An Outcry for Excellence

Oprah Winfrey’s show regarding the deficiencies in our public schools throughout our country has sparked some wonderful debate and discussion.  Throughout the past six months as I have delved deeper into my local school district, I have often been implored by some parents and administrators to just shut up and stop saying “bad things” about our schools.  I have been asked to focus on the good and the achievements [of the few].  I have been accused of “ruining the reputation of our [wonderful] schools for the students who must attend them.” Honestly (and fortunately), many, many more parents, administrators, teachers and voters have applauded my attempt to bring attention to the problems which plague not only our school district, but districts all around the country.

When do we scream with outrage that mediocrity is not good enough for our children?  When do we stand collectively against the unions and administrators and school boards/committees who fight to maintain status quo in a system that does not work?  How far do our schools have to decline before we – as a community of people – say, “Well, now the performance has crossed the line from mediocrity [which we accept readily] to failing!”?

To those neighbors of mine who stand up at School Committee meetings and Town Meetings and preach about the excellence that is occurring every day at our schools and how phenomenally our children are excelling and who write in their blogs about the exceptions [to the rule] who exceed – I say to you that you are helping no one!  Yes, there are [some] exceptions to the rule.  Yes,  there are [some] children who are getting decent educations.  Yes, there are [some] good teachers.  Yes, there are [some] students who are accepted into colleges.  Yes, there are [some] athletic and music teams/clubs who achieve superior status.  Yes, there are [some] things being done right.

There are schools in some of the most challenging, poorest, previously failing inner cities in this country which have been completely revamped that now achieve a nearly 100% matriculation rate into 4-year colleges.  Our district’s 4-year college matriculation rate is 25%.  That’s appalling in this day and age.  And it should not be good enough for any parent in Dennis or Yarmouth.

I do not aspire to some Pollyanna ideal that every single child and every single school will achieve 100% excellence at all times.

But since when do we find solace and comfort and satisfaction in knowing that just SOME children are excelling SOME of the time?

We are not an inner-city school district fraught with terribly high drug, crime and violence rates.  We are not perhaps as wealthy a community as some others – that’s for certain.  But we are not poor either.

My outcry for excellence reaches beyond just our own district.  It reaches beyond the Cape and beyond Massachusetts.

There is one commonality which is shared by every public school district in America and which, in my very convicted opinion, is at the root of all that is wrong and is forcing the failure of our schools: teachers unions.

We fight amongst ourselves in every town, city and county in this country over budget numbers and declining performance indicators.  The schools continue to cry out for more money and the taxpayers continue to vote against raising taxes for schools which are not performing.  The administrators blame the parents for not taking responsibility for their children and the parents blame the teachers for not effectively teaching their kids.

We all know this system is broken – but no one can agree on how or why.  More money, better teachers, more parental involvement . . . and on and on it goes.  The only ones who don’t think the system is broken is the group of people who stand to benefit the most from keeping it exactly the way it is: teachers unions.

The concept of fighting against the teachers unions in this country and actually effecting real and significant change in the way they operate (or disbanding them entirely – which is the real solution) makes the battle of David versus Goliath seem like a schoolyard snit.

Teachers do not need to be protected.  There are labor laws  which adequately protect every single other employee in this country.  The laws which ensure a balance between a company’s ability to succeed and an employee’s ability to work have evolved into a far more effective model for mutual success than any union contract in the last 50 years.

The teachers unions and the ridiculous contracts they negotiate in this country are bankrupting our towns, cities and counties and they are literally robbing our children of the potential for excellence which they deserve.

What would happen, when it came time to negotiate the next teachers union contract, if the prior contract was thrown out completely?  What if we didn’t negotiate a new contract against the old one?  What would happen if whoever is at the table to negotiate it actually negotiated a contract to protect each and every child’s potential for excellence rather than protect each and every teacher’s job and exorbitant benefits?

What would happen if the teachers union representatives had to sit at a table and negotiate their contracts against student union representatives who had the power (political power, power in numbers, historical power) to match their demands mano-a-mano?

It is the administrators and school boards/committee members who are charged with just such representation for our children and that fact is forgotten every day.

This system is not working.  It has not been working for years.  It is time for dramatic change.  It is time to separate the egos of the adults from the best interests of the children.  It is time stop putting the teachers’ best interests before the students’ best interests.  And good teachers who know that this system is broken agree.  The union contracts prohibit any measure of accountability on the part of teachers’ performance (or lack thereof).  The unions protect all teachers – and are mostly designed to protect the worst and the most ineffective teachers the most.

