68 33 25 7
$'92&$&<
('8&$7,21
7+(
www.cabe.org
www.facebook.com/ConnecticutAssociationBoardsEducation
-2851$/
&RQQHFWLFXW $VVRFLDWLRQ RI %RDUGV RI (GXFDWLRQ 7KH /HDGLQJ 9RLFH IRU &RQQHFWLFXW 3XEOLF (GXFDWLRQ Vol. 17, No.10
³2XW RI WKH SXEOLF VFKRROV JURZV WKH JUHDWQHVV RI D QDWLRQ ´ 0DUN 7ZDLQ 1RY
October 2013
Professional Educator Evaluation and Support system rolls out statewide Chris Seymour Reporter, CABE
WATERBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
With new teacher educator evaluations being rolled out statewide in 2013-14, the fresh academic year has ushered in an entirely new year in Nutmeg State education. The passage of Public Act 12-116, An Act Concerning Education Reform, in June 2012 “was pivotal in defining an annual performance evaluation system for administrators and teachers, based upon a new standard of effective practice,� according to Connecticutseed.org. The law requires each district to adopt either Connecticut’s System for Educator Evaluation and Development (SEED) — which is the state’s “model evaluation system that is aligned to the guidelines�—develop their own, or formulate a hybrid. “The option was to adopt the SEED model, to develop a district proposed alternative or to develop a hybrid,� explained Dr. Sarah Barzee, Chief Talent Officer at the State Department of Education (SDE). “In many
Breakfast - Every Kid, Every Day! Jim Crawford, School Breakfast Navigator, End Hunger Connecticut
Connecticut ranks last in the nation for the past eight consecutive years in the number of schools offering the federal School Breakfast Program that otherwise participate in the National School Lunch Program1. Yet, educators everywhere know that preparation, planning, and active participation are three recognized ingredients for achieving success in almost all ventures. Students need to come to school prepared to learn each and every morning; hungry minds cannot learn on empty stomachs. Why, then, do we continue to equivocate on ensuring that each learner comes to the task nourished to participate
fully and turn our backs on the federal resources available to every school choosing to participate in the federal School Breakfast Program? Similar to the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program is funded through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and administered by the Connecticut State Department of Education. However, unlike the National School Lunch Program, Connecticut schools are not taking advantage of the student, teacher, and school benefits that come with federal funds available to them for simply offering school breakfast like they do lunch. Every school is eligible and every student is eligible to participate in the School Breakfast Program. Like the National School Lunch Program, students pay on a sliding scale depending on their designation to receive free, reduced, or full price meals. Schools are reimbursed for every meal claimed – including meals for ‘paid’ students. Although many of Connecticut’s schools currently offer “a la carte� food items that can be purchased only at full cost to the students, those privately funded items may be less nutritious, and are often out of reach for those students who may need it
81 Wolcott Hill Road Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242
of Boards of Education Inc.
See BREAKFAST page 4
cases, districts liked components of SEED but not all of them would fit in their local context so they developed what became known as a hybrid, which is some components of SEED and some proposed alternatives.� Whichever model districts chose, they still must have their evaluation system breakdown as follows: teacher performance and practice, 40%; parent or peer feedback, 10%; student growth and development, 45%; and wholeschool student learning indicators/student feedback, 5%. Though the new evaluation systems have meant a lot of work for local school systems, Barzee said she feels districts are becoming increasingly comfortable as they build a better understanding of the system. “I think, like any change initiative, last year was a really heavy lift because it was very new,� explained Barzee. “Very anecdotally, I spoke to a few superintendents at an event [in September] who gave me the impression, ‘we’ve got this now, we are moving on, we have new fish to fry and new challenges.’� Added Barzee, “This is a significant change process but they’ve had a full year now to understand [the new system]. As they developed their plans it required them to really fully understand the system. So now, as with any change process, the implementation will bring its challenges, but I think districts are addressing them and are looking forward to the positive opportunities that exist.� Superintendents “across the board� have expressed the fact that they like the “opportunity that our new system brings to elevate educator effectiveness and we did see many instances of that in the pilot,� continued Barzee. The pilot Barzee referred to, “The 10 District and Consortia of districts,� was conducted in 2012-13. “I think it did what it intended to do, which is give us an opportunity to test the system and to study all aspects of implementation,� she observed. “We learned many, many lessons that have assisted us in further refinements and developments for the System for Educator Evaluation and Development; it was very instructive and very informative in helping us to pilot the system and to make continuous improvements before we went statewide this fall.� In West Hartford, Superintendent of Schools Dr. See EVALUATION page 7
INSIDE THIS EDITION President Commentary .......................................... 2 Executive Director Commentary .......................... 3 The changing face of PR in public schools ........... 4 Nutmeg deals with adopting a uniform calendar .. 5 Medical marijuana: needed policy direction......... 6 Lessons from the Penguins ................................... 7 Bridging the gap to the common core ................... 8 CABE: working for YOU ................................... 10 Technology and the role of parents ..................... 11 Boards of education should partner with CAG ... 12 U.S. Supreme Court ............................................ 13 School boards beware ......................................... 14 10 reasons why you shouldn’t miss the 2013 Annual CABE/CAPSS Conference ........... 15
Connecticut Association
Periodical Postage PAID Hartford, CT
2
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 PRESIDENT COMMENTARY
Growth and Gains The technology for calendar reminders can be useful, if only used. Recently, I found an advertisement from 2012 with a post-it-note reminding me to participate in The New York Times “Schools for Tomorrow” Conference. I googled for more information only to find that the Conference was by invite only and was taking place that very day. I was grateful, however, that I could watch a live stream, since topics and speakers had peaked my interest. In its third year, the Times created this educational conference to promote dialogue and action for greater schools of the future. They examined what classrooms of tomorrow should look like, and the changes that can be made in our educational system to improve teaching and learning for every student. Assembled every year are leaders in education, k-12 and higher education; technology; business; politics and philanthropy who participate as audience members, speakers and panelists. Moderators are a mix of columnists and education correspondents. Last year’s theme, Building a Better Teacher, explored the changing roles of teachers, using technology more effectively, teacher training, and professional development while attracting the best teachers possible. An inspiring lesson came from a middle school math teacher who, along with his students, created math video games as instructional strategies. His utilization of math games and other technology in his classroom is part of Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Should students win at his own games, the loss is his, as the students have surpassed a skill – a way of creating mechanisms to learn. This years’ focus was titled “Virtual U: The coming of Age of On-Line Education”. Keynote speaker was Sal Kahn of Kahn Academy who spoke of innovations in instruction and education, how to assess technology in
our classrooms and identifying the best environment for student learning in this digital age. One panelist defined CCSS as a wakeup call, since 52% of registered voters have never heard of it, and it should be considered as we campaign door to door this election year. Future schools are not just about the achieveLydia Tedone ment gap but gaps between acceptance and use of technology, what Seniors are expected to have accomplished as they graduate, what they need to know and narrowing the gaps between information and technology. Our roles are to provide structure and resources to help them navigate their personal pathways of learning. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan spoke of reform as continuous – in investing in sets of values and principles, while not losing sight of the value of the educators of our children. Even as districts face tough, uncertain economic times, we are making progress in public education. He mentioned the strength of our system resides at the local level. As board members, it is crucial we continue conversations about how our districts should be allocating our budgets to enhance the learning experience of each and every student – whether latest technological tools available or discussions on education initiatives. Tomorrow’s classroom starts today – because our students should have a chance to learn anytime, anywhere.
September’s State Board of Education action Sheila McKay Sr. Staff Associate for Government Relations, CABE
The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were briefly discussed at the September State Board of Education meeting. They have been developed by a collaboration of 26 states in coordination with Achieve, Inc. The new standards, as the State Department of Education (SDE) reports, “will augment expectations for science learning from simply knowing facts to being able to put knowledge to use in critical, analytical and creative ways”. The SDE will, over the next few months, complete its adoption implication study. About 2/3 of the concepts in the NGSS have a match in Connecticut’s current state standards. It is likely that recommendations will come to the State Board of Education in early 2014.The new
Common Core State Standards do not include science. Also discussed was the new requirement for a Master’s degree in an appropriate subject area to qualify for Professional Educator Certificate. Issues of pedagogy and cross endorsement were questioned. Siegel, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Beck are investigating the potential testing irregularities in the Hartford School District. Of note: Dr. Steven Adamowski will continue in his role as Special Master for Windham and New London school districts. Dr. Sarah Barzee was appointed as Chief Talent Officer, a role she had been assuming unofficially for a few months.
“Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” – William Butler Yeats
Mission: To assist local and regional boards of education in providing high quality education for all Connecticut children through effective leadership. Vision: CABE is passionate about strengthening public education through high-performing, transformative local school board/superintendent leadership teams that inspire success for each child.
