Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-09-04-SC-min Page 73 September 4, 1979 A meeting of the Lexington School Conuuittee was held on September 4, 1979, at 8:00 p.m. , at the School Administration Building. Those in at- tendance were: Brown, Swanson, Shaw, Michelman, Gaudet. Also present were Lawson, Pierson, Maclnnes, DiGiammarino, Monderer, Barnes. Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS VOTED: to accept the following schedule of payments: (Swanson, Michel- man, Unanimous) (See attached sheet.) Mr. Morey reviewed for the School Committee the property lines of 12 DANIEL ST. the residence at 12 Daniel Street, Arlington; and the history of its ARLINGTON, MA school attendance. He requested the School Committee allow students living at that address to attend the Lexington Public Schools. He said students who lived at that address had attended the schools in Lexing- ton since 1942, and in 1975, students of tenants had attended the schools in Lexington. Mr. Barnes explained that the Adams School had enrolled the students incorrectly in 1975, and a review with the Town of Lexington officials confirmed the fact that the home was in Arlington. Also, his contact with the officials of the Arlington School Department validated that the schools of Arlington expected the children to attend the schools in that district. Dr. Lawson also noted that he had been in contact with the superintendent regarding the situation, and found also that the School Department was not in favor of paying tuition to Lexington for those stu- dents. Mr. Morey reiterated his concern that he had lost the sale of the house to the tenants, since the children would not be allowed to attend the Lexington schools. He asked the Committee to accept the students in Lexington. Mr. Brown noted that the consensus of the School Committee was that the problem should be addressed to the Arlington schools and review with the superintendent there as to options that might be avail- able for the new owners. Mr. Morey agreed he would approach the super- intendent of the Arlington Public Schools regarding the matter. Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was NEW PERSONNEL VOTED: to accept the following new personnel (certified) as listed on the attached sheet: (Michelman, Swanson, Unanimous) Upon the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was PERSONNEL CHANGES VOTED: to accept the following personnel changes (certified) as listed on the attached sheet: (Michelman, Gaudet, Unanimous) Upon the recoimuendation of the Superintendent of Schools, it was ELECTION OF STAFF VOTED: to accept the following staff re-elections as listed on the attached sheet: (Swanson, Gaudet, Unanimous) The Superintendent suggested that the School Committee structure SCHOOL COM- priorities for the 1979-80 school year as they had done in previous MITTEE PRIORI- school years. He requested that members send suggestions to him, and TIES 1979-80 he would consolidate all items for the next School Committee meeting. Page 74 September 4, 1979 The Superintendent of Schools noted that during the school closing SCHOOL CLOSING process many questions had arisen regarding students transferred to STUDY - other schools. He added that the larger question included, "How well TRANSFERS do students adjust to their new school?" He said that he had met with Dr. Monderer regarding the concern and he would share the results of the student transfer study. Dr. Monderer noted that the study of transfer students included the following questions : 1. How well do students adjust to their new school? 2. If a significant number of students have trouble in adjusting, how should that information affect school administration and the School Committee in considering closing other schools? 3. How do students feel about school closings before and after the event? 4. What can the school system learn to facilitate satisfaction and adjustment in the new school for transfer of students? Dr. Monderer stated that last year students were surveyed in the ele- mentary schools. Elementary school counselors in Lexington developed ques- tionnaires to help answer the questions. In May of 1979, all students who had ever transferred to the elementary school currently attended were sur- veyed. Another separate survey was conducted of Munroe School students whose school closing July 1979 would make them transfer students in the fall. He noted the following findings : 1. Transfer students are a common phenomenon in the Lexington Public Schools. Last year, the elementary schools had 678 students who at one