What chance do our children have of meeting or exceeding standards of excellence, if their teachers and educational role models are held to no standards whatsoever?

The Good, The Bad and The . . . Nope – No Ugly

I’d like to start this post by saying that last night at the “goal-setting work session,” six School Committee members (of seven) attended and they were – each and every one of them – civil, respectful and thoughtful adults who worked towards a common goal.

It’s unfortunate that such an occurrence should draw my admiration, but I confess it was a serendipitous event.  Kudos to each of them for having the wherewithal to come to the table having holstered their guns and with their eyes to the task at hand instead.

Initially, members were asked to list their individual concerns for the district and/or the Committee so that general focus areas could be identified.

It was determined fairly early on – with the competent guidance of Mike Gradone (kudos to him also for a job well done as the Facilitator) – that the three areas of primary focus that the School Committee would like to see the district set goals are, in order: (1) academic excellence, (2) improved teamwork and communication, and (3) adequate funding.

There was no disagreement amongst the School Committee members that goals should be set to specifically raise graduation rates, lower drop-out rates, improve MCAS scores and decrease the number of children leaving the district for school choice.

There was a suggestion (and a fair bit of discussion) that the district’s mission statement and/or goals should incorporate the concept of facilitating [and recognizing] that each child “do his or her best” or “achieve the best of which he or she is capable.”  The reality of such a concept is that federal law mandates that “no child be left behind” and there are standards which all children must be measured against and must meet in order to progress and eventually graduate.  Not to mention the question of who determines what each child’s “best” is and how one measures whether or not each child’s “best” is being achieved.

Fortunately, other members reminded the Committee of this fact and no “disclaimer” or “qualifier for mediocrity” [in my opinion] was incorporated into the district’s mission statement.  This was group collaboration at its best.

Generally, all members agreed that “the first goal of the DYRSD is academic excellence and that our goal is that each student will (1) stay in school, (2) meet academic expectations, and (3) grow continually throughout the school experience.”  I would like to see the Committee expect the district to strive to “exceed” academic expectations – but, baby steps, I suppose.

This brought the Committee to the second focus area which was identified: the concept of improving teamwork.  Chairman Jim Dykeman spoke with some eloquence and with [from what I’ve seen] uncharacteristic confidence and certainty about the fact that in all the years he has served on the Committee, never before has such dysfunction and a lack of civility and respect been so prevalent amongst School Committee members.

Given that many of the initial concerns voiced by several of the members spoke to this same issue, it was explored as a possible district goal.

There was a very lengthy discussion about whether or not this concept should be the subject of a district goal (which directly benefits the kids and their education) or if it should be more of a School Committee goal.  Good and valid points were made on both sides of the issue.

On one hand, there is the argument that effective teamwork and group collaboration amongst the School Committee members will directly affect and potentially improve their ability to influence and guide the school administrators to accomplish the primary goal of academic excellence and their other goal of obtaining improved/adequate funding by both towns in the region.

On the other hand, there is the argument that goals must be measurable and “trackable” [and I’m not sure who would, could and should be benchmarking “teamwork” amongst Committee members] and that district goals should really be set to directly impact the education for the children.

These were both good points and both points were discussed at length.  The one comment made by the Facilitator which went seemingly unheard but which I thought was a valid and valuable approach to tying the two ideas together was that perhaps the Committee should provide a positive and effective teamwork “model.”  I like the idea that our elected officials might actually provide a positive model of collaborative teamwork and in doing so, the resulting improved public perception of their ability to accomplish anything effectively could very well foster confidence in the School Committee’s commitment to our children’s education and to the integrity of the positions to which they were elected to uphold.

Chairman Dykeman summed up his concern on this topic by saying that it has been repeatedly expressed to him by a multitude of people that Committee members do not respectfully discuss their opinions but instead turn to personal attacks on one another, make snide comments, interrupt each other, get up and walk away while another is speaking and generally treat each other with disdain.

I couldn’t agree more, Mr. Dykeman.  Perhaps going forward, more decorum will be shown at School Committee meetings.  After all, who could disagree that fostering a productive and effective atmosphere for achieving objectives has a far better chance of doing so than the back-biting and immaturity previously evidenced by the members?

In the end, the meeting was adjourned with this second objective/goal still on the table for further discussion, but overall, I must say that I was impressed with the progress which was made.

My final thoughts (perhaps because it is a personal peeve of mine) regarding the members wishing to somehow foster more involvement by parents is simple.  Allow parents to speak more freely; facilitate parents’ ability to approach the School Committee (their elected officials, after all); let parents have a voice without censorship and restriction.

