TOWN
OF ROCKY HILL
BOARD
OF EDUCATION
BUDGET
WORKSHOP OF
Members
Present: Neil Geldof
Jennifer
Viggiano-Grosse
Nadine
Bell
Mark
Carberry
Charles
McMonigle
Rene
Rivard
Anne
Schmidt
Catherine
Vargas
Members
Absent: Peter Arico
The fourth budget workshop of the Board
of Education was held on
Pledge
of Allegiance
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
Chairman Geldof turned the meeting over
to the Finance Committee Chairperson, Mrs. Schmidt, at this time.
Mrs. Schmidt turned the meeting over to
Dr. Vautour.
Response
to Information Requests made at January 17, 2006 meeting
Dr. Vautour provided the following
responses to informational requests made at the last budget session:
Possible
Revisions to Proposed 2006-07 Budget
Dr. Vautour stated at last Thursday’s
budget workshop administration completed its presentation of the 2006-2007
budget which amounted to $25,151,642 which represented an increase of
$2,082,015, or 9.02%. The Board informed
him that a budget increase of this magnitude needs to be seriously reviewed and
Dr. Vautour made the suggestion that the
administration should come back to the Board with a list of possible areas to
consider for action depending upon the level of funding the Board wants to
submit to the town. Dr. Vautour handed
out a list of items the administration suggested and planned to provide a
rationale for each. He advised the Board
they should in no way assume that any of the items on the list aren’t
important. Rather this is an
acknowledgment that a budget of 9.02% increase may not be doable this year and,
therefore, administration has compiled some information for the Board to
consider in making a determination as to what’s in the budget that goes to the
Town Council.
Assistant Principal and Lead Teachers. Dr. Vautour explained what administration
attempted to do was look at a budget that contains the basic maintenance issues
of contractual obligations and also aspirations for growth in some areas. He explained if administration were asked
what would go first in the event the Board decides to adjust the budget
downward they would place the Assistant Principal at the top of the list. The assistant principal is needed and Board
guidelines suggest we should be adding two, but the decisions process that
administration used was to try and hold safe student/teacher contact and
resources necessary for classroom teachers to work as a baseline. So, the assistant principal was offered for
consideration. He stressed the workload for
elementary principals has increased dramatically over the years. The number of night meetings and special ed
related meetings they are required to attend continues to grow. In the event the assistant principal should
fall from the budget, we would request two lead teachers be designated and
offered stipends of $5,000 so they could help out with some administrative
tasks. There might be situations where
on a given evening the lead teacher would attend a function rather than a
principal. It might be that they are
chairing some of the staffing needs on behalf of administration. We would eliminate the assistant principal
and request two stipend positions.
Accreditation Expenses. Dr. Vautour made a proposal that we have our
elementary schools and middle school join the New England Association of
Schools and Colleges and over a seven to ten year period we would subject each
of our schools to a review based on the standards of NEASC. In the first year the costs associated would
be those for memberships in the organization.
Two years later the first of the schools would be subjected to an onsite
visit and cost for an elementary school from $5,000-$7,000. If it were the middle school it would be
$7,000-$10,000. We have placed on the
list the accreditation expenses suggesting that while they are worthwhile we
may have to forego it for a year or so.
FLES (2.0 elem. and .4 GMS). Dr. Vautour explained the world languages
proposal was a request to consider the initiation of the study of world
languages in grade 3 and moving through grades 3, 4 and 5 then handle the grade
6 component. The idea of world languages
at the elementary level is not new; it is something that was brought forth at
least three years ago and has not made it through the budget process yet. Research tells us if you are serious about
developing proficiency in world languages you must start in the elementary
grades. We start 6th grade
with exposure, and 7th grade is actual study of the language. The 6th through 12th
grade program is very strong. It would
be strengthened even more if we began the study of a language in the elementary
grades starting with grade 3.
Grade 3 Moser. Dr. Vautour originally placed in the budget a
request for the addition of a teacher at the third grade level because of
enrollment concerns. He indicated we
would probably be forced to look at placement of that class at
Special Education Tuition Placeholder. Dr. Vautour stated historically when we build
our budget we attempt to account for all known special education tuition costs
by looking at existing population and where they are currently situated. We know for example there are a number of
students out-placed in various facilities.
The Director of Special Education reviews those cases with a view
towards whether or not they will continue to be out-placed. We built the special education tuition budget
on the basis of known students and we added a factor of $30,000 for the unknown
and called it a placeholder. If this
budget is to be reduced, one of the items we would suggest the Board consider
is elimination of the placeholder.
