School Committee Meeting, 15 June 2016

School Committee Meeting, 15 June 20165 present, Mr. Gendron absentThis meeting agenda was packed as the School Committee goes on summer meeting schedules (once each month, 3rd Wednesday) for July and August.  After 3 1/2 hours, the Committee also went in to Executive Session for purposes of administrative salary/contract updates (principals, assistant superintendent, superintendent) and salary increases for unaffiliated employees (otherwise not part of a negotiating group). Special Order of BusinessPresentation and public hearing regarding the transformation of LHS Career Academy into an Innovation School. Passes (6 yea, 1 absent) with supportive statements for staff and from UTL.The designation “innovation school”, like a “Horace Mann” school is for schools that are chartered, but still under local control in funding and governance. This is a huge distinction from Commonwealth Charter Schools such as LCCPS and Lowell Collegiate. Both of these schools receive public funding on a per pupil basis but are not governed or answerable to municipal school boards. The innovation school fills a need to continue to reach out to some of our most needy and disenfranchised students with a unique and creative program that will remain under governance of the Lowell Public Schools.Unfinished Business2016/246 transfers of money - sounded as if it mainly was to expend Circuit Breaker funds so that this funding source was trimmed to the allowable limit.  Through 3 transfers, the district will be enabled to purchase additional laptop carts (1 cart per grade level per school) and to fund furnishing for the additional Grade 5 classrooms needed to accommodate the bubble at the Middle School.2016/247 Cost of Education for Children Out of District.  The amount presented $129,610 is estimated for 2015-16 (final year-end numbers available after financials close in July).Dr. Khelfaoui states that while this number is not for 2016-17, he anticipates the expense for educating 36 OOD students will be “flat” - marginally changed up or down as the number of students will remain the same, just the grade level changing.  When questioned as to meeting legalities according to state law regarding students who may also be out-of-state, Dr. Khelfaoui notes that the district can choose to accept such students but that there is no reimbursement from Commonwealth and that the OOD students who also live out-of-state cannot be included in student headcount for purposes of budgeting/funding.Public ParticipationJonathan Richmond, of TAKEOFF Space, an entity formed to encourage talented low-income students to apply to prestigious colleges reads statement relative to the rejection of his proposal for Lowell High students.Laura Ortiz, parent, advocating for more precise and inclusive language in Student Handbook which would include anaphalaxis prevention and procedures/safeguards for all students, not just those specifically hypersensitive to food allergies.Laura Ortiz, parent, advocating that when addressing rezoning, or return to neighborhood schools, that the Committee carefully consider the impact of any attempts to lift the desegragation order. Mr. Gignac clarified his position as looking at rezoning within the context of the desgregation order yet exploring whether some adjustments might be made to address transportation issues/costs and middle school population explosion.Motions2016/251 (Mr, Gignac) report on class sizes for 2016-17. (Note, during discussion of Online Waitlist, Mr. John Descoteaux reports that 56 students are committed to STEM Grade 5 for next year and 11 will be on a waitlist. This effectively ensures that the large Grade 5 class sizes warned about during budget hearings will no longer be a concern).2016/252 (Mr. Gignac) Request superintendent investigate the feasibility of rezoning (see note under Public Participation).2016/254 (Mr. Gignac) report on facility repairs and improvement projects scheduled for this summer.2016/262 (Mr. Hoey) creation of an Early Candidate pool (amended to referral to Personnel Subcommittee).Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 14 reports from the Superintendent ranging from status update on the Massachusetts Teacher Evaluation System to a thorough vetting of updates to School Handbooks.2016/236 Massachusetts Teacher Evaluation update. Follows DESE protocols for evaluations; most are completed including the evaluations of school-wide and district staff.  Report to follow (aggregated) in July.2016/260 Washington School. Principal Cheryl Cunningham and her team present what makes this school unique, special and successful.  Great presentation on the importance of character education to students.2016/264 Cultural Competency. Along with Head of School Brian Martin, very impressive presentation by Lowell High students explaining the efforts of this group to examine LHS culture in the aftermath of last fall’s racial incident.2016/265 Parent Handbooks LHS changes explained by Dr. Howe; similar changes presented by Ms. Durkin.  In light of Parent Laura Ortiz’s suggestions, Ms. Durkin to meet with Health Department.2016/241 Online Waitlist.  Parents will be able to look up waitlist status as long as they know their child’s LASID number. Most students know this from memory already as it is used for lunch check-in. Lookups by LASIDs should be quite easy to do and the waitlist will be more transparent to all. More important, the District has a well thought-out plan to check periodically with families to see if they wish to remain on the wait list for a school.  Sometimes a child may be placed in a school that was not among the family's listed choices, yet it became a good fit -- and in that case, the wait list entry is moot.  2016/268 Lowell Career Academy Innovation Plan2016/263 Task force planned to address student growth. To convene in early Fall 2016.2016/243 Legal consult (re OOD children). Attorney Hall is working with prior documentation of how/when OOD students were placed in Lowell Schools in preparation for offering legal opinion.2016/259 Report of what civics curriculum materials and programs used in schools.2016/261 STEM efforts at the High School2016/262 All principals have been contacted about school materials ordered for 2016-172016/267 Nondiscrimination on basis of gender identity2016/238 and 2016/239 List of eligible teachers and personnel reportNew BusinessItems accepted and voted favorably include purchases of new food service equipment, financial statements, and 2 donations from the District Attorney’s Office and the Lowell Police Department ($1,000 each).2016/244 Charter School Resolution was formally voted upon. Lowell will join other school districts and the Lowell City Council in support of keeping the current cap on Charter School seats. Mayor Kennedy reports the City Council unanimously voted on a similar motion during last Tuesday's meeting.In my opinion, there are many reasons for insisting on this. The state legislature habitually underfunds the charter school reimbursement account for municipalities.  In Lowell, there is a shortfall of over $1.5 million dollars caused by this underfunding - which means that some municipal program is cut or short-funded so that the money assessed the City for charter school students is paid in full.  There are many other issues of governance and accountability that divide public schools from Commonwealth Charter Schools. I would urge every voter and taxpayer in Lowell to become familiar with those issues as there will be a ballot initiative question in November.Prior to going to Executive Session, Claire Abrams, Assistant Superintendent, was recognized for her 41 years of service to the Lowell Schools. Claire has been a driving force, particularly in Mathematics, which is where I first met her. With a soft-spoken, calm manner, she has lead many curriculum efforts in Lowell., not the least being toward a mathematics curriculum that is cutting edge. Claire, it was a rare privilege to work with and for you. Your thoughtful leadership will be missed. But you are going to LOVE retirement!Meeting adjourned from Executive Session. Meeting Packet can be found here.