time or other had transferred to another school, More students transferred to a new school because of moving into Lexington than for any other reason. The fol- lowing chart was presented.: Reasons for Student' s Transfer No �. Move into Lexington 296 44 School Closing 247 36 Other (move within Lexington, parent request, FETCO student) 135 20 678 100 2. Most students (64-747) have "negative" feelings (e.g. , sad, scared, bad, unhappy) when they first learned they had to leave their last school. Some have positive feelings, others had mixed or no feelings. Students transferring because of school closings tended to express more negative and less posi- tive feelings than students transferring for other purposes. Page 75 September 4, 1979 Positive (%) Negative (%) Neutral (%) School Closing 12 74 14 Move into Lex. 27 64 9 Other 21 65 14 Mien Munroe School students were asked this question before their transfer, when they first learned, they responded with: 10% posi- tive, 59% negative, and 31% neutral responses ("good and bad", "different," "don' t know") 3. Almost all students end up having positive feelings about their "new" school after they experience it. 93% express positive feel- ings ("good," "good school," "like school.") Of the 678 transfer students only 32 still expressed any negative feelings. 4. What did students say made them feel comfortable when they came to their "new" school. The focus was on "friends" and teacher in- troduction. Most often mentioned are listed below: No. of students No. of students School Closing, Moved to Lex. New friends 52 79 Friends/Classes/Teacher better 3 10 Teacher' s introduction helped 33 55 Old friends 62 24 Old teachers 7 0 Kids should be friendly 6 0 Guide for day 2 5 5. Students expressed views about what made them feel comfortable, and what can help others. The major suggestions related to friendliness of students, and forming friendships, and their being recognized as new - needing to be introduced to other students, the setting, and that school's expectations. The students suggested we do the follow- ing to help students who transfer: No. of students No. of students School Closing Moved to Lex. Kids should be friendly 58 74 Teachers should introduce school 53 31 and kids Guide for day 35 38 Page 76 September 4, 1979 The Superintendent noted that this information had been shared, and principals would respond to what we were doing in their buildings to make the process meaningful. Mr. Michelman said the study seemed to show that once the decision had been made, the process was carried out in a sensitive and caring man- ner; and felt that this, certainly, was an asset in the whole process. The Superintendent said that he would require that each school develop a plan for transfer students to adjust to the new school. He felt the results of this study will be very beneficial to each principal, and that each principal will forward a plan to him regarding the procedures for transfer students. Mrs. Swanson suggested the results of this study be shared through Massachusetts School Committee newsletters and other newsletters. The Superintendent agreed that this would be done. Mt. Lombard presented a final report of the Summer Reading, E.S.E.A. SUMMER RDG. Title I Program to the School Couwtittee. The School Conmiittee thanked PROGRAM REPORT Mr. Lombard for the report and the fine job accomplished by him and staff (FINAL) during the summer. The High School Work Study Proposal was deferred to a future meet- ing. Mrs. Mabyn Martin, Administrator of Special Education, introduced ADAPTIVE the history of the Adaptive Physical Education Program. Mrs. Martin PHYSICAL noted that with new State and Federal legislation, it was now possible EDUCATION to receive grants to provide educational experiences for special needs PROGRAM children in the area of Adaptive Physical Education. She said that in addition to providing physical benefits, a well-developed Adapted Phys- ical Education Program frequently, provided for more positive social and emotional growth. She noted that this project, Project Discover, was funded through Public Law 94-142, and was designed to meet the indivi- dual physical education needs of special needs students, K-12. She introduced the Adaptive Physical Education. teacher, Kathy Glen- non- Miss Glennon stated that Project Discover had provided supplemen- tary physical education experiences for ten elementary students identi- fied through the Kindergarten Screening process as having difficulties in growth motor area. She also added that she and three elementary phy- sical education