It was suggested that meetings should be held at various schools to allow parents from throughout the region to attend meetings.  This is problematic because the district does not have the technology available to televise meetings from other schools, but also because if it’s difficult for parents to make it to meetings now – see how many show up when the location changes continuously.  There is a lot to be said for continuity and the public being able to count on knowing where to go and being able to watch the televised meetings from home.  I hope this suggestion is not pursued.

“Waiting for Superman”

Today, on The Oprah Winfrey Show, the subject was failing public schools in our country and the fact that our education rates very near the bottom of the top 30 richest countries in the world.

http://www.oprah.com/showinfo/Waiting-For-Superman-The-Movie-That-Can-Transform-Americas-Schools_2

No matter how you feel about Oprah Winfrey, each and every educator, school administrator, school board/committee member and teachers union member should watch this program and look for the movie “Waiting for Superman” when it opens in your neighborhood over the next month.

Tonight our local School Committee will get together for a “goal-setting meeting” and I am hopeful that in doing so, they remember that the job of every adult in public schools is not to protect their positions – but to protect the future of the children in their charge.

Set lofty but reachable goals that will weed out poor and ineffective teachers and inadequate teaching methods.  Set goals which will aim to hold teachers and the administrators accountable for the performance of the students in their charge.  It can be done.  It is being done.  There are some great teachers and there are some effective administrators (just look at the results Principal Emily Mezzetti achieved at Mattacheese – until she was reassigned to M.E. Small – Mattacheese has fallen significantly, while M.E. Small has improved!).

Our children are not stupid or unteachable and our parents are not wholly indifferent.  Money is not the answer to improving performance.  Charter Schools all over the country (and right here on the Cape) are having great success.   There are schools throughout this country who face far more strenuous financial hardships than our schools – but they find ways to succeed.  Many more just continue to struggle, following old and ineffective methods while generations of our children are falling so far behind the world’s increasing standards that the future of our country is at risk.

It is time that our public school administrators stop burying their heads in the sand, exclaiming that there is nothing wrong with the way they are running our schools (except that the taxpayers don’t spend enough money on them!) and take responsibility for the jobs they have been given!  It is high time that we expect our elected officials to hold our public school employees accountable for real performance.

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt!

MCAS Results leave a bit to be desired

MCAS results have been published for 2010 for our district with a comparison to 2009 results.

http://www.capecodapps.com/databases/mcas/results.php

At very first glance – the numbers do not look great.  They don’t even look okay in many instances.  Most specifically, the 2010 scores at Mattacheese Middle School for 8th graders look horrendous!  The percentage of students failing has almost doubled in every subject since 2009.  Likewise, the percentage of students scoring advanced decreased nearly as significantly.

I would like to think that such results might prompt the School Committee to take far more seriously their responsibility to set meaningful goals – unlike the ridiculously benign and ambiguous goals which are published on the district website.  It’s time we hold our elected officials’ feet to the fire and expect them to set goals which can be measured.  It is probably the biggest responsibility the School Committee has to this community and so far, their goals are laughable.

http://www.dy-regional.k12.ma.us/dyrsd/scgoals.htm

These goals haven’t even been updated since 2008.  Note #3 which reads, “Develop and implement plans to decrease the district dropout rate to state average or below by 2009.”  News flash: we’re now entering the 2010/2011 school year!

Let’s see some goals set that have actual verbs in the sentences!

An interesting discovery

Today, while I was looking over the employment contract of the Interim Director of Finance and Operations, I looked over the employment contract and the extension of that contract for Joe Cucinotta.

Mr. Cucinotta’s last day of employment (the expiration of the extension) was July 31, 2010.  His actual last day was Friday, July 30, 2010.

I just noticed that the extension (which extended his contract term until July 31, 2010) was signed July 28, 2010 . . . just two days before anyone else (public and School Committee members) was notified of his “resignation”.

Superintendent Woodbury indicated, in response to my questioning, that Mr. Cucinotta gave “about three months'” notice that he was leaving.  That certainly seems like more than adequate time to draw up a simple extension of his contract prior to his actual leaving.

Cucinotta Extension

There is so much that smells fishy about Mr. Cucinotta’s exit that it – again – raises questions.

Part-Time Confirmed

I have this day received the following Employment Contract for the position of Interim Director of Finance and Operations.

Finnell Employment Contract

The contract confirms that the position is, indeed, a part-time position.  Mr. Finnell will work not more than three days per week.  Assuming an 8-hour day for those three days per week at $75 per hour, his interim appointment will come to $1,800 per week (or $93,600 per year, based on a 52-week year) – and that does not include the additional $25 per hour and the additional hours he will be paid for any evening hours he works.

