Minutes – November 21, 2019
BERKSHIRE HILLS REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
Great Barrington Stockbridge West Stockbridge
SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING
District Office Professional Development Room, Stockbridge
November 21, 2019 – 7pm
School Committee: R. Dohoney, A. Hutchinson, J. St. Peter, S. Bannon, A. Potter, B. Fields, M. Thomas, D.Singer
Administration: P. Dillon, S. Harrison
Staff/Public: K. Farina, B. Doren, K. Burdsall, T. Lee
Absent: S. Stephen, D. Weston
List of Documents Distributed:
RECORDER NOTE: Meeting attended by recorder and minutes transcribed during the meeting and after the fact from live recording provided by CTSB. Length of meeting: 1 hour, 44 minutes.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Steve Bannon called the meeting to order immediately at 7pm.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The listing of agenda items are those reasonably anticipated by the chair, which may be discussed at the meeting. Not all items listed may in fact be discussed, and other items not listed may be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by law. This meeting is being recorded by CTSB, Committee Recorder, members of the public with prior Chair permission and will be broadcast at a later date. Minutes will be transcribed and made public, as well as added to our website, www.bhrsd.org once approved.
October 24, 2019 School Committee Minutes
MOTION TO ACCEPT SCHOOL COMMITTEE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 24, 2019 B. FIELDS SECONDED: J. ST. PETER ACCEPTED: UNANIMOUS
MEET & CONFER TOPICS/SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT:
- Additional Coaches funded by Booster Club: (Assistant Girls Basketball Coach & Assistant Boys Basketball Coach) MOTION TO APPROVE ADDITIONAL COACHES FUNDED BY BOOSTER CLUBS FOR BOYS AND GIRLS BASKETBALL FIELDS SECONDED: J. ST. PETER ACCEPTED: UNANIMOUS
- School Improvement Plans (MBE, MVM, MMRHS)
- Tim Lee, Muddy Brook Regional Elementary School: The format is similar to what I shared with the school committee last year. I started with the school’s mission; unchanged from last year. I talked about children being able to approach life and future challenges with curiosity, asking good questions, developing knowledge and strengths, care for and respecting themselves and others in connection with the community and to develop an appreciation to relish learning from differences and embrace diversity. I highlighted in the context in the background is that there is still an emphasis that Muddy Brook as it was last year and in past years to try to provide an educational experience that focuses on the whole child indicating that our days are a balance of academic learning, physical activity, deep engagement in the arts. I have very happy that in our school and our district, we are able to sustain arts instruction to the level that we still have. It is not the case in all districts. I am very grateful and appreciative of that. Over the summer the principals met as a continuation of the work we did last year around the district improvement plan and one key word that keeps coming up as we talk about where we would like to move our students on a collective basis is equity. It is an overarching outcome that we are going to hear in the context of all three schools tonight. What that means for us at Muddy Brook is that all students continue to have access to the full range of academic opportunities regardless of their academic or other abilities; regardless of the socio-economic circumstances they might come from at home. I also talked a little bit about what I feel is the responsibility of our school to provide for this vision of equity to be realized in future grades is that we see it as our responsibility to provide all of our kids with mastery in the basic skills they are going to need to be successful at future levels. No doubt this term “equity” will come up again as we talk about the district improvement focus and the school improvement focus. I provided a little bit of data to start, as I did last year. You will see it starts in the upper left with relative data 2015-2019. The first box has some generic data: school enrollment, the percentage of students with IEPs, students with disabilities; I did not have a number for average daily attendance yet. I listed what at the time of this writing were some discipline indicators. This was in-school suspension days and out-of-school suspension days. I would like to point out from this grid, some of the more relevant facts. Total school enrollment is up by 20 students and we have actually added a couple of more since the writing of this report. That is a good trend for the school after dipping in 2018-2019 down to a total of 329. Today, we are at 350; expecting 351 by early next week. Moving down to some of the performance indicators and assessment trends that I talk about, there are some things that are relevant here. The Brigance is a kindergarten screening that we use with all of our incoming kindergarten students. We do this in the spring, usually in May. It typically gives us information that helps us identify students that might be at academic risk. There will be some developmental indicators, some early academic indicators that will point out what the population is that we are going to be bringing into the school. You can see that from a high of 2016-2017 of 42% of those children were screen, currently that number has dropped to 15% of the students that we screened last year fitting into that at-risk category in 2018-2019. We haven’t done the screening for 2019-2020 yet, so I don’t have figures for that yet. Looking at MCAS performance in the various grades and various subjects, just a point of explanation, these scores represent the percentage of students that were meeting or exceeding, identified state expectations for the various academic areas that we are measuring. Again, these are all MCAS results. The first one that we have is grade 3 reading and you can see that in 2018-2019, 47% of our 3rd grade students were meeting those state identified expectations in reading. In math, 26% of our students were meeting the state identified expectations. MCAS grade 4 ELA, some nice trends in this area. Actual performance last year amongst the 4th grade, 61% of our students were meeting or exceeding expectations. We moved above the state average in that category and grade 4 math, 47% of our students are meeting or exceeding expectations, which is just about what that state is setting in that expectation. I think there are a couple of things happening that I will talk about as I go through the plan. MCAS scores are only one indicator we use to set priorities for the coming school year and what we want to work on but because of what we are seeing particularly in grade 3 math last year and also grade 4 math, even though the trend is positive, over the years we are still below what the state is setting as an expectation. Moving