teachers had designed an efficient screening instrument to identify those students in grades 1 and 2 who were in need of a spec- ialized physical education program. She said, in summary, that there were fifty students in the elementary level involved in Adaptive Physi- cal Education programs. At the secondary level, individual physical ed- ucation services have been provided for eight students with specific provisions in individualized education programs. She noted the program attempted to insure that all students in self-contained classrooms re- ceived appropriate physical education services and those students who were mainstreamed for physcal education were maximally involved. The program at the secondary level provided services for seventy-five stu- dents. In conclusion, Mr. Lord, Director of Physical Education and Athletics, said that much was needed in the area of identification and also provisions for services to those students with less severe or less obvious handicaps. Page 77 September 4, 1979 He complimented Miss Glennon for the accomplishments she has made since her employment in Lexington. He felt the program provided quality experiences for special needs students, and, hopefully, in the future, additional bene- fits could be provided. The School Committee complimented Miss Glennon, Mrs. Martin, and Mr. Lord for the fine presentation and for the obvious - - beneficial program going on for special needs students in the area of Adap- tive Physical Education. Mr. Brown noted he had received information that the increased fuel C & W prices were having a negative impact on the contractor since there was no TRANSPORTATION fuel price escalation clause. He suggested the School Committee might want to consider the situation as it related to future contracts. Mr. Brown said that he and the Superintendent had been in receipt DRIVER of a letter from Rowe Chevrolet which noted that due to the increase cost EDUCATION of financing and the depreciation cost of driver education vehicles, it was his intention to eliminate for the 1979-80 school year, all vehicles. However, he requested that if the School Committee could assist by absorb- ing some of the charges, approximately $5,000, perhaps the program could continue. Mr. Brown suggested that the High School would have to rely on three cars rather than four cars, and perhaps an additional charge per student would be levied to pay for the costs of the driver education cars. Mr. Brown suggested that he and the Superintendent meet with Mr. Rowe to review all options. It was VOTED: to adjourn. at 9:45 p.m. (Micheiman, Swanson, Unanimous) Respectfully submitted, - Richard H. Barnes Recording Secretary /c SCHEDULE UI' PAYMEA S The following schedules of payment ; were available for scrutiny and approval prior to this meeting: SCHOOL LEP` FTC"NL GllDGFTS Personal Services July 20, 1979 Classified 'Payroll # 3C $ 54 ,612.60 August 3, 1979 '4C 56,071.83 August 17, 1979 #50 49,614.67 August 24, 1979 Professional Payroll #4 31 ,963.19 Expenses August 24, 1979 3111 Schedules #18 35,644.56 August 24, 1979 #19 1,025. 90 August 24, 1979 #20 9,145.14 August 31, 1979 #21 5,671.55 August 31, 1979 x022 12,311,97 August 31, 1979 #23 1,886, 92 August 31, 1979 #24 3,375.98 Expenses (Carryover Account) August 24, 1979 Bill Schedules 4321 11,308.13 August 31, 1979 #322 1,060.35 August 31, 1979 #323 1,657.36 SPECIAL PRC;RAi?S - Non-Lexington Funds • Metco July 20, 1979 Classified Payroll 120.00 August 3, 1979 120.00 August 24, 1979 Professional Payroll 965.58 August 31, 1979 Bill Schedule --#25 168,52 Proiect Discover July 20, 1979 Classified Payrolls 10.30 August 3, 1979 300.00 August 17, 1979 196.00 Low Income (Sumner Readin_s nroram) July 20, 1979 Classified Payrolls 674.19 August 3, 1979 653.60 August 17, 1979 2.40 August 11, 1979 i;:.11 Schedcia 4;4 496.38 Math Computer August 31, 1979 Bill Schedule ,;-5 158.97 NEW PERS)>'NE'. NAME SCF10OL/Sl " 'r6T EDUCATION EXPERIENCE (Over) NEW PERSONNEL NAME SCHOOL/SUBJECT' EDUCATION EXPERIENCE PFSSoNN[:1, NAmi;' grOO /Sg-e. T7fT EDUCATION EXPERIENCE --„ RESIGNATION REASON CHANGE IN ASSIGNMENT i :,GREE CHANCES (Over) RESCIND COAC TLNG AS:-riuNNENT A??OLNTAIENI'i 4sLNVft' 1__.--__ �_ RESIGNATIONS `.. IN ( Y 1 l� ";_iVE REASON ? ^E-ETICTION . FEW PERSONNEL EFFECTIVE TRANSFER (Over) SECOND ELECTION These people have p+ . virsly rrcei9 + a c ‘c[rs ftld are Lein recommended for their second election. GRADY school 1,Pg1:1, 3.rr c SALARY CO} tENTs THIRD ELECTION These people have previously received uwc, coo me is and are being recommended for their third etection.