Board of Education Meeting Minutes Part I

September 4, 2007

ATTENDANCE: Jody Bishop-Pullan, Chair; Susan Hamilton, Gregory Burnett, Bruce Kimmel, Robert Polley, Shirley Mosby, Migdalia Rivas, Rosa Murray, Thomas Vetter

STAFF: Dr. Salvatore Corda, Superintendent of Schools

OTHERS: Charles Wilhelm, Paul Blumenthal, Mary Theresa Conrad, Stuart Opdahl, Ted Welch, Norwalk High School Social Studies, Dr. Karen Lang, Hugh McKiernan

I. CALL TO ORDER

Ms. Bishop-Pullan called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. Ms. Bishop-Pullan welcomed everyone to the first Board of Education Meeting for the 07-08 school year.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Ms. Bishop-Pullan led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance.

III. SPOTLIGHT ON NORWALK PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Ms. Hamilton then read the Spotlight on Norwalk Public Schools Report to the Board.

IV. SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND REPORT

Dr. Corda said that the opening went well. He stated that this school year would be a pivotal year for the District with respect to student performance. He said that there were concerns that the progress that the District has made is being overshadowed by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation. Dr. Corda said that after looking at performance data over time, it is clear that the District is moving forward. There are areas that need to be addressed, but the student performance has continued to move in an upward trend. There is also an upward trend on the subgroups that NCLB has identified. There is a commitment to the belief that every child can be successful given the right time and the support necessary for that to happen.

Dr. Corda then spoke about the level of professionalism in the school. It is more than being courteous and responsive. In the larger context, there is a recognition and understand that education is similar to other professions like medicine and law. This has to do with pedagogy, which is based on research on how children learn and what constitutes effective teaching. It also is based on the assumption that those who are in the profession will continue to expand their own knowledge base. Dr. Corda then explained that this was how professional learning communities became vehicles for teachers to demonstrate that kind of professional behavior.

Dr. Corda said that in his early teaching experience, the teachers were expected to stand in front of a class that was absolutely quiet and talked to the students about matters related to content. The expectation was that the students would take notes about what the teacher said and this would be followed by a quiz. The student was expected to give back to the teacher the information that the teacher had imparted to the student. Now the expectations for the profession extend far beyond that. It requires a teacher who makes intelligent decisions based on good teaching practices. Rather than being an isolated activity, teaching is now viewed as the teacher adding to the knowledge that everyone else has. Both the success and lack of success are examined.

Dr. Corda said that he had told the faculty at the convocation that as a result of the NCLB legislation, the District is required to participate in a quality review process conducted by Cambridge Education. This does not mean that the District is failing. The rationale behind this is to have an objective assessment of how the faculty view themselves in order to highlight what the strengths and identify where the areas that need strengthening are. This also offers an opportunity for suggestions on techniques for self-improvement.

Dr. Corda said that in the visits to the various schools that he has made since the start of the school year, the faculty had a sense of anticipation and pride in what they have done. But the faculty at the various schools also recognized and understood that they still have work to do.

Regarding No Child Left Behind, Dr. Corda explained that this legislation was enacted by the federal government based on the belief that as a society that there is an obligation and a responsibility to all of the students. Prior to this legislation, school districts spoke about themselves in very general terms. In doing so, they were able to allow those areas of performance that needed attention to slide under the radar. The value of NCLB is that it requires school districts not only to meet ever increasing targets of performance, but also requires that groups of forty or more students in a given category, their performance must be reported. This highlights where areas are that need strengthening. This helps the District.

On the other hand, the NCLB legislation uses a one size fits all model. Irrespective of the needs of a given district or where a district is starting from, failure to make the benchmarks result in being categorized as needing improvements. It is interesting to note that frequently when a District fails to meet the target, this is portrayed in the press as a characterization that the school is a failing school. The legislation is 11,000 pages long and it does not talk about failing schools. It addresses schools that are in need of improvement. It does not recognize the difficulty for some districts to reach these benchmarks or allow for more time. The legislation is under consideration for extension and review. There has been discussion on the part of legislators about possibly creating a value added model, which would document the progress a district is making. Other ways of looking at student progress has also been discussed. Dr. Corda said that he believed that there would be some modification of the legislation, but did not think that the legislation would be allowed to expire.