through our school improvement goals, we have identified four this year. Some of these you will remember from last year. We have turned them into multi-year goals because we think the focus is important enough to maintain from year to year. The first one that you will notice is social/emotional learning; safe schools. This is a multi-year goal. I think of these four objectives that we identify here, some of these we have partially completed but the one that I am feeling pretty good about right now is defining what the social/emotional competencies and proficiencies are that we would like to see in all students. As far as activities go, one of the measurable outcomes, there is a focus in our school right now related to these objectives on mindfulness so there is actually a mindfulness curriculum that has been developed that is being developed by our school adjustment counselor and our clinician on a regular basis in all of our classrooms. Also, in teacher teams, this social/emotion continuum that we developed as a draft last year, we continue to refine as we look at the current needs of our students. We are hoping to get to a place where the kids’ social/emotional development is helping them grow as individuals but also putting them in a place where they are more ready to make the academic growth that we are hoping to see. We want to continue to expand pro-social routines using different curricula and programs that have been explored over the years at Muddy Brook. The ones that are most prevalent right now are responsive classroom and social thinking curricula. The measurable outcomes that we are hoping to see as a result of this work at the end of the year are trackable reduction in social issues, social behavior issues. These are typically recorded through reports so when the student has to leave a classroom, a report is generated so we are basically tracking the number of these reports, comparing to past years, making judgements about what is causing a positive trend or negative trend and the interventions we are using to address kids’ needs. Positive ratings in end-of-the-year parent surveys related to school culture and student well-being. This is a new one. We haven’t done and end-of-the-year survey for parents before but we will be incorporating one this year to get the pulse from parents about how they are feeling about their kids’ school experience. Overall improved climate in learning observable in benchmark and state assessment performance so what I am trying to summarize here is all of this work around social emotional learning besides producing happier, more capable students who feel like they belong within our school culture, we want to see them doing better academically as well. It is all connected. Goal #2 talks about inclusive practices and co-teaching. This again was a goal that we put onto our school improvement plan last year. We have expanded this work significantly to this year and the rational being that depending on a cohort of students and the grade they are in, the needs of that cohort, we want to change the ways we deliver specialized instruction, particularly for students with IEPs. The way we have done this year is we have expanded the co-teaching model that you have heard me talk about before. Co-teaching as a reminder is the practice of having a regular education teacher and a special education teacher together in one classroom either for some subject areas or for the entire school day. Last year, you may recall, we did a pilot of this in grades 1 and 4. This year, we have expanded the practice significantly so that this year we have two full day, co-taught 4th grade classrooms; we have a 3rd grade classroom that is co-taught for two core academic blocks probably about 60% of the day and we have a 2nd grade classroom that is co-taught also for the core academic subjects for about 60% of the day. It has expanded considerably going into this year. Our objectives are relative to this goal or not, it is about the implementation of this practice and they are about providing the capacity of the regular education teachers and special education teachers to effectively deliver education in this model. We are hoping to build a cohort within our school of teachers who have experienced co-teaching that can as the cohorts of our students identify themselves and demand we are able to put these resources into place but also down the road they can also serve as models for other teachers hoping to create this sort of structure in their classrooms. Another piece of this is to build capacity in budgeting and staffing to sustain co-teaching in the coming years. I should say about this goal, the capacity and budgeting, the provision of special education services through a co-taught model costs a little bit more than providing it in a pull-out model. The way that it works is students with IEPs might have specialized instruction identified for example a 3rd grade student might have a specialized reading program and in the past special education teacher has been working in a room, students will leave their various classrooms and go have their instruction in the other room. Under co-teaching, some of that does happen but the bulk of the english language arts instruction will happen in the mainstream classroom with non-disabled peers usually in a context that is connected to social studies or science or something else the class might be studying. The idea behind all of this is that students with disabilities formally when they had been moved to another place for that key piece of instructional day, now they can be with their non-disabled peers and every body can advance together. With two teachers in the classroom, not only are the students with disabilities being served but there is more capacity in teachers in the classroom to serve the needs of all the students. The final one is a bit ambitious and I realize it is from the perspective of the elementary school but we are hoping to establish co-teaching as one of our primary models of special education service provision throughout the district. It is approved, effective, inclusive practice as we would like to do more of it. The activity I would like to highlight is that the co-teachers, both regular education and special education this year at all three of our schools are being supported by a trainer that is coming in once a month, spending a day at each school observing and giving immediate feedback to their co-teaching teams. It has been incredibly effective. They have learned how to better plan. They have learned how to better deliver instruction for mixed ability groups and even just since the beginning of the year, what I have observed is the increase in teacher capacity has been really quite positive. There were some changes we had to make in our school schedule and the structure of the school day to allow for somewhat longer blocks of academic time especially in the core academic areas of math and english language arts. We have increased those