| BOE Minutes | BOE Home Page | |
| Previous: 2007-02-19 || Special Meeting - Open Session || Next: 2007-03-12 | ||
| Madison Metropolitan School District Madison, Wisconsin Art Rainwater, Superintendent | ||
|---|---|---|
| BOARD OF EDUCATION Minutes for Special Meeting - Open Session February 26, 2007 |
Doyle Administration Building 545 West Dayton Street, Auditorium Madison, Wisconsin |
|
Board Members present: Carol Carstensen, Lawrie Kobza, Lucy Mathiak, Ruth Robarts, Arlene Silveira,
Johnny Winston, Jr.
Student Representative Present: Joe Carlsmith
Staff present: Mary Gulbrandsen, Steve Hartley, Jack Jorgensen, Pam Nash, Roger Price, Art Rainwater,
Clarence Sherrod, Marcia Standiford, Ken Syke
4. Approval of Minutes
It was moved by Arlene Silveira and seconded by Lucy Mathiak to approve the minutes of the Special meeting in open session dated February 19, 2007 as distributed. Motion unanimously carried by those present.
5. Public Appearances
Kristina Navarro-Haffner, East Side parent, prefers to have choices about where to send her children to school, parents want choices, inequitable situation, can make the student body diverse, parents and educators urge the Board to give this a chance.
Administration's original PowerPoint presentation was shortened but contained the same information. Ms. Abplanalp could not be present due to a death in the family.
Lisa McGuffey supported the Studio School. Described the process as grueling and having a chilling effect on others. Some people are choosing private school because of the district's charter school process. She stated that the district showed a lack of willingness to try to innovate. Charter schools are not going to go away and Madison is changing.
Marianne Bloch stated that at the January meeting the administration suggested the Studio School had no evidence or had insufficient evidence to support their recommendations to begin the Studio School. She read the evidence differently and believed the Studio School came out positive to neutral on all measurements. She talked about the types of programs the Studio School is trying to promote. She was worried that a no vote would be regretted by the Board. Instead of leading reforms, they would not be part of the public school offerings.
David LeClair purchased a home three blocks from Emerson Elementary School and is getting a teaching license. Stated that students learn in multiple ways. Madison needs to be diverse ethnically and racially and in the way knowledge is transmitted to the children. He strongly supported the Studio School.
Jessica LeClair, public health nurse, supported arts schools. That is what she attended in Milwaukee. She wanted Madison to provide similar opportunities to its children.
Written registrations included ten in support of the Studio School charter school proposal.
6. Announcements
There were no announcements.
7. Health Insurance Contributions for MMSD Administrators
This item was withdrawn by the administration.
8. The Proposed StudioCharterSchool
(Packets included a memorandum from the administration providing background information and the team involved in developing the report to the Board (2/26/07; an analysis if The Studio School is not fully embedded; analysis if The Studio School is fully embedded; new MMSD budgets based on The Studio School planning process; The Studio School recruitment plan; The Studio School revenue generation plan; The Studio School classroom and The Studio teacher schedule; The Studio School's list of benefits of the charter; The Studio School student-teacher ratios; and The Studio School PowerPoint. Copies are attached to the original of these minutes.)
Written materials distributed at the meeting included "The Studio School: MMSD Response" dated 2/26/07 and "The Studio School: 1. New & Revised Slides for Presentation, and 2. Projected Enrollment and Staffing (alternate format) dated 2/26/07 (copies are attached to the original of these minutes). A presentation from The Studio School entitled "The Studio School: A different way to learn in the Madison Metropolitan School District."
Superintendent Rainwater gave the PowerPoint presentation. Highlights included: charge; Studio School initial proposal (12/20/06); attempts to make staffing, transportation, facilitating diversity, classroom teachers, specials teachers, professional development all cost neutral; after-school collaborated planning; costs that cannot be eliminated; revenue generation; inclusion; and components yet to be developed.
DISCUSSION:
§ What happens if the grants are not awarded. Grant would cover professional development aspect but not the Studio School teacher. May be some grant money depending on whether or not the program is fully imbedded or not. Grants cannot be relied upon over time. Different strategies for raising funds are proposed.
§ DPI waiver for art and music certification.
§ Administrative concerns with sharing a principal and secretary in an imbedded program.
§ Appleton charter schools. Different teacher contract.
§ Actual costs to the operating budget if the grants were taken out.
Nancy Donahue and Laurie Cunningham presented for The Studio School. Highlights: diversity; inclusion; cost; enrollment and staffing; the model; revenue generation; benefits to children, family, the MMSD, and Madison.
DISCUSSION:
· No waiver required. Charter applies for a license allowing certified teachers in elementary education to teach anything.
· Integrating art and music excellent goal for all MMSD schools. Concerned that The Studio School teacher would be someone who is trained in Reggio Emilia approach and would also teach art and music. How to find someone who has all those skills? Teachers work as a team. Collaboration is key to the model. How do we know they are strong in these areas? When you hire.
