1976-02-02-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 35 February 2, 1976 Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was BIDS (CONTINUED) VOTED: to accept the bid for Data Processing Services of the 1976 Lex- ington Census from the L.H.S. Associates in the amount of $6,000 as being in the best interests of Lexington. (Rotberg, Berchtold, Unanimous) Mr. Maclnnes commented that though he chose the higher bidder, he felt that this was in the best interest of the system, based on prior good service by the chosen bidder. He noted, too, that the cost of this service had increased markedly and that he would have to reflect increases in the 1976-77 budget. Dr. Rotberg asked how the census item had come to be included in the school budget. Mr. Maclnnes indicated that the State required a census by law, and that the school system had at one time done its own census. Dr. Monderer indicated that the school census had been combined with the town census six or seven years ago in an effort to save money and avoid duplication of effort. He explained that we use the informa- tion for a number of purposes: kindergarten population, screening for special needs, filing State reports, etc. Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent it was VOTED: that orders (for food service paper supplies) be placed with the companies indicated, based upon low unit prices meeting specifi- cations in the listed approximate totals. (Berchtold, Rotberg, Unanimous) Mr. Wadsworth EVALUATION OF PRINCIPALS MOVED: to accept the Superintendent 's recommendation of the process for the evaluation of principals. (Berchtold seconded) Mr. Spiris explained that the process had been devised as a means, for this year at least, of evaluating the principals and assisting their professional growth. At issue, he said, was whether or not the evalua- tion submitted by the professional staff to the Superintendent should be signed. He noted that his personal philosophy would mandate signing. However, he felt, at this time, unsigned evaluations would provide a pur- er reading of staff reactions. He cited staff uneasiness as a result of necessary reductions in force, and the staff's unfamiliarity with the new process as among reasons for his feelings. Mr. Spiris noted, too, that results of a small sampling of staff and principals generally supported his contention that professional staff might be hesitant to express their most accurate perceptions on a signed instrument. He admitted that 8 of the principals surveyed would prefer to have a signed document; how- ever, even two of them were of the opinion that the document would be less valid if it were signed. Dr. Wadsworth concurred with the current proposal, noting that it had been his experience that a signed evaluation tended to be less open.