Sir Ken Robinson on Teaching

Subtitle: EdReformers Have Got It All WrongPerhaps you have never heard of Sir Ken Robinson before today, but I guarantee that if you are willing to spend 20 minutes to play the TED-Ed video found here, he will become someone who you can’t forget. Sir Ken, educator, speaker, author and champion of creativity, nudges us to examine what must be done in order to save education in this TedED Talk.Teaching is, afterall, “a creative profession, not a delivery system. Great teachers mentor, stimulate, provoke, engage.”Those ideas certainly resonated with me, a teacher for over 30 years. In place of lessons crafted for the students in front of the teacher, educators now are forced to follow pacing “guides” and scripted teaching manuals. You read that correctly. Teachers are provided with a script of the words to use during a lesson. Apparently, anyone can teach as long as there is a script involve.No need for gauging whether or not students are actually learning; stick to the script. Further evidence that it’s not about the processing of learning or creating a learning experience can be found in the pacing guides driving the sequence and delivery of lessons. These pacing guides assume that the scripts are a guaranteed success for every student in the room. In lock-step, every classroom must deliver the same knowledge act the exact same time. Does that make even an ounce of sense to anyone?If students in a classroom don’t understand a lesson or need more time to learn, too bad. The frenetic pace that is currently upheld in the classroom is, in truth, only useful for preparing students for testing. Until someone, somewhere, somehow understands that the humans in a classroom are quite unlike widgets on an assembly line, I fear education is destined to remain in assembly line mode, or as Sir Ken calls it, the Death Valley of creativity.Ed reformers with backgrounds in making profits need to get out of education. Education is not a profit center, it is an opportunity center. It is where young minds learn to love learning, to follow curiousity, to craft solutions to problems. It should not be the one-size-fits-all, narrowly mandated program it has become. No Child Left Behind, Race To The Top and the newest iteration of government driven education reform, the Every Student Succeeds Act, has not and will not work because each and every student is an individual with a range of needs and talents. Students will always be individuals with diverse and complicated needs. Shouldn’t education reflect that?There should be an outcry from parents, teachers, students, and the general public. From my vantage point, there are several ways to do this:

• Give equal time to non-STEM disciplines such as physical education, humanities, arts,
• End mindless paperwork tasks,
• Reduce the inordinate attention on high-stakes standardized test preparation and testing.

What would happen if, instead of training a generation of conformers, our students were encouraged to be creative and use that creativity to solve problems? What if we trusted educators to meet the needs of our students with absolutely no interference or second-guesses from corporate America’s hotshots willing to put up cash in exchange for dubious influence.We are approaching education in the worst possible way. We are killing creativity. Education reformers are getting it all wrong. All of it.

Still Ignoring the Evidence

Play - real, unstructured brain break time - is as important to a child's learning as academic time.So why are school leaders and decision-makers so reluctant to let go and allow more recess? I cringe whenever I hear a school leader lecture that there isn't enough time in a school day to increase play or unstructured time. Two reasons come to mind:

• Quantity not quality - somehow the misguided idea that number of minutes and time-on-task are larger concerns than actual learning,
• Test preparation is driving the construction of a school day.

Quantity not quality assumes that a student can maintain peak brain function and learn every second of a lesson. Ken Wesson tells us that students can attend to a lesson launch for approximately the same number of minutes as that child's age.  Here is a link to an article I posted some time ago outlining this thought as it applies to a classroom.  If we are serious about optimizing student learning and making sure academic time is effective, we should know how the brain functions. What is the point of just yammering for 60 minutes when a 10 year old brain turned off 40 minutes ago?I often hear - and truth be told, sometimes would say - that school days are packed. At one point when I taught 4th Grade, there were more minutes of instruction required within the day than there were minutes in the entire school day. And in this day and age, there is test preparation, which has to come from somewhere. Just exactly how much time gets expended to prepare students for those high-stakes tests like PARCC or Smarter Balance?Nancy Carlsson-Paige, Professor of Education at Lesley University advocates for younger students to have more time for play and unstructured learning time as does K-12 writer Caralee Adams in the article "Recess Makes Kids Smarter". Students are routinely asked not only to sit, but sit still for inordinate amounts of time when they developmentally are not ready to do so. Could misguided school policies requiring students to be on-task for long periods of time be driving the bulk of students perceived to have ADD or ADHD? Brain research makes me wonder.For more about the importance of recess, free play, and unstructured time, the New York Times Parent Blog posted an article titled "Students Who Lose Recess Are The Ones Who Need It Most". This article takes the importance of unstructured time a step further by advocating that taking away recess as a means of punishment for out of compliant behavior or for missing homework is counter-productive.  Losing recess may be a major factor in loss of self-control or executive function.Our kids need to move, they need less chair time for their physical health and for their brains for function. Why do we continue to ignore brain researchers? To quote Ken Wesson, "If your job is to develop the mind, shouldn't you know how the brain works?"

Citizens for Public Schools, 26 April 2016

Driven by an $18 million advertising campaign, those in favor of lifting the current cap on charter school seats have launched an all-out effort to increase the number of seats allocated to charter schools. This ballot initiative is one of several state-driven mandates, ruling, issues - whatever you choose to call them - that is spurring Lowellians to become more vocal advocates for our Lowell Public Schools.Last Tuesday, Lisa Guisbond (Executive Director) and Alain Jehlen of Citizens for Public Schools led a discussion and information session about about the impact of not only this ballot question, but other state education policies as well. Should it be successful, the "lift the cap" ballot initiative has the potential of transferring funding away from the Lowell Public Schools.  Why does this matter to Lowell and what impact would increasing seats have on school programs and budgets?Lisa Guisbond began the session by giving an overview of how and why charter schools began. Starting with their inception in 1993, publicly funded charter schools  have morphed over the last 20-plus years from  schools set up to try to impact learning through  innovation to schools often times managed by corporations. In Lowell, we have both models of charter schools - one run independently and another set up as a SABIS school.While Commonwealth Charter Schools are set up as chartered public schools and receive funding from the local community, there are several concerns. Accountability to the local community and demographics of the student body which often does not represent the traditional public school student body are among two of many concerns.Most communities have a limit of 9% of the foundation enrollment on charter schools seats; however, some communities - and Lowell falls in this second category - are designated differently and the limit is 18% (double). Lowell currently has 9.2% of its student population attending Commonwealth charter schools so there is room for growth or even new schools to be chartered within the City. Lisa's presentation triggered discussions about who authorizes charter schools (the state Board of Education), the current Commissioner's role in monitoring, governance (appointed boards which do not include representation from the community's governing entities). Therefore unlike traditional public schools where the elected School Committee answers to the public on how public monies are spent or how school policy is overseen, Commonwealth Charter Schools, operate with appointed boards that do not answer to the public funding the school. As Lisa pointed out, there is a prevailing sense of pro-charter support by Governor Baker, Secretary of Education (James Peyser) and the Board of Education, all of whom have had or currently have some connection to Charter Schools through their participation in and/or connections to Charter Schools.Alain Jehlen, a Somerville resident and member of Citizens for Public Schools, presented information regarding how local funding is allocated to charter schools within a district and pointed out that our very own Commonwealth does not always fund (in fact almost never) the state budget adequately to provide the legislated reimbursement to municipal budgets. The trickle down effect of the under-funding is that traditional public school budgets and/or municipalities make up the gap in funds through their own budgets.Thinking about Lowell's budget this current year, about $17 million was paid to charter schools for Lowell students and approximately $3 million was reimbursed by the Commonwealth.  That $3 million was about $1.3 million short of the state's responsibility. When there is a shortfall in the reimbursement funding, the local community must fill the gap between assessed amount and state reimbursement. In other words, a traditional public school program might need to be cut or a municipal service eliminated. Cities and towns often find themselves making difficult financial decisions because the Commonwealth does not live up to its promises.According to the DESE website, Lowell's 2016-17 assessment will be based on 1,494 students enrolled in charter schools (15,300 in traditional public schools) which represents 9.8% of the foundation enrollment.  A District payment of $18,430,028 will be assessed with the mythical reimbursement of $3,708,525 from the Commonwealth IF charter reimbursements are fully funded in the state budget. And if not.... well Lowell, already tightening fiscal belts and consolidating programs, will need to find the difference somewhere in the City's budget.The Q&A session from the group continued discussion about the impact of the ballot initiative fiscally and educationally. Several raised concerns about increasing charter seats and how that might impact the proposed budget for next fiscal year. There was some surprise to learn that if a student is counted as enrolled in a charter school on October 1, but leaves to return to the city's public schools after that, the per pupil funding stays at the charter school until the next school year.There was interest in continuing informational discussions in the near future.If you, or someone you know would like to continue to be informed about this issue, we invite you to email the local group at lowellcps@gmail.com to be added to the email list. Additional information about Citizens for Public Schools and their advocacy efforts can be found on either their Facebook page or on the web at http://www.citizensforpublicschools.org.    

