Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-01-20-SC-min Page 15 January 20, 1975 The regular meeting of the Lexington School Committee came to order at -30 p. rn. in Unit F of Lexington High School. Present were Mr. Currier, Mr. Rotberg, _✓Ir. Wadsworth, Mrs. Berchtold, Mrs. Davison and Mrs. Swanson. Also present were Mr. Barnes, Mr. Maclnnes, Dr. Monderer, Mr. Spiris, Dr. Fobert and Mrs. Cummings. A large group of parents was present during Public Participation to hear the following persons make statements concerning the recommendations of the recent building survey. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION John Sharff, Co-Chairman of the Munroe PTA Board, spoke in favor of keeping up the small neighborhood schools. He extended an invitation to the School Committee to meet with all Munroe parents to discuss this matter at an informal meeting before any final decisions are made. . Sven Spoerri, speaking for the Lexington Council of the PTA and the Fiske School, urged that no precipitous action be taken on the survey until the full impact of the recommended changes can be assessed by a broadly based group drawn from the educational establishment and the town as a whole. He asked the School Committee to appoint such a group promptly so that its analysis can be a thorough review of Lexington's long range educational plans, of which the survey is only one part. Sam Nablo, Co-Chairman of the Muzzey PTA Board, read excerpts from a _etter written by Anton Morton to Mr. Terry. The letter praised the Muzzey faculty and the benefits derived from the educational excellence at the school. Vincent Vitto, representing the Adams PTA, said they had conducted a survey of parents to determine their reaction to the recommendations in the building survey. He gave the results of the survey of parents noting that 78% of those polled were willing to pay an average of $2. 60 increase in-the tax rate to renovate the Adams School rather than to see it close down. A copy of the form used and background material supplied to the parents was passed to the School Committee. Mrs. Swanson noted that a $2. 60 increase in taxes would have to be applied to all schools and not to just one in particular. Esther Litt, Publicity Chairman for the Hancock PTA, said a statement regarding the building survey has been sent to the School Committee. William Welch commented on the new budget figures for fuel. He asked the committee to consider a minimum of 16c increase in fuel prices when considering the costs for the year. Frank Sarno asked when the committee will hold public meetings to discuss school closings. Mrs. Berchtold said an announcement will be made once the dates are set. Page 16 • January 20, 1975 A listener remarked that school closings are as important as school "nenings and suggested that a great deal of effort be made to get a range opinions on this matter - perhaps a vote at Town Meeting - before a final decision is made. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Mrs. Berchtold said this has been considered before. She added that CONTINUED tonight was a very good indication that people have opinions to share and assured everyone that we will set up a schedule to discuss this matter with the public. She stressed the importance of getting as much input as possible before a decision is made. Nancy Hubert and John Lange asked questions concerning reimbursements for the Ch 766 program. Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was VOTED: To accept the Schedule of Payments as presented. (Swanson, Davison, Unanimous) SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS Personal Services January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll #16C $373,413.32 Expenses (1974 Carryover) January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #116 2,810.93 Expenses (1975) January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #87 4,117.93 January 16, 1975 #88 9,185.75 January 16, 1975 #89 46,501.58 Athletics January 17, 1975 Payroll #14 574.00 January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #16 346.62 Adult Education (Driver Education) January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 289.00 Special Programs (Non-Lexington Funds) January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 1,025.08 January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #74 300.00 LAB Pre-Vocational Life Care Program January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 519.54 January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #14 4,500.00 Metco January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 1,867.24 Page 17 January 20, 1975 Autistic Program (Arlington) January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 1,535.46 January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #8 28.45 Autistic Program (Lexington) January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 654.54 Multi-Handicapped (Burlington) January 17, 1975 Professional Payroll 990.15 January 16, 1975 Bill Schedule #6 405.35 Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was PERSONNEL VOTED: To accept Personnel Changes (certificated) as presented. CHANGES (Swanson, Davison, Unanimous) (certificated) Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was (non-certificated; Page 18 January 20, 1975 Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Welch presented a Class Action Grievance at Level elative to a change in the school calendar in December. At that time the School ,ommittee voted to change the calendar after requests for reconsideration were made by teachers, students and parents, The new calendar specified that four days would be added to the end of the school year to make up for time lost during Christmas and New Year's vacation. Mr. Goodwin and Mr. Welch presented the grievance contending the changes made in the calendar by one party to the Agreement caused friction, frustration and lost opportunities and is achange in the working conditions of the other party, the LEA. It was the contention of the LEA that working conditions have been unilaterally changed and that this is a violation of the contract. LEA GRIEVANCE PSC 74-75-10 Mr. Goodwin read a statement further describing the LEA position on School Year - this matter. Mr. Rotberg asked if names of the teachers who would be Calendar