blocks of time from 45 to 50 minutes to more along the lines of 60 to 70 minutes in some cases. We are able to do that in one contiguous period without interruption which has helped out these efforts. Measurable outcomes that we are hoping for at the end of the year, of course the delivery of special education services through co-teaching, maintain a rigor for all students, being able to deliver a higher level of differentiation to all students, higher achievement of students with disabilities and students without disabilities that is measured by benchmark assessments and standardized testing in grades 3 and 4; increased competence in sense of belonging amongst students. Again, I am not sure how we are going to measure yet but I am suggesting at this point is just an observational survey of the co-teaching teams at the end of the year to somehow get a handle on what they have observed from the beginning of the year to the end of the year in terms of their kids capacity. Goal #3 is a little more concrete. We are talking about computational and math habits of mind. This goal is also somewhat expanded into just generally improving mathematics outcomes for all our students. Last year, we assessed the computational ability of Muddy Brook students in grades 2-4. We made comparisons to state expectations. Year 1 and 2 in our instructional leadership groups and in teacher teams, we have been asking the question “what works” to help students build computational fluency, not just in math facts but also in mathematical thinking that are going to allow them to better improve their overall mathematics achievement. In Year 2, this year, build teacher capacities with training expanded to other grade levels. This is primarily being delivered by the teachers development group. You might have heard that from last year as well. We have expanded from just 4th grade last year into 3rd grade this year and as we get into the spring, we will be doing the initial training down into grade 2 as well. What teachers development does is they mainly are about promoting a program called Math Habits. It is structures and practices added to mathematics instruction that help kids to better understand and frame their mathematical thinking. I would say the primary, most observable difference is that teachers are constantly asking students to justify their thinking; it is not just solving the equation. It is “how do you know that is true”, “how can it be expressed a different way,” listening to one anothers mathematical thinking, critiquing that thinking, giving feedback, learning new ideas from peers in the class. Teachers are receiving training in that this year but also implementing those mathematical practices. Another thing I mentioned in the objective side of this goal is that I really think that since our performance in mathematics has been somewhat below or significantly below the state expectations for the four years I identified on the data page, I think it is time at Muddy Brook that we consider a new math instruction program. The same conversations are being had at the middle school right now, so one of the activities we have are to acquire and view samples of math programs throughout the school year and plan for additional resources in the budget that might allow us to acquire us a new math program as indicated through this study. We how to see measurable outcomes as a result of this work. Higher benchmark outcomes for the year. When I say benchmark outcome, you may be aware that at Muddy Brook, we give benchmark tests in reading and math three times a year, fall, winter and spring. This year we switched to a testing medium for those benchmark assessments called Star 360. We hope to see the comparison to last year but it might be difficult because we are using a different benchmark tool but generally, how are the students performing compared to state and national norms across the course of the year as we implement some of these changes in math instruction. An overarching goal that we have connected to some district initiatives is that throughout all this work we have hope to see stronger levels of preparing for middle school mathematics going into 5th grade and of course improved outcomes in grades 3 and 4 MCAS. Goal #4 is a recent addition. I haven’t had a lot of time to process this one with our faculty or school council yet, but in discussions with colleagues and considering that is happening on a district level right now with career vocational technical education, we thought it would be time for us to get a little bit more organized and formal about starting to teach our elementary students in a systematic way about careers. This year is an exploratory year. We hope to understand a little bit better best practices used in other schools and areas for career education at the elementary level. There are actually quite a number of successful models of career education that are at the elementary level. We would like to establish some career education goals aligned with social studies, science and other subject areas and frameworks. Part of these goals will probably identify which grade levels, at what times and what activities we hope to insert into our current instructional practices to make careers and career education more present in our instruction. Aligned career learning efforts with district-wide continuum, skills and pathways at other levels. There has been a lot of discussion over the past year and a half about creating more pathways towards areas of technical and vocational study. This year we are going to be looking at what we can do at that elementary school to support those efforts down the road. Knowing that students are not going to be making those choices in elementary school but trying to lay some groundwork to let students better understand what the many options are that they can look forward to as they move ahead in school. Activities I talked about a little bit. Mainly done in grade level teams during two one month cycles. Identified grade levels will explore and plan for limited career learning activities. I say limited in this first year, because we have quite a number of other things going on, and I am not quite sure how much we can get done. We want to draft the parameters of what career education looks like at Muddy Brook; who, when, what the priorities are and what the focus will be. Then we want to execute at last one career education event, evaluated, adapt and possibly expand for future use. Measurable outcomes are hoping for completion of the targeted activities that I set forth in the goals and then preparation for whatever we are going to expand into during the next year and being able to consider what the curricula are and are out there right now, maybe make some choices and implement them. I don’t anticipate a whole lot of costs associated with this goal. The curricula at least the ones that I have seen that are out there, are not very costly as a school-wide math, reading, science or other core