Regarding Norwalk, Dr. Corda said that performance is assessed at the elementary levels based on the performance of the CMTs. This is also true at the middle school level. At the high school level, performance is assessed on the basis of the CAP test. These tests focus on the performance of students in math and reading. He then reviewed the testing procedure and goals. Dr. Corda said that the intent was that by 2014 every school and every district in the entire United States would have 100% of their student population performing at or above proficiency.

The District will be assessed on the basis of subgroups from across the entire district. He pointed out that if a particular elementary school has less than forty students in a particular category, then there would be no progress reporting because there are less than forty. A school could have a small group of ESL student who were not doing well, but since the group was less than forty, it would not be reported. However, these sub groupings would be used in evaluating the District.

In Norwalk District, the subgroups that did not meet AYP status in mathematics are African American students, Hispanic students, Special Education students, Free and Reduced Price Lunch and English Language learners. Because these subgroups did not make adequate yearly progress, the District has been identified as a district in need of improvement. Norwalk is in Year Four of that designation. Obviously there is a great deal of work to be done.

Dr. Corda then reviewed the figures for the Norwalk elementary schools for math and reading. He also explained that when a school has been designated as a school in need of improvement, the parents of the students have the right to choose to send their children to a school that has not been identified as in need of improvement. This is the second year that some of the Norwalk schools have had this designation. Very few parents have chosen to remove their students from the schools. Dr. Corda said that this was encouraging because it is the recognition on the part of the parents that the measure of a success of a school goes beyond specific performance on the CMTs.

Mr. Burnett then asked Dr. Corda to elaborate on the schools that were currently in their second or third year of being designated as a school in need of improvement. Dr. Corda then reviewed the additional steps that would occur in the future for a school that did not meet the targets, including school choice, or sanctions that would remove the administration or have the State take the school over or reassign teaching staff, which occur in the most severe stages.

Regarding the high schools, at Norwalk High School in the mathematics, there are three groups that did not meet the target and are therefore the school is in need of improvement. The groups are the African Americans students, Hispanic students and those who receive Free and Reduced Priced Lunch. At Brien McMahon, only the African American students did not meet the target in math. The flip side of that is every group met the target in reading. At Briggs, there were not enough students in the subgroups other than African Americans, to be identified. However, the District recognizes that those students need a tremendous amount of support. The reason that Briggs exists is because the students enrolled there were not being served well in the other two high schools.

Data like this appears to indicate that there is a tremendous amount of work that is needed. The District is aware of this. However, the fundamental question is whether the overall situation is improving. When the data is compared with prior years, the context becomes clear. There is significant improvement and this is a testament to the faculty and the administrative staff along with the hard work that has been done. Dr. Corda said that this hard work would, over time, move the District to the place where it needs to be. He then reviewed the various scores for the individual schools with the Board.

The work that the various schools are doing for their school growth plans is beginning to pay off, Dr. Corda said. He pointed out that work remains to be done, but that there has been progress.

Mr. Kimmel asked if there could be a future discussion on the Special Education scores. Dr. Corda said that this would be possible. Dr. Corda went on to say that the argument from the organized groups of Special Education student parents is that these students should be treated as a group. They don’t want anyone to write off their child because of Special Needs or think that it is not as important for students with special needs to make progress. The other side of the argument is that those special needs students often just require more time in order to master the content. They argue that because of this, the students should not be viewed as a group. There are also students who have limitations in terms of mental capacity and would not likely be able to perform highly within the time frame set. Those youngsters are not excluded from the large group. Dr. Corda said that he felt this issue needed to be examined in greater detail. Rather than looking at everyone as a group, the District needs to look at each individual child in order to make intelligent decisions about their progress.

Mr. Polley said that clearly there were students that were in more than one group and felt that the groups almost overstated the problem. If there are enough students in more than one group, solving the problem for one portion of the population might actually solve the problem for two groups rather than one. Dr. Corda agreed. Mr. Polley then asked how that would come into play on a day-to-day basis. Dr. Corda replied that the District’s goal was to utilize data in the most sophisticated manner possible. This District is now able to provide the teachers with student data that they did not have two years ago. The teachers’ emphasis needs to be paying attention to every student in the class. When the teacher focuses on the students in the class, everything falls in line.

Dr. Corda then distributed packets of information on the Student Performance Data for 2001-2007 to the Board.

He then reviewed the changes that occurred during this time period with the Board. Dr. Corda also reminded everyone that during that time period there was a total turn over in student population, which is a flaw in NCLB. There was also a significant increase in the number of students who took the CAP exam over the time period covered by the data. This means that there was larger group of students taking the test and performing at higher levels.

