piece
was vastly superior with the enVision Math over the Go Math. The response to intervention and the
assessment pieces were also favored for enVision math. I know at JJ, I can only speak to JJ, because
I was there when the superintendent was reporting the responses. When the staff heard that the
recommendation was enVision math, there was a round of applause. So I feel we have met our goal
as principals, our goal, the superintendent directed us that we included all faculty in the process of
selecting a program, I feel that our teachers have gone above and beyond to participate in the process,
the number of people who responded to the survey, 100% included in terms of the grade level
meetings, who actually give the feedback and evaluate the programs, the number of individuals who
volunteered to be able to participate in utilizing the materials and sampling some of the materials
from both the companies. As a district we are very grateful to the support of Pearson Scott
Foresman and Houghton Mifflin because they went out of their way to provided us with materials
and technology supports and workbooks for grade 2. On the same note of thanks, Mrs. Kalinowski,
who is the department chair for mathematics at the secondary level, , has been highly supported of us
all year long. In the absence of a Curriculum Director, as we as administrators and principals, take on
the responsibility of selection of a new math program we recognize what a big challenge it is and we
appreciate the fact that Mrs. Kalinowski shared her content know ledge with us and she helped work
with during our awkward use stage this year, as we were supplementing Everyday math with
standards based materials and also taking opportunities to utilize materials and get ready for the
adoption. Mrs. Miller asked if she heard correctly that the teachers responded about content, what
type of content they would look for, more specifically recommending enVision instead of the other,
who then compiled that and decided that this fit better with a particular program. Mrs. Murphy said
that the survey gave them the information what they believed are requirements for a good math
programs, in terms of the content we knew it had to be common core aligned that was a given, it had
to be common core aligned. Mrs. Miller asked who decides, if someone says they want X, Y and Z
who decided that fit better with the enVision program vs. the Go Math? Mrs. Murphy explained
that every teacher went into a room where every program from Go Math and enVision were laid out
and they went through all of the components and evaluated whether or not it existed in either of the
programs , comparing the actual materials and then those checklists which the teachers completed
were compiled by the vertical team for the Jordan Jackson Schools and compiled by the school
principals at the Robinson. Mrs. Miller noted that she understood that the majority of the teachers
were for the enVision could you give me a sense of what you mean by a majority, was it 26 to 25?
Mrs. Murphy then stated it was overwhelmingly enVision. For Example, Mrs. Podesky and I have
been working with the teachers all year. We know of one challenge for the third grade is that there is
no workbook with enVision, however, we have worked around that challenge by getting those
Smartboards into the classrooms so that our teachers will be able to utilize the Smartboards. It's the
21 Century skills, the new buzz words. At first the teachers thought it would be challenging without
workbooks because we have always used them and yet now that they see the alternatives and what's
out there the possibilities are endless. Mrs. Miller was curious as to the numbers of who wanted
what. I just want to preface this by saying we have paid a lot of money for math text at the middle
school that we were told that the majority of the teachers supported it and that lasted a year. So, I
want to make sure that where we are talking about a majority, this is a significant piece of our budget,
and that you are saying the majority number of teachers want this, might be 25 to 26. Mrs. Hodges
then mentioned that it was difficult giving it a percentage because of the checklists, it was where
people made positive comments so we have a sense of the positive comments were overwhelming,
but someone could have had 4 positive comments and maybe then had not had a positive out of 5. If
you try and put a percentage on it, we are not trying to not answer the question Jean, but to try and
put a percentage is difficult. Mrs. Miller was looking more for a ball park figure. Mr. Perry was
curious why there wasn't a simple, do you want A or B? Why was this not offered to teachers? Mrs.