academic area curricula would be. As far as progress thus far, the training that I talked about in the teacher development group, it is presented in a math studio and that is where teachers receive some intense instruction on planning lessons that cause students to participate in mathematically thinking and justification, then the teacher delivers that to a class with team members from the same grade level observing. Then the whole team retreats to a conference room or some other location and they process what they saw, then they make plans on how to implement that in future lessons. We already had an introductory workshop at the beginning of the year; we have another one scheduled for December and at least subsequent activities just like that for the remainder of the year. In terms of the math program, I have only just begun the very introductory work of seeing what other schools are using at this time. I am noticing that there are quite a number of schools that are using the same math program; Southern Berkshire, Lee, Lenox, Pittsfield and it would be a consideration that if we were to select the same math program, if it met our needs, if it is producing favorable outcomes in these other districts, then conceivably professional development down the road could be done in concert with some of these other districts and their staff as well. It is something that could be very good for our small districts to have cohorts of other grade level teachers using the same curricula and focusing on the same topics. If there are any questions, I would be happy to answer them for you. Fields – I have two questions, throughout all this, I am looking at measurements, at positive measurable outcomes but I don’t see the word play used at all. Play and its important role in social/emotional learning, it seems to me if I am a parent that wants to see what my child will be doing during the day, I see lots of things that my child will be doing but I don’t see anything about my child just having play. I see a word that really disturbs me and it is increased rigor. It seems to me from what you represented and what I read here for the second time, that there is a lot of rigor in this program already. Where is play in all of your recruitment plans and why is it not mentioned as it is an important aspect of any program you have as play has been shown through social/emotional learning…and just having kids go out and play. Maybe I feel that being on their own is really important but what really worries me is the lack of play and the emphasis on rigor because this committee knows when I first joined it and still now I have a really animosity toward state assessments and state tests and I noticed in the education lingo that is coming from the gates community and all these people who are for the common core, rigor is being mentioned and it is really hard for me to see a kid in kindergarten being told that the curriculum isn’t rigorous for you. Can you explain this? T. Lee – I think I would start by saying that increased play or a focus on play was not identified as one of our school improvement goals because I have not learned from parents, students or teachers that it is a part of our school program that is lacking at this point. In other words, my assumption in creating this plan is that we currently provide adequate opportunities for students not just during recess, during PE, during unstructured times but the nature of instruction in their classroom does allow for students to have multiple creative opportunities, social opportunities, active learning, project based learning. So when I think about the urgent needs and the needs of our kids as I see them every day at our school and at recess, I just don’t identify with the same urgency as I do in the preparation of some of the basic skills. That is what is concerning me right now is that if we look back at the data, and by no means am I saying our school program is driven exclusively by MCAS performance, because it is not. It is one indicator that we use to test how our students are acquiring basic skills, necessary basic skills that they will need to be successful as they more into middle school and high school beyond. Reading, writing, mathematics, etc. The focus of rigor, for me, rigor means that what we are asking students to do, presents them with more academic challenge. It is not necessarily that they are going to be miserable as they experience this enhanced academic challenge, in fact, I hope the opposite would be true. I think the issue that I have with your point is that I don’t necessarily see that rigor equals less enjoyable or less playful school experience. B. Fields – we will agree to disagree. My only point is the math program you talked about is getting done and you are looking at it because it is being done in response to scores that the state set. Has anybody even questioned the state and whether the state’s expectations are realistic or are they as critics of PARC pointed out, they are highly unrealistic considering the grades the kids are in and what they are being asked to do. It is almost like a kid is running and the four minute mile is the goal, so a runner would be told, you are not as a success unless you run a four minute mile. Most people who run are not going to run a four minute mile but we are going to set that as a goal. Every kid who doesn’t run a four minute mile is deficient and now we are going to add rigor and now we are going to say not only must you run a four minute mile but you have to run 3:50 and enjoy it while you are doing it. That is what concerns me is that the program that is being done in response to the state which is being…actually the critics of the state are, and the state is starting to, maybe this emphasis on benchmarks is mislaid. My point to the recent MCAS scores it just goes to show that your zip code equals the school score. Lenox and Mt. Greylock did very well and Pittsfield didn’t. Well we have had years and now we are on another round of expecting rigor and expecting benchmarks can be reached but they can’t be reached because some unrealistic goals are being set by the state and that doesn’t include the socio/economic backgrounds that we all know are one of the major aspects that determines the score. Having talked to teachers, they are doing the best they can and it is loaded against them in many cases. When we look at the number of economic disadvantaged, the number of kids on lunch programs, but my thing is maybe it is just because I am used to seeing something that is …. It is good to hear you say that there is play. R. Dohoney – when he says rigor, are you equating that with time? B. Fields – no, my definition if rigor is that what you are doing is not good enough and you have to do more. R. Dohoney – you said more, and that sounds like time. What I read is different. Structural things may be more rigorous but I don’t think what he is saying is rigor is the kids need to spend more time doing this. B. Fields – I am saying