CABE Board of Directors EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Lydia Tedone ..................................................... President, Simsbury Richard Murray ................................. First Vice President, Killingly Ann Gruenberg ................. VP for Government Relations, Hampton Stephen Wright ........... VP for Professional Development, Trumbull Robert Mitchell ................................. Secretary/Treasurer, Montville Don Blevins .............................................. Immediate Past President John Prins ............................................................. Member at Large
AREA DIRECTORS Susan Hoffnagle ............................. Area 1 Co-Director, Winchester Mari-Ellen (Mimi) Valyo ............... Area 1 Co-Director, Winchester Daniel Santorso ................................ Area 1 Co-Director, Plymouth Becky Tyrrell .................................... Area 2 Co-Director, Plainville Susan Karp .................................. Area 2 Co-Director, Glasbonbury Don Harris ...................................... Area 2 Co-Director, Bloomfield Laura Bush ................................................. Area 3 Director, Vernon Douglas Smith .................................. Area 4 Co-Director, Plainfield Steve Rosendahl ............................. Area 4 Co-Director, Woodstock Gavin Forrester ................................ Area 6 Co-Director, Stratford Elaine Whitney .................................. Area 6 Co-Director, Westport John Prins ............................................... Area 7 Director, Branford Pamela Meier ........................................... Area 8 Director, Madison Gail MacDonald ................................... Area 9 Director, Stonington
ASSOCIATES Eileen Baker .............................................. Associate, Old Saybrook Sharon Beloin-Saavedra .............................. Associate, New Britain Gary Brochu .......................................................... Associate, Berlin Robert Guthrie .............................................. Associate, West Haven Cal Heminway ..................................................... Associate, Granby COMMITTEE CHAIRS Elizabeth Brown ........................... Chair, State Relations, Montville Beverly Washington ..................... Chair, Federal Relations, Groton Becky Tyrrell ...................................... Chair, Resolutions, Plainville
CITY REPRESENTATIVES Jacqueline Kelleher ....................... City Representative, Bridgeport Matthew Poland ................................ City Representative, Hartford Carlos Torre .................................. City Representative, New Haven Polly Rauh ........................................ City Representative, Stamford Charles Stango ............................... City Representative, Waterbury
STAFF Robert Rader ....................................................................... Executive Director Patrice McCarthy .................................. Deputy Director and General Counsel Bonnie Carney ............................................ Sr. Staff Associate for Publications Nicholas Caruso ............................................ Sr. Staff Assoc. for Field Service and Coord. of Technology Sheila McKay ............................. Sr. Staff Associate for Government Relations Kelly Moyher ......................................................................... Sr. Staff Attorney Vincent Mustaro ..................................... Sr. Staff Associate for Policy Service Lisa Steimer .............................. Sr. Staff Assoc. for Professional Development Teresa Costa .................................. Coordinator of Finance and Administration Pamela Brooks ......................... Sr. Admin. Assoc. for Policy Ser. /Search Ser. Terry DeMars ............................................... Admin. Assoc. for Policy Service Melissa Dickinson ............................. Admin. Assist. for Membership Services Gail Heath ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Government Relations Wilmarie Newton ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Labor Relations Corliss Ucci .................................. Receptionist/Asst. to the Executive Director
The CABE Journal (ISSN 1092-1818) is published monthly except a combined issue for July/August as a member service of the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, 81 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, CT 06109, (860) 571-7446. CABE membership dues include $30 per person for each individual who receives The CABE Journal. The subscription rate for nonmembers is $75. Association membership dues include a subscription for each board member, superintendent, assistant superintendent and business manager. The companies and advertisements found in The CABE Journal are not necessarily endorsed by CABE. “Periodicals Postage Paid at Hartford, CT.” POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The CABE Journal, CABE, 81 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242. Email: bcarney@cabe.org. Members can find the CABE Journal online at: www.cabe.org/ userlogin.cfm?pp=84&userrequest=true&keyrequest=false& userpage=84
3
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTARY
CABE Affiliate Members
The key role of chairs in promoting board success
BUSINESS AFFILIATES DIAMOND MEMBER Finalsite GOLD MEMBERS
Advanced Corporate Networking dba. Digital BackOffice Berchem, Moses & Devlin Centris Group Pullman & Comley Shipman & Goodwin Siegel, O'Connor, O’Donnell & Beck, P.C
SILVER MEMBERS Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Corporate Cost Control Milone & MacBroom, Inc. Quisenberry Arcari Architects The Segal Company
BRONZE PLUS MEMBERS Brown & Brown Insurance Friar Associates Goldstein & Peck, P.C. Lindburg & Ripple O & G Industries The S/L/A/M Collaborative Trane Whitsons School Nutrition
BRONZE MEMBERS Chinni & Meuser LLC Dattco Inc. Fuller & D’Angelo Architects and Planners Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C. The Lexington Group Muschell & Simoncelli Ovations Benefits Group
EDUCATIONAL AFFILIATES American School for the Deaf Area Cooperative Educational Services Capitol Region Education Council The College Board Connecticut Association of School Business Officials Connecticut Center for School Change Connecticut School Buildings and Grounds Association Cooperative Educational Services EASTCONN EDUCATION CONNECTION LEARN Unified School District #1
The more I see boards function, the more certain I am of the important role played by board chairs. In cases in which the board functions well, it is often the chair, backed by supportive other members and the superintendent of schools, that make the difference. In order to see how this occurs, it’s important to look at how boards affect the success of their students. Back in the early 2000s, the Iowa School Boards Foundation did a study of the effect of boards on student achievement. They picked six boards, none of which were actually located in Iowa, but which had similar demographics and other factors, to study the boards’ role. What they found indicated that school boards in high-achieving districts are “significantly different in their knowledge and beliefs than school boards in low achieving districts. And, this difference appears to carry through among administrators and teachers.” While the study is quite lengthy, these are the key differences found between the advancing districts and those that are not: • In the high-achieving districts, the board/superintendent team and school personnel consistently expressed an “elevating” view of students. Students were viewed as emerging and flexible and the school’s job was seen as releasing each student’s potential. The board/ superintendent team and school personnel viewed the school system critically and were constantly seeking opportunities to improve it. In the low-achieving districts, the board/superintendent team and school personnel accepted limitations in students and the school system. They tended to view students as limited by characteristics such as their income or home situation, and accepted schools as they were. Their focus was on managing the school environment, rather than changing or improving it. • In the high-achieving districts, school board members showed greater understanding and influence. They were knowledgeable about topics such as improvement goals, curriculum, instruction, assessment and staff development. They were able to clearly describe the purposes and processes of school improvement initiatives and identify the board’s role in supporting those initiatives. In the low-achieving districts, board members were, as a whole, only vaguely aware of school improvement initiatives. They were sometimes aware of goals, but were seldom able to describe actions
being taken by staff members to improve learning. So, if school boards need to increase their focus on student achievement (or “growth” as some prefer), it is often the chair who has the responsibility of ensuring this occurs . I would infer that if the district efforts place in the group of high-achieving districts, it is often the board chair who sets the tone.
How does the chair do this? One of the most key roles of the chair is to develop strong relationships between him/herself and the other members of the board and the superintendent. According to Leading Leaders, by Salacuse, the best way to do this is to privately spend time with each individual board member. The board chair should work towards understanding the member’s interests, whether or not they are school-related. Taking the time to learn about the member’s family, why he or she ran for the board and what motivates them will help ensure that the board member contributes to the overall work of the board in the most effective way. Salacuse says that “interests drive actions” and as the chair understands where the other board members are “coming from”, the better the chance of developing agendas, budgets and taking other action, with the consent of more board members. So, the board chair has a role beyond just doing his or her best in running efficient, orderly and thoughtful meetings. The job is also coach, cheerleader, mentor and coordinator. That is why it is critical that the chair is chosen in a fair process, ensuring that the person with best leadership abilities gets the position. One of the most important roles for the chair is to ensure that the new members are provided with an in-depth orientation which will help them “hit the ground running”. As many elections will take place in November, I urge chairs to make sure this occurs and to come or have another experienced board member and/or the superintendent to attend our New Board Member and Leadership Conference, December 10th. Here, the new member can learn much more about being a board member—and their Association. CABE also provides a booklet, Who’s in Charge, which contains lots of material on best practice for board chairs. It also includes much wisdom from former and current chairs. Board chairs: you make a huge difference in your districts. Your leadership can determine whether the students thrive in your schools. Make sure that you carefully, thoughtfully and clearly consider your roles and responsibilities. You are in the best position to leverage the work of your
Robert Rader
board and leave a legacy of success for the board, your community. And, most importantly, for your students. [Editor’s Note: CABE, with grant support of SDE, makes Lighthouse training, based on work done in Iowa, available for Alliance Districts. You might consider seeing if your board qualifies for Lighthouse Training under the grant. Contact CABE staff to find out. We are currently developing our 2013-14 calendar of Lighthouse Districts.]
What Do The Iowa Studies’ Results Mean to Connecticut Boards? Boards can help increase student achievement by: • Consistently expressing the belief that all students can learn and that the district schools could teach all students. This “no excuses” belief system results in high standards for students and an on-going dedication to improvement. • Becoming more knowledgeable about teaching and learning issues, including school improvement goals, curriculum, instruction, assessment and staff development. • Using data and other information on student needs and results to make decisions. • Creating goals both for the board of education and for the district as a whole. Progress towards achieving them should, of course, be monitored on a regular and planned basis. CABE has helped many districts with this – if we can help you, please let us know. • Monitoring high-achieving boards’ progress on improvement efforts and modified direction as a result. • Creating a supportive workplace for staff. Boards in high-achieving districts support regular staff development to help teachers be more effective, support shared leadership and decision making among staff, and regularly express appreciation for staff members. • Involving their communities. Board members in forward-moving districts identified how they connect with and listen to their communities and focus on involving parents in education.
