Here is the purpose of the Teamworks proposal:
For this project ISD 279 seeks technical expertise to facilitate a process which will result in a recommendation for:
Phase A: Completion by December, 2008
1) 2009-2010 facility utilization and attendance area adjustments for secondary schools
2) Options for facility utilization and attendance area adjustments for elementary schools if needed
3) Updating of 2008 -2009 student data and adjustments in attendance area assignments
Phase B: Completion by June, 2009
4) Long-range facility utilization and attendance area adjustments including but not limited to closings, repurposing, programming changes and grade level configuration
[Translation: closing schools and laying off more teachers.]
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
SB: Notes
Here are a few notes about the transition:
Some notes about Wyzata and open enrollment:
* 60-70 requests from District 279 in past several weeks.
* Typically they get 5 to 8 requests as normal move in and move out.
* Only have room for a very minimal amount of students.
* Hesitant to accept many more students until August because numbers are uncertain.
[My apologies for minimal blogging, but most of the interesting points were in the working session.]
Some notes about Wyzata and open enrollment:
* 60-70 requests from District 279 in past several weeks.
* Typically they get 5 to 8 requests as normal move in and move out.
* Only have room for a very minimal amount of students.
* Hesitant to accept many more students until August because numbers are uncertain.
[My apologies for minimal blogging, but most of the interesting points were in the working session.]
SBM: Working Session
I was only able to attend about half of the School Board Working session. A few observations:
* Fees for sports (tickets and participation fees) were discussed largely before I got there.
* Fernbrook will be a Tier 3 school in terms of start and stop times.
* There is a proposal for Teamworks to do more work. The original proposal (a couple month ago) was for an additional $20k in services, if I recall correctly. This proposal is for $90,000 worth of services. Yes. $90,000. (Interestingly enough, the proposal does not include totals -- the fact that it will cost $90k is a bit buried.)
* Levy - there were more numbers shared in terms of how a new levy would affect us and some general paperwork.
[Correction Fernbrook is actually a tier 3 school next year with times from 8:50 a.m. to 3:20 p.m. Weaver Magnet is a tier 4 with times from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.]
* Fees for sports (tickets and participation fees) were discussed largely before I got there.
* Fernbrook will be a Tier 3 school in terms of start and stop times.
* There is a proposal for Teamworks to do more work. The original proposal (a couple month ago) was for an additional $20k in services, if I recall correctly. This proposal is for $90,000 worth of services. Yes. $90,000. (Interestingly enough, the proposal does not include totals -- the fact that it will cost $90k is a bit buried.)
* Levy - there were more numbers shared in terms of how a new levy would affect us and some general paperwork.
[Correction Fernbrook is actually a tier 3 school next year with times from 8:50 a.m. to 3:20 p.m. Weaver Magnet is a tier 4 with times from 9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.]
Saturday, April 12, 2008
Steven's Response
[Steven's response to my previous post is posted below. In response to Steven's request to be on the blog and in the email discussion group, I encouraged him to join. As he indicated, he may not engage us on the list, but he is concerned about our comments.]
I think your statements about your accountability to your family exactly make my point. As a board member, I need to be accountable to the entire district. That is a little more abstract that one family, neighborhood, school or community, but it is necessary. Sometimes, that broader interest cannot accommodate all perspectives and needs and so we have conflict. On the whole, I think conflict can generate better solutions in the long run.
I agree that some people might take the statements about accountability as an excuse to not listen. That is not my position, nor is it my point. I try very hard to listen to all perspectives, but I cannot agree with all of them all of the time and I need to weigh the comments made based on perspective and all those other things we consider in making good decisions.
My only excuse for the way I voted was that I thought it was the best for the district as a whole. It's not that I didn't listen. I did listen intently. It's not that I did not care. I care deeply. I just could not reconcile some of those views presented with the best long term interests of the district as a whole.
It's important that I retain my integrity as that is how you can know I will listen to all sides in the future. I won't promise something I cannot do. I will promise to do what I think is best. I keep my promises.
BTW, may I join the blog/discussion group? I was not sure whether I was welcome and I did not want to appear to be eavesdropping. However, I think at least being a "lurker" will help me be in touch with the district parents (at least those that blog).