that rigor is they spend time doing hard things. We are being unrealistic in moving our expectations and that means we have to increase rigor. P. Dillon – I hear what you are saying and it also may be thinking over simplification and our measures don’t only just look at the absolute standard, they look at growth. While zip code plays a lot in what happens, and demographics can be destiny, there are thousands of examples where schools, kids and teachers beat the odds in spite of what cards they are dealt and I think Tim put together a very articulate set of goals around areas for growth and is response was brilliant. B. Fields – I agree. Totally agree. P. Dillon – there is all of this stuff going on that is wonderful and he picked out four places to do a little more work. They are not mutually exclusive; they can happen simultaneously. B. Fields – I agree. I like your answer. I understand where play is done within the classroom. I guess maybe it is just the old traditionalist in me. Play to me was go out and teachers weren’t telling you what to do and you were just going out to have fun. Swinging on a swing for 15 minutes. S. Bannon – in this improvement plan, he also doesn’t mention art, music or anything else. That doesn’t mean he has done away with it. A. Potter – the definition of rigor in education describing the result of the work that challenges students’ thinking in a new and interesting way. I don’t know if that is what we are using as educators, but I like to have a firm definition when we are having a conversation as opposed to a persona definition. T. Lee – maybe I will choose a different word next time. R. Dohoney – I don’t know where I am with the career thing in the elementary school. I have to be honest with you. I am not saying I am against it or for it. I would say that if I was identifying four goals for the elementary school personally, I don’t know if that would be in my top four. To channel Jack Spencer a little bit, I have reservations about us getting away from the broad education at the high school to this real career driven thing. To hear career at the elementary school, it gives me pause. S. Bannon – I guess it is how it is interpreted and I have a little more faith that it is not going to be by the time they are in 4th grade, tell us what your career is going to be and we will put you on that path. I think it is going to be broader and exposing kids to all kinds of careers so as they move along, they have an open mind about what they want to do. R. Dohoney – I agree, and I know they won’t be doing that. I question whether the elementary school mind can even process or process that in a way they are going to retain it or if it will affect them by the time they choose a career. Maybe it is wheel spinning. I would like to learn more about it and think more about it before I get behind it as one of our four top goals. T. Lee – it is already some of the social studies frameworks. A question that is asked in the same context or the theme in a social studies section is there are people in our community that have different roles, what do they do, we have firefighters, teacher, lawyer, doctor, everybody does different things in our community to contribute to the whole. That is the sort of thing we want to work on so that kids begin to understand the different options to think about their future possibilities. Not that they are making a choice but so they understand what is a career. Who are the people in the community that make a difference, etc. B. Fields – I like the use of your word joyful curiosity. J. St. Peter – I understand what you are saying Bill and I appreciate your concern, but for someone that has two kids in the elementary school as well as one in the middle school, from my perspective it can’t be any more rigorous. The kids are in school about 33 hours a week, they have 135 hours outside, they get to play, they have free play, in school and out. They have ample free time, unstructured play time. I wasn’t put in there because the school has that sweet spot for that balance. I like the way it is doing and Tim I think you are doing a great job. I know the answer to this but I also want the public to hear because I have heard it mentioned to me, for kids that are the higher achievers, the upper end of third grade or even above grade level, we have heard a lot about equity and other things, I personally know the school is doing a good job in talking to parents about their kids but I also know that there are other private schools that are itching to cherry pick the best that we have and I think it is critical that we keep that cohort in our school and to be good role models for all the other kids. If you could touch on what is being done and the focus we have on satisfying those kids educationally as well. What I have seen and heard parents talk, they are very happy. T. Lee – my understanding is that my approach toward that question would be through curriculum and through enrichment and through differentiation that takes place in the classroom. Curriculum and instructions put in place for those opportunities such as more challenging, rigorous curricula that we bring into the school, that is going to provide those opportunities for those kids to find an enriching experience. Student activities beyond the classroom, additional activities, such as school newspaper, we have music, instrumental music, again ways for students to express their talents, exceptional talents in some cases, that we can’t really back away from and we just have to keep exploring new ways to do that as well. J. St. Peter – thank you. The last thing was the math program we have now, you know how long the school has been using that. I was obviously before your time. P. Dillon – it predates me. So maybe 15 years we have been using it. J. St. Peter – so if it working or not, it is probably a good thing to look at. T. Lee – It is investigations and we are in the third session so Investigations 3. It is a good program and it really promotes mathematical thinking and problem solving. Where it is not as strong is in some of the repeated computational practice that I think should be a part of any math program. I don’t think there is as much of that in Investigations as there should be and some all kids, not all kids, need repeated practice with number facts to be able to develop mastery that they can then apply with efficiency to the next mathematical operation they want to take on. That is my biggest concern with Investigations. Another factor about Investigations is it is not terribly aligned with our current state math frameworks and the assessments that Investigations 3 offers; actually the assessments that the program offers are minimal on misaligned to the units of study in the program itself. The publisher had to come out with a secondary package of assessments that now the teachers are using to assess their students progress in the program. It is kind of a wonky awkward match to what we are trying to find out.
