Leave the Drama to the Drama Department

Lowell appears to have established a personnel practice that is not, in my opinion, a winning strategy for attracting, and more importantly, keeping the best administrators to serve a large and complex school system.  The last two School Superintendents in Lowell had tenures lasting 3 years. When these former administrators first were appointed, the spirit of collaboration and cooperation was positive. And then, as often happens, the honeymoon period disintegrated. Time passed, the acrimony continues and before you can say “help wanted”, a new hiring committee formed. Oh Lowell, this is why we can’t have nice things.The School Committee agenda published on the City’s website hints at what could turn out to be an extension of this practice, this time directed toward the current superintendent, Dr. Khelfaoui. This is disturbing for several reasons:  the loss of continuity in LPS District leadership and the manner in which what appears to me to be a personnel issue, is being conducted.Right now, the Lowell Public Schools budget/financial situation is dire. The lack of funding is so critical that K-8 school libraries will no longer have a library aide to oversee them. Effectively, that will end the library access for elementary and middle school students. There have been several cuts, equally acute, at the High School level. Lack of funding is no longer a belt-tightening exercise, it is now affecting students and school services directly. Anyone paying attention knows that the amount of Chapter 70 funding allocated to Lowell’s charter schools has increased by $2 million to a total assessment of $19 million. Top that off with a state budget that chronically, and I’d say intentionally, underfunds its obligations to both ELL and low-income students (see Foundation Budget) and a charter school reimbursement that never actually receives funding from the State.  Consequently the swirling vortex of school funding has turned into a tsunami. This is not necessarily the fault of Lowell’s Superintendent of Schools.The CFO for the District has left Lowell for another Massachusetts school position. Currently the CFO position is vacant at a time when critical end-of-year reporting is in process. Three candidates for the interim CFO position withdrew before being interviewed. Does this indicate that Lowell’s reputation for being a tough gig is limiting the number of candidates willing to work here? Lowell, your reputation precedes you.And that reputation as a “tough gig” brings me to conducting and discussing personnel and evaluative issues. No doubt about it, one of the School Committee’s main responsibilities is overseeing the school superintendent. It is the body that evaluates the superintendent. [Note the last evaluation, overall “Proficient”, was completed and reported at the School Committee meeting on Dec. 20, 2017. Notes for that meeting are found here in Agenda Item 6. under "Unfinished Business].The three agenda items for the July 18, 2018 meeting (link above in Paragraph 4) which, in short, call for a document to terminate the superintendent’s employment, an immediate move to put the superintendent on administrative leave, and the appointment of a replacement from the Superintendent’s Central Office “team” telegraph that the School Committee has issues with the Superintendent’s performance since that 2017 evaluation. Shouldn’t this be a discussion held in person, either in a face-to-face meeting OR in executive session?  Putting such items out in an open meeting seems vindictive and petty, and not at all benefitting to Lowell’s schools or families. It most likely means any resemblance to a Central Office "team" has now evaporated.This is an embarrassment to our schools and our community. It does not serve Lowell’s interests now, nor will it serve in the future when a new leader for our schools needs to be selected.

Recess: How can we not?

LEJA, a local grassroots collaborative of teachers, parents, students and community allies is hard at work here in Lowell to advocate for consistency in recess allocation across all elementary and middle schools in Lowell. One would think, logically, that fair and equitable recess would be a given, but it is not.Recess time is a building based decision. Anecdotal evidence shows that in this test-crazed, performance based era of education, it is much too easy for a building administrative team to shave recess minutes away in favor of test preparation. Having recently retired from nearly 10 years as a 3rd and 4th grade teacher, I have personally experienced the pressure put on students and educators at test grades, and the response has generally been to increase test preparation time. That increase comes at a cost; the cost has historically been to reallocate recess minutes to academics and test preparation. When I tell you that more targeted test preparation does not yield higher test scores, you don't have to believe me, but you should.I empathize when schools try to carve out more test prep through less recess time. However, that doesn't make less recess the right thing to do. Research notwithstanding, there should be an expectation that children will a) have recess AND b) have a minimum of 30 minutes to re-set. There is much research that supports the need for recess (LEJA Recess Policy Guideline Proposal) including the impact on a child's brain and the manner in which children learn and the impact on executive function and social-emotional growth of children.Here's a personal story that I hope illustrates that cramming more information in without sufficient break time is a recipe for ineffective teaching:Some years ago, I attempted to learn Italian. I felt doing so would serve several purposes,  not the least of which would be an experience similar to what the children I taught as ESL learners might experience.  The class was 3 hours long without a break and conducted completely in Italian. By Hour 2, I was no longer able to retain any of the important language learning that the class was engaging in; the instructor's pace did not slow and mainly what I was hearing was nonsensical droning. By the end of Hour 3 I had a terrific headache and couldn't tell you what I had been learning. What I can vividly recall is the rush of fresh air as I stepped outside of the building. My brain needed a break not only to refresh and be ready to learn, but also so that synapses could form that would allow the connections to what I already know grow to include new information.Now apply this experience to a student in an elementary school where from 8:30 to 11:30 (3 hours) you are learning in YOUR second language English. In college we used to call this type of "learning" cramming; it was useful to varying degrees of success for retaining facts just long enough for a major exam. In an elementary or middle school it is just plain cruel.Children who reach their frustration level often show us that frustration without verbalizing it. Could the impact of a longer recess allowance reduce the number of out-of-compliance incidences in schools and classroom? Eliminating and reducing behavioral interruptions certainly would make time-on-task academics more productive for all the learners in the classroom, would it not?I challenge our school committee and local policy makers to make increased recess and priority for our children. We need to treat our children like children. When you hear someone say we cannot schedule 30 minutes of recess in our school schedules, ask them HOW can we not?

Interested parents, students, educators, and community members are encouraged to attend a Policy Subcommittee meeting scheduled for April 23, 2018 starting at 6:00 pm in the Public Schools Central Office Fifth Floor Television Studio (notice attached).

17 May 2017: Budget Hearing and Regular School Committee Meeting

All Members present for both meetings.

Budget Hearing, Part 3

Somehow in the flurry of budget activities over the last week I lost track of last night’s Budget Hearing which preceded the regular School Committee Meeting.  So if you were hoping to add a public comment to the funding proposals, you are out of luck.  The Hearing portion has ended, but there are still revisions and corrections being made to the final document. That will be voted on at the end of the month, sent to City Council and (hopefully) approved.At the start of the Budget Hearing, Mayor Kennedy announces some positive news: the Senate version of the Commonwealth’s budget includes a $611K increase for Lowell. Additionally, Mayor Kennedy has received word that the City will increase its contribution to the schools by $257K. This additional funding should enable the Schools to restore the library aide positions.The two positions that had been put in abeyance (a school psychologist and a clerk - both potentially eliminated as personnel retirements which the Schools propose not to replace), were discussed. The essence of these discussions is that, while the School Committee is appreciative of the additional funding by the City, these positions also need to be restored. Ms. Martin brings up the re-classification of the School Resource Officers (SRO). There are 3 SRO positions that are not being eliminated, but the expenses associated with them are be reclassified (for lack of a better term). Under the proposed budget, the expenses associated with 3 of the SROs will shift back to the City in order to maintain consistency.Ms. Martin reminds the members that she has placed a motion on the upcoming meeting agenda (Item 7.VIII) to requests both City and School Finance Subcommittees meet to discuss the FY18 Budget and also to review Maintenance of Effort and contracts. She advocates for leaving the budget as it sits until the discussion can take place.Superintendent Khelfaoui brings up 2 corrections to be made to budget proposal. One is a line item correction to a previous calculation and the other is to add $257K addition from the City.Mr. Gignac makes 2 motions:

• Amend line item in Account 2300 Library to reinstate Library aides (7 yeas, approved).
• Amend 5100/5200 Benefits to include the costs benefit restorations for the Library Aide positions. (7 yeas, approved)

Mr. Gignac makes a motion to fund the school psychologist position (placed in abeyance in the previous meeting) by reducing the proposed budget for substitutes (p 18 of budget, Line 207). Lots of discussion here. During the regular school committee meeting which will follow, a Report of the Superintendent details suggested substitute teacher pay increases (Item 9.I), and Ms. Doherty is concerned that the budgeted amount for substitutes in FY18 will not be enough if Mr. Gignac’s motion carries. Mayor Kennedy cautions that the City will not be favorably able to provide the additional $150K (estimated) to restore both the School Psychologist and the Clerk positions currently in abeyance. Mr. Gendron notes the potential for “salary adjustments”. After much discussion, including commentary by school psychologist, Sheela Pyles, the motion does carry. (7 yeas, approved)Ms. Martin returns to topic of Maintenance of Effort and potential impact on School FY18 Budget. Mayor Kennedy suggests that the discussions with City re Maintenance of Effort will be long and perhaps spill beyond the start of Fiscal 18.  Therefore, waiting for any impact resulting from discussion with the City side about Maintenance of Effort is not advisable.In the end, amounts in the budget book were adjusted as follows and the Public Hearing closed.

• Suspense Account increased to include Senate proposal and City increase. I believe that the new amount is $1,000,377 (in Suspense).
• Page 18: $59,700,560 (reduction in substitute account)
• Page 29: $4,501,964 (increase of 1 school psychologist)
• Total on p 11 is now $162,942,846 (7 yeas, approved)

Budget hearing adjourns and regular meeting begins.

Regular Meeting

The discussions during the Regular School Committee Meeting were quickly dispensed with. Three budget-based items to note:

1. Motion 7.VIII [Connie Martin]: Request that the Mayor facilitate a joint meeting of the Finance Subcommittees of both the Lowell City Council and the Lowell School Committtee for the purpose of discussing the FY18 Budget and the current review of Net School Spending and ongoing contract negotiations. (approved)
2. Report and Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of Wednesday, May 8 2017 [Robert Gignac, Chair]. Accepted as a report of progress. Link here.
3. Report of the Superintendent: Proposed Substitute Salary Increases. After a short disucssion to explain the research Ms. Sheehy conducted to reach the rate increases proposed, the Report was approved (7 yeas).

The agenda and supporting documentation can be found of the Lowell City Agenda and Minutes web page.

10 May 2017: About the Proposed Budget

It's budget time in Lowell and the predictions look a bit grim. I won't second guess (most) of the reasoning behind proposed budget amounts, but I am dismayed that the belt tightening has been mind numbing. As a former educator in Lowell, even without children (or grandchildren) in the City Schools, I feel compelled to speak up. Those are "my" kids who are moving along through a terrific urban district and they deserve as many opportunities as we can provide. Here's a letter that I sent to our School Committee Members this morning. I plan to attend tonight's Budget Hearing (Butler School, 6:30 pm), LISTEN and then advocate for them as best I can. I hope many of you will do this as well. Let's work together to ensure that Lowell Public Schools meet our students' needs.

Dear School Committee Members,I am writing to you today in support of one of the budget proposals, and also in hopes of engaging your support of another.As Mr. Gendron said at the last Committee Meeting, the good news is that the budget is balanced and that there has been a herculean effort to preserve current school department employees.  That being said, there is much to reflect on.I fully support the effort to create a CSA Day School to accommodate Lowell students needing services as outlined in IEPs. Bringing services that had been contracted through out-of-district placements is not only expensive, but worrisome for parents. Students receiving these services at collaboratives and other placement agencies often are on buses or vans for lengthy rides out of their community. By tapping in to talent and expertise in the area of Autism within our own education community, not only are parents and students able to eliminate long, tiring rides to service agencies, then the schools can ensure that education funding is spent judiciously in support of the children.  In my opinion, the School Committee should support this effort as a long-term solution to meeting the needs of children right here in Lowell.I am, however, deeply disappointed in the effort to eliminate Library Aides from the K-8 public schools.  As a former educator, now retired, I am concerned with the short-sightedness of this action. Library Aides not only check out materials for staff and for students, they maintain the school libraries as a welcoming environment in which to pursue literacy. Books that are in need of repair, are fixed and reshelved. New and replacement materials are added to school libraries. Weekly book exchanges are a time when students can explore new reading genres. The Library Aides also assist students using electronic card catalogues, a research skill that will be necessary as a student moves from grade to grade.  Without the assistance provided by Library Aides will these valuable literacy and library skills still exist in the coming years? I do not think they will and I wonder if in a few years, the School Committee will be decrying the loss of library skills.The budget prepared by the School Department has been trimmed, and is a representation of consensus by school administrators as to what can be done with the reduced funds coming from the City.  These fund are not adequate.I implore the School Committee to engage the City Manager and City Council in a further discussion for funding. While the loss of available funds to a larger-than-anticipated transportation bid is understandable, the loss of monies due to expansion of grade levels at local charter schools is not.Last evening’s City Council approved funding to fix the roofs at three schools. My questions are: a) will these repairs become part of the City’s in-kind contribution charged back to the school department and b) would these repairs have been needed had the City met Net School Spending amounts in prior years when those repairs may have been minor ones? And finally, c) should our current students “pay” for reduced opportunities at schools because of short-sighted budgeting that occurred in years past.I urge the School Committee members to meet with the City Council and City Manager and demand increased access to funding for one of the greatest assests in the City of Lowell: our public schools.