Thanks.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 279
Steven E. Antolak
School Board Member
I think your statements about your accountability to your family exactly make my point. As a board member, I need to be accountable to the entire district. That is a little more abstract that one family, neighborhood, school or community, but it is necessary. Sometimes, that broader interest cannot accommodate all perspectives and needs and so we have conflict. On the whole, I think conflict can generate better solutions in the long run.
I agree that some people might take the statements about accountability as an excuse to not listen. That is not my position, nor is it my point. I try very hard to listen to all perspectives, but I cannot agree with all of them all of the time and I need to weigh the comments made based on perspective and all those other things we consider in making good decisions.
My only excuse for the way I voted was that I thought it was the best for the district as a whole. It's not that I didn't listen. I did listen intently. It's not that I did not care. I care deeply. I just could not reconcile some of those views presented with the best long term interests of the district as a whole.
It's important that I retain my integrity as that is how you can know I will listen to all sides in the future. I won't promise something I cannot do. I will promise to do what I think is best. I keep my promises.
BTW, may I join the blog/discussion group? I was not sure whether I was welcome and I did not want to appear to be eavesdropping. However, I think at least being a "lurker" will help me be in touch with the district parents (at least those that blog).
Thanks.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 279
Steven E. Antolak
School Board Member
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Response to Steven's Email
[You might want to skip down two posts and start reading from there as that is where this exchange starts.]
Steven,
Again, I would like to take a moment to thank you for your time in responding to my concerns. I truly appreciate your response and always gain new insight through your comments. There is one paragraph in your response that I would like to respond to that I believe is at the root of my own frustration:
"That is not to say that parents won't be heard. We just have to remember that parents have absolutely no accountability. They are not held to facts or decisions. They can freely change positions and arguments without consequences. They are advocates in the purest sense and have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own. That's their role, but we need to remember that when making decisions."
This appears to be a strong justification for not listening to parents or rather classifying them as only caring about their own point of view and being without obligation to understand the view of the district or the more far ranging implications.
Parents do have accountability. I look accountability in the eye each day when I get them out of bed.
Parents will be judged for freely changing positions. I have seen parents on our email discussion list that swap positions freely lose credibility rapidly. I have also seen parents with deep reflection change position with great purpose and acknowledgment of diverse perspectives. I can guarantee that every parent on the leadership committee is being continually judged and accepts that as part of the position as well.
Parents have every need to see every side of the issue as we know that approaching a far reaching decision from a narrow perspective gives us no credence. This is the exact reason why Parents Concerned About Weaver Lake Elementary became Save District 279. This is exactly why we welcomed everyone to participate in our email discussion and one does not need to dig deeply into the archives to see the diversity of opinion and the openness of all parents.
"Parent" is a label that gets everyone into trouble. Many, many of us are leaders throughout the community, in our churches/synagogues/place of worship, and careers. We regularly demonstrate deep understanding and commitment (obligation) far beyond the perspective of simply being a parent. (Which I have come to find out is never really simple or narrow.)
I would ask you to reconsider your assessment of parents holding "absolutely no accountability" and "have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own."
After all, you are a Parent.
Best regards,
Derek Haidle
Steven,
Again, I would like to take a moment to thank you for your time in responding to my concerns. I truly appreciate your response and always gain new insight through your comments. There is one paragraph in your response that I would like to respond to that I believe is at the root of my own frustration:
"That is not to say that parents won't be heard. We just have to remember that parents have absolutely no accountability. They are not held to facts or decisions. They can freely change positions and arguments without consequences. They are advocates in the purest sense and have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own. That's their role, but we need to remember that when making decisions."
This appears to be a strong justification for not listening to parents or rather classifying them as only caring about their own point of view and being without obligation to understand the view of the district or the more far ranging implications.
Parents do have accountability. I look accountability in the eye each day when I get them out of bed.
Parents will be judged for freely changing positions. I have seen parents on our email discussion list that swap positions freely lose credibility rapidly. I have also seen parents with deep reflection change position with great purpose and acknowledgment of diverse perspectives. I can guarantee that every parent on the leadership committee is being continually judged and accepts that as part of the position as well.
