Board of Education Curriculum Committee Meeting

April 22, 2009

ATTENDANCE: Shirley Mosby, Chair; Glenn Iannaccone, Migdalia Rivas (7:55 p.m.)

STAFF: Anthony Daddona, ASI

OTHERS: Evette Ellis, Silvermine School Principal, Bruce Mellion, NFT President

CALL TO ORDER

Ms. Mosby called the meeting to order at 7:44 p.m.

APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2009

** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED THE MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2009. ** MS. MOSBY SECONDED. ** THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2009 AS SUBMITTED PASSED WITH ONE IN FAVOR (MOSBY) AND ONE ABSTENTION (IANNACCONE).

DISCUSSION ON THE MANO Y MANO PROGRAM

Mr. Daddona then reminded the Committee members that there had been a pamphlet from Silvermine School included in the information packet. He then introduced Evette Ellis, the principal of Silvermine School, to give a brief overview of the program.

Ms. Ellis said that the program is for K-5th and there are presently three classes at each grade level. One aspect of the program is focused on English speaking students and the other aspect is focused on the Spanish speaking students. The K-2 grade portion of the program provides the reading materials in the students’ native language for all the student subject letters. This is called an immersion program. Starting in third grade, the transition to the second language begins in reading and writing in the other language. By the time the students reach the 4th and 5th grades, the students have been exposed to the other language for a six day rotation in the full curriculum. Throughout the entire scope of the rotation, all the students received all their course instruction in the designated language. The teachers do the lesson plans together.

Mr. Iannaccone asked about the number of sections in the school for K-3, which Ms. Ellis reviewed with them. Mr. Iannaccone asked about the CMT testing. Mrs. Ellis said that the State only provides the test in English and this had not proved to be a problem. By the time that a student is in the third grade, their native language proficiency skills have been firmly established and the transition to the second language is much easier because of the continual exposure. The native English speakers have a more challenging transition to Spanish because they have a more limited exposure to Spanish outside the classroom, in area such as television, radio, and regular conversation.

Ms. Ellis said that last year, there had been significant gains in the Silvermine test scores, which she attributed to the data team’s conversations with the staff. Ms. Ellis explained that the staff provides the students with test preparation materials for taking the test in English. She felt that this work would have an impact on this year’s test scores.

Mr. Iannaccone asked about late arriving foreign language students. Ms. Ellis said that the CTM’s have an exemption for the students who have been in the country for less than a year. A transferred Spanish speaking student who arrived at the school for 4th grade would be put in the English immersion portion of the program. A brief discussion followed.

Ms. Rivas joined the meeting at 7:55 p.m.

Ms. Rivas asked why it was difficult for parents with a student in the Mano y Mano program to have their child moved into the mainstream program. Ms. Ellis said that when a student is enrolled in the program, it is with the understanding that the student will remain for the program until the 5th grade. The end goal of the program is to have the student proficient in both languages. Ms. Ellis said that this was an issue that the school will be clarified with the parents at an upcoming open house. Many of the Spanish speaking parents seem to believe that the program is there only to teach their child English. The focus is to have dual language instruction program. A parent that wishes to have their child learn English would simply be provided with ESL services and placed in a mainstream class.

Previously, there was an application for enrolling a student in the program. This application was later discontinued and the parent was simply asked if they wished to have their child enrolled in the program and based on the parent’s verbal answer, the child was enrolled in the appropriate program. Ms. Ellis felt that many of the Spanish speaking parents had not received a full explanation of the program and its goals.

Ms. Rivas then asked about the evaluation process for the students in the program. Ms. Ellis reviewed this process with the Committee. Ms. Rivas had several detailed questions about the assessment process. Ms. Ellis said that it was important to have the student continue in the program because an English speaking student who had just acquired proficiency in Spanish would lose their newly acquired skill by moving them out of the program. She added that she had not received a request to remove a student from the program because the student had reached language proficiency in the non-native language. However, she said that she had received requests from parents to remove the child for other reasons. Moving children from a classroom is a decision that will seriously affect the student because the student has friends in the class and also the teachers are aware of how the student learns.