03 May 2017: School Committee

At last night's meeting, the School Committee met for the first time since the beginning of April. This was the first time the public got a glimpse at the proposed budget (see link within the Meeting Packet here), and the first time the rationale for the budget was shared with the public and the School Committee.The Superintendent's Contract was approved by a 5 yea (E. Kennedy, A. Descoteaux, S. Gendron, R. Gignac, R. Hoey) to 2 nay (C. Martin and J. Doherty) vote.

Spotlight on Excellence

The Spotlight on Excellence segment was dedicated to this past Spring's Knowledge Bowl competition between teams from all Lowell Public School Middle Schools, including first-time entrants from the STEM Academy (the STEM has just this year expanded to include fifth grade).  After a quick presentation by Carolyn Rocheleau, coordinator for this effort, and Liam Skinner, Principal at the Daley School (this year's winning team), Daley School students impressively and passionately spoke to the Committee about their experiences as Knowledge Bowl participants. To paraphrase one student, the Knowledge Bowl is a time when those students who love trivia and academic trivia in particular can feel the same camaraderie that students in athletic competitions feel.

Public Hearing: School Budget 2017-18

If there is a bright spot in this budget, it is that a) the Superintendent and his leadership team have crafted a balanced budget and b) the positions that are "lost" are due to retirements and not reductions in staff.  That's the good news.The proposed budget is posted online and definitely worth a look. This document is, as Paul Begala once said a morally profound document in that we fund what we value. Do we value our schools? Here's a little background on where some of the numbers come from.The cash contributed by the City to the school budget is about $3 million lower than the current fiscal year, even though the state has proposed an increase (about $5.4 million) in Chapter 70 funding. The fiscal contribution by the City to the Lowell Public Budget is made up from two parts, Net Cash and Indirect (or in-kind). Anticipated increased expenses that the City provides means that contributions in "cash" toward the School Department's budget is lower. For example, tuitions to Charter Schools will be increased as the grade levels at one of the Lowell charter schools is expanded next Fall. The transportation bid came in at a "much higher" level (if I understood Mr. Frisch correctly, approximately $1.2 million more), and there is a 4.8% increase in health insurance premiums.The City is meeting Net School Spending (a requirement from the Commonwealth) at the required level. Many of our neighbors in surrounding cities and towns fund budgets that are significantly higher (thanks to Paul Schlictman for this graphic!) and you may be wondering why. The need to add to the state's funding is necessitated by the calculations for per pupil costs are old and out of date - 25 years out of date as it turns out. Out of dat calculations lead to artificially lowere state funding (And yes, there was an effort to re-set these calculations to be realistic; however, the bi-partisan proposal to do so was not enacted by the Legislature).All of this is contributory to the proposals made for 2018 and presented at School Committee. This is a less-than-bare-bones budget and unless the School Committee can advocate for an increase in the cash contribution from the City, there will be a need for some very difficult decisions.Just a head-up to those interested in how this budget plays out: the next budget hearing will be Wednesday, May 10 at 6:30 pm (I didn't catch the location, so check the LPSD website for details). There will be a chance for the Public to speak in opposition if so desired.Library Aide PositionsOne of those difficult decisions is the proposed budget is elimination of school library aides. The proposal before the School Committee is to offer paraprofessional open positions to the aides (currently 23 positions of which 3 are long-term subs. Three library aides have decided to retire). Technically, no one will lose a position if they don't object to assuming a paraprofessional position. The libraries won't close, but library (sounds like this is just check-in and check-out books?) would be "covered" by other staff. Several Committee members expressed dismay at this development and questioned the logistics of "covering" library services.The schools have already eliminated all but the High School Librarian (Library Media Specialist). As good as the Aides are and as much as each one goes above and beyond their job descriptions to make a school library a great space for learning important library skills, this has been a detriment. To eliminate the last vestige of a library program in the elementary and middle schools is, in my opinion, a HUGE mistake, just as it was a mistake to eliminate the library media specialists and the instructional technology specialists before that.Bringing Out-of-District Placements In-DistrictThe Special Education Department has made a concerted effort to be mindful of OOD tuition costs. One of the proposals that has been in development for the last few years is to accommodate students who might be sent out-of-district (OOD) within the Lowell Public Schools.Those OOD placements often include 6-figure tuition costs and involve transporting children to collaboratives quite a distance from home.  Parents have expressed concern that their children have long bus or van rides and have expressed some preference toward including their child within the Lowell schools.  This would, in the long run, reap a cost-benefit to the School District and an educational benefit to students and their families.To meet these needs, the proposal is to create four additional Pre-K CSA (autism) classrooms to service an increased number of students district-wide. In addition, there is a proposal to create a Special Education Day School to accommodate students who have been in local CSA classrooms. By committing funds to these two endeavors, an anticipated saving of $1.7 million (in out of district placement tuitions) should result. In other words, by investing in Lowell's capacity to accommodate these students within the District and with District funding, there will be less need for OOD tuition payments.Other School Committee BusinessWhile the Budget presentation was the major focus of attention, there were two motions put forward, one of which could have possible implications for Lowell Public School budgets.7.I (Robert Hoey): Requests the Superintendent establish a task force in collaboration with City Administration to review, revise and recommend a new Maintenance of Efforts Agreement (Indirect Costs).7.II (Jacqueline Doherty): Request the Superintendent provide the committee with a report that compares the district's performance on state-required standardized tests over the last 3 years with similar urban communities. The report should highlight Lowell's areas of particular growth and weakness, as well as specify efforts and goals for improvement.For the packet which includes the budget, click here and navigate to the School Committee subsection.

05 April 2017: School Committee Meeting

School Committee Meeting 05 April 20177 Members Present, Student representative: Cole Conlin  Spotlight on Excellence & Permissions to Enter.

• Science and Engineering Fair.
• Bartlett Community Partnership School
• LHS Ice Hockey Team

Public Hearing for Interdistrict Choice: No comments from the public.  2016-17 had 30 open slots, 15 were filled.  Decision to continue the School Choice decision is made annually. Motion to recommend continued participation for grades 9-12 (30 students within grades 9-12). 7 yeas approved.MotionsThere were 8 new motions presented tonight:

• 7.I. [By Robert Gigac]: Request the Superintendent work with the City Administration to develop a plan and/or update on the capital improvement funds that were allocated for the schools. City RFP process, repairs that were determined will proceed in May.  Mr. Gignac requests looking into roof repairs and AC/Boiler repairs. Motion passes.

• 7.II. [By Connie Martin]: Requesting an update on the plan for recruiting and hiring a new Head of School for Lowell High School, including a proposed timeline for assembling the interviewing committee and any public sessions that will be part of the process. 

Registered Jonathan Richmond. Begins by speaking about LRTA passes and then proceeds to enumerate his thoughts concerning the hiring requirements and qualifications for new Head of School. Registered speaker Daniel Ouk speaks about suggestions for chosing LHS Head of School.In my opinion, the acrimonious and abrasive nature of this segment of the meeting was unnecessary and distracting from the importance of the process of selecting a new LHS Head of School. It is worth viewing this for yourself on LTC’s posting of the meeting video when that occurs. Move about 40 minutes in to the video to view this for yourself.Ms. Martin questions the process and the timeline. Superintendent Khelfaoui clarifies that there is a plan and a timeline and that the taskforce is in process. Should a person be interested in becoming part of this taskforce (approximately 15 members), that person should apply via email or snail mail to either Superintendent Khelfaoui or Anne Sheehy, Director of Human Resources, Personnel & Recruitment. Ms. Doherty is absolutely on point in suggesting the importance of including stakeholders representative of the population of Lowell High School in the taskforce. 

• 7.III. [By Steve Gendron] Request the Superintendent form a task force to interview Lowell High School Head of School applicants.

• 7.IV. [By Connie Martin] Requesting an update on the staff plans for Principals and Assistant Principals for the fy17 and fy18.

• 7.V [By Jacqueline Doherty] Request the Superintendent provide the committee with the DESE School Climate Survey along with recommendations as to whether we should implement the survey or some other instrument. The recommendations should also include timelines for beginning to collect baseline data about school climate, family involvement, or other aspects that address the education of the whole child.

Mitchell Chester (DESE Commissioner) has announced (link here) that, following MCAS 2.0 testing this year, students in Grades 5, 8, and 10 will be asked to complete a survey about school climate. DESE claims that the results will not be disaggregated nor used in any significant manner, so my question is WHY subject students to this “optional” survey right after the completion of a high-stakes and draining academic test? According the Dr. Chester’s update, parents and students can refuse to complete the survey; in fact, some entire districts have already decided not to administer this DESE survey. It doesn’t sound like LPS is going to do that. Also, according to DESE’s update reference above, parents can request that principals and/or superintendent show the survey questions to them.What was confusing throughout the discussion is that Lowell Public Schools is part of a consortium of school districts developing a more thorough and valid survey of community education stakeholders that will hopefully become part of a more thorough and thoughtful analysis of the public school system.  This consortium survey is in draft form and not yet ready for administration to student from what I understand.

• 7.VI [By Steve Gendron] Request the Superintendent work with the City and the LRTA to develop a program to provide free bus passes to Lowell High School students based on financial need.

• 7.VII [By Connie Martin] Requesting that the administration provide the committee with an update on plans to accommodate the middle school bubble for the FY17-18 school year.

• 7.VIII [By Robert J. Hoey] Request Superintendent conduct a review of safety and security in our schools.

Joint Finance and Student Support Services Subcommittee report on meeting 3/29/17. John Descoteaux presented a draft plan for a 5-zone system (eliminating city-wide). The current desegregation order would stay in place. The issue is complicated by costs for busing (the Cawley option for LHS would need 26 additional buses or a projected $3.2 million plus additional amounts for future years). Start/dismissal times would need adjustment as well. The endeavor needs further study, which was the recommendation from the subcommittees. Mayor Kennedy notes the cost of busing is going to increase substantially over time and that some of the proposed zones will be unfair to 2 neighborhoods. The K-8 model being proposed to accommodate a 5-zone system will necessitate additional teachers. Mayor Kennedy supports a more thorough look at how the schools provide transportation in order to potentially increase efficiency. Motion to accept.There were 3 Reports from the Superintendent and 2 items under New Business:

• Report: Tutoring Services offered by Dharma Center
• Report: Community Service Update
• Report: Quarterly Report on Motions
• New Business: Interdistrict Choice (Voted on previously)
• New Business: Farm to School Research Project

For anyone looking for the full meeting packet and agenda, please navigate to the City of Lowell's Agenda/Minutes website.

School Committee Meeting, 15 March 2017

Imagine for a moment that you are 10 years old, speak another language at home, and as kids sometimes do, have heard the adults in your family expressing concern about Immigration returning you and your family to another country where your life had been one filled with violence and poverty.  Worries about being removed from this new place where you had felt safe might naturally fill your waking thoughts. And those worries would, of course, extend to the place where you, a ten-year-old, spends the greater part of each day: your school. Last night, the Lowell School Committee ensured that, at least within the walls of school, a child whose family's immigration status might be called in to question could know that they would not be forcibly removed from their school and classmates. While the School Committee's motion and School Department's response is reassuring for that child during time spent within the school setting, there is no guarantee of protection outside of it. Whether a 10-year-old refugee can differentiate that remains to be seen.School Committee Meeting 15 March 20175 members present (Ms. Martin absent), Student representative: Onoste OmoyeniSpotlight on Excellence & Permissions to Enter.Please refer to packet and agenda. LTC neglected to start the broadcast at the beginning of this meeting.MotionsSix motions :

• 6.I. [By Jacqueline Doherty]: Request the Superintendent provide the committee with recommendations for increasing the compensation of our Substitute Teachers to be competitive in today’s education market along with the data to support such increases. Request the Superintendent provide the committee with recommendations for increasing the compensation of our Substitute Teachers to be competitive in today’s education market along with the data to support such increases.

• 6.II. [By Jacqueline Doherty]: Request the Superintendent ensure the LPS website is updated, links to packet reports are working, and each school page provides information on its School Site Council members, meeting times, agendas, and minutes along with other relevant school-specific dates, events and information. THIS IS WHERE THE MEETING COVERAGE BEGINS. 

• 6.III. [By Steve Gendron] Request the Superintendent develop a class size policy for Lowell Public Schools that includes current status and goals for all grades K- 12.

• 6.IV. [By Connie Martin And Robert Gignac] Request that the Administration prepare a resolution for consideration by the Lowell School Committee that clearly defines the district's commitment to protecting our students, regardless of their immigration status and offers all LPS staff a clear procedure for ensuring that no Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials will be granted access to the Lowell Public Schools without the expressed permission of the Superintendent of Schools.