Dr. Corda then distributed copies of CMT data to the Board.

Dr. Corda then reviewed the CMT data with the Board. Dr. Corda said that the program would continue with analysis of student performance data, the use of best practice and increasing program assessments. The District will be submitting a plan based on the District performance data, the use of research and benchmarks to the State, along with other items. The District will also be participating with the guidance of the Cambridge Education Group in self-assessment, which will be checked against the assessment that Cambridge will do.

Ms. Bishop-Pullan asked Dr. Corda to review the details for the literacy specialist. Dr. Corda then explained that the literacy specialist under some of the funding that the District receives, requires that literacy specialist provide coaching and support services to the teachers. Dr. Corda said that there were concerns regarding this because the District needs to continue to provide direct service to the students. In order to provide this student support, the District has added two addition literacy specialists based on the money that the District has received. Now there will be six literacy specialists that will be providing direct services to students. Each literacy specialist will be shared between two schools. Dr. Corda said that later in the school year, there would be more information on the work that the specialists will be doing in the school year.

Ms. Mosby asked about the Priority School money at Briggs. Dr. Corda assured her that the District was not cutting back on any of the programs funded by the Priority School money. The new programs would be an expansion of the existing programs.

Ms. Hamilton asked if the literacy specialist would only be providing direct services or dividing their time between coaching and direct service. Dr. Corda explained that some would be exclusively working with teachers and others exclusively working with students.

Mr. Burnett asked about the additional support that will be given to Silvermine and Jefferson because of the trending that has begun to take place. He wished to know if individual teachers would be assessed to see if they need additional support. Dr. Corda replied that this would be done.

Ms. Rivas had some questions about the 2006-2007 data. Dr. Corda explained the District’s ability to track the performance of students from 2006 to 2007.

Mr. Kimmel said that he had heard that there will be some analyzing of the raw scores to see the student improvement in New York City and that this data will somehow be factored in. This will help show the amount of progress, even if the student still is performing below the mark. Dr. Corda said that there was nothing in the model that Connecticut uses right now to that would acknowledge that kind of growth as it relates to a designation under NCLB. The Federal Government has approved twelve states to initiate to use a “value added” model. This is being done as a pilot program. However that model does not currently exist in Connecticut. Dr. Corda said that this was why it is important to honor and acknowledge the work that the teachers have done in the classrooms. NCLB creates a perception that people have that if a school or District is labeled “in need improvement”, that it is a failing school or failing District, which may not be the case. Dr. Corda said that once this happens, the District is barraged with the newspaper stories and other forms of communication. A constant pressure then develops which is focused on negativity rather than how the schools and District can improve.

A discussion about the various details of how the subgroup performances impact both the individual schools and the District followed.

V. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Charles Wilhelm came forward and greeted the Board. He said that he would like to speak to the test scores that he has seen. There is a tremendous amount of information in those reports and presents a different picture of what is going on within the schools and the District than what is being perceived by the public, the parents and the taxpayers. Mr. Wilhelm said that he would like to propose that Dr. Corda pass the information on to the Public Relations Department of the District with some notations and post it on the Web would help. Having printed copies for a select group or having them available at the Administration Office or school offices does not do it. There is an undercurrent in the Norwalk community that uses the Internet to correct others when the information is easily available. Mr. Wilhelm said that there was a great deal of information present by Dr. Corda during his talk that needs to be made public, either as a web page or PDF document.

Mr. Wilhelm said that the reason he was addressing this issue was because of the current issues involved in the upcoming elections, the situation with the scores and a tremendous amount of gossip from both inside the schools and outside of the school. It would be helpful to the community if it were mandated that this information was made public. As information is added to it, this should be also posted. Mr. Wilhelm said that in the light of transparency, and eliminating misnomers, this would be a justice to the people, the students and teachers.

Ms. Murray then asked if there was anyone else who would like to address the Board.

Mr. Paul Blumenthal, who lives at 4 Logan Place. He stated that he was a resident and a parent. Mr. Blumenthal said that he also wished to address the Norwalk District Improvement Plan. Mr. Blumenthal said that part of the job of the school system is to have the community embrace what is being done in the District and participate by supporting it. He said that he would like to encourage the production of this information into a clearer form. The language is extremely difficult to understand. Many people will not bother to read the document more than once; they will just turn off. The negative attitudes are likely to follow when this happens. If something were more easily digested, like the Groton Plan, which can communicate to the public at large, it would help the Board and District to provide this.