On the plus side, Mr. Finnell is not entitled to any benefits (beyond whatever benefits are already included in his retirement package).

Mr. Cucinotta’s salary upon resignation was $114,240 (approximately $55 per hour) with full benefits; however, he was a full-time employee.

Mr. Finnell’s contract terminates January 31, 2011.  It remains to be seen whether or not a part-time employee will be able to adequately fulfill all of the responsibilities of this position, but if so, perhaps the district should consider the possibility of keeping it a part-time position since, absent the cost of benefits alone – it is likely a bargain.

I assume that, in the long run, continuity and consistency will prove to be more advantageous and there will be sacrifices made in many of the more “peripheral” responsibilities which will prove that hiring a permanent, full-time Director would have been far more beneficial to the district.

The new school year begins

So, now that the new school year has begun (and still no approved budget!), we should have some concrete numbers regarding how many students have exited the school district in favor of other schools.  However, if I were a betting [wo]man, I’d bet against having any concrete information whatsoever about why those students left our district.  Given the appalling number of students leaving each year, it would seem to me to be of utmost import to determine why by vigilantly contacting the parents of those students and compiling some statistics.

I know for a fact that the parents of two children who attended DY grade schools and Mattacheese Middle School chose to enroll their children at Sturgis and they were not only not asked why – but this year, when their second child began school at Sturgis, he received a packet from DY regarding scheduling his pictures.

With enrollment numbers declining and the district paying out some $3 million per year in tuition to other schools as a result of those declining enrollment numbers (school choice, etc.), finding out why children are leaving – so that the district can set some realistic goals to bring students back and/or keep students in the district – is the most proactive way of which I can think to address the issue.

Even without knowing for certain why parents are placing their children in other schools, I can guess that the most recent report regarding MCAS results is paramount in such decision-making.

This is an excerpt from a letter I received from Superintendent Woodbury regarding MCAS results from 2009-10:

“During the 2009-10 year, Dennis-Yarmouth Regional High School’s performance rating was Very High and On Target for both English Language Arts and Math.  The aggregate and subgroups exceeded the state’s performance targets, yet the high school did not achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).  This was directly related to a few students not taking the test due to absence and failing to participate in the designated make up [should be “make-up”] sessions.  There are strict regulations that call for 95% of the students to participate in testing.  Once a group falls below this participation rate, it is not possible for the school to make AYP. Workable solutions to insure [should be “ensure”] that participation rate will meet state guidelines will be addressed in school improvement planning.

The District has also been identified for Improvement – Year 1 for English Language Arts and Corrective Action for mathematics. This designation means that when tested subgroups are combined across the District, some did not meet the performance target or demonstrate enough improvement to make AYP.  This designation does not indicate a failing school district, but highlights areas where more work is needed by principals, teachers, and parents to ensure that all students are successful.” [emphasis added]

In the first place, if the Superintendent cannot apply proper spelling, grammar and word usage in a letter which goes to every parent in the district, it shouldn’t be a complete surprise that our students are no better equipped to do so.

Beyond that, and more disturbing, is the fact that we cannot achieve AYP because over 5% of our students couldn’t be wrangled up to take the MCAS test!  Shame on the parents for sure.  But aren’t there officers of the schools to deal with truancy and absenteeism?  Isn’t there someone who should be contacting the households of each and every parent who isn’t responsible enough to get their kid to school for MCAS testing?  I’m trying to track down the actual numbers – but I’m estimating that one class (sophomores) must have approximately 230 students – so we’re talking about 10-15 students.  We simply cannot manage to get 10-15 students nailed down (or if you only have to get the number under 5%, then it’s more like 5!) to take the MCAS?

Come on, really?

As a parent of a child at DYHS, I have personal contact with other parents and I can tell you that the reasons parents are removing their children from DY is less than satisfactory measurable performance indicators and because every time the district is required to control their budget, they trim the programs (such as sports) for the kids.  DYHS does not provide Boys Lacrosse (it is fully self-funded) and the only reason there is a Junior Varsity Hockey team is because the players and the Booster Club fund-raise to fund it.  These are only a couple of examples, but they are significant and they are telling.  Hockey and Lacrosse are huge sports in New England and provide ample college scholarship opportunities to children who excel in them.  We’re losing those kids to Barnstable and other local districts who support the programs.

Meanwhile, the district maintains significantly better teacher/student ratios and smaller class sizes than state averages without exhibiting the higher performance the public expects.