- Doren, Monument Valley Regional Middle School – The middle school’s plan has taken a pivot. We really aligned one for one with the district improvement plan. It really would benefit from the plan Tim has to put forth what we have really seen which is exciting is a spike in performance on conventional assessments like MCAS. In 3th, 4th, and 5th as well as 6th grade at the district but what is exciting for me is that all the investments that have happened over the past five or six years at the elementary school are really starting to pay off with Tier I curriculum investment and what they actually teach the students, Tier II curriculum what we actually do for students who don’t succeed right away and also Tier III what we are doing in terms of the social/emotional curriculum and a lot of intensive supports we do for students with disabilities or severe learning disabilities. I notice the difference. My faculty notices the difference in the 5th graders that have been coming across the street for the past two or three years. It makes a huge difference for us being able to successful for all students. The school improvement plan tried to capitalize on all the investments the district has made and some of the successes we have seen over the past couple of years. The district improvement plan is pretty straight forward. It talks about three areas; one is investigating and understanding proficiencies and seeing a real shift from a standards based model to a proficiency based model meaning moving away from trying to teach kids just reading, writing, math, social/emotional curriculum to really getting deep, doing the integration, starting to understand what are the ideals that we want a student in 4th grade or 8th grade or 12th grade to have when they leave the elementary, middle, high school. We want to invest in the middle school in that level of work that the district is saying we are going to do. The first goal is around proficiencies. The first objective is to identify middle school proficiency areas. Last year, we worked really hard on getting together as a full middle school. We worked on our instructional learning groups to see what does a middle school graduate look like. It is interesting that academics was only one of five areas; the other four areas were around citizenship, the whole child, connections and relationships and around an idea of college and careers. This year we realized we have to dive a lot deeper because it is great to say as a middle school you are coming out and you are a solid citizen and good at academics but what does that look like in math and science and in a social/emotional curriculum. That is what we want to dive deeper into this year. It is articulated in the different disciplines; what it looks like to leave the middle school and then in our grade levels to come to a consensus about once we get all those inputs, what does a 5th grade look like, what does a graduate from middle school look like. We want to examine our current instructions practices and learn new techniques to improve student engagement and outcomes. Is the work that we have been doing in math, teacher development group, next generation science, literacy program in english and push hard in social studies and our exploratory program and some of the work we are doing around the national work in foreign languages. We are basically in a mature place. We have been doing some of this work for three or four years. We want to look at what we have been doing and saying has it been having an effect? How do we know that our students are making progress in math, reading and writing, science and areas of the exploratory arts? We can do that; one way is the MCAS, Star 360 which we implemented in reading and writing, but the bigger thing is what we are doing at the middle school for years and that is performance assessments. The real work that we are asking the students to do when they write essays, to do claim evidence reading, math projects, research projects, and projects in their exploratory arts programs, that is interesting and I think teachers have been plugging away at that but now with science week and an interest in integrated studies, how do we take a look at humanity when we do English and social studies. How do we look at stem when we are doing science integrated with math? What does it mean to integrate the arts into a science and math program? We want to start to look at not just what are the assessments we do to discrete areas but actually how do we assess these integrated learning areas. That is an area the teachers are pretty excited about. Lastly, we want to examine practices in the development of our Tier II social/emotional learning program. We put together a clinical team that is more formal this year that our student study teams in the past. We have a strong group of our interventionists in our social/emotional area, myself, Miles Wheat as well as our nurse, started collaborating with local pediatricians which MACONY and CHP which cover 80% of our students through collaborative care and we are starting to pull in our local therapists. We want to understand what has been the real impact of all this work we have been doing around social/emotional learning. We really think we have had a strong impact with advisory and some of the other work that we have been doing on Tier I, some of the Tier II to really understand what students need to be successful in the classroom and remain in the classroom and how we have really moved our Tier III work away from moving kids out of programs and working with them in a separate setting to really being in a full inclusion program. Second goal is teacher leadership and investing in our professional learning culture. We are going to continue to the stuff we started 18 months ago with proposing the instructional leads and the team coordinators. It has been awesome. The instructional leads really look at the whole school, the whole child, what are we doing. The team coordinators are what I am really impressed with both horizontal, the team leadership on the grades and also our discipline teams. We have also added leadership from the clinical team, advisory and peer leadership to Anti-Defamation League and mentoring. It has been going great but we want to make sure we are doing well in investing it. I can say that from my point of view the idea that our team leaders are now in addition to the team leads using protocols really getting rigorous work with the groups that they work with whether it is the math team or the 5th grade team, that they are actually looking at student work, student outcomes and starting to have solid conversations. Provide professional development in facilitation, that is the work with the Great School Partnership. We work every week with our instructional leads. Dan Leibert is our coach with Great Schools Partnership which is doubling down on the work. I feel like I have a lot of platform to launch a lot of work protocols. The team leaders seem really excited about the work as well. Lastly, this connects to goal three but this is with the teachers, focus the work of the instructional learning groups on these three areas of equitable outcomes, student centered learning and community engagement. We just put in a proposal to the state called Kaleidoscope and it is about deeper learning. The state really, I’m surprised that the commissioner really wants to look at alternatives to the way we do discreet standards-based education. The commissioner is asking us, what would it look like if you had an integrated curriculum. What would it look like if you actually had kids working for long periods of time on things that jazzed them up. Well, we want to be part of that, we want to move ahead with that. We have put in an application and we want to make sure it works for all students at the middle school. We have been working on that for a while but I really want to understand what does it look like if we have all students working this kind of rigorous and exciting work. Lastly, in goal 3, implement and consistent equitable engagement strategies; we are really trying to figure out what is it that works with kids and how do we know that it is working. One of the things that we haven’t asked in many years, is this working for students, is this working for families? We haven’t done the surveys. We want to make sure that we are getting the feedback from our community that we are doing a good thing. I get a lot of great feedback from families and I also get a lot of criticism from families, that is the job. What I like is that we are getting a lot of great feedback about what we are doing at the middle school and that is in line with the elementary and now with the high school and the new leadership over the past couple of years, there has been a lot of collaboration.