4
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 CABE and Baldwin Media: Partners in Managing Communications
The
Media Message
from Ann Baldwin, Baldwin Media Marketing, LLC
The changing face of public relations in public schools Public Relations for school districts used to be about getting a positive message out to your school community. It was previously a one-way communication designed to showcase the best of a school or district to gain community support. Currently, too many school districts are dealing with their constituents in a reactionary mode as opposed to being pro-active. As we all know, the way people receive their information has changed. Today, public relations is less about conveying information than it is
about establishing and promoting partnerships’ within the community. An effective school public relations plan needs to provide value! People are more open to receiving news they can use, not just information that the school ‘throws’ at them. Your communications should be focused on a ‘call-to-action’ or based on trying to motivate behavior or support. There should also be a way for people to respond to the information they receive so that they feel they have a voice on a particular issue. Communication can’t be a one-way street, even if there is
CABE-Meeting CABE-Meeting is a user-friendly, web-based service specifically designed to assist the board, superintendent and central office staff in preparing for and running board of education meetings. An exciting feature designed for use by committees, in addtion to boards of education, was recently added to CABE-Meeting. Now all your board work and committee information is conveniently located in one place!
“CABE-Meeting has been a great program for our district. We have saved time and money and increased our ability to disseminate information quickly. I encourage Board members to consider the advantages of CABE-Meeting.” Becky Tyrrell, Member, Plainville Board of Education
For more information, or to schedule a demonstration for your board, call Lisa Steimer at 800-317-0033 or 860-571-7446 or email lsteimer@cabe.org
a fear that the response might not be all positive. The number one question you should be asking yourself is ‘What does our school or district want to achieve with its public relations program? To increase enrollment? To generate support of school reform? To counteract negative media? To help parents learn how to help their child succeed? All of the above?’
Only when a school has determined its community’s concerns, formed a strategic communications plan, and developed a public relations strategy, will the public relations delivery find its best mark. The goal of a district’s public relations should be a community of citizens that believes the motto, ‘public schools…there is no better place to learn.’
Breakfast- Every Kid, Every Day! (continued from page 1) most. However, these schools do have the systems already in place to streamline the process of participating in School Breakfast and begin to bring federal dollars directly into the district. Enrolling in the School Breakfast Program with the CT State Department of Education is a simple, straight-forward process for schools already participating in the National School Lunch Program. Additionally, the Connecticut Breakfast Expansion Team offers a wide variety of free, individualized support to schools working to start, expand, and improve their School Breakfast Programs. The Connecticut Breakfast Expansion Team (CBET) is a collaboration of the CT State Department of Education, End Hunger Connecticut! and the CT No Kid Hungry campaign, New England Dairy & Food Council, CT Action for Healthy Kids, and the School Nutrition Association of CT. CBET engages in outreach efforts designed to spread best practice ideas, disseminates information about available funds to support school breakfast, provides technical support, and works with schools to adapt the breakfast delivery model that works best for them and to overcome logistical hurdles that are unique to each situation. CBET provides these supports and more at no cost to schools or districts and do not receive any financial or other compensation for schools participating in the School Breakfast Program. Often, districts with lower numbers of students that qualify for free or reduced price school meals fail to recognize that even one hungry student can alter the entire classroom dynamic. Trips to the nurse, behavioral issues, tardiness, and absenteeism are all affected by hunger. Statistics indicate clearly that providing a nutritious food offering early in the school day reduces all four of these hindrances to learning. Additionally, studies clearly indicate that students who do not regularly eat a nutritious breakfast are more likely to
have lower math scores, poor cognitive function, slower memory recall, and more likely to repeat a grade.2 For students who consistently start the day with breakfast, research shows that they attend 1.5 more days of school, score 17.5% higher on math tests, and are less likely to experience disciplinary problems.3 Many schools send home messages encouraging students to have a healthy breakfast during standardized testing weeks. Some even provide breakfast and/ or snacks just prior to or between testing sessions. If being well-nourished helps performance on tests, why isn’t it a priority for learning on a daily basis? Starting a SBP does not have to be complicated. It can begin at any point during the school year and pilot programs have been employed to “work out the kinks” on many occasions. There are many resources to assist your schools with the process. For more information, please contact Jackie Schipke, SDE Education Consultant and CBET coordinator, by telephone at (860) 707-2123 or e-mail at Jackie.schipke@ct.gov to discuss the straight forward steps involved with implementation or expansion of the SBP in your district. (Endnotes) 1 Food Research Action Center (FRAC); School Breakfast Scorecard: http:// frac.org/reports-and-resources/publications-archives/#breakfast 2 Food Research Action Center (FRAC); Breakfast for Learning: Scientific research on the link between children’s nutrition and academic performance: http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/ 09breakfastfor learning.pdf 3 Deloitte and No Kid Hungry Center for Best Practices; Ending childhood hunger: A social impact analysis: http://www.nokidhungry.org/pdfs/schoolbreakfast-white-paper.pdf
5
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 See You in Court – The Nutmeg Board of Education
The Nutmeg Boards deals with adopting a uniform school calendar Thomas B. Mooney, Esq. Shipman & Goodwin
The Nutmeg Board of Education makes many mistakes. The latest imbroglio created by the board will be reported here each issue, followed by an explanation of what the board should have done. Though not intended as legal advice, these situations may help board members avoid common problems. Setting the school calendar has been a problem for the Nutmeg Board of Education. Two years ago, it proposed to eliminate February vacation from the school calendar in 2012-2013. But the Nutmeg Union of Teachers (NUTS) went crazy, arguing that such action would violate their rights. Mal Content, long-serving President of NUTS, claimed that the February vacation is a time-honored therapeutic tradition in Nutmeg, and he threatened that any change to the February vacation would be an illegal unilateral change in working conditions. So the Board relented, and it left the vacation in the school calendar. As fate would have it, in October that year, Superstorm Sandy hammered the
Nutmeg Public Schools hard. For eight days, district schools were closed, and with several more snow days before and after February vacation, there was real drama over whether the Nutmeg Public Schools would be able to hold school for the required 180 days before June 30. Fortunately, with the coming of spring, Mother Nature finally cooperated, and the district squeaked by, holding the last day of school on June 27. This year, Bob Bombast, veteran member of the Nutmeg Board of Education, has made it his personal crusade to make sure that the school calendar would never be a problem again. After getting his ducks in a row with a series of one-on-one meetings with his fellow Board members, Bob proposed in open session that the school calendar for this year be amended to eliminate February vacation. Given Bob’s politicking, there was little need for discussion, and the Board promptly passed Bob’s motion unanimously. Then the fun began. Mal Content was in high dudgeon about this change in the school calendar. During public participation at the next Board meeting, Mal threatened to file an
Seventh Edition Now shipping
A Practical Guide to Connecticut School Law by Thomas B. Mooney, Esq. Shipman & Goodwin The Guide comes with a CD which provides hyperlinks to many cases and statutes and will permit word searches as a supplement to the Index. New to the Seventh Edition: Bullying, Background Checks, Child Abuse Reporting, Discrimination Issues, Educational Reform, FERPA, Freedom of Information, State Aid for Education and much, much more The 7th edition is now available from CABE. Call and order your copy TODAY at 860.571.7446 or 800.317.0033
unfair labor practice charge against the Board for its unilateral changes in the school calendar. Next came a gaggle of parents who, one after one, explained in agonizing detail how important family vacations are. Some of them even threatened to sue the Board members for the non-refundable deposits they had made on vacation packages scheduled during the days on which February was originally scheduled. Bob ignored Mal and the parents as they were talking, preferring instead to text friends on his cell phone. But the other Board members were intimidated by the vehement protests, and after the twelfth parent complaint, Penny Pincher asked to be recognized. “Mr. Chairman, I think that we were too hasty. I move that we rescind our prior action and restore February vacation.” Red Cent quickly seconded the motion, which Mr. Chairperson promptly put to a vote without discussion. Bob couldn’t believe his ears when Mr. Chairman announced that the motion passed 4 to 1. What should the Nutmeg Board of Education learn about the school calendar? Before we get to that, there are a number of other issues to consider here. First, Bob’s politicking may have been a violation of the Freedom of Information Act. The question is whether Bob shared Board members’ perspectives with other Board members in his various meetings so as to be a discussion among a quorum of the Board. Penny’s motion raises another FOIA issue. At regular meetings, a public agency can add an item to the agenda by a two-thirds vote. Here, however, Penny made a new motion without any vote to place it on the agenda. In addition, Penny’s motion raised an issue under Robert’s Rules of Order. The Board had already taken action in amending the calendar, and Penny’s motion should thus properly be considered a motion to rescind or amend. In contrast to a motion to reconsider (which can only be made at the same meeting by a member who had voted with the majority), a motion to rescind or amend can be made by any member, but there are still special rules. When a body wants to revisit action previously taken, the proposed action must be set forth specifically on the agenda. If it is not, the action must be passed by either a two-thirds vote or by an absolute majority of the body to guard against timing such action to thwart the will of the majority. Mal Content claimed on behalf of NUTS that the Board could not eliminate February vacation, but he was wrong. The Teacher Negotiation Act provides that the length and scheduling of the student school day or student school year are not
mandatory subjects of bargaining. However, the union may have had a claim concerning the impact of the late cancellation of February vacation for the current year. When an employer exercises the right to act unilaterally, it may still be obligated to negotiate over the impact of its action. For example, if a board of education adds a day to the school year, it must negotiate over pay for the additional day. Similarly, if a district has not reserved the right to change the calendar because of weather and other unanticipated events (as many districts do and should), it may have to negotiate over the impact of late changes to the school calendar. The broad discretion vested in boards of education to set the school calendar may soon be lost. In Public Act 13-247, Sections 321-324, the General Assembly has adopted a procedure whereby school districts will be required to use a uniform school calendar by region, starting in 2015-2016. Specifically, this Public Act established a “Uniform Regional School Calendar Task Force,” which is responsible for adopting “guidelines for a uniform regional school calendar [that] shall include, but not be limited to, (1) at least one hundred eighty days of actual school sessions during each school year, (2) a uniform start date, (3) uniform days for professional development and inservice training for certified employees, pursuant to sections 10-148a and 10-220a of the general statutes, and (4) not more than three uniform school vacation periods during each school year, not more than two of which shall be a one week school vacation period and one of which shall be during the summer.” The Task Force, which includes a CABE representative appointed by its Executive Director, is required to adopt and submit such guidelines to the General Assembly and to the various regional educational service centers by January 1, 2014. Each regional educational service center is then required to develop a regional school calendar and submit it to the State Board of Education for approval by April 1, 2014. Such school calendars must be consistent with the guidelines developed by the Task Force, as described above. This new law provides that boards of education “may adopt” the uniform school calendar for 2014-2015, and boards of education “shall use” the uniform calendar in 2015-2016. Is there a difference between “adopt” and “use”? Stay tuned. Attorney Thomas B. Mooney is a partner in the Hartford law firm of Shipman & Goodwin who works frequently with boards of education. Mooney is a regular contributor to the CABE Journal. [Editor’s Note: Deputy Director and General Counsel Patrice A. McCarthy is CABE’s representative at the Calendar Task Force.]