Superintendent's Proposed Budget Presentation, 25 April 2016

Superintendent’s Proposed Budget Presentation, April 25, 20165 present, Mr. Gendron absent.There have been many reports that this budget season is going to be a tight one. Although the City has committed to increasing their contribution by $1 million, the school department had recently floated a budget total with an additional $1 million deficit gap.Dr. Khelfaoui was on record as against making up the $1 million deficit through cuts to classroom teaching staff (link to Lowell Sun Article). Most of the reductions proposed are achieved through retirements and some through combining programs. Mr. Frisch who is LPS' Chief Financial Officer, cautions that this budget leaves no room for salary increases in 2017.Budgeting  and Finance BasicsSeveral terms - and the source of funding - were explained by both Dr. Khelfaoui and Mr. Frisch as they introduced the budget document (link at end). For clarity, I’m including parts of that discussion here.Foundation Enrollment: the number of students attending public school in the district on October 1 of the previous year. The enrollment figure for the 2017 budget is based on the October 1, 2015 headcount.Foundation Budget: the amount of money or minimum budget a community is required to spend to ensure a quality education. This is based on the October 1 enrollment from the previous year times the per pupil spending amount, again determined by the Commonwealth.Required Local Contribution: The amount that the community is expected to contribute to the budget. It is determined through CASH + IN KIND services. In Lowell “in kind” services are such things as technology services (ex: payroll, purchasing) and maintenance (ex: plowing)Chapter 70 Aid: This is a dollar amount determined by the Commonwealth and is based on a formula that takes into consideration the financial wealth of a community. The actual amount will be an unknown until the Commonwealth’s 2017 budget is set.The DESE website holds more detail on all school financial terms and calculations.Simply stated, the formula for the School’s Budget is:Chapter 70 Aid + Required Local Contribution = Required Net School SpendingOctober 1 is a significant date in all things education. It is the date on which a school’s headcount is taken (this has been true throughout the 30 years I taught), and it is a significant date for determining not only the minimum budget for a public school district, but also is the basis for charter school assessments (once the headcount is taken in October and the money stays at the school/district no matter where that student may transfer beginning on October 2). NumbersI am certainly a novice at this, but it seems that if you enjoyed algebra and dealing with unknown variables, you will most likely enjoy budgeting for a school system.  The state contribution through Chapter 70 will be an unknown until the Commonwealth’s budget is in place, the “in kind” portion of the City’s contribution can be estimated, can’t be determined until all of those costs have been tallied (example: how much will plowing out schoolyards in 2016-2017 cost?).  Hence, the back-and-forth between City and School Departments.The proposed budget from the Superintendent looks like this:

• Foundation enrollment 15,616 students
• Times per pupil amount from State*
• Equals Foundation Budget for 2017 $183,238,362

• Foundation Budget for 2017 $183,238,362
• Less Chapter 70 aid (preliminary, best estimate to date) $138,588,381
• Required City Contribution $  44,649,981

The City contribution is an approximately $1.5 million increase over the 2016 budget.And now to break out the $44,649,981, because that City Contribution consists of both CASH and IN-KIND contributions. The cost of transportation is broken out separately. For 2017 budgeting, that amount is listed at $7,819,660. City Manager Murphy has committed to a $1 million increase in cash contribution over last year’s cash contribution, making that cash amount $19,856,851.  Breaking away the transportation costs from the cash contribution yields an actual cash contribution of $12,037,191. So,

• City’s Cash Contribution $ 19,856,851
• Less Transportation $   7,891,660
• Net Cash Contribution $ 12,037,191

From here, the City contributes indirectly (in-kind services mentioned above) to a minimum amount of $44,649,981. Those in-kind services could be set higher or end up being more money, but the requirement under state finance is that the City’s contribution is, for now, at least $44,649,981.When the City exceeds school spending, as it did last year, that’s fine; but when the City does not, the underfunded amount rolls over onto the next year’s contribution. Manager Murphy appears committed to meeting the City’s spending requirements. Historically, Lowell has fallen into both categories. A good discussion of the past spending/budgeting cycles are on the first four pages of the Superintendent’s proposed budget <link here>. * The per pupil cost is determined based on many factors, including the economy of the community and the demographics of the students served.  My understanding is that this is not just one number applied across the Commonwealth, but specific to each community. Here’s a link (http://www.doe.mass.edu/finance/chapter70/chapter-cal.pdf) with more detail for this process.What are some of the suggestions for closing the gap between an ideal budget and reality?First and foremost, both Superintendent Khelfaoui and Mr. Frisch stated that this budget is very lean and as efficient as possible. It aligns to the “pillars” of the Superintendent’s Strategic realignment plan (yet to be published, but the references to it throughout the budget are clear). There is no room for raises which should make for interesting bargaining for future negotiations with unions and non-union personnel.Some proposals for solving the cash crunch might include an increase in cash from the City, bringing increased Special Education services within the district so that students with Special Education Plans requiring resources for out-of-district services (placements can range from $55,000 to $83,000 - and up - per student) can receive education services within the Lowell Schools (presumably at a less expensive rate). Lobbying the Lowell state legislative representatives to increase programming dollars from the state to support English Language Learners (ELLs) and Special Education Students and a suggestion from Mayor Kennedy to add school zones to the district so that transportation costs savings would occur (thought to be about $500,000).Some cost savings will be achieved through retirements/attrition and consolidation of programs. The consolidation of the BRIDGE program for at-risk middle school students administered through Middlesex Community College with the Cardinal O’Connell program was discussed. Adding two fifth grade classes to the STEM School and two to the Wang to accommodate the bubble population of the incoming Grade 5 students. Cutting down requested increases in personnel (cutting the request for 21 ELL teachers to 5 for example) and consolidating administrative positions (example: 2 math coordinators will become 1 position) were also mentioned.  Dr. Khelfaoui expressed the hope that the personnel who will be losing current positions will apply for and obtain positions elsewhere within Lowell Public Schools.There will be a need to add some line items in order to achieve the savings expected through consolidations. For example, an Educational Team Chair (ETC) is needed to lessen the case load of Special Education team chairs and 6 certified behavior analysts are needed so that services to students with autism can remain in-district.The school committee had several questions about the impact of these adjustments to programs and staff and other changes in the proposed budget. Those questions and others voiced last night will be further addressed in detail at the Finance Committee Meeting which follows the regularly scheduled School Committee Meeting on Wednesday, May 2.  At that time, more detail about many of the line item changes will be provided.A link to Amelia Pak-Harvey’s Lowell Sun story summarizing the meeting can be found here.The full detail on the proposed budget is on the LPS website.