Parents have every need to see every side of the issue as we know that approaching a far reaching decision from a narrow perspective gives us no credence. This is the exact reason why Parents Concerned About Weaver Lake Elementary became Save District 279. This is exactly why we welcomed everyone to participate in our email discussion and one does not need to dig deeply into the archives to see the diversity of opinion and the openness of all parents.
"Parent" is a label that gets everyone into trouble. Many, many of us are leaders throughout the community, in our churches/synagogues/place of worship, and careers. We regularly demonstrate deep understanding and commitment (obligation) far beyond the perspective of simply being a parent. (Which I have come to find out is never really simple or narrow.)
I would ask you to reconsider your assessment of parents holding "absolutely no accountability" and "have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own."
After all, you are a Parent.
Best regards,
Derek Haidle
Response from Steve Antolak
[This is the response from Steve Antolak, School Board Member, to my request for clarification. My email is presented prior (below) this post.]
Hello Derek,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond to your concern. I often find that I am so attuned to the presentation before me at the board meeting that I forget that others are essentially "eavesdropping" on a conversation and don't always have the same background and context that I have in speaking in public.
I have several points.
You are right that I don't fear parental involvement. It's very important to me because that is what makes the decisions I face "real" and not just some theoretical exercise in school governance and finance. That's my accountability. That's also the way that I can be sure to hear my constituents' desires from an informed electorate. It's much easier to have a public dialog when parents' are well informed of all the issues and consequences. Most importantly, I am a firm believer in our strategic plan and our commitment to seeking diverse views and working towards consensus. Of course, there is not always a "consensus solution" and it falls on my shoulders to make a decision. (and I am willing to live with the consequences).
I may have erred in saying my line about "not being concerned about the administration overstepping its bounds." (I don't think it's what I said and I think it might be out of context). Recall that the presentation was about the transition activities, and not management of the schools. I expressed my concern that the decision making responsibilities be made clear up front so that parents do not feel misled about their role. I want the roles to be clear. The administrators responded that they understand their roles and responsibilities and will act within their powers/obligations. I tried to change the focus of their concern to the parents and not the administrators. I don't want people to be disappointed by coming into the process thinking that they can do/accomplish a list of things that cannot or will not happen and then perceive their participation as a fraud or farce because they misunderstood their role.
My comment about parents not considering this a "mini school board" was directed to that point. The involved parents will not be voting on bell times, teacher compensation, teacher assignment, etc. Those (among others) are exclusively management responsibilities and will not/cannot be delegated. If we allow involved parents to think they may be deciding these issues, they most assuredly will be disappointed at the end of the process.
That is not to say that parents won't be heard. We just have to remember that parents have absolutely no accountability. The are not held to facts or decisions. They can freely change positions and arguments without consequences. They are advocates in the purest sense and have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own. That's their role, but we need to remember that when making decisions.
In the broader context, I think this is what happened with our recent decisions on the strategic budget. The board's been struggling with the issues since it decided to go for the levy last summer. We've studied ways to cut expenses, examined the effects of cutting programs such as athletics, arts, and looked at what larger classroom sizes would mean. We looked to the experts working directly with children's learning needs, health needs, transportation needs, etc to put together a plan for dealing with the shortfall. Then we turned to the parents for perspective and to understand the "real" consequences of what we were facing. Some parents concluded that their involvement meant that they have a more direct vote in the issues, forgetting that their perspective was from their own child/family/school/neighborhood/community. From that specific perspective, I probably agreed with 99% of the opinions. However, neither I as a board member nor individual members of the administration could take that perspective when making and implementing district wide decisions. Because we didn't explain the roles well enough up front, because we didn't share expectations explicitly enough (and maybe because the consequences of the decisions don't hit everyone's radar at the same time) many parents were hurt and disappointed. I am trying to not make that mistake again.
I put no stock in the smiles and nodding of the administrators. I took their nods as an attempt to show me they intended to address my concerns. We have to work together and the smiles are simply how humans connect. (More realistically, they understand that a vote to compel a specific action by the board would be a command they cannot disobey without serious consequences. I think their nods and smiles were intended to convey an honest attempt to comply with my concerns without having to do that).