Murphy then said that there were parts, for example we broke it down into differentiated instruction,
home school connection, all of the pieces that the teachers ranked highly important. For example,
differentiated instruction, it was 1 positively written comment for Go Math and all the others were
written for enVision, and as a committee it was looked at as not a yes or a no but that there were parts
of each that may be very positive, but overwhelmingly it was the enVision math is what people
wanted to go with. Mrs. O'Neil asked if it was different groups that piloted the different programs
so that the were there more in the Go Math than the enVision ? Mrs. Murphy explained that in
talking with some teachers the other day that they thought in the beginning that Go Math would suit
their needs, but when they actually used the Go Math, they needed to supplement, and we found with
enVision Math across the board, there was not the need to supplement, there was so much material
and particularly with the technology piece. Mrs. O'Neil asked if all the classrooms have
Smartboards. Mrs. Murphy said at the JJ they did. Mrs. Miller felt it was a good question if the
same number of teachers piloted the programs, were there more teachers piloting enVision? Mrs.
Murphy, noted that at JJ they had a number of teachers, 2 teachers at each grade who took on a
fraction's unit for Go Math we also had a number of teachers, another 5 or so , who took on Go Math
from March until the end of the school year. We had 2 at each grade level with enVision. At JJ there
were more people who were utilizing more enVision materials throughout the year. When our
summer institute people put together all of the materials, they were actually using from 3 different
programs, they quickly discarded one, went through the other two and found they were more
successful with the enVision. At the Robinson school, 2 n grade teachers were using the Go Math
workbooks. Robinson principal, Mrs. Kristenson, commented that they used enVision and Go Math
to supplement all the units in I" and 2 "d grade and the kindergarten used the materials they presently
already had, to follow the common core. So, if it were time for addition and subtraction facts, up to
20, they used different packets from envisions or if they shifted to geometry, they used packets from
Go Math, and that process lasted until April and then the Houghton Mifflin, Go Math, gave all the
teachers the workbook to use and they found that to be very bulky and big and then we had 4 teachers
pilot the enVision and they felt it was the same platform as the Reading Street so the teachers are
familiar with the technology and the assessments they use for Reading Street, enVision is the same
publisher, so it easier for the teachers to translate the Reading Street into the enVisions and worked
out very well. The Smartboard activity for enVision were much more interactive for the children and
they could participate more with the enVisions and not the Go Math. Mrs. Miller was wondering, if
she heard correctly, that some of the teachers pushed aside different components because they did not
like it, do you feel then that they actually want this other program or why were they going to both.
Mrs. Kristenson then clarified, they did not like the Go Math workbooks, they were very thick and
cumbersome for 2nd graders, the enVision has more like a newsletter platform to use for 1 si & 2 "d
grade. So they tried different things and they like some components of both, but all in all the
majority of the teachers prefer the enVision Program because it parallels to the Reading Street and
they are very familiar with that on how to inform the instructor on how to get to the children who are
having the most trouble. Mr. Perry then asked if both principals felt comfortable, that this is a huge
expenditure, that the teachers are not going to have to supplement the enVisions Math Program?
Mrs. Kristenson hoped that would not be the case, Mr. Perry stated that if you were going to buy
another program that you were going to have to supplement, and spend over $300,00 - ... Mrs.