Data Clerk. Dr. Vautour stated in his presentation to the
Board the data requirements from the State Department of Education, as a result
of state and federal legislation, such as the No Child Left Behind Act, are on
the increase and while in the past it was paper entry it is becoming almost
exclusively electronic entry which is burdening existing personnel. A request for a Data Clerk is on this list for
consideration.
Consolidate Stevens/Moser Supplies. Dr. Vautour stated in years past we had a
factor in the budget at the elementary level to attempt to address
inconsistencies or irregularities between Stevens and Moser schools relative to
supplies and materials. That factor this
year resulted in $2,541 beyond the allocation that would be made available for
Stevens students on a per capita basis.
We discussed the idea of consolidating with the ordering being done at
Stevens and materials being couriered over to Moser. We put $2,541 on this list.
Moser Furniture/Supplies. Dr. Vautour stated the suggestion the Board
consider not funding the grade 3 class at
.55 Keyboarding Teacher. Dr. Vautour stated that the No Child Left
Behind Act and the State Committee on Technology are indicating to us that by
the end of 8th grade we need to insure that every 8th
grade student is keyboard proficient. We
originally requested a full-time keyboarding teacher; we have reduced that
request by .55. We have received
information concerning research on the subject of keyboarding proficiency that
suggests a young child’s brain if subjected to 20 minutes for 20 days of
keyboarding tends to internalize that with sustained practice. With a proposal of using a .45 keyboarding
teacher, we would be able to offer 23 days of 43 minute periods of instruction
which should help us meet the challenge the state and federal government are
giving us.
.55 Strings Teacher. Dr. Vautour stated the request in his budget
that the Board consider the introduction of a strings program to complement the
strong music offerings. He offered the
observation that the “White House districts”, the districts people tend to look
to have such things as elementary world languages and strings programs and it
is his belief that Rocky Hill students should be entitled to the same. We trimmed back the request on the strings
program and would begin it at the elementary level on a modified basis, and
next year provide instruction both at the elementary and middle schools, then
the next year phase it into the high school.
Professional Development. Dr. Vautour stated they have taken a look at
the professional development account. We
had originally attempted to bring it back up to the level it was two years
ago. We have backed off and suggested
that we would reduce, if necessary, $10,000 in professional development funds.
Field Trips. Dr. Vautour stated the budget as submitted to
the Board contained an attempt to bring field trips back up to their original
levels would have entailed $6,410.
.2 Science Teacher. Dr. Vautour indicated a desire to introduce a
Biochemistry course in the high school which would have required a .2 teacher
which represents $11,420.
.2 Adaptive PE Teacher. Dr. Vautour stated with
Textbooks (keeps Calc., Trailblazers,
Creating Amer.). Dr. Vautour stated
we had a list of textbooks that we were seeking to replace. We looked and made
the statement if pushed hard we would eliminate a number of textbook requests
but we would retain the Calculus text for the high school, Trailblazers for grade
4, and one-half of the grades 7 and 8 social studies texts. We will start with
Creating America and next year, we will complete the social studies text.
Curriculum Development for Textbooks. Dr. Vautour stated with the removal of
certain textbook requests, curriculum development associated with those texts
would amount to $1,144.
He stated administration submits the
list for the Board’s consideration and pointed out that should the Board decide
it must go farther, there is considerable pain that would be associated with it
in terms of personnel.
Mrs. Viggiano-Grosse asked about the
Technology Education Program, Page 13a, Object 430, “for offset printing press
service contract, general repairs for automotive lift”, why this account is
significantly up. Mr. Turansky explained
because the auto lift needs repairs that were not taken care of in the past;
$3,000 represents the service contract, and $600 is for general repairs
throughout the department.
Mrs. Viggiano-Grosse asked about Object
730, the system tester for $4,000 and the oscilloscope for $3,000, are they for
the automotive shop. Mr. Pitocco said
yes. Mrs. Viggiano-Grosse asked if these
are new or replacements. Mr. Pitocco
said they are new. Dr. Vautour explained
the State of
Mrs. Viggiano-Grosse asked about the
tool grinder for $1,700. Mr. Pitocco
said it was damaged by a water leak in January, 2004, and is still out of
service. This tool grinder would help
with the certification program. Mrs.