The Other Growth Our Students Need

About 10 years ago, I was introduced to the Responsive Classroom, a program that was highly supported in the school in which I worked. There are many principles of Responsive Classroom that not only make for good classroom management, but create an environment of communal trust within a classroom and a school as a whole.The first principle of a Responsive Classroom has always been important for me, a foundation of my career as a teacher: The social and emotional curriculum is as important as the academic curriculum. Recently, Edutopia and other education news sources carried the tale of how student "grit" is a key to student success.  What is grit? Self-perception, the ability to overcome inner obstacles, persistence, resiliency, self-regulation of emotions - in short, as Carol Dweck has written, it is a Growth Mindset.These ideas are essential to a child's education. They are the social and emotional curriculum that form the foundation for academic growth. And they are often missing in classrooms jammed with test preparation and curricular standards.Sandra Dunning, the Principal who introduced me to Responsive Classroom, believed in the importance of developing a community of learners. Each morning, a 30-minute block of time was carved into our schedules for the community-building of Morning Meetings, Greetings, collaborative activities that fostered this development in each student, teacher, and classroom. There was a calm, purposefulness to our classroom in those days, and when things went off the rails, as sometimes happens, our group was able to process together and resolve whatever issues had preceded it.Sadly, under the guise of "raising the bar" and increasing "rigor", by the last few years of my teaching career, the daily activities that had created and fed my students' social and emotional growth were undermined and replaced by time-on-task schedules, test preparation and packed curricula. Most mornings, we could squeeze in a Morning Greeting between breakfast and leaving for Allied Arts classes; some days we could not.Responsive Classroom Principle 4 reminds us that To be successful academically and socially, children need to learn a set of social and emotional skills: cooperation, assertiveness, responsibility, empathy, and self-control. We are short-changing our students' education when we can't attend to emotional and social growth.  

School Committee Meeting, 02 March 2016

School Committee Meeting: Wednesday, March 2, 2016All members present.This meeting, the first since February 3 due to the Winter vacation week cancellation, was extra lengthy - 37 items. The highlights are posted below.  Special Order of Business: Spotlight on Youth Mental Health First AidThis new program was funded through a $100,000 federal grant and trains staff and community members to recognize and offer resources to youth who need to be connected to mental health supports.  Not only school staff, but community members (Middlesex Community College, UTEC, Public Health nurses, Boys and Girls Club, etc.) receive an 8-hour training and in turn, become resources at their organizations for staff not yet trained.  The grant represents a collaborative effort between Project Learn and the community.No one wants to miss the signs of a mental health trauma and wonder later if there was some resource that could have helped a youth in crisis. This program sounds like it has been and will continue to be a strong support for our community’s youth who need mental health support. Although the grant funding for this program is coming to an end, the coordinators expressed confidence that the “train the trainer” model will allow the program to continue through the use of  trained in-house expertise and possibly a series of videos.MotionsThere were 5 motions on the agenda, although one (2016/91) was withdrawn (no reason given).Given the revival and renewed interest in the Citywide Parent Council, Mr. Descoteaux and Ms. Doherty, requested (2016/86) a report detailing the parent involvement in each school along with meeting times. The Superintendent’s Report (2016/101) on Parent Involvement provided some detail on the state of parent involvement at this point.  Both Mr. Descoteaux and Ms. Doherty stressed that School Site Councils (a blend of school staff and parents) and other parent involvement-based groups are mandated as part of education reform.Several schools did not submit information or submitted incomplete information pointing to the need to refocus on including parents in both school-based and city-wide decision-making. Dr. Khelfaoui was quite adamant that all schools will renew their efforts to include parents in schools.Although participation in parent involvement groups have, over time fallen off, in the past, parent input was routinely sought for such things as the school’s USIP (Unified School Improvement Plan) as well as more routine decision making such as evening events (game nights, curriculum informational nights, etc.). My opinion is that the success of any school or classroom depends on a trusting, shared relationship between parent, school (teacher), and student. It has been my experience that most parents want to know about their child’s education and want to be a part of it no matter the life circumstances that might be interferring. Renewing the Citywide Parents, increasing parent advocacy and support, and insisting that every school include parents in meaningful school discussion and decision-making will make Lowell schools strong and vibrant.Two additional motions (2016/90 and 2016/93) addressed the next school budget cycle.  Mr. Gary Frisch, the new school business administrator, has committed to preparing a draft budget by mid-April so that the School Committee can go about reviewing and approval processes prior to May 2.  Because of the tight deadline, the mid-April School Committee meeting (previously cancelled), may need to be reinstated.The final motion (2016/97) by Ms. Martin requested a standing Curriculum and Instruction subcommittee time; however, after much discussion by the committee and clarification of the protocol for scheduling subcommittee meetings as standing meetings by Mayor Kennedy, the original motion was withdrawn and a substitute motion for including the full School Committee in some activities of the subcommittee was approved.Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 12 reports from the Superintendent. Due to some confusion over 2017 February School Vacation, the School Committee meeting dates and School Calendar for 2016-17 may contain an error (to be reviewed and presented for final approval at next meeting). Several reports were responses to motions made by former Mayor Elliott about scholarship information (it sounded like communication of the two scholarship opportunities may have unintentionally slipped and that this has been remedied for the future). There was also a response to Mayor Kennedy’s STEM curriculum proposal. This information is thoroughly outlined in the packet for those wondering what STEM offerings are currently offered and what the plans for increase STEM coursework. Additionally, Assistant Superintendent Durkin offered an update (2016/89) on the LPS response to complying with new (January 1, 2016) regulations from DESE regarding student restraint.  However, the reports (see packet) are quite lengthy and the Committee needed more time to process the reports. By working throughout the  fall, the LPS has addressed the new regulations and they are compliant with the new regulations; however, the report was referred to Student Support subcommittee prior to formal acceptance.Two programs impacting student success were highlighted in this portion of the meeting: the Dropout and Recovery Program (2016/96) and Middle School Intervention Program and Policy (2016/102). There is plenty of statistical detail for both programs in the packet; however the presentation for both of these programs was quite impressive.  With collaboration and persistent effort to reach all affected youth, the drop out rate in Lowell is effectively 1.6% - an historically low number.The High School staff know exactly who has not been attending school, who is in danger of giving up and therefore dropping out, and makes a multi-prong effort to reach out to students. However, that is not the end. Through collaboration with many supportive partnerships and departments, students in danger of dropping out are only encouraged to continue schooling through meaningful and often personalized solutions and support. This enables that student to continue their education and obtain a High School diploma. Examples of such supports include allowing a student who is juggling infant/child care to come in during 2nd period to accommodate childcare arrangements, and finding ways to make up missing credits (credit recovery). Knowing how essential it is to continue to reach disengaged students and not give up on them, this is truly an effort to be recognized.Sometimes, the most effective solution is a result of looking for creative ways to solve a problem and that, it seems, is what has been the result of defunding summer school at the Middle Schools. Ms. Durkin explained that when summer school (estimated costs $250,000) was defunded, her office cobbled together about $20,000 from a variety of budget sources. With that money, the Middle Schools offered extra interventions (before/after school, Saturdays, April vacation) for students in danger of failing coursework or in danger of non-promotion. Middle School administrators reported that the interventions were far more successful than Summer School.The packet contains details for these two programs, but a suggestion might be to look for the re-broadcast of the meeting or the LTC video link for this meeting online. Discussion and presentations for the two items come up somewhere in the vicinity of the 90 minute mark.New BusinessThe biggest item from this portion of the meeting was the School Committee’s approval of the United Teachers of Lowell (UTL) and Lowell School Administrators (LSAA) contracts. The principals’ and Assistant Superintendents as well as SEIU were discussed in Executive Session. The contracts were approved quickly with virtually no discussion save the comment by Mr. Gendron that this was the best agreement for all parties along with a stated wish that the contract could have been 3 years, not two.  The negotiations on a successor contract will begin shortly.Those viewing the meeting may have wondered why Mr. Descoteaux recused himself from the vote.  Mr. Descoteaux, like I, retired in June 2016, and the recently ratified and signed contract will have a personal financial impact.  As I understand it, there will be benefit from the 0.5% increase that went into effect in January 2015 as there will be a change and adjustment in salary reporting to MTRS for the purpose of pension computations. For the uninitiated, pension amounts (funded through contributions to Massachusetts Teacher Retirement System or MTRS) are impacted by collective bargaining agreements as a retiree's pension amount is a percentage (based on age and years of service) of the average of the highest (usually the last) 3 years of remuneration. When a collective bargaining agreement has lapsed, as it did in Lowell, the reported salary for a teacher is considered tentative. In simple terms, as far as MTRS is concerned, any Lowell teacher who retired last June will need an updated 3-year salary average, and recalculated monthly pension amount.  Since Mr. Descoteaux is benefiting from the “new” contract, he must recuse himself from the vote. The meeting packet can be found here.