Mr. Daddona said that he felt that there had been a misconception about the program in the Hispanic community. Ms. Ellis agreed. Ms. Rivas said that she felt that it was the administration’s fault because her community did not understand what the program was about. She added that she did not want to have a community that was resentful or hurt because they did not understand the focus of the program. Discussion then followed about this issue.

Ms. Mosby said that Ms. Ellis had recognized the problem and that the program would be thoroughly explained to the parents of the Mano y Mano students at the open house. She said that it would be important to have better communication with the parents about this. Regarding the communication aspect, Mr. Iannaccone said that the meeting was not posted in the newspaper. He then asked about the curriculum aspect of the program. Ms. Ellis said that there was an evaluation process underway and that then staff had visited a school in Long Island, which has the program already has reached the full implementation of having the students exposed to both languages every day for some period of time. She said that she was planning to meet with the staff about the curriculum and the texts for Mano y Mano. Mr. Daddona said that the program had been reassessed and that in the last few months, there had been much more parent participation for both the Mano y Mano students and the mainstream students. Ms. Rivas asked how the parents were selected for the meeting with the consultant. Ms. Ellis explained that a notice had been sent out to all the parents regarding the meeting with the consultant and that whoever attended the meeting was part of the discussion. Ms. Ellis added that she was not present for the meeting as the consultant wanted the parents to feel that they could speak freely. Ms. Rivas asked for a copy of the invitation. Ms. Ellis said that she would send copies of the notice to the Board members.

CREC REPORT UPDATE

Mr. Daddona said that Mr. Cunnane from the Department of Education has been assigned to work with the District. There have been several meetings with Mr. Cunnane. In his March meeting with the District, Mr. Cunnane said that he had expected the District to have made more progress and expressed his concerns about the District Administrative teams clarifying the roles of the District. The CREC report recommended that the District hire someone to perform this function and Mr. Daddona explained that the Administration did not know where they would be getting the funding for this position. The District had not yet finalized the Special Education Consultant who would work with the Central Office staff in assisting in implementing the CREC recommendations. This was also another budgetary concern.

Mr. Cunnane also had concerns about the professional development for the School year ’09-’10, and the finalization of the plans for the stimulus funding. Mr. Daddona explained that many people believe that the stimulus money will be the “be all and end all”, but this is not so. There are stipulations and strict guidelines with the funding. It can not be used to supplant the deficiencies in the budget, but this is not possible because of the guidelines.

There were also concerns about the finalization on the guidelines for the use of assisted technology, to give a report update on the status of the Special Education Committee on implementing the SRBI in the District, to develop a written procedure criteria for recommendations for paraprofessionals, to develop written procedure criteria for out of district placement, to develop written procedure criteria for other in district placement, to develop written procedure criteria for the use of modern use of IP direct, finalize the composition of the Parent Advisory Committee, have met at least one time with the Parent Advisory Committee, have a plan for the handbook committee as to the goals and suggestions for the handbook and have developed a list of special education information that can be added to the District website.

On April 7th, there was another meeting with Mr. Cunnane, who expressed his pleasure over the fact that all of the items he had expressed concerns about had been accomplished and were well on their way to be completed in an email. Mr. Daddona then gave a brief overview on how the District had accomplished these tasks. Mr. Cunnane will be attending a meeting with the District on April 24th for the Data Team meeting.

Mr. Daddona explained that the CREC guidelines want to have the District trained in the SRBI by February, but the State has not yet issued the new criteria guidelines for the students and the administration has not yet been trained. On the professional development days, the District will begin training the administration on the SRBI three tier model. The building principals will need a clear understanding of the model in order to implement it. The Student Response Team (SRT) model will be changed to the Educational Improvement Plan (EIP) for the regular student population, which is very different from the IEP, which is for Special Education population. Mr. Daddona then went on to explain the details of the tier instruction plan.