disadvantaged by the change could be made available to the committee. He wished to know what the impact would be and how many teachers would be involved. Mr. Welch said that the number involved didn't make a difference and felt the issue was broad enough to be brought before the committee. Mr. Rotberg replied that he could not appreciate the broadness of the issue unless he could have specific information on which to build an option. Mrs. Swanson told Mr. Goodwin that pressure from teachers, parents and students was the reason that the school committee reconsidered the calendar 'est fall. She stressed the fact that Dr. Fobert did not do it on his own. _ urthermore, student and parent frustration, as Mr. Goodwin mentioned earlier, hadn't anything to do with the LEA contract. Dr. Fobert said it would have been easier to leave the calendar in its original state and to treat the few requests for time off individually. Mrs. Davison said that until it is specified in the contract, the School Committee has the right to set the school calendar. Mr. Goodwin said that prevention of the disruption of plans, lost income, and lost opportunities due to a changing of the working conditions is the desire and aim of this grievance. In order to prevent any recurrence of this unfortunate experience, the LEA wished to eliminate the present informal procedure of calen- dar selection which had no formal ties to either the LEA or LSC and substitute instead a mutually acceptable alternative (such as a joint LEA/LSC committee) that would be responsible to and represent the contractual parties and present the best possible school calendar educationally, socially, and economically feasible. Mrs. Berchtold said the committee would take the grievance under advisement and render a decision as soon as possible. At the request of the School Committee, the Science and Math Specialists presented a report describing their roles, responsibilities and functions in the Lexington School System. SCIENCE & MATH SPEC. Mr. Edward Jacobus, Chairperson for the Elementary Science REPORT Specialists, said there are 4 1/2 specialists serving 923 students in the system. All specialists have multi-school assignments. He described the format which the specialists would follow this evening. Page 19 January 20, 1975 Mr. William Read gave an historical account of the program. He said the chool Committee of 1957 directed that a Science program be instituted for those in grades 1-6. Two science specialists were hired at that time and equipment was purchased for the buildings. He then gave a detailed account of the responsibilities and activities, type of courses offered, and the relationships between specialists and teachers in the classroom. Mr. Lawrence Costanza discussed the background and insight of the program, purposes and objectives, appreciation of the worlds of physical and natural science, the various services to teachers and students and professional involvement with other specialists, administrators, attendance at various meetings, etc. The last phase of the report was given by Mrs. Roberta Deemer who recorded an average day at Franklin School to give an account of her activities and presented this information to the committee. She reviewed the information for the benefit of the audience. Mr. Rotberg asked Mr. Read if he felt that overall acceptance of the program was encouraged by the flight of Sputnik in 1956 at which time there was a feeling that American Science was lagging behind what was happening in the Soviet Union. Mr. Read felt that this was true. Mrs. Berchtold asked Mr. Read if the specialists make us e of NSF curriculum. :e replied that they have access to samples of federally produced materials but they don't use them all equally. Mr. Rotberg asked Mrs. Deemer how the Nuffield Unit, "Structures" was chosen to be used at Franklin School. He was told that Dr. Pavan brought back the guides when she visited England. After reviewing them, Mrs. Deemer made her recommendations that the Unit be procured. Mr. Wadsworth asked about the use of text books in Science. Mr. Read said that students do not have text books but do use the library to gather information as needed. Mrs. Swanson asked what coordination exists from K-12 in the Science program. She was told that the Continuing Curriculum Committee does come together to discuss this and is concerned about the problem. Billie Fitzgerald, Clarie Zalewski and Peg Pulliam provided information on the duties of the Math Specialists. The audience was told that all services benefit the students directly or indirectly. Diagnostic, placement or standardized tests are administered. These tests are reviewed and analyzed. Where necessary suggestions are made relative to the needs of a group or next level to be taken. The specialists provide classroom demonstration lessons or give ideas and sugges- iions on materials for those academically talented in math. They also attend math meetings, show text books, encourage the use of audio visual aids or the computer. Paren contact includes conducting workshops for them or advising them on a child's progress. Page 20 January 20, 1975 Mrs. Swanson asked who is in charge of revising the Scope and Sequence Charts. She was told that revisions were made during the school year but the feeling is that block of time is needed to focus on this problem. The last revision was made in 1965. It emerged that the feeiing of the Math Specialists, Dr. Fobert and the School Committee was that the elementary Math Scope and Sequence Charts were in need of revision. Tom Naughton spoke briefly about the need for Math Specialists in the system. It was VOTED: To move to Executive Session at 10:00 p. m. to discuss business matters with Norman Cohen, Town Counsel and other personnel matters. (Swanson, Davison, Unanimous). At that time LEA Grievance PSC 74-75-10 (School Calendar), which was heard earlier, was discussed. The School Committee reverted to open session at 11:30 p. m. to vote unanimously to deny the above grievance. Discussion followed concerning meeting schedules for the next six weeks. Agenda items were reviewed and dates set to discuss different parts of the budget. It was OTED: To adjourn the meeting at 1:00 a. m. (Davison, Swanson, Unanimous) Respectfully submitted, .� Isabelle J. Cummings Recording Secretary