6
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
The Policy Corner Vincent A. Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service, CABE
Medical marijuana in the schools setting: needed policy direction Background of the Legislation Marijuana, used by humans for thousands of years, is classified as an illegal drug. However, there has been a growing movement to legalize its use, primarily for medical purposes. Prior to Connecticut’s new legislation, medical marijuana use had surged in 18 states and the District of Columbia. States are still wrestling with the question of what medical marijuana is or should be. Connecticut approved the medical use of marijuana through Public Act 12-55, “An Act Concerning the Palliative Use of Marijuana,” effective October 1, 2012. The law sets the boundaries under which medical marijuana may be recommended, cultivated, possessed and used. The Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) was required by the legislation to adopt implementing regulations by July 1, 2013. The applicability of this legislation is limited in the school setting. This Act allows a licensed physician to certify an adult patient’s use of marijuana after determining that the patient has a debilitating medical condition and could potentially benefit from the palliative use of marijuana, among other requirements. The legislation lists certain conditions that qualify as debilitating. Patients seeking to use marijuana for palliative purposes must have a written certification by a physician and register with DCP. Qualifying patients and their primary caregivers may possess a combined one-month marijuana supply. Conditions are established regarding who can be primary caregivers which requires them to register with DCP. Licensing requirements for pharmacists (termed “dispensaries”) to supply the marijuana and for producers to grow it have been established. Patients, their caregivers or doctors, dispensaries, or producers are protected from being subject to criminal or civil penalties, or being denied any right or privilege, for specified actions relating to palliative marijuana use. Schools, landlords, or employers are prohibited from taking certain actions against a patient or caregiver if the actions are solely based on the person’s status as a palliative marijuana patient or caregiver, unless the actions are required by federal law or to obtain federal funding. The new law prohibits patients from ingesting marijuana in certain settings, including at work or school, in public places, in moving vehicles, or in front of children.
Under the Act, “palliative use” means the acquisition, distribution, transfer, possession, use, or transportation of marijuana or related paraphernalia to alleviate a qualifying patient’s symptoms of a debilitating condition or their effects. It includes the transfer of marijuana and related paraphernalia to the patient from his or her primary caregiver but does not include use by someone other than a qualifying patient. A “qualifying patient” is a state resident who is at least age 18 and has been diag-nosed by a physician as having a debilitating medical condition. A patient’s “primary caregiver” is someone at least age 18, other than the patient or the patient’s doctor, who agrees to take responsibility for managing the patient’s well-being with respect to his or her palliative use of marijuana. Qualifying patients and their primary caregivers must register with DCP, who will issue the patient and the primary caregiver a registration certificate that, once issued, is valid for the same period as the written certification from the physician, up to one year. The legislation prohibits qualifying patients, their caregivers or doctors, or licensed dispensaries or producers from being arrested, prosecuted, or otherwise penalized, including being subject to civil penalties, or denied any right or privilege, including being disciplined by a professional licensing board, for taking specified actions related to the palliative use of marijuana. The legislation establishes particular requirements for each group. The legislation also prohibits anyone from being arrested or prosecuted solely for being present during, or in the vicinity of, the permitted palliative use of marijuana. The protection does not apply if the patient ingests marijuana on a motor bus, school bus, or other moving vehicle; at work; on school grounds or any public or private school, dormitory, college, or university property; in any public place (i.e., any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated for public or private interests); of anyone under age 18; or in a way that exposes someone under age 18 to secondhand marijuana smoke. School districts cannot refuse to enroll a student nor should they discriminate against a student who may be a permitted user of medical marijuana. Moreover, school districts cannot refuse to hire someone or fire, penalize, or threaten an employee based upon medical use of marijuana. The district is still permitted to prohibit the use of intoxicating substances during work hours or to discipline an employee for being under the influence of such substances during work hours. The Act specifies that these provisions must not be construed to permit the
palliative use of marijuana in a way that violates other provisions prohibiting palliative marijuana use in certain settings (e.g., ingesting marijuana at work, school, or other specified settings, or using it in a way that endangers the health of others).
Implication in the School Setting Regretfully, marijuana use has increased among teenagers. A December 2011 government report cited that one out of every fifteen high school students smokes marijuana on a near daily basis. The popularity of marijuana reflects what researchers and drug officials say is a growing perception that habitual marijuana use carries little risk of harm. That perception, experts say, is fueled in part by wider familiarity with medical marijuana and greater ease in obtaining it. As a general principle, medical marijuana is no different than standard marijuana. Under the federal Controlled Substances Act, marijuana is classified as a “Schedule I drug,” meaning it (1) has the potential for abuse, (2) has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the U.S., and (3) has a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug under medical supervision. Therefore, there is a growing debate concerning the personal medical use of marijuana and its legality. Medical marijuana laws are constantly changing and vary among geographical location. Federal and state laws make it a crime to use, grow, sell, or possess marijuana. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that it is illegal to use, sell or possess marijuana, even for medical use in the 2005 case of Gonzales v. Raich. However, 20 states, including Connecticut and the District of Columbia, have legalized medical marijuana; thereby removing any criminal penalties from doctors who prescribe the drug or from patients who use it within the bounds set by state law. There has been a “tug of war” between the federal and state laws concerning medical marijuana. As noted, on the one hand federal law makes it a crime to cultivate, possess, or use marijuana for any purpose. On the other hand, several states allow the medical use of marijuana. Generally, in cases where federal and state laws collide, federal law prevails, meaning that users of state-authorized medical marijuana may be subject to arrest and/or prosecution. The U.S. Government, since 2009 indicated that the Department of Justice (DOJ) would not prioritize the enforcement of federal marijuana laws on authorized users of
medical marijuana or their caregivers. In a directive issued to federal prosecutors on August 29, 2013, DOJ indicated that it will not attempt to challenge state laws that allow for the medical use of marijuana providing the drug sales do not conflict with eight new federal enforcement priorities. Those priorities include the distribution of marijuana to minors and sales that assist or act as cover for trafficking operations. Medical marijuana poses another challenge to schools as they urge students and staff to stay away from drugs. Prescription drug abuse is most common among young people. School districts face the uncertainty of how medical marijuana use should be handled in the school setting, as students are taught to stay away from drugs including prescription drug misuse. Despite marijuana having a medical benefit, it still poses the dangers that all mind-altering substances pose. As a substance that is now legal when properly prescribed by a physician, it must be treated in the same manner as any other prescribed drug that is only used in extreme circumstances. It is intended to be prescribed for extreme and unique medicinal needs and not as a first option.
Policy Implications Policy language should be considered, pertaining to medical marijuana, for both staff members and students. The legislation does not require a policy; therefore this new material is considered optional for inclusion in a district’s policy manual. Policy #5131.6, “Alcohol Use, Drugs, and Tobacco” can be revised to contain a separate, but optional, section pertaining to the medical use of marijuana by students eighteen years of age or older. In addition, two new policies for consideration have been developed pertaining to this topic. They are: (1) #4118.235/4218.235, “Medical Marijuana Standards” (Personnel), and (2) #5131.601/4118.236/ 4218.236, “Medical (Palliative) Use of Marijuana,” which is applicable to students and staff over eighteen years of age. Samples of these are available from the CABE Policy Service upon request.