Taking Item 8.7 (resolution) which is the response at the same time. There was mention of a registered speaker, but that person did not materialize. The motion and response found in 8.VII are a response to discussion with Superintendent re families who had received letters from Immigration about their immigration status. Mr. Gignac feels it is imperative that the SC takes a formal position so that students do not feel unsafe or fearful while they are in school.Mr. Hoey asks Superintendent if this resolution could negatively impact government grants. When the City Council took up the Sanctuary City issue earlier this year, one of the reasons for not supporting such a motion was that the City, highly dependent upon federal funding, could possibly find those funds removed or suspended should Lowell adopt a sanctuary city policy.  Superintendent  states he does not know the definitive answer to this query; however, Dr. Khelfaoui notes that tonight’s policy is reflective of the state policy. Students need to feel safe in schools or they are not learning. Ms. Omoyeni expresses support for this motion on behalf of the students at LHS.  Mr. Gendron also expresses support; Lowell is and continues to be a city of immigrants and we should support them by removing any concerns that these students could potentially be removed forcibly from school during the school day.Ms. Doherty echoes this sentiment as does Mr. Descoteaux. Superintendent Khelfaoui reiterates that the policy as presented tonight has been in place in the LPSD. It has been vetted by the Police Department and is legally correct.  Dr. Khelfaoui states that this policy is intended to reassure children, some of whom have already received notices from Immigration, that whatever their status, the children can regard their school as a place of safety.Mr. Gendron reiterates that it is exactly because of the situation at the federal level that Lowell needs to put this policy in writing for peace of mind and safety of students and their families. Ms. Omoyeni also notes anectdotally that there have been some increased absences and it is the moral obligation of our community to ensure that students know they are safe.  Mr. Kennedy notes the difference in the role of the school committee as different from the City Council in creating a sancutary city.  In response to Mr. Hoey’s question about how ICE would know a students’ status, Dr. Khelfaoui responds that there is legal processes in place which prohibit just anyone from accessing students’ school records.This issue is divisive and complicated and, as I am not a legal expert. I do note that bowing to pressure and threats about loss of funding from the federal government concerns me. Other cities such as Boston - also heavily reliant on federal funds - have taken steps to become sanctuary cities.  Role Call:  5 yeas, 1 abstain, 1 absent - approved

• 6.V. [Robert J. Hoey]: Request a report from the Superintendent regarding the total cost of security and safety in our schools, including the amount we spend on resource officers, security and security equipment.

• 6.VI. [By Steve Gendron] Request the Superintendent provide a response to the contract offer from the Lowell School Committee. Referred to Executive Session which follows this meeting.

Policy SubcommitteeReview of Homework Policy and Staff Sick Time.Ms. Desmond reviews the current policy which is based on number of minutes. She is approaching building leaders to reinforce that homework might be differentiated and evaluated in a more meaningful way.  Mr. Gendron notes that a student has contacted all the Committee members and his wish is that homework is less about quantity and more about making homework a more effective activity. Ms. Omoyeni also speaks to the importance of ensuring that homework is designed to be more than busywork.The second part of the report was about sick time. This report was intended to provide information to the City. Ms. Doherty noted a motion was made to request Human Resources formalize the policy on staff attendance on purpose. Accepted as a report of progress. Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 9 items under Reports of the Superintendent.8.I. Food Service Presentation At Satellite Sites & Food Truck Approval DocumentsThe food truck purchase would be (partially) reimbursed through the distribution of summer meals. The vehicle would also be used during the school year to transport meals to satellite schools (those without food prep kitchens).Mr. Gignac clarifies that $14K is returned to Aramark for meals served; $45K costs include personnel in the Food Service Department working through the summer. Questions re re-serving food that has been stored in the (refriegerated) truck. Leaving food in a truck, even if refrigerated is a concern (break-ins). Expresses the opinion that we should fix what we currently have and does not feel that the $14K in administrative fees turned back to Aramark is problematic.Mr. Hoey asks who is paying for the truck; Dr. Khelfaoui confirms the truck is paid from the “revolving account”, which is also used for other direct costs for the food program. The money originates from the federal government. Mr. Hoey also notes that cafeteria staff is hired to work 3.5 hours daily. Advocates for a 5 hour day.Ms. Doherty notes the reality of poverty in Massachusetts and in Lowell. Being able to feed students throughout the summer and taking the food to where the children play/are, will lead to a positive outcome.Regarding food quality, Mr. Gignac notes positive improvements in food quality in a short amount of time.Providing meals to children throughout the summer is something Lowell should support. When the Commonwealth calculates the "Economically Disadvantaged" student percentage in Lowell at 55%, it is an understatement of reality borne by fuzzy mathematical computation. I taught in several schools where the actual number of students in poverty was over 90%. Those kids are hungry and school meals, as well as food provided by organizations like Merrimack Valley Food Bank, might be the only nutrition they receive.  In my opinion, expanding food distribution throughout the summer is a moral obligation to help children in need. What I am having difficulty understanding is the fact that the School Department is being asked to purchase a new truck for Aramark. This new truck would be used for summer food distribution as well as delivery of meals to satellite schools during the school year (satellite schools are schools without food preparation facilities). The "administrative" costs for the summer food program is $14,000, which is the cost Aramark assesses for what I understand is overhead at the corporate level. The new truck will ostensibly be purchased to distribute meals to students "where they are" during the summer months. Those places include program sites, playgrounds, etc.  The new truck will be used to replace 3 smaller vehicles currently in use for school-year meal delivery to satellite schools. Because the truck is bigger and has a refrigeration feature (no warming option), only 2 food service employees will be needed to staff it, eliminating need for one food service employee for 2017-18.  Roll call to send truck request to bid (4 yeas, 2 nay, 1 absent). Approved. Report accepted as a report of progress.8.II. Dropout Prevention And Recovery Documents LHS dropout rate reflects the hard work and coordination of efforts PreK-Grade 12.  LHS Dropout rate is 1.8% (below the Massachusetts state average) for 2 years in a row.8.III. Extracurricular Activities Update Documents8.IV. K-12 Student Population By Zip Code Documents Ms. Doherty requests the report be referred to Finance/Student Services Subcommittee.8.V. Management Letter Documents: Mr. Gignac asks about some funds that had been returned to DESE, but then returned to LPS and used for a summer SpEd program.8.VI. Response To Mayor Kennedy's Motion Of 02/01/17 Regarding STEM Academy At LHS Documents 8.VII. Rights Of Undocumented Students And Protocols For ICE Access In SchoolsDocuments Taken previously8.VIII. Monthly Financial Report Documents Referred to next Finance Subcommittee Meeting.8.IX. Response To Robert Hoey’s Motion Of 01/04/17 Regarding Diversity Hiring EffortsDocuments Mr. Hoey requests Anne Sheehy’s explanation of Paraprofessional cohort and the opportunity to obtain teaching licensure. Lowell has applied to offer licensure through a program in the district which would in turn create a pool of diverse candidates for teaching positions. Ms. Doherty spoke to encouragement of students in High School who would be candidates for paraprofessional positions and who might go on to a career as an educator. Mr. Gignac reminds that there is state aid/assistance for tuition through EEC (Early Education & Care).All approved 6 yeas, 1 absentAll conference requests were also approved.Following adjournment, the Committee went into Executive Session.Meeting detail and support documentation  can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 1 February 2017

School Committee Meeting 01 February 20176 present, 1 absent (S. Gendron) Onoste Omoyeni represented the students during this meeting.After approval of minutes, SC Gignac requests Lowell HS Subcommittee/Joint Facilities meeting be taken out of order. Permissions to Enter$20,665 in expenses approved, See detail in the Meeting Packet (downloadable PDF) (6 yeas, 1 absent approved)MotionsNine motions were presented:

• 6.I (E. Kennedy): Request that the Superintendent and Administration at Lowell High School provide information regarding how many students walk to Lowell High School and how many students participate in athletic events. (Passes)

Mayor Kennedy is looking for updated information so that any decisions about Lowell High School’s renovation plans reflect that.  Ms. Omoyeni asks School Committee to consider equity in education. The current Lowell High site is centrally located; the impact of other site under consideration for the High School's building project could have far-reaching impact on students.

• 6.II (E. Kennedy): Request that the Superintendent and Administration at Lowell High School provide an update on the proposal to institute a STEM curriculum or STEM Academy at Lowell High School. (Passes)

• 6.III (E. Kennedy): Request to either postpone or cancel the School Committee meeting scheduled for April 19th, which falls during April school vacation. (To be discussed during Reports of Superintendent).

• 6.IV (E. Kennedy): Request the Superintendent provide a report and update on the school department’s efforts towards recruitment designed to bring diversity to the Lowell High School faculty.

SC Gignac suggests diversity hiring report to include schools all levels, not just Lowell High School.

• 6.V (E. Kennedy): Request that the Superintendent direct the Lowell High School Administration to take advantage of the free tutoring services offered at the Dharma Center on Merrimack Street.

Mayor Kennedy attended an opening at this Center which is located in the same area as the Curriculum Office. Mayor Kennedy wants to bring this information to the Superintendent’s attention. (Passes)

• 6.VI (R. Gignac): Request the Superintendent develop and distribute an Organizational Health Survey to all staff and parents throughout the district. (Passed)

SC Gignac would like 2 surveys: one for staff by building; one for parents by building. Focus on Leadership, Teaching Learning, Security, etc. Would like a sense of how each building’s organizational units are functioning and how parents feel. SC Doherty supports the idea as it speaks to the culture in our schools. Asks the Superintendent if LPSD currently doing something like this already (they are). Wonders if an implementation of surveys should consider how this data is collected.  Tim Blake, parent at the Sullivan school (and Leominster teacher) and on site council speaks about a survey the Sullivan Site Council developed. Mr. Blake found the electronic response to surveys increased parent participation.  Ms. Omoyeni advocates for a portion of the survey addressing school climate and comfort level of parent when contacting the school (translators available, cultural norms, etc.). Cautions that multiple language versions are necessary.Dr. Khelfaoui cites Lowell’s participation in state-wide accountability group and how this type of survey (parent, faculty, student, etc) focuses accountability to include input from all stakeholders in accountability for a school district (part of ESSA, or Every Student Success Act). SC Descoteaux notes the success of the survey can be tied to the brevity of the survey.

• 6.VII (R. Hoey): Request that the Superintendent send a letter of appreciation to Coach George Bossi, on behalf of the Lowell Public Schools and the Lowell School Committee, in recognition of Coach Bossi's holiday wrestling tournament, held at the Paul Tsongas Arena annually, and known to bring large crowds into the city. (Passes)

• 6.VIII (R. Hoey): Request that the Superintendent send a letter of congratulations to Coach Tom Cassidy, on behalf of the Lowell Public Schools and the Lowell School Committee, on Greater Lowell Technical High School Gryphons wrestling team's recent win over Lowell High School. (Passes)

• 6.IX (A. Descoteaux):  Have the Superintendent work with the Lowell High School administration to look into adding the IB (International Baccalaureate) program to offer our advanced HS students another opportunity in addition to AP course work. (Passes)

SC Descoteaux would like this offering available to advanced students if it is possible to incorporate such a program into the High School. SC Doherty notices that the program is offered for Elementary and Middle School as well; is this a program that would enhance younger students?  Superintendent Khelfaoui notes that advantages of the program, geared to Grades 11/12 and the preparatory programs (K-10). SC Doherty would like to know more about this as there are costs involved in having educators be certified as Advanced Placement coursework.Subcommittee Meeting ReportsFinance SubcommitteeThe minutes for the January 24 Finance Subcommittee Meeting are found here.  Two Special Education Reserve Fund line item was removed from discussion as there were new regulations regarding carry-over of Special Education Fund. SC Gignac makes motion to create a Special Education Reserve Fund (must go to the City Council). Once the Reserve Fund (currently circuit breaker funds are mandated just to fund outside Special Education placements) is approved, any monies can be expended for Special Education as determined by the Committee. (6 yeas, 1 absent) approved.Also included during the Finance Subcommittee discussion was a report of transfers by Mr. Cassidy and year-to-date budget expenditures.Joint Facilities & Lowell High Subcommittee (also 1/24/2017)Meeting notes can be found here.Mr. Martin, Head of School, gives a brief presentation  and notes the LHS project is the largest school project in history of MSBA.  Public can access documents and progress through the LHS site on the City of Lowell website (see link here).The members of the committee visioning this project came from a broad cross-section of stakeholders. The architects will work to refine the resulting parameters for a 21st century Lowell High School. It was interesting to note that the net affect of a transition to a flexible classroom plan is that, even with increased enrollment, the number of classroom spaces will be decreased. Notes this occurs because the rooms will not be assigned to a single staff member, but will be flexibly programmed throughout the day. Presentation Powerpoint is here.Dr. Amy McLeod presents the Education Program and Programming for the future and how the architects will use this information to plan for a new High School. The visioning group feels that the structure of the school with a separate Freshman Academy is still important, however, including the Freshman Academy as a wing or separate section of a new High School would be more inclusive.Important updates will address adaptability and flexibility as well as technology needs (creating equitable access to technology) and appropriate science configurations. Another big space is to include teacher planning space. The group feels that clustering classrooms for interdisciplinary studies will allow for advantages where learning crosses the boundaries of a strict, structured curriculum.Take a look at the last slide on the Powerpoint Presentation. The amount of thoughtful consideration into what Lowell High students need and what is important and valued in the High School, becomes apparent.MSBA needs document generated by stakeholders can be located here.Motion to accept this Subcommittee Report (6 yeas, 1 absent), Approved.Reports of the Superintendent

• Online Community Resource Guide. Ms. Durkin notes that the resource guide is currently live on the LPSD website.  It is not all-encompassing; however, there is information that can be elaborated on. (Student Support Services); the goal is to update this information quarterly and will include Early Childhood information. The resources will be pushed out to school websites.