PARCC Week, Part 2: Pearson

If you're inside Education, you've probably got a good idea or at least name recognition for Pearson Education. And if not, well to paraphrase Lowell's own Bette Davis, "Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy ride."Pearson is a prime example of the corporate take-over culture that infects business today.  Corporate giants adhere to a business model in which companies bid and buy smaller companies or competitors, mostly to get an already successful product developed by the second company. In lieu of development, one enterprise simply raids the pantry of another company, usually keeping the piece that they want to profit from and getting rid of most everything else.Pearson has raided many of the educational publishing houses such as Addison-Wesley, Allyn & Bacon, Heinemann, Scott Foresman, and Ginn. Sadly now that Pearson owns them, many have ceased to exist as independent imprints.Once Pearson obtained the lion's share of the textbook publishing market, they moved on to the next great profit center: assessments. Pearson owns and manages the rights to several assessments that should be familiar territory to educators, such as DRA2 . Not surprising, Pearson has the rights to PARCC. Pearson was the successful bidder to the multi-year multi-million-dollar PARCC test. PARCC Inc. or PARCC Org. - Pearson has their hand in both.When the PARCC Consortium, the group banding together to use PARCC as the required standardized assessment, began, there were 26 states committed to using this test.  As State Departments of Educations got a good look at test administration, the costs, the technology requirements, and experienced the delays in score reporting, many dropped out of the PARCC Consortium. At this writing, there are SIX remaining commited to administering PARCC (Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island, plus D.C). Whether this is a factor or not, layoffs were announced this past week at Pearson.Not to worry! States can also contract for parts of the PARCC test. Offering individual test items or parts of subtests seems to be a recent development to respond to states who are, shall we say, "uncomfortable" with the PARCC test in its entirety. States like Louisiana and now Massachusetts, have floated the idea that their replacement hybrid assessment, named MCAS 2.0 in Massachusetts, may contain a significant proportion of PARCC test items.Pearson may be disappointed that the gravy train is not stopping at their corporate headquarters. However, it appears that they will manage to make a profit on PARCC one way or another.Link to next post here.     

School Committee Meeting, 02 December 2015

School Committee Meeting: Wednesday, December 2, 2015Five members present, Mr. Gendron was absent.This meeting again featured a public portion and an Executive Session. Most of the agenda items were dealt with quickly with little discussion.MotionsThere were two new motions, both made by Mayor Elliott.  Agenda Item 5 (2015/453) addressed some concerns that LHS students appeared uninformed about a Voice of Democracy scholarship opportunity. Concerns were expressed to both Mayor Elliott and Councilor Mercier, and a request for a report on what transpired leading to the lack of LHS participation was requested.Agenda Item 7 (2015/454) sparked some discussion/questions. This motion requested a vote to release the Executive Session minutes relative to updates to the UTL collective bargaining negotiations and grievance/litigation updates. While Ms. Martin expressed that releasing the Executive Session minutes (which are not public) was premature, Mr. Elliott contended that the release of this information is needed to keep taxpayers and teachers/paraprofessionals up-to-date.  The motion to release the minutes passed with Mr. Elliott, Ms. Scott, Ms. Ross-Sitcawich and Mr. Conway voting in favor (Ms. Martin and Mr. Leary voted no, Mr. Gendron was absent).I’m going to refrain from commenting here as a former UTL member. However, I would comment that releasing Executive Minutes could possibly be a limiting factor in reaching agreement during contract negotiations. It seems to me that discussion of issues and proposed solutions might be less forthright and/or there might be less willingness to compromise or seek creative resolution when the parties know that whatever is said will go through the filter of public opinion. Subcommittee Meeting NotesThree subcommittee meetings were on the agenda.  Ms. Martin reported on the Curriculum Subcommittee Meeting of Nov. 17 which highlighted current and future collaborative efforts between the University of Lowell Graduate College of Education and several Lowell Schools.  See Meeting Packet for details.  As the Personnel Subcommittee Meeting reflected a discussion regarding the CFO position, that discussion was combined with Item 15, later in the meeting.Ms. Scott reported on the Policy Subcommittee meeting during which refinements to the Weather Cancellation Policy (school cancellations and the 2-hour delay proposal) were discussed.Reports of the Superintendent