7
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
Lessons from the Penguins Patrice A. McCarthy Deputy Director and General Counsel, CABE
Having had the extraordinary opportunity to travel to Antarctica and read “Our Iceberg is Melting” by John Kotter during the past year, I offer some observations that may be useful to boards of education facing challenges implementing educational reforms in a time of constrained resources. While there were no school boards to observe in Antarctica, I did have the opportunity to observe behaviors of penguins that I had only read about. For example: • Penguins are careful planners, giving great attention to detail. They carefully build their nests, stone by stone, to insure a dry nesting place for their young. • Penguins live as a group, but protect
their turf. In fact, they feel free to steal stones from the nests of their neighbors. • Penguins are vulnerable – they face significant dangers from predators including leopard seals and killer whales. • Penguins teach by modeling behavior for their young – swimming, fishing and preparing for the changing seasons. • Penguins are good communicators. Chicks recognize the sounds of their parents from an early age, even in a crowded colony. • Penguins are curious about their surroundings – human and within the colony. “Our Iceberg is Melting” offers advice for changing and succeeding under any conditions – and uses a penguin colony as an illustration. The key elements that
Professional Educator Evaluation system rolls out statewide (continued from page 1) Karen List said her district has been working on developing its teacher evaluation system “for about a year and a half.” She elaborated, “The beginning process of rolling out the teacher performance section of the plan is going very well. We have spent time—our administrators have spent over 30 hours—calibrating to make sure that we all are in agreement about what we are seeing when we watch good teaching or poor teaching.” The district has also spent a lot of time making sure teachers fully understand the new system. “We have devoted a tremendous amount of time to ensuring that our teachers really understand it and our administrators are calibrated to use the rubric as faithfully as possible and as consistently as possible,” continued List. Though West Hartford has devoted much time to the teacher performance part of the system, List pointed out that her district hasn’t “devoted time to developing student learning outcomes and what those might look like.” “We are moving a little slower than we anticipated because I had submitted a waiver request [with the SDE] and I had requested that we implement the teaching performance part of the plan in year one, and then in year two [2014-15], we would implement the student performance part of the plan,” said List. “I was told that my waiver was denied and I had to implement the whole thing in one year.” Barzee noted that, earlier this year, the Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) considered “additional implementation flexibilities” as a result of “feedback we were hearing from the field,” but partial model implementation, as West Hartford had requested, was not one of those options. “We were hearing that this really was a significant amount of work for districts in a single year,” said Barzee. “So, PEAC
did introduce a number of additional flexibilities that were offered to districts; however the one that the PEAC did not approve was partial model.” According to Barzee, each waiver request that was received was considered on its individual merits. “With respect to West Hartford, they were the only district to request a waiver from whole model implementation and we felt strongly that the PEAC and the Board agreed to other flexibilities but whole model was an expectation that all districts would do in ‘13-14,” she said. Back in West Hartford, List said another reason she requested partial implementation was the extensive work her district is doing in preparation for the Common Core State Standards. “One of the other reasons, and a big reason that I asked for a delay, is because we are in our third year of implementing the Common Core and our teachers have been working for well over a year on designing units that reflect the Common Core,” said List. “It’s teachers having a hand in the work and making it our own but basing it on Common Core State Standards,” added List. “I don’t want the fact that they’re going to be rated to interfere with what I’m hoping, what I’m actually seeing, is innovation and greater rigor through the units they’re developing for the Common Core. They’re being risk takers in the work they’re doing now and I don’t want to stifle that because they’re going to have to worry about a rating at the end of the school year.” Using student learning outcomes to rate teachers “is something different and I really would’ve liked more time to devote to getting that right,” observed List. “I don’t want to just check off a box and say we did it—I want to say, ‘this is something we all believe in and it’s going to really, over the long term, improve teaching and learning.’”
John Kotter identifies in the process of successful change are: • Setting the stage by creating a sense of urgency and pulling together the team. • Developing the change vision and strategy. • Making it happen by communicating, empowering others to act, producing short-term wins and being relentless in making the vision a reality. • Creating a new culture so the changes are sustained. Resilience and persistence are two of the qualities illustrated in Kotter’s fictional penguin colony that I observed among the penguins of Antarctica. Like Antarctica, education is undergoing its own “climate change”, with the implementation of the Common Core curriculum, new testing, and the educator evaluation and support system. A great deal of planning to implement these changes has already taken place at the state and local level, but adjustments will
be needed along the way. Communicating what these changes mean for education in your district is an important role for board members and superintendents. School board members and superintendents who are persistent, resilient and communicate well will enable their students, staff, parents and the community to embrace these new challenges and use the opportunity to improve student achievement. There really is something to learn from the penguins!
CABE Search Services is recruiting for
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS NEWTOWN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
For an update or more information on vacancies go to our website: www.cabe.org
For more information contact, CABE Search Services, 860-539-7594 Jacqueline V. Jacoby, Senior Search Consultant Paul Gagliarducci • Associate Consultant Mary Broderick - Associate Consultant Bob King • Associate Consultant P.O. Box 290252, Wethersfield, CT 06129-0252 www.cabe.org/support • Equal Opportunity Employers
8
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 You are invited to join the CABE/CAPSS Community at the Annual Conference! Is your district on this list?
Area 1 Naugatuck Plymouth Region #1 Region #6 Region #14 Region #15 Waterbury Winchester Wolcott
Area 2 Avon Berlin Bloomfield CREC East Hartford East Windsor Enfield Glastonbury Granby Hartford Manchester New Britain Newington Plainville Simsbury
Area 2 (continued) South Windsor Southington Wethersfield Windsor Locks Windsor
Area 3 Bolton Colchester Columbia EASTCONN Ellington Hampton Mansfield Stafford Tolland Willington
Area 4 Canterbury Eastford Griswold Killingly Plainfield Putnam Sprague
4
1
5
2
7
3 8
6
Bethel Brookfield New Milford Redding Region #9 Region #12 Ridgefield
Cromwell East Hampton Guilford Madison Old Saybrook Region #4 Region #17 Region #18 Westbrook
9
Area 7 Area 6
Area 5
Area 8
C.E.S. Fairfield Greenwich Monroe New Canaan Shelton Stratford Trumbull Weston Westport
ACES Branford Cheshire Derby East Haven Milford North Haven Orange Region #5 Seymour Wallingford West Haven Woodbridge
Area 9 East Lyme Ledyard Montville North Stonington Norwich Salem Stonington Voluntown
Districts with at least one CABE/CAPSS Conference registrant as of September 12, 2013.
Bridging the gap to the common core with blended learning Michelle Rutherford Apex Learning, Seattle, WA
Blended learning models, in which teacher-directed instruction is combined with digital curriculum, create studentcentered experiences that enable improved learning outcomes aligned with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Transitioning to the CCSS using traditional methods alone may be challenging to implement because the CCSS lower the grade level at which certain content is introduced and are more rigorous than many current state standards. Although the breadth of Standards coverage is reduced, students must demonstrate and apply conceptual understanding in greater depth. Curricular resources and assessments must be adjusted to match the increased rigor and bridge the gap between state grade-level concepts and CCSS gradelevel concepts. In addition, learnercentered instructional strategies must be employed to assist students during the transition. With the higher expectations of the CCSS, teachers are challenged to address disparate student needs. Blended learning is a method that makes this possible.
One challenge of any classroom is addressing each student’s unique learning needs. In a blended learning environment, Apex Learning comprehensive courses provide direct instruction and assessment, allowing each student to work at his or her own pace and focus on specific content yet to be mastered. Teachers can engage one-to-one with each student, using real-time data to monitor progress and performance, and determine the best way to help each student achieve. Blended learning enables teachers to work in more effective ways to ensure successful learning outcomes. Teachers can adopt digital content specifically designed to address the Standards as the core curriculum or to enhance instruction, pulling lessons and interactive activities into instruction with the aid of an interactive whiteboard. Digital lessons, compatible with individual student devices alows for further individualization. Students take assessments and receive individualized study plans based on assessment results. Teachers use assessment results to improve learning outcomes by grouping students by skill mastery and developing targeted instructional strategies for small-
group and individual instruction. Teachers review individual student progress and aggregate class data. This real-time access to data allows teachers to identify each student’s learning needs and provide strategic targeted intervention, re-teaching, and remediation prior to summative assessment. In each case, the digital curriculum delivers a comprehensive, Standards-based scope and sequence that enables students to access rigorous content and develop problem-solving skills. Apex Learning digital curriculum provides quality instruction and assessment specifically designed for the CCSS. Active learning keeps students engaged as they explore new concepts, apply learning, and deepen mastery of difficult concepts. In addition, data is provided for teachers to individualize instruction and fill gaps in student knowledge. This personalized approach leads to greater learning outcomes. According to the U.S. Department of Education, students participating in blended learning have opportunities to
achieve at higher levels than students receiving traditional instruction and assessment alone. Blended learning enables student-centered learning while also meeting the new Standards. Additionally, Apex Learning digital curriculum address the Standards by focusing on developing students’ skills to demonstrate conceptual understanding, show and explain their reasoning, and apply this knowledge to everyday life. Teachers have Standards-based lessons and assessments to support instruction whenever that support is needed. Using the blended model, teachers are able to meet a wide range of learning needs, are more effective, and increase student learning outcomes. To learn more about Apex Learning Solutions, visit http://apexlearning.com or email info@apexlearning.com. [Editor’s Note: Apex Learning Solutions was one of many who submitted a work-shop proposals to the 2013 CABE/ CAPSS Conference Committee. Those not selected to present at the Conference were offered the opportunity to write an article.]