This is a valuable resource for everyone working with students in the Lowell School System - parents, students, and educators.  The website is easily accessed from the LPSD website by navigating to Departments-Student Support Services-Community Resources (direct link here)

• Chapter 70 State Aid The total budget is anticipated to increase by $6.107 million (about a 3.3% increase). About 80% of the funding comes from the Commonwealth and the balance is provided by the City in either cash contribution or in-kind contribution (for example amounts the city “charges” for things like snow removal). The City’s contribution would increase by about $1.1 Million for the 2017-2018 school year making the City’s contribution a bit over $40 million.

Information from City Manager on Wednesday afternoon indicated the non-cash contribution will increase but the cash contribution will decrease by $1 Million. The net effect is a $3.82 increase FY17 and FY18. SC Doherty asked for and received clarification that the cash received from the City would be less even though the Chapter 70 formula indicates an increased City contribution to schools. Several factors contribute to a decrease in cash contribution:

• non-cash contribution increases and
• charter school assessment increase of $1.8 Million

SC Doherty also clarifies that Chapter 70 is all state funding, not federal (true). Lowell’s budget has a large proportion of federal grant funding, and, all of those funds are in question pending what may or may not happen with a new administration in Washington.Foundation Budget Estimates (oh boy). Foundation budgets are - as I understand them - the amounts of funding the state determines necessary for education. This is generated at the state and is based on enrollments and a set of expense categories (here's DESE link; read it at your own peril).  On the state level, there have been several attempts to update the expense amounts that drive the foundation budget calculations. Some of those expense computations have not be updated in over 20 years; it doesn't take a degree in finance to understand that 20-year-old numbers are bound to be erroneous. The impact of out-of-date calculation is to underfund education on the state level which of course, trickles down to the local level. 

• Budget Meeting Dates

The proposed meetings as published in the packed are here and will hopefully be updated to reflect some changes that were approved including: a) date revision for first meeting to 4/12, b) the second meeting (4/26) will be with Finance Subcommitteef and c) location of final budget adoption meetings will be in council chambers so as to allow for broadcast on LTC.New Business:A transfer of $500 to create a Coral Supplies account (approved); disposal of surplus supplies (approved)Convention and Conference Requests were all approved (6 yeas, 1 absent)Meeting detail and support documentation  can be found here.

School Committee Meeting 18 January 2017

School Committee Meeting 18 January 20176 present, 1 absentSpotlight on Excellence:Tonight’s Spotlight on Excellence featured the Stem Academy at the Rogers School and the meeting started with the Pledge of Allegiance led by STEM Academy students. With over 600 students in Pre-K to Grade 5, the students in Grade 4 were nominated to not only present, but create the slideshow presented to the Committee. Most impressively, students from the STEM Academy are at varying stages of English language acquisition and powerfully demonstrate the integration of academic content.First up, 2 students demonstrate a “spheros”, controlling it from keypads. The students’ demonstration highlighted the importance of experimentation and the scientific process and how their attempts at controlling the Spheros through a maze informed solutions to problems.Working with the US Dept. of Wildlife, 3 students explained their project with Blandings Turtles. Investigating these turtles led students to investigate the impact of humans on the turtle habitat. The students not only have done research into their topic, they are creating a website about their subject.The third project, Block Coding utilizing code.org, demonstrated students’ use of algorithms in coding. Students at the STEM routinely learn coding principles.Growing Microgreens was the focus of the fourth student presentation. Students made a presentation documenting how  to grow microgreens and their nutritional value.  The STEM Academy has an on-going relationship with Mill City Grows and has one of the first School Gardens created in Lowell. The students distributed the fruits of their labor to members of the School Committee.The final presentation was a demonstration of a DRONE used by students. The students use the Drone to help the City create images of Thorndike street renovation.  The highlight was a demonstration of the drone in the air. The video with be on Twitter @stemacademylps and on the STEM Academy facebook account.Permissions to Enter$66,500 in expenses approved, See detail in the Meeting Packet (downloadable PDF) (6 yeas, 1 absent approved)MotionsFive motions were presented

• 7.1 (C. Martin): Requesting that the Administration, including all members who are cited as School Committee Representatives, provide the Lowell School Committee with a complete report on the history and current status of the charge filed by the LSAA regarding parking for Central Administration LSAA union members. This report should include:
  • the legal language differentiating a “charge” vs a “grievance” and notification protocols required by each,
  • a timeline of past meetings with Union leadership and
  • all associated documents and minutes from those meetings.

• 7.II (R. Hoey): Request the Superintendent refer the Homework Policy to the Policy Subcommittee to review and revise if necessary.

• 7.III (R. Gignac): Request the Superintendent provide a report on all extracurricular activities at each school throughout the district.

SC Gignac states parents have inquired about this information He is hopeful this information will also be populated on school individual website. SC Descoteaux would like to also know which activities have stipends.As a former Instructional Technology Specialist, I am puzzled - and often frustrated by the Lowell Public Schools’ web presence. The revision to the District website is very attractive and clean-looking; however, locating information is frequently a problem. As an example, tonight I attempted to find the Doors Open Lowell Public Schools schedule for the rest of the year so that information could be included in the STEM Academy’s spotlight information. The calendar link does not appear to function and the individual school’s websites are equally non-functional.  This is something that, in my opinion, needs to be rethought. Before a revision to a webpage goes “live”, the revision needs to have functionality and links tested to ensure that they work properly

• 7.IV (J. Doherty): Request the Superintendent porvide the committee with a report on the time allocated for students to have recess, lunch, physical education and health at each of our elementary and middle schools. Please include in the report any government mandates or recommendations regarding time allotted for these activities as well as if students are allowed to talk during lunch.

School Committee members have had some conversations with parents who express concerns over time allocations for recess and lunch in particular.  Parents are particularly concerned about reports of “silent lunch” periods - not those times when silent lunch is used as a behavior modification, but silent lunch periods used as a general practice. The Superintendent had queried building administrators and noted that silent lunches were isolated incidents and now resolved.Students are under quite a lot of academic pressure during each day; they need to be able to socialize during “down time”. English Language Learners need opportunities to practice social language - lunch time is an opportunity for that.  If there is an expectation for students to eat silently as a matter of course, that expectation is unreasonable. Students may need to learn to appropriately socialize while eating, but an expectation that students, especially elementary aged students, will sit in silence while eating is unreasonable. I can understand that as a behavior modification, out of control and/or inappropriate lunch room behavior may occasionally result in a silent lunch, but as a general practice, no. I’ve had numerous conversations with parents of students who have concerns about the amount of time allocated for eating and for recess and physical activity. That is also a concern of mine.

• 7.V (J. Doherty): In view of the upcoming implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) this fall, request the Superintendent develop local measures of assessment focused on the whole child such as school culture, social and emotional learning, and the arts.

ESSA replaces No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and many people who are of the mind that there is too much emphasis on academic testing see this as a step in the right direction. ESSA encourages schools and districts to ook at other factors that indicate school success. SC Doherty notes how these idea support the Superintendent’s Strategic Plan and Vision. Can we determine how to measure those other factors; how can we measure things like school culture, for example.? How do we show “evidence” of good schools outside of using standardized academic testing?Superintendent Khelfaoui refers to the Massachusetts Consolrtion for Educational Assessments (he is chair). Currently 6 districts are meeting to research and explore this very topic. Each of the six districts is represented by the Superintendent of Schools and the President of the Teachers’ Union. They are working together to determine performance assessments that track accountability which will include other means of measuring quality schools.  Lowell is on the cutting edge of this and lots of work has been done over the past 5 months.SC Martin mentions a MassINC call on Friday - more info on the changes resulting from ESSA.Lowell’s Superintendent and UTL President Georges should be commended for working on this complicated, and historically politically charged issue. Test scores from standardized testing are indeed never going away, but there should be so much more that goes into determination of how a school is valued.   Reports of the SuperintendentThere were seven items under Reports of the Superintendent.

• 8.1 Participation Opportunities in Food and Nutrition Program

There seemed to have been some misunderstanding of what was being requested. There was quite a lengthy discussion of opportunities for feeding students over the summer (or during the evening) through acquisition of a food truck. The report presented tonight asks the School Committe for their input as to whether or not to pursue the permissions (zoning for example) that would make such a program a viable option.The cost of the food truck would seemingly be picked up by reimbursements to the Food Service Accounts and, like the free-to-every-student breakfast and lunch programs, cost the City and School Department nothing.SC Doherty makes a motion to support exploring this opportunity, which eventually passes.However, the original motion was a request for food trucks on an occasional basis for LHS students. these trucks would be sources of different foods (more ethnic variety). According to the report included in the packet, this would result in non-reimbursement for these meals.Additional discussions about the satellite school meals (satellite schools are those without kitchens - those meals are cooked at the STEM Academy and transported to the schools without kitchens) and wasted food.Motion roll call: 6 yeas, 1 absent approved

• 8.II Science and Engineering Fair Update

SC Martin offers thanks and encouragement for moving forward with these opportunities. She would like the schools to continue to be mindful of opportunities, some of which can be at the Univeristy. SC Hoey asks for clarification about LHS student participation (1?). Ms. Desmond explains that while 1 LHS was selected to participate in the MIT Science Fair, several other high school students did participate. Ms. Desmond notes the $35,000 cost associated with science fair impelemntation and the pursuit of mini grant funding for the same.

• 8.III Sick Time Report

SC Hoey appreciates the report as it stands; would appreciate a report broken down by school. SC Doherty recommends via motion that the report should be referred to the Policy Subcommittee to discuss attendance incentives for staff and to review staff attendance policy.

• 8.IV December Financial Report

SC Gignac raises questions about budget transfers that need to be prepared to offset negative balances in some accounts. Mr. Frisch states budget adjustments are ongoing starting in January. SC.Gignac refers SC Gignac’s question about the Suspense Account (2400, 577771 for $179K) on page 3.  Mr. Gignac makes motion to refer to Finance Subcommittee.

• 8.V Lowell High School Education Program and Space Use Plan The detail is found in this PDF document.

This report was taken first at request of SC Gignac.  Head of School Martin presents the documents forwarded from Educational Leadership Team (ELT). Next steps is to refer this document to the subcommittee, with the approval of School Committee then sent to City Council. Visioning sessions inclusive of the LHS community (cross-section), compilation of the ideas and documentation of the programs needed/desired at LHS.SC Gignac - motion to refer plan to joint meeting of LHS Subcommittee and Facilities Subcommittee next Tuesday at 8 pm. SC Doherty suggests that this joint meeting be held at the STEM Academy television studio.  Questions in advance of the subcommittee meeting would be best handled by email so the architect and project managers as well as ELT can be queried. The meeting next Tuesday will be for clarification and inquiry - vote on the report will be February 1. Questions can be directed to Assistant Superintendent Durkin.

• 8.VI Facilities Maintenance Report

Student Representative Leahy notes heating issues. Requests resolution as fast as possible; all three LHS buildings were cold today.  Superintendent Khelfaoui concurs and notes the age of systems in several schools makes this challenging. He has received emails from parents and students.The age and disfunction of heating (and AC systems) and leaks in roofs are a major concern. The SC members all express a feeling of urgency. Mayor Kennedy cautions blame-assignment and finger-pointing; we all have to work together on this.  He has asked departments to identify the most egredious issues. Mr. Underwood notes that there must be a response to these emergencies; there is frustration, but we are not pointing fingers. We need to figure out how to resolve these issues without fear of hurt feelings. Notes the response to emergency by DPW is excellent. Mr. Kennedy says he will have a report at the next meeting. Ms. Leahy expresses gratitude toward Facilities and DPW. SC Hoey notes city and schools just need to get along a little bit better. Not here to have a war with the City.Motions accepted and placed on file.

• 8.VII Home Education

Approved (6 yeas, 1 absent)Convention and Conference Requests were all approved (6 yeas, 1 absent)To download meeting agenda and support documentation, click here and navigate to the School Committee meetings. The agenda are organized by date. 