Kristenson noted that she did not foresee that. Mr. Trowbridge said that we did not know if things
would get changed in a few years. Mrs. Hodges noted that it is now aligned with the common core
standards. The problem with the Everyday Math was that 50 -60% of it was NOT aligned, so that was
the amount of supplementing that was required if we continued with it. Mrs. Miller was not
advocating for the Everyday Math, my concern is that we are going with a program that not
everybody or the majority of the teachers are not loving it but it's better than the other program or
than what we have, and it is a huge expenditure, and again I am coming from past history, fairly
recently, we did purchase an expensive program for the middle school that only lasted for a year. I
do not want to invest this kind of money if it's not what really embraced by the teachers or if we are
going to be supplementing, like Jim said, very shortly thereafter. Mrs. Hodges said that she did not
foresee by any means, that we would be supplementing to any degree because it is aligned, what may
come at us in a few years down the road, I can comfortably say that right now, that what we have
seen and used the materials are there. There are on line activities, activities that embrace the
technology, so many activities that really enrich this program. Mrs. Kristenson then added that the
enVision teachers from the Robinson school met with the consultant that will be giving the
professional development and resoundingly felt very comfortable with that person. There is a lot of
professional development involved in learning a new program. We have had good success in
professional development with people that come from Pearson. Mrs. Losiewicz wanted some
clarification on what you said. I am hearing you say that the teachers are excited with this, so it
wasn't they were picking which one was the worst; which one do we want to go with, it was that they
were excited about this. Mrs. Murphy stated that yes they are excited and that they identify
components and factors they were very enthusiastic about and that lead them to make their decision
would not have had the opportunity to be able to compare anything to if they did not have two
programs going on, so it has been our benefit to be able to use all of these materials, they are very
enthusiastic. For me, this is the first program that you can say, the sky's the limit, when you come in
and see that technology piece, it's incredible, and our kids are so used to living in this technology
driven world, they're digital natives, and our teaching needs to meet those needs, and their interests
and their goals, this program certainly will. Mrs. Losiewicz found most disturbing how you bring up
the old curriculum was not aligned with the standards, very disturbing. Mr. Trowbridge noted the
amount we were supplementing this year was more that we were using. Mrs. Miller stated that it
was not her intent to stay with Everyday Math, they were trying to get rid of it since I got on the
School Committee. I just want to make sure that we are making an investment that next year we are
saying gee we were, I guess from my perspective, it because we didn't get a more specific outline of
how many teacher liked this and the piloting was set up so that it was like chunks, this verses this, I
just needed some clarification for myself and in no way am I saying keep what we have. Mrs. O'Neil
stated that she thought it was great, but she thought she would have liked to have heard more about,
we have see it at this district and it's been successful or this district is using this, or we talked to
teachers at these districts, that type of information. Mr. Trowbridge asked which towns they
actually talked to. Mrs. Murphy spoke to a number of towns, in fact she went to a Pearson's training
and she was talking with people in Barrington, RI and a couple of other Rhode Island communities, I
know their scores are good and their schools do well score wise. I do not want to stand here and say
she has spoken with districts that use enVision Common Core aligned because that does not exist,
however, I can tell you that by looking at the scores of our Pearson Scott Foresman Reading
Program, that I feel that if the enVision Math can do what the Scott Foresman is doing then we will
see improvement. Mrs. O'Neil's last comment, what will be huge next year will be once we are all
started is to have a parent information night and get the consultant from Pearson, just to get the buy in
from the parents as to why we are doing it different, the differences, buying it and why they are
different. Mrs. Murphy said they heard very positive comments when Mrs. Kalinowski spoke to
the MESA group and talked about math, and certainly where we are looking to our professional
development trainer, our teachers will be experts, we can certainly do that, we want our parents to
have a good understanding of it. Mrs. Hodges explained to Mrs. O'Neil that we could not really
compare with other districts because the common core standards are just rolling of the press as we
speak, we really are ahead of the curve on this, we have talked to many school districts that don't
have an adoption process in place, they are not where we are, they are going where we are, we began
this really, two years ago and we began this year is real earnest. Go Math and enVision Math are just
rolling off the press, they are aligned to the common core standards, so no one has used this.
If the School Committee should endorse the Envisions Math Program the district will be able to
have the materials available by June 30th, so that teachers may access the program materials for
review over the summer. We will be able to provide professional development for representative
teachers at each building that can provide support for the larger staff. The cost of the program is
approximately $340,000.
Chairman Michael Trowbridge called for a motion to approve. A motion was made to approve the
enVisions Mathematics Program Vt by Mrs. Jean Miller, 2 "d by Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz.
Motion U.C. 5 — 0
Joint Strategic Plan / Town & School:
School Committee Chairman, Mr. Michael Trowbridge, explained that he has not heard back from
the Town regarding any meetings or updates toward forming a Strategic Plan. Mr. Trowbridge will
contact the Town when we can plan to begin the process.