· Fifty-percent enrollment would be from host school? District decision about that goal. Came out of Nuestro Mundo experience. The percentage given should be the minimum. Recruitment outline does not get into lot of detail about how to go about doing this. What is your message about the school? Different way to learn, benefits to kids.
· Parental involvement opportunities available but not required. Ways to achieve parental involvement, especially for those who do not have transportation or a computer at home. Evolving concept.
· Location and current district student diversity.
It was moved by Ruth Robarts and seconded by Lucy Mathiak that the Board direct the Administration to take steps to enter into a contract with The Studio School to operate a charter in one of the MMSD elementary schools.
DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION:
Ø Amount of cost increases and controllability.
Ø Consulting other school districts that succeed in doing these kinds of charter schools.
Ø Keeping and building MMSD student enrollment.
Ø Future referenda.
Ø Using different models to help children succeed.
Ø Holding the charter school responsible to the larger school community.
Ø Not throwing up roadblocks.
Ø Budget issues: cuts, class sizes, fine arts.
Ø Need for innovation but with caution.
Ø Frustrating process. Needs revising.
Ø Inviting other school districts to come here and talk to the Board directly over the summer.
Ø Hard to justify spending.
Ø Hard to start a program and then having to cut it.
Ø Issue of equity for all the children.
Ø Readiness of proposal.
Ø MMSD's current work in this area.
Ø Conversations with principals and teachers.
Student Representative advisory vote was nay. Motion failed 2-4 with Lawrie Kobza and Ruth Robarts voting aye.
Recessed at 9:05 p.m.
Reconvened at 9:17 p.m.
Ruth Robarts left this time.
9. Services for MMSD Special Education Students
(Packets included a PowerPoint presentation with attachment. Copies are attached to the original of these minutes.)
Jack Jorgensen, Executive Director of Special Education, gave the presentation addressing five questions:
I) What is Special Education (SE) and related services?
II) Who are the children receiving SE and related services in the MMSD?
III) How are children served in the MMSD who need SE and related services?
IV) What is the process for allocating staff resources?
V) What are the costs and values associated with these services?
DISCUSSION:
o Percentage of students with autism has grown considerably over the last ten years.
o Costs associated with low-incidence much higher.
o Factors that decide full inclusion, partial inclusion, or substantially separate.
o Phonology program. Works with two teaches working together. Flexible and supported.
o Parents are trained through the (Individual Educational Plan) IEP process.
Johnny Winston, Jr. left at this time.
o How services get provided at the schools with an allocation of 10.5 students per teacher.
o Range of services in the building.
o How special works with class sizes of 15:1.
o Number of environments for a teacher limited to three at most. Attempt is made to limit density of special education to any one classroom to 30 percent. Primary or intermediate within two grade levels. Same is true for English-as-a-Second Language.
o How MMSD SE allocations compare to other districts. Comparable to large ones in the state. Cannot just look at pupil/teacher ratio; Madison is serving higher percentage of high-cost, low-incidence students.
o Demands and challenges at the high schools very different form elementary. Must prepare students to graduate and transition to adult life. Recent high school leadership institute explored ways to be more inclusive and higher performing.
o Middle schools are quite inclusive. Continuing to provide appropriate accommodations with general education standards and transition into adult life.
o There is a need to look at how special education measures success or effectiveness of special education across the schools. Test data only tells part of the story. How successful the students are with regard to their IEP goals and how that impacts on learning, relationships, and engagement. Looking at attendance, drop-out rates, graduation rates. An evaluation of the Positive Behavior Support Team is going to be conducted next year.
o Context for having budget discussion.
FOLLOW UP: Annual evaluation report on the phonology program. Provide percentage of students who have disabilities coming through registration from kindergarten vs. being identified for special education in elementary school. Process used to arrive at decision for special education transportation.
10. Request for Proposals/Qualifications for Consultants to Conduct Superintendent Search
(Packets included a cover memorandum and a revised Request for Proposal document outlining options for approaching the superintendent search and a timeline. Copies are attached to the original of these minutes.)
Mary Teppo, Director of Administrative Services, presented the revised document and reviewed the changes as suggested at the last meeting.
DISCUSSION:
· Section 4.2—information on similar size should also ask for demographics throughout the document.
· Section 5.5—little more on them helping with developing a contract and salary expectations. May have been better language in the more open model.
· Criteria—deliverables should be weighted more heavily than the top three. Could group 1-3 together and break out the deliverables. Some risks - may get tied down a bit more. Recommendation was made to leave the deliverables more broad but to weigh them more.
· Add a category for presentation or organization.
· Making cost one aspect rather than a deciding factor. Choose vendor based on other criteria then open cost proposals afterward.
· Board members gave their preferred weight percentages for the criteria.
· Board would like to choose from up to five vendors for final selection.
FOLLOW UP: Ms. Teppo will try to bring back the document for this Thursday's Board packet.
11. Other Business
There was no other business.
12. Adjournment
It was moved by Lucy Mathiak and seconded by Arlene Silveira to adjourn the meeting at 10:39 p.m. Motion unanimously carried by those present.
bl
Previous: 2007-02-19 || Special Meeting - Open Session || Next: 2007-03-12