Schmidt asked if insurance didn’t cover things like damage to tools. Mr. Pitocco said for some reason it wasn’t
covered, he didn’t remember the details, but would find out.
Mrs. Bell said she was under the
impression that we were going to do the study in tiers. We talked about chunks
of certain amounts. Mrs. Schmidt said
she requested from Dr. Vautour to be given the items in groupings of $100,000. She said when Dr. Vautour called he had
worked up the list and they talked about it. Mrs. Bell asked if the items are in rank
order. Dr. Vautour said, basically. If you conclude you need $100,000 removed from
the budget, we would suggest you would go to the assistant principal first and
then look at the lead teachers, etc.
Ms. Kasey Harding asked what percentage
decrease this listing represents from the 9.02% proposal. Mr. Turansky stated a little over 2%. Dr. Vautour said the list represents
approximately $500,000.
A recess was taken.
Mrs. Schmidt suggested the Board go
item-by-item for their discussion.
With regard to the Assistant Principal. There were no questions.
With regard to Lead Teachers. Mr. McMonigle asked if this is strictly an
after-hours position. Mrs. Marino said,
no. She explained that part of it is she
has to be out of the building during the school day and has teachers
covering. A discussion took place as to
how this affects the teacher’s schedule.
Mr. McMonigle asked how much time
during the school day and how much after.
Mr. Pear said 50/50. For example, next week he has two meetings after
school, a PTO meeting at Stevens and a function at
Mr. Pear also spoke that because there
are two schools; he could be at one and be needed at the other. About 50 students are serviced through the
special ed services within the two schools which could lead to 100-150 PPTs
during the course of the year. An
administrator or somebody that’s designated as an administrator has to attend
all of them. So, some of the PPTs at
Mrs. Bell asked how comfortable parents
would be attending a PPT for their child and finding a teacher that may not
have any direct contact with and knowledge of that child. Mrs. Marino said we do that now. We have a designated classroom teacher who
knows the child really well and so does school psychologist.
Mrs. Schmidt asked what the role of an
administrator is at a PPT. Mrs. Marino
said legally we have to be there. Mr.
Pear said sometimes we need to make some kind of accommodations or modifications
or sometimes we are a mediator.
Mrs. Bell asked would you expect the
lead teacher sitting in to have the authority to make any necessary
accommodations. Mr. Pear said that
person could definitely make the accommodation or refer it back to the
principal for another PPT or refer it to central office to the special ed director. Dr. Vautour said the inference is that the
administrator may have a broader picture of the list to services available and
for this to work properly the lead teacher would have to have spoken with the
principal in advance to get some sense of the direction to head in.
Mrs. Schmidt asked if the proposal for
the lead teacher is $5,000 per school.
Dr. Vautour said he would suspect they would have a lead teacher per
building with the administrators sorting out the responsibilities in such a way
that it helps them. Mrs. Schmidt asked
if the expectation because we are adding a stipend are there going to be
requirements outside of what we consider a normal school day. Dr. Vautour said, yes.
Mrs. Bell asked in a normal school day
do you have the scheduling flexibility to allow the lead teacher to be going
other places. Mrs. Vargas asked if the
principal is out of the building for the day and the lead teacher’s not going
to teach, do you have to hire a sub.
Mrs. Marino said we have to do that now; if she’s gone for an entire day
she cannot leave the building unsupervised.
Mr. Pear said he has a consortium sub in the building who, if needed,
could sub for the teacher. He explained
they do something similar to that now when a teacher has to take time out of
the class for a discipline situation we have someone cover the class. Usually, it’s somebody that’s already in the
building not an additional substitute.
It could be a juggling act a little bit, but it would be very
helpful. Mrs. Schmidt said one thing she
is concerned about is depending upon how many times you use the lead teacher
she, for example, would be concerned if her child’s teacher was out a day or a
part of a day a week. She thinks that would have to be very carefully
monitored. Dr. Vautour said that’s something
we’d have to consider.
Mrs. Marino said there are things the
lead teacher can do that doesn’t take them out of the classroom, they can use
planning time and after school to address things. Mrs. Schmidt asked about the planning time
isn’t that time when you’d work together to collaborate or the teacher’s
personal time. Mrs. Marino said personal
time.
With regard to Accreditation Expenses. There were no questions.
With regard to FLES. Mrs. Vargas asked if there is any benefit to
implementing FLES in the 6th grade.