School Committee Meeting, 04 January 2017

School Committee Meeting 04 January 2017All members present.Prior to the beginning of the regular agenda, there was a Special Meeting of the School Committee in order to discuss a contract offer for the Superintendent of Schools.  SC Hoey made a motion to accept the last contract offer from the Superintendent; however the most recent offer - the one presented to the Committee at this meeting - had been through some contract revisions suggested by both parties and the Law Department. SC Gendron makes a substitute motion to go into Executive Session in order to discuss the changes being presented tonight (passes 6 yeas, 1 nay). The Committee then went into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing the most recent iteration of the Superintendent’s contract. The Executive Session seems to have ended around 7:08 pm without approval of a Superintendent’s contract. The regular School Committee Meeting begins at 7:18 pm.Permissions to Enter$361,751 in expenses approved, See detail in the Meeting Packet on p 25-26.  (7 yeas, approved)MotionsThree motions were presented

• 2016/497 (R. Hoey): Request that the Superintendent direct Human Resources to provide a sick time report indicating how sick time is tracked and reviewed across the district. SC Hoey mentions the Sick Leave buy-back at the time of retirement and that this should be celebrated. (accepted)

• 2016/498 (R. Hoey): Request that the Superintendent direct Human Resources to provide a report on the percentage of male and female teachers and paraprofessionals to inform our diversity in hiring efforts. After SC Hoey presents the motion, SC Descoteaux adds that at the elementary level, the pool of candidates traditionally has more female candidates. (accepted)

• 2016/505 (J. Doherty): Request the Superintendent provide the committee with a comprehensive update on the Lowell High School Latin Lyceum program, including any changes since 2014 related to admission standards, enrollment, and curriculum, as well as plans relative to LHS designation as a participant in School Choice. Report should include information as to how the Latin Lyceum is marketed to colleges, including copy of letter sent along with student transcripts. SC Doherty would also like to see the job description for the lead teacher. (approved)

Reports of the SuperintendentThere were seven items under Reports of the Superintendent.

• 2016 /478 Special Education 2016-2017 Year to Date Report Jennifer McCrystal shared a presentation on the current state of Special Education. Of the 2,402 students receiving SPED services, 13% have an autism diagnosis, which is a higher percentage than all other urban districts and surrounding districts. A comment during this part of the presentation makes me wonder: How many students from surrounding districts come to Lowell having been "counseled" by another school district to move within district in order to receive services? 

There were some unpredicted increases in Autism students who have entered the Lowell schools and are receiving services in substantially separate classrooms and also a large increase in students (10 additional students) who receive Out Of District (OOD) services. The Special Education Department added key positions last year and that has assisted the LPS in keeping students in-district where in prior times, students would have been placed out of district. Building capacity within the Lowell School District is a significant cost saving for the schools and taxpayers as out-of-district placements can be in the tens of thousands of dollars. Take a close look at the Permissions to Enter that are listed for each meeting to get a glimpse into the costs associated with out of district placements.

As Ms. McCrystal pointed out, because of unanticipated placements, the Special Education Department needs to either find out-of-district (OOD) placements or increase LPS capacity to keep these children within the LPSD. Therefore, there are requests for 3 new teachers and 9 new paraprofessionals to be hired in phases starting immediately through  April 3.

One student with Autism is an average cost of $100,000 with a total of $1.26 million for the remaining time left in this academic year. By investing in LPS in-district capacity, there would be an ultimate saving of about $1,000,000. SC Gendron asks where the funding for out of district placements would come from. As Superintendent Khelfaoui notes, the decision is not going to be whether or not to spend, it will be how much to spend and the LPSD will be obligated to find the funds to honor the individual education plans (IEPs) developed for the identified students (including use of Circuit Breaker funds).

SC Gendron makes motion to move ahead with finding the funding and hire staff/find space to accommodate these students in-district. SC Gignac offers an amended motion to fund Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed motion with a referral of Phase 3 to the Finance Subcommittee.

SC Hoey spoke with some staff who made suggestions to the kinds of therapists that would possibly save money. Ms. McCrystal notes that the Special Education Department is working with the Mayor and City to find a location for a possible day school which would allow the LPSD to keep more out of district placements in district. See Meeting Packet p 37-46.

• 2016 /487 Response to Connie Martin's Motion of 12/07/16 Regarding Science and Engineering Fair Opportunities. SC Martin notes that the work in Science and Engineering Fairs has been growing over time and would like to hear about future potential for partnering with the University and/or potential for state-wide/national expansion. While there continues to be work done to develop the Science and Engineering curricula, he development of a robust science curriculum is manifesting itself and an increase in opportunities for students in science and engineering projects will continue as the programs grow. See Meeting Packet p 48.

• 2016 /509 Monthly Financial Report See Meeting Packet p. 55-75.

• 2016 /506 Lease for Central Office Space SC Gendron inquires as to whether a vote is needed (Response: just looking to make SC members aware of a possible future RFP which could save the City money as well as consolidate central offices. Currently the offices are in both 155 and 144 Merrimack Street).

Mr. Frisch notes that ideally it would be better to have all staff in a single location. SC Gendron remarks that the central location on Merrimack St. benefits the City and expresses his confusion in the School Department exploring the possibility of leaving. Superintendent Khelfaoui notes that this is really an exploration ahead of renewing or renegotiating a lease. SC Gignac notes Central Office is looking to increase square footage and questions whether there is a need for that sized footprint.  Mr. Frisch notes that there does seem to be a need for conference space (needs survey).

SC Hoey notes the impact on businesses of keeping the school department downtown. Mr. Frisch states that there could be some savings could may include, for example, using LPSD resources clean the space for a savings of $36,000. SC Hoey brings up parking which was in the original RFP and will be in the 2017 RFP as well. SC Gignac mentions parking and clarifies that the landlord is expected to pay for parking.

SC Gendron cautions that the RFP should be for gathering information and not about parking. Mayor Kennedy notes that the current RFP did give preference to Downtown and that he would not look favorably on moving out of Downtown. See Meeting Packet p. 77-78

• 2016 489 Quarterly Report on Motions and  2016/507 Personnel Report (approved)

• 2016 /501 Home Education (7 yeas, approved)

New Business

• Acceptance of $42,000 award to Robinson School (Yellowstone Park trip) (approved)
• Career Academy 501(c)(3) status (approved)
• Permission to post positions Early Childhood Specialist 6 yeas, 1 absent approved
• Permission to Post Data Analyst (grant funded) 6 yeas, 1 absent, approved
• Permission to Post Sales Associate (increase in number of hours) 7 yeas, approved
• Permission to Post LHS Graduation Mentor 7 yeas, approved
• Acceptance of Grant of $2,500 to Murkland School 7 yeas approved

Convention and Conference Requests were all approved.SC Gendron supports the trip, but questions the extension of the trips into academic time. SC Doherty notes that there has been a policy (previously developed) discouraging travel opportunities and overnight trips requiring substitute teachers for chaperones/students missing academics.Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting 07 December 2016

School Committee Meeting 07 December 2016Six present, Ms. Martin AbsentPrior to the beginning of the regular agenda, SC Gignac makes a motion to refer Item 13 to Negotiations subcommittee. Item 13 was a report of the Superintendent for the Policy on Admission of Children of Non-resident School Employees . Public input and/or comment will be allowed during the subcommittee's meeting when that meeting is scheduled.Spotlight on ExcellencePawtucketville Memorial Elementary School recently was recognized by National Title I Association for closing the student achievement gap and is one of two Massachusetts receiving recognition for their achievements. Principal McLean described the collaborative culture at the Pawtucketville Memorial Elementary School that brought this school from the 11th percentile (meaning 89% of all other schools performed better) to the 57th percentile over 5 years. The school’s achievement is impressive and national recognition of the school is well deserved. A large contingent of PMES teachers also attended last evening’s meeting. Over February School vacation, members of the school faculty have been invited to attend the annual Title I meeting in California where they will receive national recognition.A second spotlight on excellence highlighted the United Teachers of Lowell’s FirstBook “Books on Wheels” event where over 450 educators and 2,000 students received free new books. A video of the event can be found here and the introductory remarks for the video here. On a personal note, we'd like to thank the cast of thousands who made this event come together. The Books on Wheels event exceeded our expectations by every measure and we are looking forward to planning for the next round after the first of the year. If you would like to be part of our early planning, please let us know.Permissions to Enter$319,023 in expenses approved, including a $0 expenditure for Middlesex Community College to provide a dental hygiene program for Lowell Public Schools.. See detail in the Meeting Packet on p 29-31. 6 yea, 1 absent - approved.MotionsFour motions were presented

• 2016/460 (S. Gendron): School of the Month Program. Once every month a school is highlighted with a brief presentation during which students in attendance from the school will lead the Committee in the Pledge of Allegiance. (approved)

• 2016/461 (C. Martin): Science Fair Opportunities at the LPS and plans for expansion(s) during 2017 or 2018. (approved)

• 2016/468 (R. Hoey): Letter of Appreciation to Moody School for Veteran’s Day Presentation on 11/17. SC Hoey notes the excellence of the music program and the program honoring veterans. In discussion, SC Descoteaux notes that the Butler School’s Veteran’s Day performance is also exemplary and Mayor Kennedy notes the excellence of the LHS Choir during the City Hall Open House. A suggestion was made to recognize all three schools' groups for their excellence.

• 2016/469 (R. Hoey): Previously taken during Spotlight on Excellence.

Subcommittee ReportMeeting notes of the Lowell High School Subcommittee (2016/464) were presented by Mr. Gignac, chair of the committee.  The subcommittee addressed specific language necessary to include School Committee participation by a student representative from Lowell High School (for the balance of 2016-17 the representatives would rotate between LHS Sr. Class President and Vice President). While a non-voting position, this member would provide advisory role especially during discussions relating to Lowell High. Following a roll call vote, Ms. Onotse Omoyeni. LHS Senior Class President was invited to join the committee for the remainder of the meeting as student representative. (Meeting Notes, pages 40-41).Reports of the SuperintendentThere were five items under Reports of the Superintendent, including 2016/470 which was taken out of order (motion to refer to Negotiating Subcommittee) during prior to the Spotlight on Excellence.

• 2016/470: Policy for Admission of Non-Resident School Employees This report has been referred to the Negotiations Subcommittee.
• 2016/476: LPS Strategic Plan Presentation The LPS Strategic Plan was presented by the Accountability Office. The work on the plan began in September 0215 and included community input. Subgroups analyzed data and generated reports and recommendations throughout the process resulting in a vision (Inspire-Engage-Empower).

The Pillars of Urban Excellence support the vision and values of the Lowell Public Schools:

• Pillar 1: Teaching and Learning (broken down to 4 objectives)
• Pillar 2: Students Learn in a Respectful and Joyful Community that Attends to the Whole Child
• Pillar 3: Students Learn from a Highly Qualified, Expert and Diverse Workforce
• Pillar 4: Every Educator Engages Parents, The Community and Partners
• Pillar 5:  All Schools Have Adequate, Equitable and Safe Facilities and Resources

To make the plan a meaningful document, there needs to be accountability, not as a punishment tool, but as a support structure. How do we get to where we want to be. The LPSD is establish targets and benchmarks (in the process of developing this) through a “data dashboard”. Test scores will be part of the data dashboard and can be changed based on test scores and other measures of student achievement. A Human Resources dashboard will enable the District to monitor efforts toward meeting the District’s goals for a diverse teaching staff. There will also be capability to track, using real-time tracking, class sizes and enrollments.The plan was well received with some suggestions and thoughts to aligning the district plan and goals to data gathering and evaluation. Accepted as report of progress.

• 2016/472: Disposal of Surplus Supplies  See pages 49-58 of the Meeting Packet. (6 yeas, 1 absent approved).
• 2016/475: Request to Reschedule the April 5, 2017 Early Release Day A substitute early release alternative date would be to move this early release to Wednesday, March 29. The original date of April 5 had been developed prior to the state’s MCAS window publication. (6 yeas, 1 absent, approved).
• 2016/477: Health and Wellness Policy Advisory Committee SC Doherty was nominated and appointed to this advisory committee.

Convention and Conference Requests (2) were all approved.Due to the proximity of the next meeting (12/21) to the Christmas holiday, the regular school committee meeting of 12/21 is cancelled. There will be a special meeting, the date for which is to be determined, to discuss/approve items related to the Lowell High School project.Meeting Packet can be found here. 

School Committee Meeting, 16 November 2016

School Committee Meeting 16 November 2016Six present, Mayor Kennedy Absent (SC Gendron presiding)The attention of the School Committe was on the Middle School Report (Item 12) and Joint Subcommittee Minutes.Special Order of BusinessSC Gendron introduces both Principal Carmona of the Lincoln School and Francey Slater from Mill City Grows to speak about the recent Lincoln School Garden construction; a project video can be found here.  The garden, located  between the Lincoln School and Lincoln Street in what had been an eyesore and abandonded lot, is visioned as a place for extended learning and discovery. Along with the school garden, the space will become a community gardening space.Permissions to Enter$9,534 in expenses approved. See detail in the Meeting Packet.MotionsTwo motions were presented; both by SC Doherty

• 2016/456 (J. Doherty): request Superintendent meet with stakeholders to develop/plan for adequate nursing coverage in all schools. SC Doherty points to the important role of nurses in each school for students and staff. Concerned about compliance with state law regarding coverage and high turnover. SC Martin mentions substitute nursing coverage for absentees and school trips should be included (friendly amendment).