NEW BUSINESS
2011— 2012 OMS Schedule:
Mrs. Hodges prefaced the schedule by stating that the cuts made to the Qualters Middle School have
been so deep that it has been extremely difficult to move forward in a positive manner with the
staffing, as it is. QMS Principal, Zeff Gianetti, has worked since being hired in February, with the
middle school staff to build a new schedule and bring back 6.2 teachers. The new schedule will bring
back a team and increase the teaching blocks. There will be six (6) periods a day with a 6 day
rotation with 58 minutes per blocks. There was a long discussion regarding the loss of foreign
language. Mrs. Miller had serious concerns about the decrease in teaching time for the 7th & 8th grade
foreign language classes.
Chairman Michael Trowbridge asked for a motion to approve. A motion was made to approve
the new QMS schedule by Mrs. Lisa Losiewiez and a second made by Mrs. Kiera O'Neil.
Motion carried 4 —1, Mrs. Jean Miller was opposed to this schedule due to the loss of time
allowed for the foreign language program.
Measles, Mumps, Rubella Requirements:
Mrs. Patricia Harrison, Head School Nurse, updated the Committee on the new state regulations that
require all students and staff to show evidence of immunity. The criteria includes ANYONE born in
the US after January 1, 1957, two doses of measles- containing vaccine given at least four weeks
apart and beginning at 12 months of age, and the second dose prior to or within 72 hours of exposure
and serologic proof of immunity. A physician- diagnosed disease is not acceptable for any group.
School Committee Dates:
The School Committee received the list of the upcoming meeting dates for the new school year
Superintendent's Evaluation:
Mr. Michael Trowbridge stated that the School Committee would begin the process of evaluating the
Superintendent. There was no actual timetable given but they wanted to begin at the first meeting in
August.
Audit Committee:
There was discussion from the Committee regarding the vacancy on the Audit Committee, now that
Frank DelVecchio is no longer on the School Committee. It was decided that new Committee
member, Mrs. Kiera O'Neil, would fill that vacancy.
CITIZENS COMMENTS
Mr. Robert Ritchie spoke to the issue of the drug and alcohol Tri Town Meeting that was held in
Norton and the lack of Mansfield participation at this meeting.
Ms. Nancy Breef- Pilz spoke about the MHS Robotics Team and the robot they have built and plan to
show across the state. There will be a fundraiser at Fridays Restaurant on June 28c` from 4:00 PM to
9:00 PM.
SCHOOL COMMITTEE NEW BUSINESS
The School Committee approved a field trip request from Ms. Sheila Newton to bring the drama,
choir and stage craft students to see a performance of Les Miserable's. The students will be
responsible for paying for their tickets and will be transported by bus to the Providence Performing
Arts Center on November 2, 2011, after school.
Chairman Michael Trowbridge asked for a motion to approve. A motion to approve was made
by Mrs. Jean Miller, 2 "d by Mr. Jim Perry.
Motion U.C. 5 — 0
OTHER
Mr. Trowbridge announced that MHS junior, Josh Lambert, is Mansfield's first National Champion.
Josh took first place honors in the track & field event with a 4:05.99 finish time ! Congratulations
( Josh.
Motion to adiourn:
Chairman, Mr. Michael Trowbridge, called for a motion to adjourn the School Committee Meeting of
June 21, 2011 at 9:55 PM for the sole purpose of adjourning. A Motion was made to close the
meeting by Mr. Jim Perry, 2 °d by Mrs. Jean Miller. A Roll call vote to close: Mr. Michael
Trowbridge, yes; Mr. Jim Perry, yes; Mrs. Jean Miller, yes; Mrs. Lisa Losiewicz, yes; Mrs. Kiera
O'Neil, yes.
Motion U.C. 5 - 0
Respectfully submitted,
Maly O. Jackson
Secretary to the Superintendent
& School Committee