You're right about the number of parents on the leadership team being comical on its face. There is always a balance to be struck between workable numbers and public input. My first reaction was the same. However, I was satisfied by the commitment of Nancy Wavron (who has a great deal of respect from me) and the explanation of the whole process. The purpose of the leadership team is to implement the board's decision, not decide things anew. If we consider the role of the two parents as "perspective spotters" at that top level, it makes sense. Their purpose is to assure that the leadership is considering the parents' perspective in planning. The parents
should be asking what about a,b,c from the parent's perspective as proposals are being developed.
The rubber really hits the road at the implementation level and that is where most of the parents will be involved. The leadership team deals at the more policy/theoretical level and the involvement of the parents is most important at the implementation level where the consequences are direct and tangible. I think that if we deal with expectations up front and listen to each other, this process will work. I am keeping an open mind (and ear) on this process and if it is not working, we will have to change what we are doing.
Please recognize these are the thoughts of only one board member and not the school board (which must act as a single body). Until we vote on something, these words are really just the opinion of one parent in the district. I have an obligation to hear out my fellow board members and the public before taking action.
Feel free to share this email with whomever you wish. I will share it with Nancy Wavron (Oakview Principal), Theresa Battle (Asst. Superintendent for Teaching and Learning) Kim Green (board chair) and Superintendent Hintz.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to discuss this.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 279
Steven E. Antolak
School Board Member
Hello Derek,
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to respond to your concern. I often find that I am so attuned to the presentation before me at the board meeting that I forget that others are essentially "eavesdropping" on a conversation and don't always have the same background and context that I have in speaking in public.
I have several points.
You are right that I don't fear parental involvement. It's very important to me because that is what makes the decisions I face "real" and not just some theoretical exercise in school governance and finance. That's my accountability. That's also the way that I can be sure to hear my constituents' desires from an informed electorate. It's much easier to have a public dialog when parents' are well informed of all the issues and consequences. Most importantly, I am a firm believer in our strategic plan and our commitment to seeking diverse views and working towards consensus. Of course, there is not always a "consensus solution" and it falls on my shoulders to make a decision. (and I am willing to live with the consequences).
I may have erred in saying my line about "not being concerned about the administration overstepping its bounds." (I don't think it's what I said and I think it might be out of context). Recall that the presentation was about the transition activities, and not management of the schools. I expressed my concern that the decision making responsibilities be made clear up front so that parents do not feel misled about their role. I want the roles to be clear. The administrators responded that they understand their roles and responsibilities and will act within their powers/obligations. I tried to change the focus of their concern to the parents and not the administrators. I don't want people to be disappointed by coming into the process thinking that they can do/accomplish a list of things that cannot or will not happen and then perceive their participation as a fraud or farce because they misunderstood their role.
My comment about parents not considering this a "mini school board" was directed to that point. The involved parents will not be voting on bell times, teacher compensation, teacher assignment, etc. Those (among others) are exclusively management responsibilities and will not/cannot be delegated. If we allow involved parents to think they may be deciding these issues, they most assuredly will be disappointed at the end of the process.
That is not to say that parents won't be heard. We just have to remember that parents have absolutely no accountability. The are not held to facts or decisions. They can freely change positions and arguments without consequences. They are advocates in the purest sense and have no obligation to see any other side of an issue besides their own. That's their role, but we need to remember that when making decisions.
In the broader context, I think this is what happened with our recent decisions on the strategic budget. The board's been struggling with the issues since it decided to go for the levy last summer. We've studied ways to cut expenses, examined the effects of cutting programs such as athletics, arts, and looked at what larger classroom sizes would mean. We looked to the experts working directly with children's learning needs, health needs, transportation needs, etc to put together a plan for dealing with the shortfall. Then we turned to the parents for perspective and to understand the "real" consequences of what we were facing. Some parents concluded that their involvement meant that they have a more direct vote in the issues, forgetting that their perspective was from their own child/family/school/neighborhood/community. From that specific perspective, I probably agreed with 99% of the opinions. However, neither I as a board member nor individual members of the administration could take that perspective when making and implementing district wide decisions. Because we didn't explain the roles well enough up front, because we didn't share expectations explicitly enough (and maybe because the consequences of the decisions don't hit everyone's radar at the same time) many parents were hurt and disappointed. I am trying to not make that mistake again.