Mr. Blumenthal said that he did not think that there was the perception that when a school was designated as “in need of improvement” that the school is failing. As far as Mr. Blumenthal is concerned, the school that is need of improvement is a school that is need of improvement. He said he hoped that no one considered the various schools as failing.

Ms. Murray then asked if there was anyone else who would like to address the Board.

Ms. Mary Theresa Conrad then came forward to address the Board. She stated that she lives at 8 Mary Austin Place in Norwalk. Ms. Conrad said that she had noticed something that stated there was a consideration regarding having paid radio stations in the school buses. Ms. Conrad said that she had participated in the Norwalk Clergy Association as a representative from the Quaker Friends Meeting. A study was done that focused on the schools, the family. Ms. Conrad said that the culture assaults us with a barrage of names and many other things. She said that she would be against the idea of having advertisements on the school buses, even though it would raise money. Children need some down time and don’t always need to be “sold” because they are consumers. They are already purchasing the wrong things.

Ms. Conrad said that the Board of Education should revise the tax structure. There have been so many article about businesses that have not been paying their fair share and that the District does not have enough funding. Ms. Conrad said that the District should not have to take their ads. The businesses should pay their taxes and the money should go to education.

Ms. Murray then asked if there was anyone else who would like to address the Board. Seeing that there was no one else present who wished to address the Board, Ms. Murray announced that this would end the Public Comment Section for the evening.

VI. ACTIONS

A. Consent

1. Approval of Personnel Actions

** MR. VETTER MOVED THE PERSONNEL ACTIONS. ** MR. POLLEY SECONDED.

Mr. Kimmel said that he noticed that there were slightly over seven pages of appointments. This added up to fifty-five appointments, minus the two interim house masters. There were thirty-four resignations and retirements. This resulted in a difference of additional 21 positions. He then asked for an explanation.

Ms. Bishop-Pullan commented that there was a time lag involved and the appointments did not necessarily replace the positions on the list. The retirements listed were from last year. Mr. Kimmel said that there seems to be an on-going list through the year of resignations. He said that he was struck by the discrepancy of the total numbers.

Dr. Corda said that Ms. Rotolo provides an update shortly after the start of school for the Administration of the vacancies that have been filled. Dr. Corda said that when this updated list is compiled, the numbers would become clearer.

Mr. Burnett asked why a 2008 number was being shown for the resignations. Dr. Corda said that after July 1st, some teachers had made the decision that they would be retiring effective at the end of the school year.

Ms. Rivas said that she noticed there were five additions for Norwalk High School, three art teachers, one science teacher, one English and one business teacher. She asked if the three art teachers would be also assigned to the study hall situation. Dr. Corda replied that during the budget process, additional staffing had been added to the high schools to address the situation with the study halls. Ms. Rivas then asked for more details about the various art classes and the students assigned to the new classes. Dr. Corda then reviewed this with her.

** THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

B. Approval of minutes (August 28, 2007)

** MS. MURRAY MOVED THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 28, 2007 ** MS. MOSBY SECONDED.

The following corrections were noted:

Page 1, Heading: please change the following from:

DISCUSSION OF CENTRAL OFFICE CONTRACTS AND DISCUSSION OF WORKING CONDITIONS OF HUMAN RELATIONS OFFICER

DISCUSSION OF CENTRAL OFFICE CONTRACTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE LETTER OF AGREEMENT REGARDING THE HUMAN RELATIONS OFFICER

Page 1, EXECUTIVE SESSION, line 1: Please change the following from:

“The Board and Dr. Corda convened into executive session at 7:11 p.m.” to “The Board convened into executive session at 7:11 p.m.”

Page 3, paragraph 2, line 1: please change the following from: “Ms. Hamilton then asked if there was anyone else present who would like to address the Board.” To “Ms. Murray then asked if there was anyone else present who would like to address the Board.”

** THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED PASSED WITH EIGHT IN FAVOR (MURRAY, POLLEY, HAMILTON, VETTER, BISHOP-PULLAN, BURNETT, RIVAS AND MOSBY) AND ONE ABSTENSION (KIMMEL).