From a professional development standpoint, Mr. Daddona explained that he had assembled a Curriculum Review Committee composed of teachers and administrators from all grade levels to examine exactly what Professional Development the District is offering and how it is being offered. He said that the District needed to follow the recommendations, but also needed to follow the CALI model. Mr. Mellion said that if there was anything that would directly impact or change the delivery of services by the teachers, the teachers needed to have that before the first day in September. Mr. Mellion then objected to a particular type of training that was rarely needed but would take two days. He said that the teachers know about the CREC report and know that there will be follow up, but nothing more than that. By starting the next year without training, the teachers will constantly be trying to catch up with the new models.

Ms. Sue Haney then thanked everyone for the Curriculum Committee and expressed her appreciation about the recently formed PAC committee that could communicate with parents. She went on to say that from the PTO Council point of view, when emails are sent out to parents, she uses a blind email delivery function, which protects the parents emails from becoming public knowledge. She then asked why the Special Education Department was not using this function to notify parents. She said that using email like this would open up communication with the parents. The discussion then moved to whether the PAC meeting would be open to the public. Mr. Daddona said that this had been discussed and that the public would be welcomed to attend but only as observers. The parents on the committee will decide how and when they will interact. Discussion then followed about the process and the goals of the group.

Ms. Haney then expressed strong concerns about the District adopting the program that might be modeled on another town’s special education program because it would not be based on the student’s needs. She said that Dr. Corda’s statement at the last BOE meeting about fidelity was very important. Ms. Haney then informed the Committee that she had a needs based model that would address a number of concerns, including fidelity. Mr. Daddona said that the Wilton model does have a very large fidelity component, but that while the model was well respected, the District was not committed to that particular model. He reminded everyone that the stimulus money is expected, but the rules governing it change every day and the State has yet to issue the guidelines. The Title 1 funding will be monitored by the Federal Government. Ms. Haney then asked if it would be possible to do a magnet component in a school for students who were struggling to learn how to read.

Ms. Rivas then read a number of questions about the program, which she read aloud before submitting the list to Mr. Daddona.

What reading programs are being used in the District?

Stepping Stones Day School is one of the top ten schools in New York City. They have an excellent reading program because they deal with children with disabilities. Ms. Rivas then suggested that the District get some information on the program that Stepping Stones uses.

What software program is being using in the District in respect to Special Education and how are these different programs monitored?

Please check [inaudible] smartkids.org

Is the parent handbook available in any other language because it is a double whammy when you have children who are ELL and on the spectrum. By staff numbers, are you also including teachers and resource personnel?

Do you have an evaluation of Professional Development Days and how is this monitored?

Which five categories do not have representation because you say that eight out of the thirteen categories are represented. Ms. Rivas would like to know which five are not represented.

Can the District’s Technology Department help with the website?

How would you and how do you plan to reach out to the ELL community and the bi lingual community with [inaudible] ?

Is it possible to have a bilingual consensus [inaudible] consultants to help. Has there been any research to reach out to some minority consultant that can be used with this diverse community?

Has anyone followed up to see if the teacher have received any [inaudible] and information that the administration has already received to the point that we are now at in the timetable?

Have you checked within our own schools for teachers, social workers, resource people or any personnel who might have any kind of special education certification under the ASD or the autism spectrum disorder, or any other aspects of special education field because I believe that there are some people who are talented and they are left and fallen through the crevices because of a low profile. I think that you could use some of their expertise, but they are not out there.

[Inaudible] has already acquired the latest evaluation tool for children with ASD and I think that they could send you information on this and other things. There is another tool and evaluation piece that is a very good [inaudible].

Aides are very important to help the teachers in the schools. What are were doing with the aides piece?

Mr. Mellion commented that if certain programs are working for certain schools, that is fine, but it does not mean that one program fits all. He said that he had done some previous research on programs and that care must be taken with certain applications. Ms. Mosby said that the Committee would look at every aspect of all programs, which should be done with all programs before it is implemented. Discussion then followed.

Ms. Rivas said that the it would be important to work on coordinating the mainstreaming of the students and that it was important to consider it general education. Knowing how to teach each child in the school is what education is all about. Coordinating the staff and having everyone on the same page is the goal in order to help the student.

ADJOURNMENT

** MR. IANNACCONE MOVED TO ADJOURN. ** MS. RIVAS SECONDED. ** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted

Sharon L. Soltes Telesco Secretarial Services

Category: Committee Minutes