Dr. Vautour said it makes better sense to make the introduction at the
third grade level and build up on the experience and “beef up” the 6th
grade. Mrs. Bell asked if it would be
for grades 3 through 5 and couldn’t we compartmentalize it. Dr. Vautour said you could choose to begin it
at third grade and in the second year it will go on at include fourth. Mrs. Bell asked what the cost of that would
be. Dr. Vautour said he would have to
configure that.
Mr. Ed Ciccarello asked would all third
graders go through this program. Dr.
Vautour said, yes. Mr. Ciccarello asked
if it would take the place of something else.
Dr. Vautour said, no, it would not be a pull-out mode. The model being proposed is that the world
languages teacher would team teach with the classroom teacher. The world languages teacher would give the
students in the primary grades the equivalent vocabulary for certain concepts
in science and social studies. This
would begin to develop a familiarity with vocabulary and pronunciation of the
language then when students move into the middle school they would begin formal
study including structure and grammar. Mr.
Ciccarello asked what languages would be taught. Dr. Vautour said we have not made a formal
determination, but what’s currently being considered is French and Spanish.
Mrs. Jean Merola asked where Rocky Hill
stands in comparison with surrounding towns her understanding is that Rocky
Hill is the only town without a foreign language program in elementary school. Dr. Vautour said, no. In 1993, the number of school districts that
were providing world languages beginning at the 4th grade level and
moving up was six. In 2003, the number
increased to 34 districts out of 169 districts in
Mrs. Ethna Lamontagne asked if
elementary children will be graded on the languages. Dr. Vautour said, as they move on. He stated research tells us that exposure at
the early level when the mind is much more pliable enables us to assimilate the
language.
Mrs. Bell requested numbers be
presented starting implementation at the third grade level and moving on a
year-to-year basis; on the smaller scale instead of all or nothing. Dr. Vautour said he would work out that information.
With regard to Grade 3 Moser. Mrs. Kelly Dannahey was concerned about
increasing class sizes. Mrs. Schmidt
explained the Board is considering doing that in this one case, which would
take the fourth grade over by one student in each classroom, to accommodate a
space for one third grade to come back from
Mr. Ed Ciccarello asked what the class
sizes for the grades are and what the contract language states. Dr. Vautour said the recommended range for K
through 2, is from 16-20 students; grades 3 and 4, the range is 18-22 and grade
5 is 20-24. Mr. Ciccarello asked about
contract language. Dr. Vautour said this is Board policy and not determined by
teacher contract.
Mrs. Tina Lionetti asked if there is
any discussion about whether or not in the classroom at Stevens that would be
over guidelines would there be paras assigned to those rooms to help the
teacher with the size of the class. Dr.
Vautour said we routinely look at the distribution of the students in the
elementary grades and adjust paras if needed.
If we take the grade 3 situation, we will be moving from 5 classes to 4
with an average class size of 22.3 that means one room will have .3 kids the
remaining classes will be at class size guidelines.
With regard to Special Education
Tuition Placeholder. There were no
questions.
With regard to the Data Clerk. There were no questions.
With regard to Consolidation of
Stevens/Moser Supplies. There were no
questions.
With regard to Moser Furniture/Supplies. There were no questions.
With regard to .55 Keyboarding Teacher. Mrs. Schmidt asked for the rationale of
keeping part of it. Mrs. Boutilier said
it is in regard to the technology requirement by the state to follow
recommendations to meet the requirement of assuring that students have
technological literacy by 8th grade.
Mrs. Vargas asked about the reduction
of the .45 and how that affects the plan.
Mrs. Boutilier said the current plan would give us 22 or 23 days of 43
minute periods where we could focus on keyboarding and then teach some of the
other technology components that kids currently aren’t getting.
Mrs. Bell asked with regard to the 23
days and if you look at the time kids spend on computers are those 23 days of
instruction going to overcome that. Mrs.
Boutilier said that is a concern, but right now we don’t address it until 9th
grade which is three years longer of them having to do more and more word
processing for school.
Mrs. Vargas asked if you are going to
do this in 6th grade, what happens in 7th and 8th
grade. Mrs. Boutilier explained
curriculum will be reinforced in the 7th and 8th grade
classrooms. She explained about a rubric
that was obtained a couple of years ago that is shared among the classes
delineating what was taught and what the expectation is. It lets teachers know we expect that whenever
you do have a student in the computer lab, you begin reinforcing it. Mrs. Vargas asked if currently now in 7th
and 8th grade they are being taught that. Mrs. Boutilier was talking about reinforcing
in relation to this new program. Mrs.