C. Budget transfers

** MR. BURNETT MOVED THE BUDGET TRANSFERS. ** MR. VETTER SECONDED.

Mr. Kimmel said that he was concerned about the number of transfers needed two months into the fiscal year. He then reviewed the line items that he had questions about. He asked why funds were being moved between object codes.

Mr. Opdahl explained to Mr. Kimmel that this was the principal’s basic authority. The funds were not placed in the various object codes when the budget was being developed last October. Mr. Kimmel said that he was not clear on the process and was not comfortable with this practice.

A discussion about the code numbers assigned to the various schools the followed. Dr. Corda said that when the school principals are given allocations in October and they build the budget, the District is concerned that they have accounted for the dollars in the codes that over which they have discretion. The understanding is that if transfers are needed in the account codes over which they have discretion, the principal has the authority to do that. The District expects the principals to manage the funds wisely in the codes that they have responsibility for. If it is necessary to transfer funds from one code to another, that actually falls within the principal’s authority to do so. Dr. Corda said that he did not want to micromanage the schools to that extent.

Ms. Mosby asked if it was possible to get a break down or listing of the codes. She also said that it was not clear if the transfers were occurring between the various departments in one school or if the transfers were being done between different schools. Ms. Mosby was told that the Board would be provided with a listing of the codes.

Mr. Polley said that he believed that the Board should receive as much information as possible to make the budget transfers as easily understood as possible. With that said, Mr. Polley pointed out that principals have a finite amount of time, and if the Board expects the principals to build a perfect budget, the principals will do that. However, that time will come from somewhere else. If the Board expects the principals to be both perfect budget builders and perfect instructional leaders, the principals will not be able to do this. The question is whether the Board wants perfect budgets or to allow the principals to operate budgets knowing they have the capacity to move money from account to account, knowing that within a given amount of money. Or the principals could spend time doing drop in visits to teachers, which is part of the Teacher Evaluation Plan. Mr. Polley said that he would prefer the principals to spend more time doing drop in visits, knowing that the Board expects the principals to act as professionals and manage the funds professionally.

Mr. Kimmel said that after this discussion, he still was not sure if the transfers were for the same building or a different building. He then said that he did not know why the transfers were being presented to the Board, if the principals have the authority to do this. He said that a good instructional leader would understand the difference between leadership and administration and then insures that there are personnel in the building to handle the administrative matters, particularly those related to the taxpayers, down to the last penny and provide instructional leadership to boot. He went on to say that if the principals are doing all of the budgeting on their own, isolated in their office, they are doing it the wrong way and should have some professional development.

Mr. Kimmel said that he knew many principals who had schools that had 1,500 elementary students and can handle this stuff well. They even have to answer to their own teachers about every penny spent. He said that he hoped that Norwalk’s principals would be able to exercise both functions at the highest levels that the Norwalk residents are demanding. That is all there is to it. The world of public education does not allow for being fast and loose with pennies. Mr. Kimmel said that he not suggest for a minute that it was an “either or” proposition. That is ignoring a serious problem. It is not mutually exclusive. Norwalk deserves both, the highest level of expertise on both levels.

Ms. Rivas asked if the future transfers have the names of the schools listed on it. Ms. Bishop-Pullan said that Mr. Opdahl had heard the Board’s concerns and will put together a document with the necessary information.

** THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE BUDGET TRANSFERS PASSED WITH EIGHT IN FAVOR (POLLEY, VETTER, HAMILTON, MURRAY, BISHOP-PULLAN, BURNETT, RIVAS, MOSBY) AND ONE OPPOSED (KIMMEL).

D. Approval of Teacher Evaluation Plan

Ms. Bishop-Pullan reminded everyone that this presentation was made at the previous meeting and that there were no changes other than editorial corrections.

** MS. HAMILTON MOVED THE APPROVAL OF THE TEACHER EVALUATION PLAN. ** MR. POLLEY SECONDED.

Ms. Rivas said that the presentation was very good, but requested that a report to show on a monthly basis. Ms. Bishop-Pullan explained that the Teacher Evaluation Plan is in effect in all the schools. The evaluation plan is for all the teachers in the District and is tied to instruction and achievement.

Mr. Polley said that it would hard to overemphasis his concern regarding the tone that the evaluation plans are conducted. This is probably as important as the content of the plan. Mr. Polley said it would be essential that the teachers feel supported, rather than the evaluation is an attempt to catch something being done wrong. Mr. Polley said that he was not asking that this be included in the document, but did ask Dr. Corda to address the management of tone.

Category: Minutes