• Item 10 (2015/440) - LRTA schedule. Mr. Antonelli (Interim Superintendent for Finance) reported that conversations with LRTA resulted in increased service; however, Ms. Ross-Sitcawich reports parents contacted her regarding overcrowded buses in the afternoon. Mr. Antonelli will investigate further.
• Item 11 (2015/441) - LHS had recently committed to a violence prevention program (Mentor Violence Prevention or MVP). LHS has identified students who, along with faculty advisors, will receive this free training  via Northeastern University. The SWEAR program, referenced in Mr. Conway’s motion on 9/16, will be included in a program assessment at the end of the school year.
• Item 12 (2015/442) Ms. Durkin explained the yearly process LPS engages in regarding review of bullying prevention and intervention. Although this is mandated every 2 years, LPS does this every year and updates manuals as needed.
• Item 13 (2015/445) Mr. Curley (LPS Maintenance) met with city-side counterparts to ensure reponsibilities for efficient removal of snow. A concern is that the snow accumulated at bus stops makes waiting for buses unsafe. Ms. Ross-Sitcawich requests that school committee and LPS administrators monitor the bus stop safety issue throughout the upcoming winter.

New BusinessA new CFO (Chief Finance Officer) contract was developed through the Superintendent’s office.  The most significant changes include the removal of the sick-leave buyback provision and the addition of earned vacation time (25 vacation days, 12 sick days, 2 personal days). The vacation time earning process is similar to that of private sector companies where a portion of the maximum vacation time is earned every pay period. The District went through a series of interviews and have selected the successor to Jay Lang for a the newly-renamed CFO position. Of the 18 applicants, Kevin McHugh, former Lowell School Committee Member and currently Lynn Public School Business Manager was the successful candidiate.The vote for the contract was 5 yeas (Martin, Leary, Conway, Scott, Ross-Sitcawich), 1 nay (Mayor Elliott) and 1 absent (Mr. Gendron) Here the discussion got a little muddy as to whether the Committee was approving just the contract wording or a revision that would include Mr. McHugh’s name as CFO. However, Amelia Pak-Harvey (Lowell Sun) is reporting that Mr. McHugh was the successful candidate and has received a contracted salary of $145,000 beginning on January 1, 2016. Link here to the Lowell Sun article.The revisions to the 2-hour delay policy (Agenda Item 17 2015/450) were presented. Those revisions include

• using ConnectEd to telephone families,
• the addition of local cable access TV show as an official means of communication,
• outlining which employees would report as usual upon a school delay (cafeteria and custodial staff), and
• cancellation of before school programs in the event of a cancellation or delay.

This item passed (6 yeas, 1 absent) and Dr. Khelfaoui will update the current written policy (dated 2004) and disseminate.The discussion regarding establishing an Accountability Office was deferred until next meeting.Prior to Executive Session and Adjournment, Ms. Martin requested that the incoming School Committee members are invited to the next meeting (December 16). Dr. Khelfaoui reported that his office had already reached out to the future school committee members through a introductory coffee meeting.Following the open meeting, the Committee went into Executive Session to discuss updates to the UTL contract negotiations, litigation and grievances.The link to the meeting packet can be found here.

Connecting Dots

Nancy Carlsson-Paige, Lesley University Professor Emerita, recently stated the following during an acceptance speech for the Deborah Meier award. Dr. Carlsson-Paige cites a statistic from the DOE Department of Civil Rights which reports that 8,000 Preschool students (!) were suspended at least once in a school year.

“There is a connection, I know, between these suspensions and ed reform policies: Children in low income communities are enduring play deficient classrooms where they get heavy doses of direct teaching and testing. They have to sit still, be quiet in their seats and comply. Many young children can’t do this and none should have to."

Anecdotally I know she is right, not only for low income early childhood classrooms, but upper grades as well. Kids may not always be direct in identifying what is bothering them; they sometimes show us with their actions. They "act out" with displeasure.Brain-based research from experts such as Ken Wesson tells that children in Kindergarten are capable of 5-10 minutes direct instruction and learning before they become inattentive; fourth graders - my former wheel house - can sustain attention for 10-20 minutes.The connection is that "mini" lessons, those short and focused bursts of direct instruction beginning a learning segment, are often 20 minutes or more. And when that is followed by more pencil/paper task work, there lies a recipe for disengagement. Now extend that: what happens when a 10-year old is asked to sit and engage in a high-stakes task such as our current MCAS test? Last spring most of my students wrote from 9 am to 2:35 with a 25 minute break for lunch during Long Composition, English Language Arts, and Mathematics Tests.Teachers do what they can to make classrooms and lessons more active by allowing kids to get out of seats, work in different parts of the room, and through cooperative/collaborative learning activities. What is lacking, however, is recess and play time - time for socialization, for learning to negotiate with peers, for exercise, fresh air, and fun.Make no mistake: play time is important to every child. And yet it is the first thing to be cut back when schedules are tightened to accommodate more time on tasks.So when Dr. Carlsson-Paige is talking about a connection between allowing kids more recess and the number of discipline issues, we need to listen. Our kids are stressed out and need to get off the conveyor belt.

Exactly, sort of

Here's a quote attributed to Governor Baker's testimony during the hearings to lift the cap on Massachusetts charter schools:

We should celebrate their success and build on it

I could not agree more. Surely good practice and innovation needs to be celebrated and built upon. However, I wonder who the Governor is referring to with the word their in his statement. Surely he can't mean only Charter Schools are experiencing success that can be built upon. I refer local readers to the Murkland School in Lowell, whose success in turning around from Level 4 to Level 1 has been nationally recognized.In this YouTube clip, the governor indicates that among most successful (by what measure?) schools in the Commonwealth are Charter Schools. Where is the data for this? Does this statement mean all Charter Schools are successful simply because they are not traditional public schools? And what measure is being used to assess success? Because if the single measure for success is a high-stakes test such as the current MCAS test (or the PARCC in the future), that opens up another challenge. Is a single-shot, high-stakes standardized test the only way to measure educational success?According to the Governor and news reports there are in excess of 37,000 students across the Commonwealth on waiting lists to enter Charter Schools.  Again, where is the data for this? And why are news outlets not challenging the Governor for this data?Before a cap on the number of Charter Schools is lifted, answers need to be provided. Decisions must be based on real facts, not anecdotes or fuzzy thinking.

