1976-06-21-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Pat e 127 June 21, 1976 proofing in addition to other work needed. He said ,se factors would increase the cost and that coordination would be neened. He expressed his concern that students would do the actual mural painting due to the liability problems. Mr. White outlined the program stating students would not do the actual painting, he would. Mr. Wadsworth suggested that Dr. Clune approach the Bicentennial and Town Celebrations Committee regarding the project. Mrs. Swanson agreed with the suggestion and said the School Committee might be able to provide some funds. Mr. Brown said he would be in favor of the group approaching other sources, but if they were unsuccessful he would support it as a budget item for the next school year. Dr. Lawson said he favored any action that would make the school better for students, however, he had no recommendations at this time because the money was not included in the budget. The status and future plans of the Educational. Program Study Com- EDUCATIONAL mittee were discussed. Dr. Lawson said that he had read the report PROGRAM STUDY twice, reviewed the recommendations several times, and complimented the COMMITTEE group of citizens on the fine job. He said that he would be receiving models from the schools that would deal with evaluation of aspects of the report by June 30. He said he would then receive a report from each school containing feedback from the staff regarding implementation by November 1. At that time he said he would share the results with the advisory committee and the school couauittee. Later he would make recom- mendations to the school committee. He said that there would be two ma- jor points concerning the educational programs study committee. Areas where there were general agreement he would assume there would be rapid implementation, especially in those areas not needing extra dollars. However, in areas not in agreement, There would. need to be discussion prior to his making a recommendation. The major concern in his mind would be the overall goals and benefits to the Lexington Public Schools. Dr. Rotberg asked Dr. Lawson if the process could be quickened since there were some budgetary items noted in the report. Dr. Lawson empha- sized the need to follow the timetable as suggested. He felt that the professionals should be allowed to comment on the validity of any aspect of the report with a reasonable amount of time allowed for such a pro- cess. Mr. Michelman said that a great deal of appraisal was needed for specific recommendations, and that the setup of feedback was most appro- priate. He said many areas needed review since they were basic policy questions that perhaps would need re-examination. He felt the committee would like to discuss such items with the superintendent and asked Dr. Lawson his feeling on that matter. Dr. Lawson responded saying that he welcomed discussion. Mr. Kenneth Hoffman, Chairman of the EPSC was asked for his viewpoint. He said there may be a danger in having too much commentary before the results were in from staff. Therefore he supported Dr. Lawson's model as presented. In conclusion the school committee authorized Dr. Lawson to meet with the EPSC to clarify and discuss any areas that he felt needed to be reviewed. Upon the recommendation of the superintendent it was MINUTES MAY 17, 1976 VOTED: to approve the minutes of May 17, 1976 as amended. (Brown, Michelman, Unanimous) Upon the recommendation of the superintendent it was MINUTES JUNE 11, 1976 VOTED: to approve the minutes of June 11, 1976. (Michelman, Wadsworth, Swanson, Yes; abstain Rotberg, Brown)