I put no stock in the smiles and nodding of the administrators. I took their nods as an attempt to show me they intended to address my concerns. We have to work together and the smiles are simply how humans connect. (More realistically, they understand that a vote to compel a specific action by the board would be a command they cannot disobey without serious consequences. I think their nods and smiles were intended to convey an honest attempt to comply with my concerns without having to do that).
You're right about the number of parents on the leadership team being comical on its face. There is always a balance to be struck between workable numbers and public input. My first reaction was the same. However, I was satisfied by the commitment of Nancy Wavron (who has a great deal of respect from me) and the explanation of the whole process. The purpose of the leadership team is to implement the board's decision, not decide things anew. If we consider the role of the two parents as "perspective spotters" at that top level, it makes sense. Their purpose is to assure that the leadership is considering the parents' perspective in planning. The parents
should be asking what about a,b,c from the parent's perspective as proposals are being developed.
The rubber really hits the road at the implementation level and that is where most of the parents will be involved. The leadership team deals at the more policy/theoretical level and the involvement of the parents is most important at the implementation level where the consequences are direct and tangible. I think that if we deal with expectations up front and listen to each other, this process will work. I am keeping an open mind (and ear) on this process and if it is not working, we will have to change what we are doing.
Please recognize these are the thoughts of only one board member and not the school board (which must act as a single body). Until we vote on something, these words are really just the opinion of one parent in the district. I have an obligation to hear out my fellow board members and the public before taking action.
Feel free to share this email with whomever you wish. I will share it with Nancy Wavron (Oakview Principal), Theresa Battle (Asst. Superintendent for Teaching and Learning) Kim Green (board chair) and Superintendent Hintz.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to discuss this.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 279
Steven E. Antolak
School Board Member
Letter to Steve Antolak
[I sent the following email to Steve Antolak requesting clarification of his comment about parents believing they are "a mini-board of education." His response will be posted above this one.]
Steve,
First, thank you for the significant time commitment that you made when becoming a School Board member. I do not know if you anticipated the demands placed on you when taking on such a role, but in the difficult times that the District faces, I am sure your time commitment will continue to grow.
As a parent in District 279, your comment last night concerning parent involvement struck me as out of place. I will try to paraphrase your comment and I hope to watch it again when the School Board meeting is replayed, but you indicated that you were not concerned about the administration overstepping their bounds, but rather the parents acting as a "mini-board of education."
The reason this struck me as odd is that you have never appeared to be someone that is fearful of parents. Furthermore, in my observations over the last 10 weeks, parents have little to no power and are largely engaged when convenient. I have not witnessed any event that would indicate parents have too much power (or really any power). In fact, unless I am missing something, only six parents are engaged so far in the transition.
I would draw the similarity in numbers between the parents engaged in the transition and the number on the School Board as an attempt at humor, but I am a bit befuddled.
I also could not help but notice that the two administrators whom you were addressing (forgive me for not knowing their names), were smiling and nodding their heads as you made your statement. This nonverbal communication means something. Why grin and nod? I am not asking you to presume to know what they were thinking, but rather dispel any belief that there may have been inside knowledge of parents previously overstepping their bounds between you and the administrators – or if there is knowledge of such activity, please bring it to light.
I understand you are a very busy person and again your dedication to the role as a School Board member is to be commended. If possible, I would like your thoughts and clarifications on the above.
In an effort to open a sincere dialog with the School Board, I will post my entire email as well as your entire response on the District 279 United blog (http://blog.district279united.com/), pending the leadership team's approval. I would typically offer to keep this information private at your request and as a matter of courtesy, but most any information passed to and from a public official is available to the public from my understanding (minus privileged content, confidential information and designations such as that).
I believe the best way to have a sincere dialog is to be open to the community as a whole.
Best regards,
Derek Haidle
Steve,
First, thank you for the significant time commitment that you made when becoming a School Board member. I do not know if you anticipated the demands placed on you when taking on such a role, but in the difficult times that the District faces, I am sure your time commitment will continue to grow.
As a parent in District 279, your comment last night concerning parent involvement struck me as out of place. I will try to paraphrase your comment and I hope to watch it again when the School Board meeting is replayed, but you indicated that you were not concerned about the administration overstepping their bounds, but rather the parents acting as a "mini-board of education."