• 2016/457 (J. Doherty): requests Superintendent work with School Committee and City Council Facilities Subcommittees to establish monthly meeting dates to address ongoing maintenance issues. Motion to show solidarity to work with the City regarding issues of building maintenance. By scheduling dates in advance, members not on the subcommittee will have adequate notice and can arrange to attend. Building maintenance ($55 million number includes more than maintenance).  SC Gendron says that misunderstandings arise from miscommunications; would like to change the motion to “bi-monthly” from “monthly”. SC Doherty would like to see more frequent meetings to address critical needs (mentions heat issues in schools) and then possible shift to bi-monthly.

Mr. Hoey speaks about costs charter schools (net school spending for charter schools is $14 million - not all of this is maintenance). For the City Public Schools Mr. Frisch confirms $400,000-$500,000.Subcommittee ReportThe Joint Facilities Subcommittee report from November 2, 2016 and Item 12 (2016/450 Middle School Report) were taken together. SC Martin takes chair as this is SC Gendron’s report. See notes on this meeting here (11/2) or Meeting Packet p 30-32 and Middle School Report on p 71-73 of the Meeting Packet.See report in the Meeting Packet. Maintenance already addressed. Superintendent Khelfaoui through Mr. Frisch reports on middle school crowding and a plan requested by SC Gendron for addressing the middle school bubble.Four classrooms needed at STEM Academy (1 year solution for 2017-18) for grades 5-6. Recommendation for a permanent solution for a middle school solution after that time. Notes that class sizes of 26-30 students per class are lowered when considering pull-out students in Grade 5 (pull-out services for 60% of the day).  Mr. Frisch will confirm his understanding that 150 Grade 5 students across the City are pulled out for some portion of the instructional day.As much as possible, under the law, there is a requirement that students are instructed using the Least Restricted Environment (LRE). Sometimes this involves adaptations of the instruction planned by the “regular education” classroom teacher working with a special education teacher, and sometimes, as determined through Special Education evaluation testing and collaboration between the team (educators, parents and specialized therapists/instructiors) the student’s need requires more intensive instruction or pull-out instruction.Under the pull-out model for special needs, students go to locations other than the regular classroom for specialized instruction as outlined in each students Individualized Education Plan or IEP. Students may be pulled out for intervals during the school day up to 60% of the total school day. The remaining 40% of the day, the students are with their peers in the regular classroom setting. For example, if a student’s need is determined to be only in the realm of mathematics, the student may go to a separate space to receive the instruction that is needed for academic growth for just the mathematics portion of the school day instruction and will remain in the regular classroom for all other instruction and activity during the day.  Mr. Frisch is pointing out that in considering the class sizes at the Middle Schools the size of each instructional class can be somewhat lower due to the numbers of students who receive this smaller group or pull-out instruction.Mr. Frisch detailed the costs of adding classroom space at the STEM Academy for 2017-18.  These costs include: four teachers (approximately $480,000), an additional custodian ($55,000), guidance counselor ($80,000), and supplies/furnishing which will total $440,000.  Mr. Frisch is still calculating the costs associated with the permanent solution of a new STEM Academy.SC Gendron states 27.25 students this year and the STEM solution 26.66 for 2017-18.  Mr. Frisch notes that an additional 60 students could possibly transition to a Charter School in 2017-18 which would result in a further reduction.  This does not, however, take into consideration that any students who transition to a Charter School would result in lowered per pupil monies received by the City from the Commonwealth. The new classroom spaces would be obtained through reuse of the home economics and office space conversion . Mr. Hoey notes there could be six possible spaces when considering some spaces he noticed during a recent tour (removal of TV Studio for example).  He notes that the increased student population (over 700 students) may necessitate the need for an addditional Assistant Principal. Mr. Frisch asserts that the District would prefer to avoid moving children in a CSA classroom (CSA means Children on the Spectrum of Autism).Superintendent Khelfaoui points to the transition from Grade 5 to 6 is not as easy a transition as it is for students coming from Grade 4 to the middle grades, Grade 5.  Charter School increased capacity (32 fifth graders anticipated to move to Charter Schools) may impact the configuration of the short-term plan.  School Committee and District will need to come to a decision about whether the STEM Academy become K-8 or is divided into 2 schools (K-4 and 5-8). Many middle schools are reaching the 700 student population - whether or not that threshold triggers the need for a new assistant principalship will become a decision impacting more than just the STEM School (Sullivan School for example is already at close to this threshold).SC Martin states that the original intent of the STEM school model was predicated on the Stoklosa being built with the STEM curriulum and focus in mind. School Committee will need to address the “what’s next” for STEM facilities in the near future. Superitendent Khelfaoui reminds the Committee that there is no longer any capacity to transition STEM Academy students back into all the other Middle School buildings; there is no additional physical space to include Grades 7 and 8 at the Rogers site on Highland Street.  The conversations for addressing capacity with the City (building, leasing space, etc.) has not yet been started. When the High School project is completed there will be a possibility of addressing the capacity for the seventh grade (in 2018-19) will be less problematic, but that is a long way off.SC Martin speaks to the original intent of creating a STEM school had been in conjunction with building a new middle school.  Reconfiguring the grade structures could have unintended consequences that the School Committee and Administration needs to examine carefully and thoughtfully. A longer term solution will need to take place now as opposed to 6 months from now.SC Doherty suggests looking at other options such as centralizing all Grade 8 students in one location (or, as previously suggested, putting all the Pre-Kindergarten in one location).  Superintendent Khelfaoui states that adding students to Lowell High during construction will be more than difficult to manage. The School Department and City will need to meet collaboratively to form the ultimate solution.Accepted as a Report of Progress.Reports of the SuperintendentThere were four items under Reports of the Superintendent, including 2016/450 which was taken out of order during Public Participation.

• 2016/445: Youth Summit Report See page 34-35 of the Meeting Packet for details.
• 2016/446: BRIDGE Annual Report. See pages 37-62 of the Meeting Packet. This is an alternative education program which has been directed through Middlesex Community College and which will be transitioned to fully under the auspices of the Lowell Public Schools.
• 2016/449 : Monthly Budget Reportt.  See pages 64-70 of the Meeting Packet.

A donation of 60 books to the Office of Student Support Services and the Convention and Conference Requests (2) were all approved.Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 02 November 2016

School Committee MeetingSix present, Mr. Descoteaux absentAlong with the prior meeting’s minutes, the minutes of the Special School Committee Meeting held on October 27, 2016 were approved. The October 27 meeting topic was Superintendent Khelfaoui’s evaluation.Permissions to Enter$51,060 in expenses approved. See detail in the Meeting Packet.Public ParticipationOtse Omeyeni, Lowell High School Senior Class President, spoke in favor of Agenda Item 2016/437, a proposal that would include a non-voting student representative in the School Committee.  After this presentation, the School Committee decided to take this item (Number 11 on the Agenda) out of order in order to facilitate discussion.The Committee members were generally in support of this agenda item; however, because of several corrections necessary to the proposal as worded (clarification that student representatives would not participate in Executive Sessions, for example), it has been referred to the Lowell High School Subcommittee for clarification.MotionsTwo motions were presented; both by Mr. Gignac

• 2016/432 (R. Gignac): Requests the Superintendent write a formal letter of thanks to members of the Lowell Fire Department for their generosity in providing winter coats for Lowell Public Schools students under their Coats for Ann Program.

• 2016/433 (R. Gignac): Request that Lowell Public Schools participate in the Massachusetts Youth Summit on Opiate Awareness taking place at the Tsongas Center.

Subcommittee ReportThe Finance Subcommittee met on October 26, 2016 to develop a policy for “permission to enter”  and a policy for budget transfer.  The details for these policies are found in the Meeting Packet on p 33-34Reports of the SuperintendentThere were five items under Reports of the Superintendent, including 2016/437 which was taken out of order during Public Participation.

• 2016/434, Community Service Learning See page 36-37 of the Meeting Packet for details submitted by each school.
• 2016/437: LHS Representative Proposal. Taken out of order under Public Participation.
• 2016/435: School Site Councils. See pages 45-49 of the Meeting Packet for each school’s Council make-up and schedule of meetings. A suggestion was made that in the future, whether the member is part of the faculty or a parent of a student would be helpful.
• 2016/436 LHS Atheltic Rule 53 Waiver Request.  Mr. DeProfrio spoke about the value of including students from the middle school in programs such as hockey not only help to build an individual sports program, but to enable students who might not have financial means o afford the expense of early instruction in a sport to more fully participate.
• 2016/438 MASS EEC Fiscal and Program Compliance Review. Reports starts on p 54 of the Meeting Packet.

Convention and Conference Requests (3) were all approved.Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 19 October 2016

School Committee Meeting, 19 October 2016All presentSpotlight on ExcellenceThe focus on this meeting’s Spotlight was on the Summer Math Program. Students complete math “packets," calendars of activities that focus on thinking mathematically throughout the summer. Each school was represented by 3 students at tonights meeting. For a list of recognized students by school, see page 9 in the Meeting Packet.Just as with the Reading Spotlight on Excellence, the Math Spotlight is a great school event which brings proud families to the School Committee meeting.  What a memorable time for each student to receive recognition for effort over the summer months and be applauded for that effort!  Once again, special thanks to the school administrators and staff who also attended last night’s ceremony.Permissions to EnterMr. Gignac requested clarification of the amount for North Reading Transportation. The amount of $336,440 appears to be a change in the contracted amount.MotionsThree motions were presented; one by Mr. Hoey and two by Ms. Martin.

• 2016/413 (R. Hoey): During a visit to Lowell High School, Mr. Hoey spoke with a junior who asked whether there could be a consideration made to allow food trucks on occasion at the High School along with a stage for students to showcase talents during lunch hours.  While several school committee members agreed this was an interesting suggestion worth exploring, there were some concerns expressed by school committee members:
  • the short lunch period would make this impractical
  • the need to keep students contained on campus
  • those students receiving free/reduced lunches would be excluded

Mayor Kennedy pointed out that when allowing food trucks in the vicinity of the high school was discussed at a recent City Council meeting, Councilor Samaras (former Head of LHS) did not think this would be a good idea.

• 2016/417 (C. Martin): Presentation by Curriculum Department on an initiative that is successful. If I remember correctly, these presentations formerly were made only in front of the Curriculum Subcommittee. There was decision several meetings ago to include the School Committee in entirety in these presentations.

• 2016/418 (C. Martin):  A request to provide the full committee with more detailed accounting, including salaries and FTE information for each grant.  There was a good bit of discussion regarding a partial list of grants provided to the Committee right before the meeting. Mr. Frisch has suggested he include the requested information as part of the monthly budget report.

Subcommittee ReportAs a result of the October 5 Finance Subcommittee report, Mr. Gignac made two motions resulting from Agenda Item 1, Purchasing Policy (see pages 39-40 of the Meeting Packet). The first motion revised the language within the purchasing policy and the second motion detailed bid requirements. The Finance Subcommittee was unable to discuss Item 2 on the subcommittee agenda, and postponed discussion of same to a future meeting.As a point of personal privilege, Mr. Gendron spoke about a Subcommittee Meeting scheduled for Tuesday, November 1 at 7 pm in the Little Theater of Lowell High School. This meeting will discuss the middle school population “bubble” and plans to address the same. In addition, there will be a report on the Lowell High School project by the project management and architects.  The public is invited to attend and there will be an opportunity for questions/discussion.Reports of the SuperintendentThere were five items under Reports of the Superintendent:

• 2016/406, Quarterly Report on Motions. Starts on p 42 of the Meeting Packet.
• 2016/414: Massachusetts DESE 2015-16 Chronic Attendance. Noted that in prior years some absences were coded incorrectly (for example, students who were hospitalized yet receiving in-hospital tutoring), correlations between a high rate of absenteeism and struggling schools, and the higher rates of absenteeism at alternative schools (with a note that this needs to be looked at as possibly a need to address wrap-around services).  Positive comments noted improvements made to attendance rates in most schools.
• 2016/415: Monthly Budget Report. Discussion over handling of the encumbered $1.9 million from FY 2016 as a “carry-over”. The auditor closes City books earlier than the state-allowed closing of expenditures in school budgets. The $1.9 million in the category was encumbered from previous year’s budget. Invoices now received and the money spent - the net effect will be that the approved FY 2017 budget is not changed, although the addition of this line makes it look as though it has. The handling of the line item was agreed upon by the City auditor.
• 2016/419 and 2016/420 Personnel Reports and Lists of Eligible Teachers.

