1976-11-22-SC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Y Page 193 November 22, 1976 An informational sheet regarding the follow-up of seniors of the FOLLOW-UP OF Class of 1976 was presented to the School Committee. It was noted that SENIORS approximately 77% of the students graduated from Lexington High School went on to two and four year colleges. Dr. Pierson outlined the purposes of the Secondary Reading Workshop SECONDARY REE that took place on November 18, at the Reading Center, Lexington High ING WORKSHOP School. He said that the focus of this type of workshop was to address discreet and chronic problems in an area and provide for quick solutions. He felt that this vehicle accomplished such a goal. The focus of the reading workshop was the development of a formal procedure for treating incoming seventh and tenth grade students with recognized reading dif- ficulties. It also focused on the development of a procedure for gather- ing data on the reading performance of all incoming seventh and tenth grade students. He said there would be additional workshops to meet problems in the areas of science, writing units, and health education. A letter from the firm of Palmer & Dodge was read regarding the LEGAL OPINION case of Romberg vs. Spiris. The communication said that the Court on November 2, 1976 granted the motion for summary judgment against Romberg. This meant that on the basis of the affidavits and memoranda of the law before the Court, the Judge found that there was no material factual dis- pute and that the names and addresses of students were exempted from the definition of "public records' in the Freedom of Information Act and therefore need not be disclosed. It was also noted that Mr. Romberg had thirty days in which to make an appeal. Dr. Lawson stated that in September, 1976, he appointed a committee FINANCIAL PR" consisting of Mr. Koetke, Mr. Barnes, Mr. Maclnnes and Dr. DiGiammarino GRAM SERVIC. to investigate methods for up-dating and automating the financial data PROPOSAL system of the Lexington Public Schools. During the past months, this committee had been meeting and recouauended the service of an outside consultant to up-date the design of the Lexington Public Schools Finan- cial Management System in an effort to provide financial informational services to the School Committee, superintendent, administrators and other staff members. Mr. Robert A. Nielsen of the firm of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., was in attendance to respond to questions from the School Committee. Mr. Michelman expressed his concern for Objective 1.1, which stated that the consultant would recommend a financial program philosophy that would serve as a guide for budget development and control of expenditures. He felt that the appropriate manner of development would be for the School Committee and school staff to develop the philosophy rather than have it imposed by an outside firm. Dr. DiGiammarino and Mr. Nielsen said that there would he a great deal of participation on the part of School Com- mittee and staff in development of this philosophy and it would not be superimposed by an outside agency. Mr. Michelman said that he was for the proposal as a total, but still had reservations about this segment of the program. After a brief discussion, it was VOTED: to accept the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools that the firm of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell enter into a contract with the Lexington Schools for a design phase according to the suggested time schedule as outlined in the proposal, and that fees and expenses not exceed $28,000. (Wadsworth, Brown, Unani- mous) (See next page)