- Kristi Farina, Monument Mountain Regional High School – I am hoping that I can be a little shorter because of the alignment, I won’t have to give as much detail about all of the individual pieces in my plan. Like Tim framed, we all started with our district level goals. Some of the context specifically for the high school is connected to the gaps that we have seen in data that have been indicating some ongoing gaps between our high needs and our non-high needs students and that still remains. We have been looking at ways we want to address that. Our work has certainly been accelerated by two of the large grants that you heard about. The Mass Ideas Grant that is carrying us through until April and we are looking to apply for the implementation grant connected to the work we have done there and then the Innovative Pathways Grant that we are also still in the process of developing in connection with the advanced manufacturing and health care. I also included data. I included both information about the percentage of high needs students which is relatively constant but our enrollment has declined so the numbers of students are actually up a little bit there. Our attendance has been improving. We have a drop-out rate that is pretty consistent and a graduation rate that is consistent. The piece that I included that I thought was interesting is the percent attending college. I just want to clarify what percentage that actually is. It is students who enrolled within sixteen months at any post-secondary institution. Two year and four year institutions, both state and private and also technical schools. Those numbers have decreased over the period of year from 2014 – 2018. That is something we are looking at as to why. Dohoney – do you have any sense how that compares to the state or nation? K. Farina – I actually don’t. I can look into it and get back to you. A. Potter – is there any way to have data beyond that? P. Dillon – what is hard is that we have access to kids that go to state colleges and universities, kids who go to private colleges and universities are not tracked in the state system so we don’t have access to it and that would be quite time consuming and expensive. A. Potter – my perception is part of it is we are pricing kids out of school. S. Bannon – is this necessarily a bad thing? We hired a CVTE coordinator and we have said not all kids should track to college if they are not ready or they don’t want to go to college so maybe as years move on, going to college is not a failure. K. Farina – I don’t disagree. I completely agree. I think it is tied to the work that we have been initiang around looking at our career technical education. I did include our MCAS trends and we have been consistently performing above the state averages for meeting or exceeding expectations. That includes last year when we implemented for the first time the Next Generation MCAS in both ELA and math. That will take place for science this June. Our first goal does align to the district goal. We are embarking upon a discussion at the school level and we want to include faculty, students and teachers in the discussion to identify what it is that MMRHS graduate needs to know and do to receive their diploma. We want to clearly articulate that and we want input from all to do that. The first piece of that work is within the school to have teachers working together collaboratively to better understand why that would help align our work and implications to especially the new programming we are introducing and if we are committed to being a comprehensive high school, we want to have some shared standards in terms of academics that all students will demonstrate achievement in before they receive their diploma. We also want at the same time to provide personalized options so that we are challenging those students who really want to be going to top notch private universities and taking all kinds of AP courses before they leave us but at the same time providing opportunities for students that are going to stay in Berkshire County and need skills to find jobs in this area. Connected to that work, we are looking at our instructional practices, our curriculum and our assessment practices. The first piece is around instructional practices but I am not going to dive too far into the activities because you have heard about it both from Tim and Ben. We are still working with the teacher development group in improving the practices in mathematics instruction specific to that, teachers are working on strategies to develop students’ ability to engage in different ways in the classroom and to work on what is referred to as habits of mind. The purpose of that is to get students to the point they are generalizing and justifying the mathematics for themselves with the thinking that that leads to a deeper understanding that they can apply them other ways. We began this year for the first time with our science professional development through MGSX and that is actually similar to the math PD in which the teachers are learning about strategies and moves in the classroom that promote student engagement and student exploration and move away from us structuring a classroom around lecturing. The final that Tim went into depth about is the work we are doing around co-teaching and the fact that we have a coach that is coming to work with the teachers who are co-teaching. This year at the high school because of the shift in our schedule, we have one 9th grade English class, two 10th grade English classes and two 9th grade classes that are all being co-taught and we also have three of our biology classes that are being team-taught. The difference being co-taught is a special education teacher and a regular education teacher; team taught is two regular education teachers. That was in response to a shift at the high school where we eliminated our standard level classes in all 9th and 10th core subject areas and we now have college prep and honors level courses. There is discussion but no plan for our consideration around heterogeneous grouping in 9th grade or remain with the college prep/honor model. We are looking for the future but no decision has been made for that. The model that we are using right now, is working pretty well and the passing rate for first quarter is really remarkable. I was looking at that data last night and it is exciting. Our curriculum, we need to do alignment around our curriculum and we are also starting specifically in math, looking at 9th and 10th grade. As Tim described we are having a conversation districtwide about a choice in curriculum for specifically algebra and geometry. Another change that is taking change in response to the new social studies frameworks is a shift there and the plan that we are in the developmental stages of is because of the change to the social studies frameworks, we will have to be thinking the very popular Fact and Fiction course that does not align with the social studies frameworks any longer. What we know is that the model Fact and Fiction was very successful and what I mean by that is the collaboration between English language arts and social studies was a really fabulous model so our plan it to put that model in place for all of our 10th graders in English and social studies next year. We have English and social studies teachers working on the curriculum and the plan is to have students who as a cohort are assigned to an English teacher and a social studies teacher then those students will be shared groups of students that the teachers teach so there is some alignment there and we can build toward a model that is like the Fact and Fiction model but curriculum aligns to the new standards. There has also been a substantial amount of work done in biology specifically both to align the science standards and in response to the shift at the high school regarding the schedule and the lab schedule. The three biology teachers spent a lot of time over the summer aligning all of their labs and aligning the honors and college prep courses so that the