Convention and Conference Requests (2) were all approved.Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 05 October 2016

School Committee Meeting, 05 October 2016

All present

Spotlight on Excellence

The focus on this meeting’s Spotlight was on the Summer Reading Program. A record 27,453 books were read and recorded by students across the Lowell Public Schools, representing an increase of 9,400 books over the previous year.  Congratulations to all students and their parents participating in this vital program over the summer. For a list of recognized students by school, see page 10 in the Meeting Packet.This is one of my favorite events to observe as the excitement of the students and their families is so contagious. Special thanks to the school administrators and staff who also attended last night’s ceremony.

Permissions to Enter

Several contract approvals totalling $849,542. See detail on p 30-31 of the Meeting Packet.

Unfinished Business

2016/391: Business Office Reorganization. Net reduction of staff was 1. Cost savings about $12.2K. Proposal by Mr. Frisch to apply a majority portion of this cost savings to the Facilities Director’s salary as this person is being asked to assume the duties of one of the eliminated positions (Energy Management) and has significant added responsibilities as the High School Building Project gets underway.  Questions regarding the reporting structure, particularly why the Assistant Superintendent for Business was not a direct-report to Mr. Frisch. Suggestion to send the salary portion of this report to Personnel Subcommittee (with request from Ms. Martin for formalized job description noting the increased duties for the Facilities Director), while accepting the reorganization. 7 yeas.2016/403 Approval of Reclassification of Position. Central Administration completed the requested revision of this person’s job description to reflect reality of the responsibilities. 7 yeas.

Motions

• 2016/397 District-wide Technology Plan (Mr. Gignac). This is a requirement from DESE. The currently posted plan (2015-2018 update found on the LPSD website's technology page is based on survey and analysis of district needs and the state of each building's technology inventory.  With the state requirement for electronic test administration (starting Spring 2017), ensuring that technology needs are reflected in the plan are important as well as the analysis that will drive technology updates/upgrades at the High School during the High School Building Project.  For more information about state-required technology reporting and requirements, see DESE's Office of Digital Learning website.

The next 3 motions were postponed from the previous meeting. During the discussion of the Superintendent’s Evaluation, the Mayor’s microphone cut out.

• 2016/398 Community Service Learning Program (Mr. Gendron)
• 2016/400 Superintendent’s Evaluation Process (Mr. Gendron)
• 2016/399 Report to Facilities Subcommittee on plans to address the middle school population bubble. (Mr. Gendron)

Reports of the Superintendent

2016/390 2016 Student Assessment and Accountability Lowell’s testing results recently released by DESE show 7 Level 1 schools (highest category), 7 Level 2 schools, and 7 Level 3 schools. This is outstanding news, particularly since, despite expectation that switching from MCAS to PARCC last year would cause an expected drop in test scores (hence the state’s offer to hold schools & districts “harmless” from test ramifications).  Lowell seems to have defied all the odds by actually doing better on a brand new test instrument. Superintendent Khelfaoui attributes some of this to the schools’ focus on teaching to standards, not teaching to the test.School Committee suggests that this news is celebrated in both the schools and perhaps a future school committee meeting. The Committee also requests a deeper evaluation to ensure that any achievement gaps are continuing to close. The report begins on p 51 of the Meeting Packet.2016/393 Homeless Liaison.  Appointment of Jane Mosher-Canty to replace Fred McOsker who is serving as an Assistant Principal of the Morey School.Three additional reports, 2016/394 Personnel Report details resignations, retirements, and hiring, 2016/395 List of Eligible Teachers, and 2016/402 Home Education were presented.

New Business

There were three items under New Business:

• 2016/387 MCAS 2.0 Computer Base Testing. Recommendation from the Superintendent that all testing for all grade levels participating in state-wide assessment be done online (MA DESE requirement is only for Grades 4 and 8 this year, with rolling inclusion of additional grades each year).  When asked if the District was ready, Superintendent Khelfaoui replied yes.
• 2016/389 Acceptance of $75.00 donation to BRIDGE program
• 2016/392 Budget transfer to support Community Based Organizations at elementary and middle schools (see p 83 of Meeting Packet).

Convention and Conference Requests (3) were all approved.Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 21 September 2016

School Committee Meeting, 21 September 20166 present, Mr. Gendron AbsentThe items on tonight’s agenda were mostly routine. Business completed in just a few minutes beyond the one-hour mark. Permissions to EnterThree contracts approved for total of $120,200.MotionsWhile four motions were listed originally on the agenda for tonight’s meeting, only one was considered due to Mr. Gendron’s absence. Mr. Gendron requested the 3 motions he submitted be considered at the next meeting (October 5, 2016).2016/365 Mr.Gignac requested coordination between the City and LPSD in dedicating a POW/MIA chair. This coordination of efforts is already underway so that the dedication can take place during Lowell High School Homecoming.Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 5 reports from the Superintendent in response to requests and motions.  The first 3 items were accepted as Reports of Progress; the last 2 were approved on roll call.2016/367 Monthly Budget Report. Mr. Gignac questions and receives confirmation that the amount attributed to a Budget Analyst was in reality a temporary holding account (reminds the body that the Budget Analyst position had not been budgeted for). The amount charged in the account in question is zeroed out on a monthly basis as grant funds allocated for the position (grant manager?) are expended.  Ms. Martin reiterates her request for an Organizational Chart for Central Administrative positions. This request was put into the form of a motion. Report detail starts on p 39 in packet.2016/375 STEM curriculum at Lowell High School. Martha Cohn and Paula Bransfield walked the committee through the STEM activities beginning with Kindergarten and percolating through Grades 10-12.  Several successes were highlighted: Project Lead the Way, Idea Camp, STEM clubs. The District has received quite a number of grants and been awarded funds and support from both the business and academic world.This would have been a terrific Powerpoint to include in the packet.  Ms. Cohn and Ms. Bransfield highlighted the cross-curricular activities that have been developed, particularly at early grades. The activities and explorations used to develop engineering skills and process are inquiry based. That is certainly something that has been lacking in recent years and I am excited to see it return.  In using inquiry, students are presented with a problem and possibly some criteria for its solution. Through critical thinking and scientific process, they find solutions without the instructor telling exactly what to do - the words “no-tell zone” describe this perfectly. The instructor becomes more a facilitator and less of a lecturer. Good to see this returning to education!2016/379 Opioid Abuse Prevention and Awareness. Mr. Gignac expressed some disappointment with the University’s feasibility study associated with this report as it lacked detail for effective awareness. Given the current crisis of opioid abuse, there is an urgency in this area for recommendations to impress upon students (children) the gravity of opioid addiction. While the partnerships cited are a step in the right direction, the progress toward addressing this issue throughout the grades is taking too long. Ms. Durkin offered that the report contained in the packet was an excerpt and that there is a meeting scheduled for Thursday, 10/22 with the University. At that time, Ms. Durkin hopes to have some of the questions about the feasibility study answered and receive some more specific recommendations for moving forward.2016/380 Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan Revision and 2016/376 Home Education both passed on roll call.New BusinessThere were five items under New Business:

• 2016/362: Approval of an Educational Research Request. Ms. Martin requests further information (would like to see the survey instrument). Passes (1 absent, 5 yea, 1 present-Ms. Martin).
• 2016/364: Vote to accept Grant award of $2,000 to Bridge Program (1 absent, 6 yea)
• 2016/373: Approval of Expenditure Transfer. See p 92-93 of Meeting Packet (transfer to make year-end correction for FY2016. (1 absent, 6 yea)
• 2016/377:  Reclassification of Position. See p 95-97 of Meeting Packet. Substitute Motion made by Ms. Doherty to delay until next meeting in order to receive further description of the position and update the position description. (1 absent, 2 no-Mr. Hoey & Mr. Descoteaux, 4 yea).
• 2016/381: Vote to Approve Title Change. DESE requires a School Business Administrator to hold license in school administration; when a replacement for the prior business administrator was being sought, there was an effort to (locally) use the title CFO in order to attract strong business administrators who may be from out-of-state. Mr. Frisch, current holder of this position, applied for and received all the requisite licenses; the SBA title can be restored without changing salary or job description. The School Business Administrator is the title to which DESE refers. (1 absent, 5 yea)

Convention and Conference Requests (3) were all approved.Meeting Packet can be found here.

07 September 2016: School Committee Meeting

School Committee Meeting, 7 August 20166 present, Ms. Martin AbsentTonight’s meeting, the first after the start of the academic year, is the beginning of the regular twice-a-month meeting schedule.  The agenda was short and to the point - under 1 hour. Some of the Superintendent’s remarks were lost due to a faulty microphone. However, from what I could surmise, the topic will be revisited at a future meeting.  Permissions to EnterContracts for both Deputy Superintendent Jeannine Durkin and Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum Robin Desmond were approved.  $56,000 to SEEN collaborative for out-of-district Special Education service was also approved.Public ParticipationJonathan Richmond,  Chief Executive and Founder of the charitable organization Takeoff Space spoke to the School Committee regarding the decision process and communication resulting from a proposal he had brought to Lowell High administration, and ultimately, to the School Committee. The program, Takeoff Space, is meant to encourage and mentor top performing disadvantaged students to matriculate to top tier colleges. Mr. Richmond formally registered a complaint that his program was dismissed without due consideration. The High School made the decision not to participate in Mr. Richmond's program because this need was being addressed through another previously established initiative.Subcommittee Reports:

1. Facilities Subcommittee: Approval of Meeting of August 11, 2016. The content had be discussed at the August 17 meeting. Minutes accepted as report of progress.
2. Finance Subcommittee:  3 topics were on the agenda:
   1. Fiscal 2016 year end financials (including Apple hardware purchases and transfers to make up for loss of state funding for Kindergarten grant (paraprofessionals))
   2. Schedule/timeline for independent audit
   3. Fiscal 2017 year to date financials.  A motion was made and approved to develop a timeline for dealing with year-end surpluses so that the School Committee can decide how to allocate such funds.

3.  Lowell High Subcommittee meeting to discuss 4 motions by Mayor Kennedy.

Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 12 reports from the Superintendent in response to requests and motions.  Two of these prompted short discussion:2016/338 Lowell High School Graduates Attending College.  During this report, most of the discussion could not be heard because of a faulty microphone.  The District provided a report stating that 83.5% of Lowell High graduates are attending either a 2-year or 4-year college this Fall.  That compares favorably across the state.  The Committee had a couple of lingering questions. One of these was the data presented show that many students are attending either a 2-year school such as Middlesex Community College or a state 4-year college (University of Lowell).  There was a question from Ms. Doherty as to whether students are receiving sufficient guidance and encouragement to apply for “reach” schools, such as the Ivy Leagues.I attended state schools through post-masters work and have never for one moment thought that I didn’t get a superior education. It was “on me” to take advantage of classes and study, the value of my degrees came from the hard work I put into school, not from the name on the front gate. I also understand, on a parental level, what a financial burden attending a private university poses. Attending post-high school is a decision that only the student and his/her family can make, and while I would hope that Lowell High students are given information about grants and opportunities to attend their school of choice, I would hope the value of a public college or university will not be lost.2016/346 Bullying Prevention and Intervention Plan Revision. There has been significant revision to this plan due to new regulations implemented by the Commonwealth. One new feature is that the incident report will be available online and includes drop-down selections which will make reporting more efficient.  Ms. Doherty suggested that some clarification is needed regarding the timeline of responses. The Plan was approved and changes to include more precise language will be added at the next meeting.New BusinessThere were four items under New Business:

• 2016/340: Permission to Post: PALS Program Head Coach. As explained by Ms. Durkin, the PALS program is funded through the university. University students provide mentor support for high school students.
• 2016/341 Permission to Post: Preschool Expansion Grant (PEG) Data Manager
• 2016/342 Permission to Post: PALS Program Assistant Head Coach
• 2016/353 Approval of a Study Grant

All passed.There was no Executive Session and the meeting adjourned at 7:27 pm (noted by Mayor Kennedy). Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 17 August 2016