Food for Thought

Recently, a local FB group had an interesting discussion about cafeteria food and time allotted for student lunches.  Most of the comments noted amount of food wasted, what was consumed, and how long students had to eat. Full disclosure: I retired from teaching in June and, while I no longer observe these things first hand, I am fairly certain nothing has changed in the last six months. Many posters and parents noted that their child(ren) are allowed just 15 minutes to a) arrive at the cafeteria, b) make it through the food line, c) eat and d) clean up for the next group.  Unfortunately, this is pretty much the norm in most schools. My fourth graders had that same timeframe for their lunch experience last year and the year before that. Although it didn't happen too frequently, there were days when the line in the cafeteria was so slow that the kids were just sitting down to eat when I arrived from my own lunch break to pick the students up.What would be a reasonable time for student lunches? In a newsletter from Harvard School of Medicine titled Why Eating Slowly May Help You Feel Full Faster (link here), outlines why and how, but the short answer? 20 minutes. So those 15 minute allocations for the cafe experience are already 5 minutes short on the eating end.The whole time-on-task environment is overtaking the educational day. It takes away the teachable moment, the socialization of recess, and now healthy eating habits. Can't someone come up with an out-of-the-box solution so kids can at least eat the food in front of them?Thoughts?

Reading Licenses

When I first began teaching elementary school, the only "independent" books kids had were the books they checked out of the library. And maybe a borrowed read-aloud left of the chalk (!) ledge. Can you imagine how boring that must have been?Morphing to Reading Workshops and Daily Five gave our students opportunities to self-select books for reading independently. And of course, that was a lot more engaging for students. Kids being kids though, were they always doing the right thing at self-selection time?We teach kids explicitly how to find "just right" books that are neither frustrating nor so easy that kids don't grow as readers. In my classroom, students received a readers' license to help them remember where their proximal reading level was. (For information on how my classroom library was leveled, see The Leveled Library Project above.)The license included a digitized photo of the student created on one of the first days of school, the student's name, and a color code sticker as a reminder of what just-right-level should be the current target. Students were encouraged to choose 1 book from a level down and 1 book from a level up (the challenge) as well as 2 just-right books. I usually printed all this on a 4x6 plain index card or some heavy card stock paper.At conferencing time, the student arrived with book box and license and we'd always spend a minute or two making sure selections were a match. New color code stickers were added throughout the year as the student progressed; we'd talk about a goal or next step to work on, record that idea in the student's reading notebook and move on.Did I have students who tried to fake their way into a level because a friend was there? Some did from time to time. But I also had students who wanted to prove that they could read more challenging books. How I loved when a student was so bent on proving that higher challenging level was really "just right" that the student doubled down on effort to move forward!A "license" to read... just another way to track whether book choices match independent reading levels.

The Toyota Principle: Collaboration

Educational leaders could take a page from one of the world's leaders in the automotive industry.Lately, educational leadership types keep trying to model education after industry. One of the problems with that idea is that some aspects of successful companies seems to be conveniently forgotten. For whatever reason, leaders at national and state, and sometimes local levels don't trust highly skilled and trained professionals to know what to do.Listening to "This American Life" on NPR this weekend, I learned about NUMMI which at the time of the original story was a joint venture between General Motors and Toyota. About 15 minutes in, we hear of the Toyota principle of teamwork.Elena Aguilar, a contributor at Edutopia.com,  describes the following characteristics needed by education teams in this article posted on Edutopia, Five Characteristics of an Effective School Team:

1. a common purpose or mission
2. a safe place to take risks
3. respectful disagreement
4. trust and
5. at least one strong leader

Forward to about the 15 minute mark in this link to the story of the Nummi Plant from This American Life. It is at this point in the story, that the lessons educational leaders need to take away from Toyota and the Toyota principle seem to intersect.In the Toyota model, when a team member appears to be struggling, the other team members will ask if that struggling member needs help. This astounds the visiting GM workers. In their California plant, no one offered help; instead the line manager would scold, yell or take other punitive actions.As the interviewees continue to tell the story, we learn about the collaborative nature of the Toyota assembly line.  If there is a problem, any member is expected to voice ideas for resolution. And the ideas are truly listened to; everyone is expected to be part of the solution. According to the interviewees, it was not unusual for a worker on the line to make a suggestion (based on their own observation) and a short time later, the suggested resolution would appear.  Imagine the power of that gesture: Your expertise and opinions are vital to our success.Let's compare that with top-down educational leadership today. Teachers are told what to teach, when to teach it, how to teach it, and how long to teach it. Not much room for listening or collaboration in that model.As I listened to this transformational story, I couldn't help but reflect on what happens in educational "teams" today. One must be very brave to let the schedules slip, even though the reason for missing a "deadline" (i.e., assessment) might have a basis in sound educational practice.So called ed-reformers emboldened by their own monetary success from their time in private industry need to take a look at Toyota's success and perhaps their own business models. Listen to the experts who are working on the front lines; be more of a partner and less of a boss. And let the educational workplace become an environment safer for innovation and solutions.

We Need To Make Time for This!

I've been privileged to teach in a school that embraced the tenets of Responsive Classroom. If you've never been exposed to this program, explore this link. There is a calm sense of purposefulness in Responsive Classroom schools; it begins right from the first days of school when students are explicitly taught expectations for their own behaviors and treatment of other members of the community of learners, but also for the materials and equipment that we use in our classroom. Kids learn to manage conflicts and to care about each other.Unfortunately, much of what we used to do had to be let go. As it stands, the time demands in classrooms exceed the number of minutes in a school day. Something is always slipping out of reach. Unfortunately over the last few years, working through Responsive Classroom has nearly disappeared.The end of a school year is a time when many children feel stressed and worried. They are concerned, naturally, about leaving the comfort of their familiar classroom and teacher and sometimes their school. This is especially true for children of poverty or trauma. Any teacher who has experienced the end of the year with students with socio-economic challenges has seen the Two-Weeks-To-Go meltdowns. It is the overwhelming unknowns that create behavior challenges just when we'd all like to sit back and glide toward a finish line.I have had a challenging group of mainly girls this year. This last week they seem to be unable to stop themselves from being in each other's business. The final tip-off that things were about to blow came this afternoon when one of my students voiced that she didn't think anyone was her friend anymore and a nearby eavesdropper commented, "Well, I don't like you!". Wow! Even I was taken aback by this lack of a filter!So, we stopped what we were working on (Literary Essays), as Writing Workshop was no longer the most important thing to be accomplished. We had to fix our community so that everyone felt they were being treated civilly. We had to resolve those conflicts.Back when we "had the time" for Morning Meetings and community building, our days seemed to go better. Oh there were times when we needed to talk it out - my favorite conflict resolution activity has always been Ruth Sidney Charney's Pretzel activity - but mainly our days started and ended with warmth, calm, and a feeling that together we could accomplish most anything. What has been lost in our high-pressure, inanely over-scheduled days where we hit the ground running and don't stop until dismissal is the chance to work on interpersonal skills.Today was simply the point when students, already feeling a bit overwhelmed and unsure, let me know in no uncertain terms that they need something else. We used some of those principles that Ruth Sidney Charney advocates and cleared the air. My favorite part of today was at the end when one student asked if we could all try to "say something nice" about each other. I knew we were on our way to healing!Even if there are only two weeks left in our school year, we are going to pass on those mandated must-dos and find a way to become a community again. Every child in that class deserves to feel safe and welcomed.