Vargas asked what they are doing now.
Mr. Watson said there is no formal keyboarding program until high
school.
Mrs. Vargas asked what the computer lab
is used for. Mrs. Boutilier said some
library media time is being used for intro to the library, internet safety,
etc. We do nothing for keyboarding in a
formalized fashion. We used to have it a
number of years ago and it wasn’t consistent so the skills didn’t become
automatic. Mr. Colonghi said it is also
used by teachers who put students in there to do research.
Mrs. Vargas said as with the foreign
language proposal being co-mingled with the curriculum, if a teacher is
bringing their class to the computer room to do a paper, and they are doing
papers in elementary school, why aren’t we looking over their shoulders. Mr.
Watson said first we would need a specific program to start them off. Dr. Vautour explained we are attempting to do
too much with what we have and, therefore, there’s a smattering of showing them
how to position themselves; we are talking a little bit about the keyboard,
internet safety, searching web sites, etc.
What Laura has presented is research that suggests you do a concentrated
focus on the keyboard over a period of time, and then begin reinforcing
technique as you move up in grades, as opposed to a smattering of keyboarding
and a smattering of research, etc.
Mrs. Bell asked how many days in the
wheel do you have library/media. Mr.
Watson said fifteen days total for the year.
Presently, we have the library piece as part of a wheel; kids go through
it for a 15-day period in the computer lab with the library/media person. Every fifteen days, those kids change to
something else. This current proposal would provide keyboarding for 22 or 23
days, which is one-half of a quarter, which is 45 days.
Mrs. Schmidt asked how you are fitting
it in. Mr. Watson said we are moving
other pieces of that wheel around. For
example, developmental guidance would be taken out and put in another part of
the day. There are things that can be
removed or transplanted elsewhere to make the wheel work.
Mrs. Schmidt asked whether the students
going through the program will receive instruction in the lab. Dr. Vautour explained the proposal was to
purchase 30 DANAs and carts so the lab would continue to be used for present
purposes. The DANAs would provide
opportunity for the keyboarding teacher to move from class-to-class. Mrs. Bell asked if the cost of the DANAs is
still included in the budget. Dr.
Vautour said, yes $14,000.
Mrs. Schmidt asked what you will give
up in the wheel to do this. Mr. Watson
said we are giving up sustained silent reading, developmental guidance and
study hall. Sustained silent reading we
talked about putting into the language arts portion of the day. Presently we have people monitoring the
sustained silent reading. Developmental
guidance we are working with the department and creating a schedule to put it
during the on-team portion so we can give 6th graders developmental
guidance in the beginning of the year when they need it rather than in the last
quarter of 6th grade. The 8th
graders would get developmental guidance at the end of 8th grade in
preparation of moving to the high school.
Mrs. Schmidt questioned staffing and
said you are adjusting school days and adding a .45 body to run
keyboarding. Isn’t there a “wash” for
the staff accommodating the students now; you are requesting additional staff
to cover that period again and not giving back the other staff. Mrs. Bell asked what will teachers who are no
longer covering the sustained reading and study hall periods going to be doing
when you bring in a keyboarding teacher.
Dr. Vautour said the response to that question would be best researched.
Mrs. Kasey Harding asked whether research
had been done on software that could be used maybe during study hall. Mrs. Schmidt said the issue concerns more a
lack of computers and that’s why part of the recommendation is to purchase the
DANAs which are a handheld device with keyboarding software loaded on it. Mr. Watson explained study hall may be
different than study hall as we experienced it.
It’s a little more structured - we have kids doing work who are able to
get help with work or things they don’t understand.
Mr. McMonigle asked about the state and
compliance and when does the program need to be in and how are they going to
measure it. Mrs. Boutilier said the
expectation is that by December of 2006 we have in place something to insure
technological literacy by the end of 8th grade. Her assumption is if the plan is written
indicating how we are going to do comply with the December 2006 deadline it
represents a good faith effort to comply and we are moving in the right
direction.
Mrs. Boutilier said a lot of the plan
includes the curriculum and adding the technological skills into the curriculum
which is the direction we should be going.
Mrs. Schmidt asked Mrs. Boutilier if she can include this plan in the
report when we don’t know the final budget until May. Dr. Vautour said we can include it because
what we’re submitting is a plan and it is subject to modification.
Dr. Vautour said at the minimum, we
need to alert you to what’s out there that will eventually have an impact on
us. Is the state going to jump down our
throats if it’s not in this budget year?