The reason this struck me as odd is that you have never appeared to be someone that is fearful of parents. Furthermore, in my observations over the last 10 weeks, parents have little to no power and are largely engaged when convenient. I have not witnessed any event that would indicate parents have too much power (or really any power). In fact, unless I am missing something, only six parents are engaged so far in the transition.
I would draw the similarity in numbers between the parents engaged in the transition and the number on the School Board as an attempt at humor, but I am a bit befuddled.
I also could not help but notice that the two administrators whom you were addressing (forgive me for not knowing their names), were smiling and nodding their heads as you made your statement. This nonverbal communication means something. Why grin and nod? I am not asking you to presume to know what they were thinking, but rather dispel any belief that there may have been inside knowledge of parents previously overstepping their bounds between you and the administrators – or if there is knowledge of such activity, please bring it to light.
I understand you are a very busy person and again your dedication to the role as a School Board member is to be commended. If possible, I would like your thoughts and clarifications on the above.
In an effort to open a sincere dialog with the School Board, I will post my entire email as well as your entire response on the District 279 United blog (http://blog.district279united.com/), pending the leadership team's approval. I would typically offer to keep this information private at your request and as a matter of courtesy, but most any information passed to and from a public official is available to the public from my understanding (minus privileged content, confidential information and designations such as that).
I believe the best way to have a sincere dialog is to be open to the community as a whole.
Best regards,
Derek Haidle
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
WD: Spending Over Budget
Near the end of the meeting a labor contract was approved that increased more than our revenue will increase by next year. Our revenue is projected at 1% (maybe 2% if we are lucky). The contract went up more than 2%. Dean pointed out that he can not support spending beyond our budget. Steve indicated that since it is once again a union contract that we can not do anything about it.
Dean voted against it. Steve,Linda Kim and John voted for it. Lyn was not at the meeting and Linda had to leave early.
[4/10/2008 - Correction - Linda did not vote for it as she was not there. Kim did vote for it.]
Dean voted against it. Steve,
[4/10/2008 - Correction - Linda did not vote for it as she was not there. Kim did vote for it.]
SB: More...
Dean: How will we insure all of the various viewpoints are represented? How will you know you are reaching everyone.
Speaker: There are 2 representatives from each school. They are responsible to go back to their communities and then bring their concerns to the committee.
Dean: Will it be a majority decision, consensus model, how will those decisions be made.
Speaker: We create and agree upon a model. We will not have one set mean for making a decision and discuss the model for the decision making prior to making key decisions.
Dean: How do we insure that parents are heard and the role of how input travels. How is the feedback going to be received and acted upon.
Speaker: By our next meeting, you will see how the joint workgroup will be created to answer those questions. We will operate as separate schools for certain things and as a campus for other things. It is not yet agreed upon.
Speaker 2: Each of the joint workgroups will bring their best solution forward to the steering committee.
[Do these joint workgroups take into account a diverse perspective?]
Steve: Once concern, I want to make sure we set the expectations and are very clear about the roles everyone will be having. They are not going to be a mini-board of education. There are many ways to have input. I want to make sure we are very clear about the roles.
[Battery 14%]
[Anyone out there?]
Speaker: Yes, that check has been built into the committee. We have the checks of the things that can not move forward.
Steve: I want to make sure the parents know their limits.
Kim: Will you come back to us again with your progress.
Susan: I am going to address that.
Speaker: There are 2 representatives from each school. They are responsible to go back to their communities and then bring their concerns to the committee.
Dean: Will it be a majority decision, consensus model, how will those decisions be made.
Speaker: We create and agree upon a model. We will not have one set mean for making a decision and discuss the model for the decision making prior to making key decisions.
Dean: How do we insure that parents are heard and the role of how input travels. How is the feedback going to be received and acted upon.
Speaker: By our next meeting, you will see how the joint workgroup will be created to answer those questions. We will operate as separate schools for certain things and as a campus for other things. It is not yet agreed upon.
Speaker 2: Each of the joint workgroups will bring their best solution forward to the steering committee.
[Do these joint workgroups take into account a diverse perspective?]
Steve: Once concern, I want to make sure we set the expectations and are very clear about the roles everyone will be having. They are not going to be a mini-board of education. There are many ways to have input. I want to make sure we are very clear about the roles.