9
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
CT Education Funding By Source: Updated for FY 2012 through 20151 According to this model, state funding is estimated to tick up slightly from 40% to about 41% in FY 2013-14 with a small decrease in local funding from 56% to 55%.
60% 50%
Funding Percentages
* The estimated years of 2012 through 2015 include known variables such as the additional expenditures for education reform and Teachers Retirement Board. Other education related costs at both the state and local levels are projected based on historical increases. Any variations from these historical increases could materially impact the estimates for fiscal years 2012 through 2015.
40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2006 20082009 2010 2011 Federal Funding state % local %
5%
6%
6%
6%
5%
5%
5%
5%
9%
9%
2012 2013 2014 2015 • • • •
5%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
42%
41% 41% 39% 38% 38% 41% 40% 42% 42% 37% 37% 40% 40% 41% 41%
51%
54% 54% 54% 56% 55% 53% 55% 52% 53% 53% 54% 56% 56% 55% 55%
(Endnotes) 1 CT State Department of Education, Division of Finance and Internal Operations, May 2013 (for figures through 2011). Budgeted amounts for education reform and TRB from P.A. 13247, retrieved from: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/ACT/PA/2013PA-00247-R00HB-06706-PA.htm
10
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
CABE: working for YOU Individualized Workshops • Professional Development Opportunities Legal Services • Policy Services • Representing You Statewide and Nationally Below are the highlights of activities that the CABE staff has undertaken on your behalf over the last month. We did this:
online Core Policy Reference Manual and/or online manuals posted by CABE for policy samples. The topics of greatest interest pertained to student health issues and security issues.
➤ By providing opportunities for members to learn how to better govern their districts:
• • • •
•
Participated in LEAD CT teleconference. Presented Candidates workshop at C.E.S. in Trumbull. Trained New Fairfield staff and board on the use of CABE-Meeting. Created and presented webinars for CABE-Meeting Meeting Managers on the Goals Feature, board members using CABE-Meeting, and one that provides an overview of CABEMeeting for districts interested in CABE-Meeting. Provided policy information to 26 districts, two out-of-state school board associations, one RESC and one newspaper through 33 answered requests for information or sample policies, on 28 topics. Further, districts continue to access CABE’s
•
• •
➤ By representing Connecticut school boards on the state or national level:
•
• • •
• • •
Participated in keynote panel on School Safety and Security at Arizona School Boards Association annual Law Conference. Participated in Connecticut School Attorneys Council meeting. Attended School Nurse Advisory Council meeting. Received grant applications for Community Conversations for the Graustein Memorial Fund. Provided a radio interview on WTIC on school safety and security. Participated in After School Advisory Council meeting. Attended meeting of Connecticut Commission for Educational Technology.
•
•
•
•
Participated in meetings of the Governor’s Prevention Partnership’s Audit Committee and Board of Directors meetings. Participated in meeting of the Big 6 Partnership. Met with representatives of Green Leaf Schools group. Participated in meeting of Government Relations and Resolutions Committees. Participated in Connecticut Society of Association Executives (CSAE) Idea Exchange. Participated in Mission-Based Marketing Program provided by the Hartford Foundation for Public Giving. Served on committee interviewing Executive Director candidates for CSAE.
➤ By helping school boards to increase student achievement
•
•
Held conference call with presenter for Pre-K workshop which has since been postponed due to circumstances beyond our control. Sent two issues of Policy Highlights via email listserv covering topics that affect student achievement. This included issues pertaining to impact physical activity and discipline, security issues, the principal’s roles, nondiscrimination, and gender equity.
public education:
• • •
•
•
Prepared resolutions for CABE Government Relations Committee meeting. Attended Wallingford Back-toSchool Convocation. Met with Paul Holzer, Executive Director of Achieve Hartford! Facilitated retreat for the Board of Directors of the Connecticut Association of Educational Office Professionals (CAEOP). Participated in mini-grant review committee for the Wheeler Clinic.
Attended meeting of the CAPSS Board of Directors. Answered questions about the current legal issues facing boards of education. “HOT” topics this month were: Pending referendum, executive session privileges, records retention, response time to FOI requests, and religious accommodations.
➤ By providing services
to meet members needs:
• •
•
•
• • •
➤ By promoting •
•
•
Met with UCONN graduate students on Capstone project for this year. Met with New Haven Chair Carlos Torre and new superintendent Garth Harries on CABE programs, services and other activities. Entered into an agreement to do an audit of the policy manual of Thomaston. Completed as part of the Custom Update Service Packets of new and/or revised policies for the districts of Ansonia, Columbia, East Hampton, East Windsor, Franklin, Gilbert School, Marlborough, New Fairfield, New Hartford, Newington, North Stonington, Old Saybrook, Oxford, Putnam, Region #6, Stafford, Sterling, West Haven, Westbrook, and Windham. Completed the audit of the Wethersfield Policy Manual. Currently working on audits for Bolton and Madison. Made revisions to CABE’s Model Student Handbook. Placed the manual of Orange online through the Connecticut Online Policy Service.
➤ By ensuring members
receive the most up-todate communications:
•
As part of the development of new policy manuals utilizing the Custom Policy Service, materials were prepared for Avon, Derby, Ellington, and Griswold.
Condolences Jewel Gutman, CABE President 1980-82, died recently at the age of 84. In addition to her extensive contributions to CABE, Jewel had served on the Simsbury Board of Education, the School Finance Commission, the Capital Region Education Council, and numerous other boards and commissions in Simsbury and the greater Hartford area. As a practicing attorney, she specialized in juvenile law. Her commitment to and advocacy for public education will be missed. Former State Board member, CABE President and Friend of Public Education awardee Pat Luke remembered, “Jewel Gutman was a strong and courageous leader who made the difficult decisions based on what was right and not necessarily on what was popular.” CABE extends its condolences to her family.
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
11
Technology and the role of parents in their child’s education Robert Rader Executive Director, CABE
The August 19th edition of Time Magazine contained an article called The Digital Parent Trap. It has much application to how school districts communicate with parents on the use of technology. The author, Eliana Dockerman, set up a situation in which two parents from different families who have very diverse ideas on the proper use of technology for their children. She asks, “who’s right— the mom trying to protect her kids from the perils of new technology or the dad who’s coaching his kids to embrace it?” Obviously there’s no correct answer, but we are at a time in which many school districts are about to incorporate Webenabled tablets into everyday curriculum and testing for the Common Core State Standards will be done on computer. School boards and school staff need to better help our parents with these difficult decisions. As the author points out, the “parental adage” used to be that the less time spent in front of screens (television or computer) was better. And, we have obesity, cyberbullying and negative aspects of social media for reasons to limit technology.
There are private schools that limit technology, not only in the classroom, but at home, too. But, according to the article, recent research suggests that “social-networking sites also offer unprecedented learning opportunities. “Online, kids can engage with specialized communities of interest” says Mimi Ito, an anthropologist at the University of California at Irvine who’s studying how technology affects young adults. “They’re no longer limited by what’s offered in school…Parents need to encourage that type of online learning, not limit it.” There also are benefits in cognitive intelligence for youngsters. A “recent study by SRI, a nonprofit research firm, kids who played games like Samorost (solving puzzles) did 12% better on logic tests than those who did not. And at MIT’s Education Arcade, playing the empire-building game Civilization piqued students’ interest in history and was directly linked to an improvement in the quality of their history-class reports.” Why were the effects positive? Children were engaged in the games, not mindlessly watching television or some online activities. When children were “actually doing something themselves—in the virtual worlds on iPads or laptops—that retention rate” for children goes way above the
amount remembered by students who were hearing or seeing an activity occur. According to Dockerman, this is “a main reason researchers like to say the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation of a two-hour screen-time limit is an outdated concept: actively browsing pages on a computer or tablet is way more brain-stimulating than vegging out in front of the TV.” But, early-age tech fluency is most helpful in enabling children to stay competitive. They need to become fluent on the computer or they will be left behind. While none of this suggests that children have “unfettered access to the gadget of their choice”, as with other childhood privileges, parental monitoring is a key. It would seem to me that the schools, especially those involved with pre-k and elementary education, need to provide parents with information about what is
best for learning and growing. Helpful analysis such as that in this article should be a part of what schools provide.
Here is what the article called The Good Stuff Kids Can Do With Popular Tech: CULTIVATE INTERESTS On Facebook and Twitter, there are communities to support niche passions like coding, photography and music. If you’re still worried, download Detective (Mac or PC), an activity-monitoring app. STREAMLINE HOMEWORK Apps such as WoiframAlpha (info searching) and Evernote (note taking) are the ultimate productivity assistants. If you’re still worried ... download iStudiez Pro (lOS), an assignment-reminder app. GET CREATIVE Games like Minecraft allow kids to create whole worlds from scratch, honing problem-solving end critical-thinking skills. If you’re still worried ... download the Stay-Focused plug-in (Google Chrome), which allows a parent to set site time limits.