School Committee Meeting, 17 August 2016All presentThis was a lengthy (2-3/4 hours) meeting due to not only the summer schedule of monthly meetings, but the financial topics that became the focus of discussion. Apologies in advance for the delay in getting notes out; I also presented information about First Book to the Committee (separate post to follow).Permissions to EnterContract ratifications for the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendents were deferred to Executive Session, which followed the public portion this meeting.Subcommittee Reports:Mr. Gendron shared findings from the Facilities Subcommittee meeting of 8/11. The recommendation, followed by full School Committee approval, to name the Butler School Auditorium in honor of former administrator Mary Alice Foley was made. (Approved). Additionally Skanska, the Project Manager for the Lowell High School Building Project, presented a quarterly report of the work thus far and listed deadlines and timeline for the projected planning work needed to be accomplished ahead of a May 31, 2017 Mass. School Building Deadline.While I understood this to be a huge construction project for the City of Lowell, I was unaware that the LHS Building Project is the largest school building project in the Commonwealth. There is a need to get the design “right” (sustainable with adaptability for future needs projected 20-30 years out) and to ensure that the costs are under control throughout all phases of the project.  The Project Manager, Skanska, is charged with this task and will work with the design team.  To view the timeline for the work that is envisioned, Sanska has provided details beginning around page 73 of the School Committee Packet.Reports of the SuperintendentThe Superintendent offered 12 reports to the Committee.  The ones receiving the closest scrutiny were financial in nature, but attention also was given to a facilities report by Mr. Rick Underwood. The Doors Open Lowell Public Schools announcement has been covered in detail by both Amelia Pak-Harvey of the Lowell Sun and through the LPS Website.  I was also wearing my “other hat”, co-coordinator of the Lowell First Book Truck Event in October, and will detail that event this week as we kick-off efforts to bring 40,000 free books to our Lowell Public Schools families.  Sharon LaGasse and Kristina Webber presented an end-of-year report on Food Services and the CEP program in Lowell.The Purchase Order Report (2016/311), received extended discussion as it addressed some of the expenditures and encumbrances made at the end of the fiscal year. Mr. Gignac requested clarification some June 30 Purchase Orders including rental of the Tsongas Center (graduation) as well as hardware (Apple Laptops and carts).Further in the discussion was the proposal for how to make up the last-minute loss of Kindergarten Grant Funding.  The Kindergarten Grant in Lowell is used in part or in whole to support the services of instructional paraprofessionals at the Kindergartens across the City.  On July 17, Governor Baker’s veto during the Commonwealth’s Budget process created a loss of funding for the Kindergarten Grant - and other budget items as well.  The Lowell School Administration  in attempting to find ways to maintain the paraprofessional positions, has resorted to what I liken to rearranging the deck chairs.  LPS had a budget surplus which seems to have some connection to the “fifth” quarterly circuit breaker payment accounted for in the 2015-16 budget of $2.8 million.  The carryover to 2016-17 is restricted by law to $2.3 million which leaves $548,000 to be returned to the City of Lowell.Noting the amount needed to make up for the loss of funds triggered by the Governor’s veto, the LPS would request $527,642 once the books are certified by the Commonwealth (December 2016?). The City Manager had been alerted that there might be need for up to $600,000 in supplemental requests to make up for the loss. The trail of transactions as I understand it, would be this:

• Funds in excess of $2.3 Million returned to City (approximately $547,000)
• School Committee will request $527,642 supplemental from City Council
• $527,642 will be placed by City in a Suspense Account (and eventually transferred to the line item needed to pay the salaries of Kindergarten paraprofessionals).

While there is an aversion to using one-time funding sources/payments for on-going expenditures, the Superintendent posited that these transactions will give the LPS a year to plan for how to fund the monies lost by the Governor’s veto on a more permanent basis.  In the end the Committee approved both the motion to request supplemental funding from the City Council and to place such funds in a Suspense Account (6 yeas, 1 absent - Mayor Kennedy).In a related report, the update to Purchasing Policy (2016/321), an effort to bring the language in the current LPS Purchasing Policy in alignment with both City and DESE/State practice, was referred to the Finance Subcommittee for review.The updated Hiring Policies (2016/331) giving qualified and certified Lowell residents an interview was passed.A report on the status of Facilities (2016/326) was made by Mr. Rick Underwood,.  The enormity of maintaining facilities and the near-term end of lifecycle for building components of those schools built during the 1991-1993 school building boom is something for which the LPSD needs to plan. Many of the HVAC plants are reaching the end of life expectancy and are becoming difficult to keep in service. The custodial staff has an enormous amount of work to complete throughout the summer:  thoroughly cleaning buildings, floors, and performing other maintenance tasks (often with community programs in the building AND when temperatures are extremely hot) that are needed while the students and teachers are out of the building. During crunch times, the outside of the building - the landscaping - may not receive the same level of attention.Mainly what I learned through this discussion is that the custodial staff have performed yeoman’s work to get all the facilities clean and ready for a new academic year. I know that  in the past, when I returned to set up my own classroom, the floors had been stripped, waxed, minor repairs performed - sometimes a new coat of paint, the the overhead lights cleaned. Any surface I didn’t have covered with packed boxes of materials was wiped down. The lockers outside the classroom were cleaned, the halls stripped and waxed and the community spaces maintained as well.Maintaining the grounds at schools is also a huge undertaking, and of course, the grounds are what the neighbors and public see as they drive by a school building.  Adding landscaping to a custodian’s punch list is sometimes impossible, yet the grounds do need to be taken care of. Mr. Underwood seems quite open to seeking outside-the-box solutions for this, perhaps involving local landscapers in regular maintenance for a courtesy sign or involving community service groups as suggested by Mr. Gendron.Before moving to Motions, Mayor Kennedy requested an update on when to expect reports for four motions submitted during the July 2016 School Committee meeting. A Report on Graduation Rates  and one on the STEM Program, specific to the High School is expected at the first meeting in September.  The LHS Curriculum Review in light of the building project is expected before December and the Suspension/Expulsion Policy is pending input and action by DESE.New BusinessThere were four items under New Business:

• 2016/310: Update on Business Office Reorganization & District Hiring.  Mr. Frisch confirms that the number of bodies remains the same; however, report was very difficult to follow. An Organizational Chart with names would go a long way to clarify what positions are filled and which remain unfilled.
• 2016/318 Accept a grant award of $2,000 for Wang School
• 2016/322 Expenditure transfer request (see page 165-172 of Meeting Packet)
• 2016/325 Budget Transfers (see page 172-211  of Meeting packet). These appear to be the detailed transfers of monies to balance accounts from 2015-16.

All passed.Meeting adjourned from Executive Session. Meeting Packet can be found here.

School Committee Meeting, 20 July 2016

School Committee Meeting, 20 July 2016

All presentMeeting once a month instead of twice means that monthly meeting is extra long – this one was 3 hours without the Executive Session.  Next meeting will also be on the Committee’s Summer Schedule on August 17.Motions2016/287, 2016/288, 2016/289, 2016/290 (Mayor Kennedy) All four motions requested reports from the Superintendent regarding Lowell High. The reports request will be to review curriculum needs and plan for curriculum in tangent the design of Lowell High. Since an architect has been selected and named, consideration of how the building is configured to address curricular needs is timely.Motion 289 requests a report in response to DESE’s recently published information naming Lowell’s expulsion and suspension rates (along with several other school districts). The DESE report and news release can be found here. Ms. Durkin assured the committee that discussions are already underway to better understand and address this report.2016/296 (Mr. Gignac) Request superintendent provide full year-end financials to the entire School Committee prior to year-end audit.2016/297 (Mr. Gignac) Requests report on opiate prevention program/awareness programs.2016/301 (Ms. Martin) Request status on Central Office hiring along with a current organization chart reflecting changes made in Central Office personnel due to retirements and resignations.2016/305 (Mr. Gendron) Request Facilities Subcommittee name Butler School Auditorium for Maryalice Foley.2016/306 (Mr. Gendron) Request Facilities Subcommittee establish quarterly meeting with the Lowell High Project Manager (Skanska OPM).SubCommittee ReportThe July 13th Joint Policy and Student Services subcommittees met to revise School Policy for students with severe allergy and to address Mr. Hoey’s motion suggesting the creation of an early candidate pool for Lowell residents seeking employment in the Lowell Public Schools.Ms. Laura Ortiz spoke on behalf of 200-plus students who have life-threatening reactions to allergens other than food. The Joint Committee is in favor of revisions suggested to the Lowell Public Schools Handbook which will include non-food allergies such as latex, insect bites/stings, and other allergens that can be life-threatening.  The Joint Committee proposed the changes to the Handbooks and have requested their adoption. This was accomplished in Item 2016/299.A second topic for this joint committee was Mr. Hoey’s motion regarding creation of an early hiring pool for Lowell residents seeking employment in the Lowell Public Schools. With the addition of language specifying that the Lowell residents needs to be qualified and certified in the area of the open position, Lowell residents are to be granted an interview.Reports of the SuperintendentThere were 12 reports from the Superintendent addressing motions and regularly scheduled reporting (Personnel, Motions Report). Additionally, the report regarding the possibility of reconfiguring school zones is progressing as a Task Force consisting of parents, school personnel and community members is being formed. This group will meet beginning in late August or early September with the giant task of exploring rezoning the school district while respecting the Desegregation Order as well as being mindful of the capacity issues. Dr. Khelfaoui expressed that this process will be a multi-year phase in so as to respect the needs and desires of current LPS families as well as being mindful of the factors such as capacity that may be affected. Three reports received extra attention.In response to Connie Martin’s motions requesting information about 2015-16 educator evaluations, Anne Sheehy spoke to the process and the resulting reported data (see packet). As reported, any licensed educator in Massachusetts must be evaluated using the Commonwealth’s Teacher Evaluation Protocols.  Currently Lowell Public Schools focuses on 15 elements (out of 30) during the evaluation cycle. The resulting evaluation data shows 12% are Exemplary, 86,7% Proficient, 2% Needs Improvement, and less than 1% Unsatisfactory. As Ms. Sheehy pointed out, this is phenomenal and further gives credence to the high quality of the educational staff in Lowell.The process of educator evaluation applies only to licensed staff at this time – from Superintendent to Teachers, Nurses, School Therapists and other support personnel, all go through the same process. Only licensed educators are evaluated using this process; those personnel who do not need Massachusetts licenses in order to work in the schools are not.A lengthy discussion accompanied this report as this is a fairly recent initiative that has come through the U.S. Department of Education via DESE at the state level.  It is quite involved and unless you have been through the process – and I have – it is difficult to understand.  I will write a more thorough explanation in an upcoming blog. The short story is that any licensed educator undergoes a two-year evaluation cycle whereby goals (personal and student-based) are set, data-evidenced progress checked (Formatives) and end-of-cycle achievements proven (Summatives).A second longer discussion was reserved for Item 2016/300, the Year-to-Date Budget Report. Mr. Frisch (CFO) updated the Committee as to outstanding Purchase Orders amounting to about $3.45 million as of July 20. On July 29, the City will close the books on Fiscal 2016 and cancel any outstanding purchase orders as of the final run on that date.The School Department’s Finance people have preliminarily spoken with the City about creating a Suspense Account equal to the totality of those outstanding Purchase Orders so that vendors can be paid even though their invoices may not arrive before the City closes the books.  That way the June Purchase Orders still awaiting vendor billing for Fiscal 2016 will be fulfilled through the 2016 budgeted amounts.Another point made during the discussion of this report was how there could be a “fifth quarter” payment for the Circuit Breaker (money for extraordinary Special Education costs provided by the Commonwealth). There was some confusion about how to handle these funds (include in Fiscal 2016 and then transfer to Suspense Account?) and whether the proposition from Central Administration would have financial implications for Fiscal 2017.The inclusion of  a “5th quarter” Circuit Breaker payment from the Commonwealth appears to be a point of confusion. Apparently the Fiscal 2015 fourth quarterly Circuit Breaker payment was made in July last year which, with new administration is several key positions, resulted in the funds being allocated to Fiscal 2016 instead of Fiscal 2015. There was some question as to why the auditor did not discover three (not four) such deposits in 2015. Through this discovery, there is a proposal under consideration to use the fifth quarter, or windfall, to offset the loss of the 2017 Kindergarten Grant funds, and thereby preserve 17 paraprofessional positions for Fiscal 2017.  (Those who follow the state budget will recall that Governor Baker vetoed the Kindergarten Grant funding during the state budget process. The loss of the state budgeted Kindergarten Grant could potentially result in 17 paraprofessionals being displaced or laid off. This is one of the ways LPS is proposing to preserve those positions. The final decision on how to make up the loss in funding will be voted on in August at the next Committee meeting, 8/17.)Finally, an additional long discussion took place regarding sizeable negative balances in several line items. Mr. Frisch noted, the City takes a charge for Health Insurance (monthly) and Dental Insurance (bi-yearly?) and when doing so, some of the accounts impacted turn negative. When those charges occur, the line item charges may result in negative balances showing on the financial reports. As far as the City and City Auditor are concerned, the bottom line, not the specific line item balance, is what is important.Several School Committee members expressed discomfort with that process and suggested that the School Committee may need to consider meeting to make the financials more reflective of what actually happens with these costs/charges and transfer of funds.The third report receiving extra attention was the Superintendent’s Evaluation. Dr. Khelfaoui took the School Committee step-by-step through his Formative Evaluation evidence (remember, that is the progress-to-date evidence) and is soliciting the current Committee and the past Committee’s input into his one-year Formative evaluation (next year is the Summative Year in the Superintendent’s two-year evaluation cycle). The School Committee members will meet with and complete their piece of the evaluation prior to the August 17 meeting; Mayor Kennedy will summarize these and the Formative Evaluation and any revisions to the Superintendent’s goals will result. This information is done in public, not through Executive Session.New BusinessThe salary adjustments for unaffiliated staff were approved with a request from Mr. Gignac to provide the new job description for one of the positions. Custodial rate approved.Meeting adjourned from Executive Session. Meeting Packet can be found here.

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.