[Battery 14%]
[Anyone out there?]
Speaker: Yes, that check has been built into the committee. We have the checks of the things that can not move forward.
Steve: I want to make sure the parents know their limits.
Kim: Will you come back to us again with your progress.
Susan: I am going to address that.
SBM: Transition Plan
Susan is setting this up. Collective leadership model being used. We combine site leaders, parents and community. We need to insure certain standards.
Starting with the cabinet. My role is to oversee the process and support the standards.
Kate and Mike have been the key people for open enrollment and communication.
John - in charge of logistics and physical changes.
Tonight Mike begins presentation with open enrollment.
MN is one of the few open enrollment state in the Union.
Open enrollment here is required. We open enroll in our school system all year long because we are a racial isolated school district, but can set parameters.
Mike: We are a state of school choice. [They have a handout that will probably go on the web??? We will get it out there if they do not post it.]
[Battery is at 48%]
It will be on web site tomorrow.
[I am not going to go through the full handout. He is just going through the handout.]
[Once you read the School Choice Process - it does not indicate if parents can switch back if they do not want to open enroll.]
No questions from the board on the School Choice Process.
Susan: The campus model - UCFL Campus: United Communites For Learning Campus.
New speaker: Formation of the steering committee: FO, CI and OV have a [missed it, but it takes into account a solid education for all students to achieve the strategic objectives].
The steering committee is made up of principals, 2 parents from each of the affected schools.... The first meeting was last night.
Next speaker: Very successful first meeting. [Visual with list of the roles and responsibilites of the UCFL. Joint work groups will be created to engage community and teachers. Administrative leadership - principals and administration.
We believe we will be creating something out of our group that other districts will want to model.
We spent a lot of time learning about each other on the committee and their commitment to the campus model. Spoke about vision and mission. Have not completed the entire vision. Things are important: children thriving socially and emotionally. We create an integrated learning community between campuses. We spent a good deal of time putting the words together for the mission.
Want to complete the mission by this coming Wednesday. Discussed protocols for communition. We would share after we were confident in our message.
We have an aggressive agenda over the next 5 weeks.
[Battery: 22%]
The model is evolving.
Starting with the cabinet. My role is to oversee the process and support the standards.
Kate and Mike have been the key people for open enrollment and communication.
John - in charge of logistics and physical changes.
Tonight Mike begins presentation with open enrollment.
MN is one of the few open enrollment state in the Union.
Open enrollment here is required. We open enroll in our school system all year long because we are a racial isolated school district, but can set parameters.
Mike: We are a state of school choice. [They have a handout that will probably go on the web??? We will get it out there if they do not post it.]
[Battery is at 48%]
It will be on web site tomorrow.
[I am not going to go through the full handout. He is just going through the handout.]
[Once you read the School Choice Process - it does not indicate if parents can switch back if they do not want to open enroll.]
No questions from the board on the School Choice Process.
Susan: The campus model - UCFL Campus: United Communites For Learning Campus.
New speaker: Formation of the steering committee: FO, CI and OV have a [missed it, but it takes into account a solid education for all students to achieve the strategic objectives].
The steering committee is made up of principals, 2 parents from each of the affected schools.... The first meeting was last night.
Next speaker: Very successful first meeting. [Visual with list of the roles and responsibilites of the UCFL. Joint work groups will be created to engage community and teachers. Administrative leadership - principals and administration.
We believe we will be creating something out of our group that other districts will want to model.
We spent a lot of time learning about each other on the committee and their commitment to the campus model. Spoke about vision and mission. Have not completed the entire vision. Things are important: children thriving socially and emotionally. We create an integrated learning community between campuses. We spent a good deal of time putting the words together for the mission.
Want to complete the mission by this coming Wednesday. Discussed protocols for communition. We would share after we were confident in our message.
We have an aggressive agenda over the next 5 weeks.
[Battery: 22%]
The model is evolving.
SBM: Response
Susan is responding to community comment from last time.
[Is she limited to 3 minutes? Just curious.]
We will share the transition plan this evening.
[That was it. She stayed way under 3 minutes.]
Superintendents report: Pawlenty approved a bond bill for our district. We are overcoming all obstacles. Over the last 1 1/2 years, A terrific amount of work went into it. Both the house and senate approved it. Pawlenty would be redlining some of them. However, ours was approved.