12
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
Boards of education should partner with the Connecticut Association for the Gifted Beverly Katz
Executive Director, Connecticut Association for the Givted
The Connecticut Association for the Gifted (CAG) is your partner closing the educational achievement gap among students. CAG supports administrators, teachers, and parents to meet the needs of Connecticut’s gifted, talented, and highpotential children. We offer resources, information, advice, and programs for administrators, teachers, and parents. CAG offers Professional Development Programs which provide valuable instruction to help districts address the needs of their gifted and talented populations—whether in formalized gifted programs or in the general classroom setting—and allow educators to apply G/ T pedagogy to a broader spectrum of students. CAG instructors deliver quality training in a variety of content areas, and will customize workshops to meet your district’s specific needs. Whether your school is looking to develop or strengthen a gifted program, to better serve gifted students within the general classroom, to utilize gifted pedagogy to help students at all levels, or to educate parents regarding the needs of gifted children, CAG’s Professional Development presenters have a wealth of experience to share. They are researchers, educators, and advocates with extensive backgrounds— from K-12 classrooms to top universities—and a wealth of practical experience who present at local and international levels. Although each workshop is customized to the needs of the district, typical topics might be Nature and Needs of Gifted Students, Dealing with Intensity, Underachievement and Selective Achievement, Perfectionism, Multipotentiality, Asynchrony in Gifted Students’ Development, and many more. District and school leaders plan for educational opportunities and teacher education that meets the learning needs of all their students. However, not all schools and districts offer services for high-ability students, or have teachers with backgrounds in gifted and talented education. To help districts, CAG offers a free Administrator’s Tool Kit. The tool kit addresses: • The rationale for gifted education services • The critical elements of gifted education programming • Accountability for gifted student learning • The connection between gifted education and other district and school initiatives such as 21st century skills. Your teachers can benefit from CAG’s
Teacher Resource Group (TRG), a free professional social network for the education community. TRG is a national resource for sharing of everything gifted. One of the most difficult challenges in education is consistently and appropriately meeting the needs of G/T students. CAG’s TRG can help you meet this challenge by answering your questions, sharing information, and providing resources and support. The TRG is specially developed to help schools, districts, and teachers meet the academic, emotional, and intellectual needs of their students. Our gifted education specialists have years of first-hand experience in the classroom and at major research institutions. They are available to help you find the solutions you need. Ask the Expert – Our consultants are standing by to help. CAG members can email us for support and resources that
can help in the classroom. Free Professional Webinars – Hosted by leading gifted educators from across the country, and our partner edWeb offers free CE’s. CAG Classroom Connections – CAG teacher members receive a bi-monthly informational memo with helpful tips and strategies provided by our experienced TRG specialists. Your entire school district can join CAG through CAG’s Affiliate Program. PTAs/PTOs and administrative groups may become CAG affiliates, bringing CAG’s statewide resources directly to your community. Have a conversation around excellence in education with CAG’s help. Become a CAG affiliate and your members get these unique benefits: • Annual CAG Membership for Your Entire Group: Every member automatically receives
CABE Board meets with State Board Members State Board of Education members Bob Trefry, Steven Wright and Joseph Vrabely along with Commissioner Pryor met with members of the CABE Board of Directors on September 12. Topics of discussion were: the Common Core State Standards, the Smarter Balance assessment, and teacher and administrator evauation.
CABE Board of Directors met with members of the State Board of Education.
annual membership in CAG. No need for individuals to renew themselves when your affiliate renews; everyone renews at the same time. Affiliate members get full CAG benefits, including our monthly enewsletter, discounts to all CAG events, the latest information, resources, and research. • Your Affiliate’s Personal Webpage: Each CAG affiliate gets a free mini-website hosted within the CAG website. Post announcements, list district contacts, share information, all within the CAG website, so your members can take advantage of the extensive content and information CAG offers. • Annual Visits from the CAG Board: CAG affiliates get free yearly visits to your community or school district to help with G/T programs: a presentation on gifted education, help organizing a parent advocacy committee, hold an annual gifted ed back to school night, for example. CAG offers many exceptional resources for your educational community. Visit CAG at www.ctgifted.org and at the CABE/CAPPS Conference November 15, and learn how we can partner together.
13
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
Legal Section Kelly B. Moyher,
Senior Staff Attorney, CABE
U.S. Supreme Court address the issue of affirmative action The United States Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas recently addressed the issue of affirmative action and the related policy of the University of Texas at Austin. The Supreme Court voided the lower appellate court’s ruling in favor of the University and remanded the case, holding that the lower court had not applied the standard of “strict scrutiny”, which was articulated in the previous Supreme Court cases Grutter v. Bollinger and Regents of the University of California v. Bakke. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Fisher took Grutter and Bakke as given and did not directly revisit the constitutionality of using race as a factor in college admissions. The suit, brought by undergraduate Abigail Fisher in 2008, asked that the Court declare the University’s race-
conscious admissions inconsistent with Grutter, which had in 2003 established that race had an appropriate but limited role in the admissions policies of public universities. While reasserting that any consideration of race must be “narrowly tailored,” with Fisher the Court did not go on to overrule Grutter, which some feared to be an action that would end affirmative action. Plaintiffs Abigail Noel Fisher and Rachel Multer Michalewicz applied to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008 and were denied admission. The two women, both white, filed suit, alleging that the University had discriminated against them on the basis of their race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Texas at Austin accepts students in the
CABE Resolutions/Government Relations Committee meetings
The Government Relations Committee met on September 12, to accept the resolutions from the Resolutions Committee, for presentation at the CABE Delegate Assembly to be held on November 14. Watch your mail for Delegate Assembly registration information.
top 10% of each Texas high school’s graduating class, regardless of their race; under Texas House Bill 588, 81% of 2008’s freshman class were admitted under the plan. Applicants who, like Fisher, fail to graduate in the top 10% of their high schools, have a further opportunity to gain admission to the University by scoring highly in a process which evaluates their talents, leadership qualities, family circumstances and race. Fisher had a grade point average of 3.59 (adjusted to 4.0 scale) and was in the top 12% of her class at Stephen F. Austin High School. She scored 1180 on her SAT (measured on the old 1600 point scale, because UT Austin did not consider the writing section in its undergraduate admissions decision for the 2008 incoming freshman class). The 25th and 75th percentiles of the incoming class at UT-Austin were 1120 and 1370. She was involved in the orchestra and math competitions and
volunteered at Habitat for Humanity. During the case proceedings, Fisher enrolled at Louisiana State University, where she was in her final year as an undergraduate in 2012. In 2011, Michalewicz withdrew from the case, leaving Fisher as the sole plaintiff. The United States District Court heard Fisher v. University of Texas in 2009 and upheld the legality of the University’s admission policy. The case was appealed to the Fifth Circuit which also ruled in the University’s favor. On June 24, 2013, the Fifth Circuit’s decision was vacated by the Supreme Court , and the case remanded for further consideration in a 7-1 decision. Periodic review of race conscious policies is necessary. Policies should be strictly scrutinized and narrowly tailored and clearly show the impact and goals of the policy. Consideration of race neutral alternatives should always be considered prior to turning to race conscious means.
Running a district is hard Lighten your load with an updated policy manual
You need an up-to-date policy manual to run your district effectively. CABE can help. Our policy specialists will assist in updating your manual, ensuring your district’s policies are current and up-to-date with the Connecticut statutes.
On September 12, CABE’s Executive Director Robert Rader, Patrice A. McCarthy, Deputy Director and General Counsel, and Lisa Steimer, Senior Staff Associate for Professional Development met with three UCONN Public Policy Capstone students to talk about how they can help us to better meet your needs.
Call Vincent Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service (860) 571-7446 or (800) 317-0033 to begin updating your manual today.
14
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
School boards beware Influential national network calls for elimination of school boards Julie Underwood, J.D., Ph.D. University of Wisconsin - Madison
[Editor’s Note: We thought it might be helpful for Connecticut school board members to be aware of this organization. Its policies and positions are concerning for boards across the country.] An organization with nationwide influence is working hard to negate the decision-making and leadership authority of each school board in Wisconsin and across the country. According to the Report Card on American Education, the education agenda of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) calls for: • Reducing the influence of or eliminate local school districts and school boards. • Privatizing education through vouchers, charters and tax incentives. • Increasing student testing and reporting. • Introducing market factors into schools, particular the teaching profession. In short, ALEC seeks to undo much of the work and power of school boards.