Probably not. But we have this
need that’s going to require some attention.
So the question becomes do we add to it now or do you want to say that’s
an item we need to revisit when we get further direction from the state. The fact is we know at some point we have to
have a response that will pass muster.
Mrs. Bell said she looks at this and
looks at the list and thinks how can we do this and not buy the textbooks we
need. We just got back on track after
years and years of not buying textbooks and getting behind the eight ball, and
here we are again ready to slip back.
She is having a hard time justifying this.
Mrs. Vargas would like to hear the
answer as to what the .45 people are doing now and what they are going to be
doing. It maybe the net affect is zero.
With regard to the .55 Strings Teacher. Dr. Vautour stated if we were to get the .45
strings teacher we would be looking at lessons in grades 4 through 8.
Mrs. Bell asked if we considered
providing lessons outside of the school day.
Dr. Vautour said they are having discussions with the music department
about having lessons outside the school day.
He said a philosophical issue that he has if it’s during the school day,
you would be looking at the placement of some of the instruction opposite other
similar lessons. Because we currently
have a music teacher at each elementary school on certain days but not enough
so you’d have to position the strings program on opposite days.
Mrs. Bell asked where lessons would be
held during the school day. Mr. Pear
said instrumental lessons at
Mrs. Schmidt asked whether the $6,670 of
equipment for the strings teacher is for books.
Dr. Vautour said it is for string instruments for instructional
use. Mrs. Schmidt suggested we don’t
provide the instruments. When her
children took instrumental violin, it was her responsibility to rent the
instrument. Can’t the instructor rent
them as well? She suggested the savings
of $6,670 be used for textbooks. Mr.
Turansky said $780 of that is for curriculum development.
Mrs. Bell asked if we can do the
strings program the same way the private lessons are done at the high school,
at least until we get our feet wet in strings and see what the interest will be
and how many kids sign up. Mrs. Boutilier
said the first concern about doing anything outside the school day concerns
what we learned from the state consultant that you don’t get the interest when
you don’t build it into the school day.
Mrs. Bell’s question is if you don’t have interest enough to take
lessons before or after school, are those students going to have the motivation
to practice. Dr. Vautour said any
district that has chosen to provide strings instrument instruction has been
able to sustain a full orchestra. He
does not think Rocky Hill students will be all that different.
Dr. Vautour over the number of years
he’s been here signaled you in a rather consistent way that there are some
ideas that at some point will need to looked at and discussed. He acknowledged that a problem overshadowing
much of the discussions is that of space concerns. He would be remiss if he said he didn’t think
strings instruction was valued. He would
be remiss if he didn’t say he thinks world language study at the elementary
level is valuable. He has been in the
district for twelve years and doesn’t want to retire without things in place,
but he is also sensitive to the fact that we are squeezing more and more into
the existing space.
Mrs. Bell said she would love to see
these plans implemented but has concerns about space and how many more things
we can squeeze into the day and wonders why we cannot start by get our feet wet
and grow it little by little.
Mrs. Vargas said her son was a
participant in the choral end of the Northern Regional Music Festival this past
Saturday in
Mrs. Schmidt asked about the rental of
instruments for the teacher. We are
taking on a .45 employee for the school system for a program we don’t have a
backlog of students to pursue. Is there
any opportunity to check with the Hartt School of Music or Falcetti Music to
see if there is a strings instructor out there that we could hire for a period
of time so while the program is building and until we see that students are
showing interest we don’t necessarily have an employee of the town. See if we can build interest that way and
consider an employee for the next budget.
Dr. Vautour said we can pursue a contract relationship. Mrs. Schmidt said she will put this on hold
for consideration at the next meeting.
Mr. Geldof said he thinks this is the field of dreams program of this budget
and if you provide a kid a violin, he will play it. He watched 20/20 when they did a piece about
education in
Mr. Ed Ciccarello said he is a music
teacher in
Mr. Ciccarello said by putting the
lessons into the day tells kids that music is just as important as reading,
writing or math.
Mr. William Pentland asked if money
that was going to be spent on instruments couldn’t be used as part of the money
for a contract service because wouldn’t someone who does a contract probably
bring their own instruments. Dr. Vautour
said those are the kinds of subjects we have to explore.
