1976-05-24-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 107 May 24, 1976 rather than professional development fund. Mr. Michelman said that the establishment of a functioning advisorship system was an appropriate objective and probably could be focused on in the summer but he had res- ervations about using funds for this purpose and should be limited to that which was budgeted for. He preferred that the money be found in another account, since he also felt that it was an administrative kind of project rather than a professional development proposal. Mr. Spiris said that he could concur with the redefinition of the phrase, profes- sional development, but the budget had been designed and accepted, and there was no money in any other account. He suggested that perhaps an- other year this interpretation could be reviewed. Dr. Rotberg asked Dr. Clune, if he could find the money in other programs at the high school, since it was such a small request. Dr. Clune said he didn't know where he could find any money. The only alternative was to have people volunteer their services, as they had been doing. Mrs. Swanson stated that she felt the advisorship system would build up a better un- derstanding among students and house teams and thought it was a worth- while investment. She was concerned, however, with the labeling of some students. Nancy Abe3mann, student representative agreed with Mrs. Swan- son's concern for labeling students. However, she felt the ultimate goal of the proposal was to reach as many students as possible, and to make education a personal experience. Dr. Clune said that the second segment of the proposal titled, Effective Management, would provide housemasters with the appropriate inservice time necessary to under- stand the ramifications of their new roles for 1976-1977. Dr. Rotberg again reiterated his stance which was stated in the previous discussion that it seemed worthwhile, but was not a professional development pro- posal, but an administrative management program. Mrs. Swanson disagreed saying the skills in administration were closely aligned to professional development and that professional development was not soley just for classroom teachers. Mr. Michelman said he agreed, since it gave staff concentrated time and would require systematic thought and effort as to what skills would be needed by the professional. A vote was called upon the first request--the House Advisorship Program (Yes, Brown, Wadsworth, Swanson; No, Michelman, Rotberg) A vote was called for the second request, Professional Development Proposal-Effective Management (Yes, Wadsworth, Brown, Swanson, Michelman, No, Rotberg) . Dr. Saulsberry presented the METCO program request in conjunction METCO PROGRAM with the Interim Superintendent of Schools. Dr. Saulsberry said that he was recommending that the level of 280 students be retained for the school year 1976-1977. He said that we would replace approximately 12 students due to graduation, assignment to Minuteman School, drop outs, etc. After a brief discussion a vote was called. It was VOTED: that the METCO student enrollment be maintained at the present level of 280 students for the 1976-1977 school year. (Brown, Wadsworth, Unanimous) . The co-directors of the Summer Reading Program, Miss Kay Dillmnre, STAFF READING and Mr. Paul Lombard reviewed the criteria for selection of staff for PROGRAM ESEA the ESEA Title I program. Mr. Barnes briefly reviewed the State require- TITLE I ments. It was VOTED: that +-he following staff be elected for the Summer Reading Pro- grar 1976. (Frown, Michelman, Unanimous)