What is ALEC? ALEC is a national network based in Washington, D.C. It describes itself as a membership organization for those who share a common belief in a “limited
government, free markets, federalism, and individual liberties.” Its goal is to create and enact model legislation, which they develop. Although identified as nonpartisan, ALEC’s members skew to the conservative end of the political spectrum and include corporations, foundations, and “think tanks.” The corporations (profit and nonprofit) pay large annual fees and pay the additional costs of sponsoring meetings. Corporate members pay to serve on their taskforces, and provide the funds for the state legislators to attend ALEC meetings. Model legislation is developed through the ALEC taskforces (e.g. health, safety, education), each co-chaired by a corporate and legislative member. In order to pass a model bill out of the ALEC taskforce, both the public and elected sides of the committee must agree. The elected officials then submit these proposals to their own state legislatures. Members of the taskforces have an interest in the topical area of the taskforce. For example, education taskforce members are representatives from the Friedman Foundation, the Charter School Association, the private school associations, and corporations providing education services. The proposals cannot move out of the taskforce without the approval of the corporate interests. The corporations involved have an interest in the areas and thus typically stand to profit financially from the proposals.
For example, two large for-profit corporate providers of virtual education, Connections Academy and K-12 Inc., had heavy involvement in the development of the ALEC model Virtual Public Schools Act. At the time it was drafted by ALEC, the chair of the education committee was a principal employee of Connections Academy. Connections Academy and K12 have reaped huge financial benefits in the states where the Virtual Schools Act has been passed. In Tennessee, K-12 Inc. received the state contract for virtual schools shortly after it passed their legislature as a no-bid contract. For this contract they received more than $5,000 per student from the state during the 2011- 2012 school year. Currently, the legislature is auditing this contract due to low student performance in the program.
ALEC Pushes Vouchers One of the key goals of ALEC is to privatize education through vouchers. Milton Friedman argued vouchers would foster competition and improve students’ learning. Experience has not borne this out. The research indicates that voucher schools do not outperform their public school counterparts. The children in voucher programs should in fact be doing better because they represent the “easier” to educate segment of the public school population. I say “easier” because, first, there are
Area meetings for Candidates running for the Board of Education C.E.S., Trumbull Elaine Whitney, Chair, Westport Board of Education and Area 6 Co-Director, talked about the time and personal commitment of being a board member.
Candidates running for the board of education met at C.E.S. in Trumbull to receive a briefing on preparing for public office.
CREC, Hartford
Candidates running for the board of education met at CREC in Hartford to receive a briefing on preparing for public office.
Lydia Tedone, Chair, Simsbury Board of Education and President of CABE, spoke about the time and personal commitment of being a board member.
far fewer students with disabilities served in private voucher schools. Second, even though they receive public funding, private schools retain the right to select, reject, and expel students through admissions and disciplinary rules. Finally, children in voucher schools come from families who are engaged enough in their children’s education to have actively moved them to the private system. Education research is clear that children with actively engaged parental or home support will clearly outperform students who do not have that support in their lives. With “easier” student voucher schools should clearly outperform the publics. Doing almost as good can hardly be called success. Voucher advocates argue that even if the academics are not up to par, at least the cost for the state is lower. Sad, and not true. First, if you are not attracting public school students to switch to private schools, the state just ends up paying tuition for those students already enrolled in the private school – this just shifts private costs to taxpayers. Second, the local schools district pays for more than the cost of the voucher; typically paying for transportation, special education and support services. Vouchers have neither shown success academically nor financially.
Reducing the Role of School Boards The ALEC agenda in education is ambitious. Model bills seek to influence teacher certification, teacher evaluation, collective bargaining, curriculum, funding, special education, and student assessment. Common throughout the bills are proposals to decrease local control of schools by local school boards while increasing control, influence, and profits of the companies in the education sector. Privatization is consistent with the interests of the corporate ALEC members. The ALEC goal to eliminate school districts and school boards is a bit shocking – but the idea is to make every school, public and private, independent through vouchers for all students. All funding is then provided to a school separately so there is no need for local school district or school board coordination, control or oversight. Personally, I believe there is a purpose for public schools and the local public oversight necessary to support and guide them. Public education was created to serve the needs of the public – ensuring that every child had access to an education that would help him/her become an active citizen, capable of participating in our democratic process. What happens to our democracy when we return to an educational system where access is defined by corporate interest and divided by class, language, ability, race, and religion? In a push to a free market education do we lose the purpose of public education? Julie Underwood, J.D., Ph.D., is a professor and the Dean of the School of Education at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. She was formerly NSBA General Counsel.
15
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013
10 Reasons why you shouldn’t miss the 2013 Annual CABE/CAPSS Conference Lisa Steimer Senior Staff Associate for Professional Development, CABE
1.
4.
5.
and implementing curricula to meet the needs of children.
6.
Find common interests and concerns If you thought your district was the only one dealing with a particular issue – think again! Attend the annual Conference to learn how other districts are dealing with specific issues, addressing concerns,
7.
Become familiar with the uniqueness of other districts Connecticut is a diverse state and to effectively educate all of children, school board members must set the example as adults respecting each other. The annual Conference provides you with the opportunity to learn more about each other by sharing concerns and successes with other districts.
Another Professional Development Resource Available to YOU! We all have read the studies that tell us what we already know, because we are living it – it is increasingly difficult to
Lisa Steimer, Sr. Staff Associate for Professional Development, presented a webinar on CABE-Meeting. Also pictured Wilmarie Newton, Webinar Coordinator.
make time for professional development. Family and work demands are such that there is very little extra time to go around. Whether you are a board member, superintendent or superintendent’s secretary CABE is making it easier for you to access important information through webinars. Throughout the year, a variety of CABE staff provide webinars live to those who register. These webinars are archived on CABE’s website after the ‘live’ presentation. If you register to participate in a live webinar, you have the opportunity to ask questions of our presenters via your computer as the
webinar takes place – much like a face-toface workshop. The current webinar offerings on CABE’s website include topics such as Professional Governance Boards = Student Success, Legislative Update, Unemployment Compensation Costs with an Emphasis on Reasonable Assurance, Alliance District Requirements, and Ten Best Practices to Avoid Liability. For CABE-Meeting subscribers webinars are available on Board Member Use and the Goals Feature. There is also a webinar available for
8.
districts interested in learning more about CABEMeeting entitled CABE-Meeting Overview. Previously recorded webinars may be accessed 24/7 on CABE’s website at http:// www.cabe.org/ page.cfm?p=354.
9.
Renew old friendships and develop new ones It is a great feeling to know you have friends across the state that you will see periodically through the year. Board members are never at a loss for conversation because they have the universal bond of children’s education to discuss.
10. Divide and conquer To gain optimum learning and to make sure your school district gets full value for sending more than one board member, develop a plan to divide and conquer. Examine the agenda, select topics of interest and send each board member to a different seminar session. Follow up and share what each has learned over dinner at the Conference or during an informal work session back in your district.
CABE Executive Director Robert Rader and Gary Brochu, President, Berlin Board of Education presented a webinar on Professional Governance Board = Student Success. Also pictured Wilmarie Newton, Webinar Coordinator.
System requirements for participating in a CABE webinar are:
PC-based attendees Required: Windows® 7, Vista, XP or 2003 Server Patrice A. McCarthy, Deputy Director and General Counsel and Sheila McKay, Sr. Staff Associate for Government Relations presented a webinar on the Governor’s Budget. Also pictured Wilmarie Newton, Webinar Coordinator.
Become a part of the solution As an association we will always have potentially divisive issues before us. When board members speak from the heart and everyone gives a little to go forward, we are a strong, unified voice for education. We come from all over the state, we have many different personal beliefs, but during the Conference we work toward common goals to advocate for Connecticut’s children. Attend the Conference to better understand the issues so we can move quickly towards developing solutions together.
Connect with other board members The opportunity to talk with others who share a common interest is invaluable. The annual Conference is the perfect place to meet individuals who share your passion for education. Talk one-on-one with people who are as energetic, committed and caring as you are. No one is a stranger for long at the Conference. The annual Conference provides an unprecedented forum where sharing and networking occur constantly.
Reenergize yourself Each of us needs to be nudged out of the rut occasionally to help us regain the fervor we possessed as a newly elected board member ready to revolutionize education. Attend the annual Conference to be inspired so that you can return home and dig in anew to make your district even better.
Exercise leadership CABE represents nearly all Connecticut school districts, and is a powerful organization. Every one of you is a “mover and shaker” in your home community. You come from every possible political agenda and yet you put that aside to pull together for children. How many other gatherings can you think of where over four hundred diverse people can gather together for a purpose as noble as the education of children? Attend the annual Conference because you want to make things happen for Connecticut’s children.
Develop your boardsmanship skills If you believe in education for children should you expect any less for yourself? Every industry and agency believes in training. Public officials need to also realize that their skills need to be constantly honed in order to remain effective. Attend the annual Conference to learn new skills that will help you become a better school board member.
Advocate for Connecticut’s children CABE’s mission is “to assist local and regional boards of education in providing high quality education for all Connecticut children through effective leadership.” Board member education and advocacy go hand-in-hand if the children are to benefit. You can be part of advocating for all of Connecticut’s children.
2.
3.
Mac®-based attendees Required: Mac OS® X 10.6 or newer
Mobile attendees Required: iPhone®, iPad®, Android™ phone or Android tablet While the staff at CABE continues to add topics that will provide our members with timely information, we recognize the value of convening a group of people for face-to-face training as well. Staff will continue to provide both forms of professional development. If you have a suggestion for a webinar or face-to-face training, please contact Lisa Steimer at lsteimer@cabe.org.
16
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013