Mrs. Kasey Harding commented that she
loves the optimism that in two years we won’t have the space issues. She doesn’t think there is any parent in the
district who doesn’t believe that world language at the earliest level along
with strings and whatever else you could offer our kids, is beneficial. She believes if we could find space at
Mr. McMonigle asked and it was
confirmed that despite how the strings lessons are offered, it’s going to be on
an elective basis.
Mrs. Schmidt concluded that the
discussion of the Strings Program is TABLED pending additional information.
With regard to Professional Development. Mrs. Tracey Mozdzierz asked if cutting back
on professional development has, over the years, resulted in the teachers
having to pay for this out of their own pockets. Mrs. Schmidt explained the change and Mr.
Arico said we’ve been working on building up the account over the last three
years.
With regard to Field Trips. There were no questions.
With regard to the .2 Science Teacher. Mr. McMonigle said he doesn’t want to cut at
all. He sees this as a gateway course
and thinks it is an important one to keep.
Mrs. Schmidt agreed and would like to keep it open for
consideration. She asked if the
Bio/Chemistry combination was a double lab. Mrs. Hayward explained it is a double period
everyday. They are getting two full
sciences. Mrs. Schmidt asked if that is
with the addition of a .2 or .4. Mrs.
Hayward said with the addition of a .2 because we already have staff. Mrs. Schmidt said she would like to put this
on the “keep it” list. Mr. Carberry
asked if this is a class that depends upon enrollment. Dr. Vautour said that’s the case with all
high school courses, if we don’t have the enrollments, we don’t run it.
Mr. Rivard said he is having trouble
with all of this tonight. He is finding
it hard to look at the list and make decisions in light of the Board’s fiscal
responsibility. He doesn’t want to just throw
it out or keep it and feels he doesn’t have enough time to think about this and
give it what he believes is his fiduciary responsibility. Mrs. Schmidt agreed and asked him to keep in
mind that tonight is discussion and we are coming back on Thursday.
Mr. Geldof said Mr. Pitocco and Mrs.
Hayward provided a very good explanation of the course at the meeting last week
and it sounded very applicable to a group of students that will have an
opportunity to take two combined periods, and he’d like to keep it.
Mrs. Schmidt said to scratch it from
this list and put it on the other list.
With regard to the .2 Adaptive PE
Teacher. Mrs. Vargas questioned whether the instructor
is to address needs identified in an IEP.
Dr. Vautour said they are not; it’s a special ed issue, if the need
presents itself we will respond to it.
Mr. Watson explained they have been able to shuffle schedules in hopes
of accommodating issues for now, but it is not an optimal situation. The concern was as more compromised kids come
in, and we know we have some others coming, we are worried about being able to
meet their needs and provide the special instruction scheduling with PE teacher
availability. It is limited as to when
the student and the gym are available. It
is difficult now and our concern is that it will become more difficult and the
kids with needs would be better off.
Mrs. Vargas asked if there is the
possibility of receiving grants. Dr.
Vautour said one of the issues might be if the budget is adopted and we find
ourselves facing movement of a child or something of that nature, we might be
looking at the IDEA grant in order to prioritize some of the expenditures to
address those needs.
Mr. McMonigle asked how many kids a .2
teacher would accommodate. Mr. Watson
said it would provide another period of availability for that teacher. It depends upon the child and the
disability. As it is now, there is more
than one child who can be in the adaptive PE class depending upon the activity
being conducted. He cautioned they could
be faced with a child, who due to the physical restriction, would be just that
child and there’s no flexibility in that teacher’s schedule right now to do
that.
Mrs. Schmidt asked should we leave this
on the list and revisit it when we have a defined need. Mr. Geldof said, yes.
With regard to Textbooks (keeps Calc.,
Trailblazers, Creating Amer).
Mrs. Schmidt asked administration for the rationale for cutting the
textbooks. Mrs. Boutilier said we looked
at the absolute necessities; the calculus we’ve been asking for two years and
now that we have the math implementation specialist who agreed that is a
priority. With regard to 7th grade social studies texts, we looked
at content of the books and the condition they are in. They looked at it from the perspective of what
was essential.
Mrs. Schmidt said she would like to put
some of the textbooks back on the list.
Mrs. Vargas said she doesn’t have a problem with putting all the
textbooks back. Mrs. Schmidt said she
wouldn’t put it all back. She looked at spelling and felt it wasn’t long ago
they purchased Cast a Spell and social studies is still a question.