Discuss Amongst Yourselves

Linda Richman was right. Throw out an open question and get the talk going.In our fourth grade classroom we've taken accountable talk to another level. We use many of the prompts that programs like Making Meaning explicitly teach, so outside of insisting on speaking patterns that first use and then play off of these stems, there were just a few new talk moves to initiate.So this year, I have taken myself out of the discussion leading role and thrown that back to students.  When we have a whole class discussion, we gather on the carpet and - this is important - face each other by sitting on the perimeter just like we do for Morning Meeting.  Why is this important? Because students can see each other and that is part of the active listening that is required in group discussions.Students must talk to each other and not to me. I throw out the question. I sometimes have to be the traffic cop when discussions go off-topic or when students in their enthusiasm forget about talking over each other. But basically, I'm out. If someone has a follow-up point, it's up to the person initiating to recognize them. And me? I get to observe students and their thought processes.Oh we've used "talking sticks", but mainly my students have gotten used to talking with each other using polite and focused discussion questions, perhaps challenging each other's thinking. Wouldn't it be awesome if the talking heads on TV could learn some of these same skills?No one has to be the sage on the stage. The students can do this. And the benefits are endless for both of us.

This Is Why

I got a new student a week ago. One with many behavioral and social and emotional issues. To be honest, reading his IEP gave me a headache. And a heartache.He was placed in my classroom because there was a rumor that he had an IEP, and I am one of two inclusion classrooms at our grade level. A few phone calls later, the IEP was faxed over from the sending district along with FBAs, token boards, and lots of indications that a pretty standard classroom might not be the placement outlined on his IEP. So, now we wait. We wait for a placement that will better fit his emotional needs, will keep him safe, and will keep his classmates safe.But while we wait, we are all trying to honor what his IEP says he needs. Each day is a new adventure for me in reaching into my professional bag of tricks and making this work. Some days have been better than others. His engaging grin sometimes appears to mask some other hurts in his life.Today, he did something so unexpected, that I know when it's time for that new placement to happen, it'll be difficult. For both of us.After making a holiday ornament as a surprise for someone at home, my new found friend brought his ornament to me. "To Mrs. Bisson, From J."  I even got a hug!Even when it's only been a week, never underestimate the power of connections to even the most disconnected child. It is why I do what I do.

Building Student Independence

I often hear what I hope are compliments when visitors walk into my classroom, and I am able to attend to this new intermission in our day's work.It wasn't always this way of course. Kids are kids.  Their natural inclination is that the moment teacher is distracted it will seem like a golden opportunity to do "something else". So, when I started reading and researching the Daily Five some years ago, I was  drawn to the idea that the students can be taught to make their own choices, that the kids can work with greater independence and self-responsibility.Before the Daily Five entered my teaching life, I felt that I needed to whip the kids into shape. I was in charge. All the kids had to do was sit back and comply - and mostly they did. But they didn't own anything. I'm sure that for most kids, that was not all that motivating.From the first day, everything - and I do mean every routine - is presented and practiced using the Daily Five 10 Steps to Independence.  For me, along with the brain-based research, this nugget of pedagogy has been the most exciting part of adopting the Daily Five model in Literacy and in Math workshops. When I say everything, I mean every single routine in our day has been practiced with independence in mind - line ups, transitions, emergency drills, finding a spot to read within the room. It sounds and often is tedious, but the end result has been that the kids know what is expected and rise to meet the expectations for increased responsibility.Learning to trust 8, 9, and 10 year olds to make good decisions isn't easy for teachers who are held accountable for everything in our current teaching environment. But building that trusting relationship is essential to the human back-and-forth that breathes life into our relationships with kids. And for me, that is worth every moment it has taken to build student independence.

The pressure to begin

Tuesday was our first day of school with the kids.  Unlike last year, I have not looped with these students. This year, everything starts at the beginning. And that is most definitely an overwhelming prospect when we teachers begin to think about what routines need to be taught. When I prepare for those first days, the burning question is "what do I want this to look like in our classroom at the end of the year?"So much of this first week is not academic; it's procedural. I don't think that's a bad thing. Many education experts advocate for building the classroom culture over the first six weeks of school. However, the pressure to start academics weighs on all of us - administrators and teaching staff. When assessments are scheduled for the first month of school, there's an implication that the academics have become the focus fairly early in the year.In the Daily 5, reading stamina - the amount of uninterrupted time students read with focus - is built one minute a day, one day at a time.  Starting at 3 minutes, I need 27 school days (5+ weeks) to build reading stamina to 30 minutes daily (a minimal goal for fourth graders).  And when I take a shortcut to get to this goal? Well, that's when some less-than-ideal behaviors pop up. Building purposeful habits can't be rushed.So if all these culture-building steps create a safe and vibrant classroom environment for kids, why don't we just do it?The pressure to start curriculum too soon is strong. Even experienced veterans start to feel the nagging pressure to be at a particular spot in the curriculum by a date carved into a calendar.  Am I trusted to assess my own students' needs, design and deliver the instruction to take them from their entry point to where they need to be at this grade level?I'm not sure I am. 

Scheduling (I'm dancing as fast as I can)

How do you start planning for a new school year? I begin with thinking about my daily schedule.At the beginning of my career, this was more problematic because teachers weren't given all the contributing factors (like lunch, recess, and special schedules) until the day before the kids came. That made for a long night before school started. This year, our principal has made the decision that lunch times will stay the same as will specials. Knowing when students will out of the classroom for allied arts and lunch is a giant help in planning for instruction.The wild card this year is that there are many mandated time allotments and not enough time in the day to meet all of them. Teachers in this district are asked to provide time on task for almost as many minutes as there are in the entire school day. That leaves no time to get to point A from point B, no time to transition kids from one activity to another, no time for recess or bathrooms. Sorry, no can do.So, today I began to triage what I hope will be our class schedule.When I try out a times on paper, I like to think about what worked with my students. I sketch and re-sketch on paper, let it simmer for a while, come back, and give it another shot. Hopefully, I have something that will make sense and be able to record these ideas on a spreadsheet before setting up any kind of plan book.My nature is that I like to mix things up halfway through the school year, but because I am teaching with a Special Education partner with an even more complicated schedule, that's not always possible. So whatever schedule I create needs to meet the mandates from our Central Office and School Committee, be natural for students, and be possibly in place for the whole 180 days.Yes, I am dancing as fast as I can, and school hasn't even started.