Our school district carried the bill and we will own the bill whatever it ends up being. I believe this is for the Early Childhood Center.
[Is she limited to 3 minutes? Just curious.]
We will share the transition plan this evening.
[That was it. She stayed way under 3 minutes.]
Superintendents report: Pawlenty approved a bond bill for our district. We are overcoming all obstacles. Over the last 1 1/2 years, A terrific amount of work went into it. Both the house and senate approved it. Pawlenty would be redlining some of them. However, ours was approved.
Our school district carried the bill and we will own the bill whatever it ends up being. I believe this is for the Early Childhood Center.
SBM: Rainville
I was very disappointed to see in the board agenda that we are contracting for $64k additional in services. Certainly this kind of disconnect makes people wonder where are priorities are.
SBM: Speakers
Almost all of you expressed dissatisfaction at the magnet moving to WL.
I feel saddened each day I walk to WL knowing that it will no longer be our neighborhood school.
We will be watching to make sure this SB and administration does not make the same mistakes.
I feel saddened each day I walk to WL knowing that it will no longer be our neighborhood school.
We will be watching to make sure this SB and administration does not make the same mistakes.
SBM: Community Comment
Teresa: 4 weeks since strategic budget ago decision was made.
Transition plan is on agenda. After spring break we should hear about transition process.
Where is the committee for the transition for parents involved in WL moving to Fernbrook and Rushcreek? We need a meet-and-greet. Why aren't parents included in the process up front.
What I want: a letter was sent home last week. The due date for the return this Thursday. A STEM informational meeting was held on Thursday, but there was not one for WL at Fernbrook. What opportunities are provided for WL kids going to Fernbrook? [Lots of excellent questions.]
Another area of concern: placement of teachers. FO, CI and OV can follow students. Osseo and WL can not. All teachers should be treated fairly.
Transition plan is on agenda. After spring break we should hear about transition process.
Where is the committee for the transition for parents involved in WL moving to Fernbrook and Rushcreek? We need a meet-and-greet. Why aren't parents included in the process up front.
What I want: a letter was sent home last week. The due date for the return this Thursday. A STEM informational meeting was held on Thursday, but there was not one for WL at Fernbrook. What opportunities are provided for WL kids going to Fernbrook? [Lots of excellent questions.]
Another area of concern: placement of teachers. FO, CI and OV can follow students. Osseo and WL can not. All teachers should be treated fairly.
SBM: Onward
[Observation: The SB is in fairly formal business attire -- last time it was more relaxed. Makes you wonder if we have some really serious business.]
Linda - call to order.
Lin is not here.
Formal items 1-4.
We are to speakers.
Linda - call to order.
Lin is not here.
Formal items 1-4.
We are to speakers.
Drum Roll...
It begins.
There are quite a few students here tonight. Evidently the students had this as an assignment - to attend a School Board meeting.
The room is packed.
I'm not sure if they have an overflow room setup -- I do not think they were expecting this many people.
They are wheeling out more chairs.
There are quite a few students here tonight. Evidently the students had this as an assignment - to attend a School Board meeting.
The room is packed.
I'm not sure if they have an overflow room setup -- I do not think they were expecting this many people.
They are wheeling out more chairs.
SBM: Bloggin'
I'm blogging for a while tonight. Each post title prefaced with SBM is from the School Board Meeting.
Update
There is a School Board meeting tonight at 8p.m.
Joyce Peppin sent out a survey to her constituents. If you are in her voting area, I highly encourage you to send it in. Even if you are not, I believe there is value to send it in even if you are not in the voting area.
You can download it from the main web site: http://www.district279united.com/
Here is the mailing address:
Joyce Peppin (R) 32A
331 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
Joyce Peppin sent out a survey to her constituents. If you are in her voting area, I highly encourage you to send it in. Even if you are not, I believe there is value to send it in even if you are not in the voting area.
You can download it from the main web site: http://www.district279united.com/
Here is the mailing address:
Joyce Peppin (R) 32A
331 State Office Building
100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Welcome
This is the new blog for District 279 United. Please feel free to visit the official web site as well at http://www.district279united.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