Mr. Ed Ciccarello asked about spelling
books. Mrs. Boutilier explained Cast a
Spell was acquired about twelve years ago and the issue of spelling raised by
teachers over the last couple of years is whether the spelling program is
producing the desired results. Teachers
brought in vendors and have learned there are other better ways of teaching
spelling. This particular program is one
of the two we are looking at.
Mrs. Vargas asked if administration has
been looking at this issue over the course of a year because she thought the
plan was to start looking as issues the year before. Mrs. Boutilier said they have been discussing
it since fall; it’s been identified as an issue for the last six years.
Mr. Geldof said shouldn’t we be looking
at this over a much longer horizon, leveling our expenditures on textbooks,
knowing what we are going to need five years down the road so we don’t have to
have this discussion. We’d have a number
in the budget on an annual basis, for example $80,000 in the district for
textbooks. We could plug that in and you
will know three years out what books are rolling into sequence. Isn’t that the right way to do this? Not a target figure, but one that we can
adhere to so we don’t have to have this discussion every year. If we get behind, we’re going to get way
behind. Dr. Vautour said we get behind
when we deviate from a range of $75,000 to $100,000 worth of textbooks. For example in 2005-06, it was $40,000 worth
of purchases so we begin the process of delaying acquisitions and we have been
trying to make a commitment that we would update our texts roughly on a
five-year cycle.
Mr. Geldof said we need to put some of
the textbooks back in. Mrs. Schmidt will
put that on the revisit list for Thursday and asked for information on the
spelling.
Curriculum Development for Textbooks. Dr. Vautour suggested a revisit of the
textbooks would require that curriculum development also be revisited.
Mrs. Vargas asked for a recap of FTEs
that were cut from the original 9.45 request. Mrs. Schmidt said the Assistant Principal is
1.0; 2.4 in FLES at this time, but that may change; 1.0 for Moser grade 3; .45
Data Clerk; .55 Keyboarding; .55 Strings; .2 science teacher is in. So, the list has been reduced by 6.35.
Dr. Vautour provided the following list
of FTEs still in: 1.0 social worker; .4 reading
teacher at Moser; .4 strategic literacy teacher at Griswold; .2 art the high school;
.2 family and consumer science at the high school. Dr. Vautour stated the .45 for keyboarding
and the .45 for strings is on a revisit list.
Mrs. Vargas said with regard to the .2 art
teacher at the high school she thought the current teacher was full-time. Are you having another teacher do another
class? Mr. Pitocco said, yes, with the
.2.
Mr. McMonigle asked about Page 31,
Original Technology Requests, 17 stations computer lab for art at $30,000. Mr. Pitocco said that’s for students that are
in the rest of the art program. They may
want to take advantage of the lab. Mr.
McMonigle said so it has nothing to do with the photo lab. Mr. Pitocco said, no. If they get into digital photography, they
will probably be taking advantage of the lab as well.
Mrs. Schmidt asked is it or isn’t it digital
art. Dr. Vautour said we have enrollment
numbers that lead us to include an additional section of art either one of
three possibilities. It is a question of
the distribution of students in those sections.
Mrs. Schmidt said she was at the
Mrs. Schmidt asked Dr. Vautour to
provide a re-summary of the FTEs (fixing Page 26) to go along with the
information he’s been asked to provide for Thursday’s meeting.
Mr. Phil Sylvestro asked about
adjustments made in some of the recommendations that the superintendent
provided this evening, and is it the Board’s intent to ask the superintendent
to look in other places to offset what is apparently going to be the joint
decision that they are not in complete agreement with all of the superintendent’s
recommendations. Mrs. Schmidt said the
purpose is to discuss every item. Board
members have asked for additional time to reconsider things and think about
them in relationship to the items presented. It is the effort of the Board in this process
to never do this in a vacuum. It is
intended to be a collaborative effort between administrators who are our
frontline people making sure that education takes place and the Board’s
responsibility to insure that education and respect our fiduciary responsibility. Everyone will go back and digest what we’ve
heard tonight. Mr. Sylvestro asked so
you will not be asking the superintendent for any further items. Mrs. Schmidt said she thinks if individual
members have questions about items they will be forwarding that during
deliberations brought forward at our next meeting.
It was determined that the next session
will be reposted and will take place on
MOTION by Mrs. Vargas, seconded by Mrs. Viggiano-Grosse, to
adjourn the budget workshop at
FAVOR: ALL
MOTION
CARRIED
Respectfully submitted,
Juanda J. Simons
Recording Secretary
Accepted by: ________________________