content is completely aligned and they are using some common assessments in 9th grade biology. R. Dohoney – what does that have to do with the schedule? K. Farina – the work was prompted because we eliminate the every-other-day lab and needed to restructure the class because of the schedule and while they were doing that they were looking at the curriculum and aligning to the standards. We have to start considering our assessment practices. This is something that is going to be very long-term chunk of work for us to do. In some ways, we are not going to really be able to dive in until we have a conversation about what a portrait of a graduate is with some defined proficiencies that we know we are looking at. For example, I would imagine one of our proficiency is going to be a clear communicator and how we are measuring that and giving students opportunities to be able to do that and what that looks like because I don’t think we have to have the same look per student and how we use rubrics on how we assess if students are doing things in the same way, that is a conversation we will have to engage the students and faculty in over a long period of time. P. Dillon – this is important and lays the foundation. I am really excited about this for us to say we have a process that is more rigorous than those tasks and we want some freedom and autonomy to use our process. B. Fields – that is what we were presented with two years ago and I praised that work because that is where I saw the high school going. Hopefully the state will be open and receptive to that. Under assessments I also did add the district purchase this year an assessment program Star 360. This is specifically to do both benchmarking and progress monitoring around reading and math so we will be using that this year for the first time for some progress monitoring with the hope of expanding that as we go into next year. The final thing in this first goal is around is the practice at the high school in our work around student health and wellness. We have a wellness team that has been working for the past couple of months and that wellness team consists of student representatives, parent representatives, community representatives and faculty representatives and they are really examining our practices across the board. They are looking at where in the curriculum we are addressing health and wellness at the high school; they are looking at what we are doing in our new advisory program that could support health and wellness. They are looking at all the work our clinical staff and our guidance counselors are doing connected to health and wellbeing and they are trying to put together a cohesive action plan for our work in this area moving forward and how we can improve it in response to some of the data specifically connected to the survey you had presented to you this fall so that we can hopefully improve some results for our students. You will be hearing more about this action plan as we move forward but I did want to highlight that in the school improvement plan. P. Dillon – they are going to come to our next meeting and share some of their work with us. K. Farina – the second goal is also aligned with the other two buildings in the district improvement plan around our teacher leadership and the development of the professional learning culture at the high school. For us at the high school this year the big shift is happening around the work with instructional leads. The instructional leads are now meeting weekly with their groups and the groups are interdisciplinary groups that have meetings that were built into our schedule. This was new because we did not have any teacher meeting time building into the high school schedule previously and the new schedule has allowed us to do that. The groups are going very well and I think that is a direct result of the ability to meet as frequently as they are. They are doing work using protocol conversations to look at lesson plans together and to what are called tunings; to do protocols called consultancies in which teachers can present dilemmas they are facing in their classrooms and then collectively solve those problems. It is in these groups that we are actually have many of the conversations connected to the portrait of the graduate and proficiencies and their assessments together. This structure is actually the structure that is going to allow us to do most of the work that was outlined in the first goal. We also have our department coordinators that are working on the curriculum I was describing because that is happening within departments and at the high school we refer to them as department coordinators. In addition to that we have an advisory team that is working and they are doing the planning for our new advisory. Right now, our advisory was built in to the schedule and is meeting once a week for 30 minutes. The early feedback we are getting from staff is that is not enough time for us to have advisory which is actually very exciting because I was hoping we could eventually add some more advisory to do the kind of work with students such as social/emotional development that we need; the health and wellness pieces that we integrate and there is also at the high school level, is an opportunity to integrate career awareness opportunities, preparation around writing resumes, practicing their interview skills and all those kinds of things can be done through an advisory period. We are working on improving leadership skills and this is for both teachers and students. We have a group of students you heard about that we went up to Vermont and did some work with youth and adults transforming schools together. These students are being trained in the same facilitation strategies using protocols and actually they will be leading conversations with faculty at faculty meetings so that we are engaging them not just by providing them information and not just by giving them surveys but also giving them some real voice. I look toward actually building a government structure at the high school that includes both faculty and students in the decision-making process. We don’t have that currently but that is part of this improvement plan. Goal 3 around the community engagement outreach that we are hoping to do. Part of that as I mentioned is the group that we are working with. We have another group of students doing restorative circles and we are doing that in collaboration with Railroad Street Youth Project. We are also involved in training this year with the Anti-Defamation League and we are doing work there, all this in an effort to improve health, wellbeing and school culture. We are obviously going to continue all our community collaboration around or CVTE initiatives. Sean is working with advisory committees for the individual Chapter 74 programs. So, there is an advisory committee for our automotive program, horticulture program and also a general advisory committee. Those committees meet several times a year to give us feedback on the work we are doing. We have the school council that is meeting once a month to give us feedback on all of this work as well. We are specifically trying to improve our work with our English language community so we had our parent teacher night we invited them early to join us for a pre-meeting and we had several attend. Our next outreach activity is to go to Volunteers in Medicine and we are really trying to improve our work with that community, of course with the hopes and that will improve the work with that group of students at the high school. We are also going to be partnering more with BCC to expand our articulation agreements. This year we added personal finance that students can earn college credit by taking the course at the high school. We have plans for next year to introduce English Comp 101; we are looking at providing college credit for anatomy and physiology which we already offer but we don’t have it as a course for college credit. We are looking at doing an articulation agreement around a business course and there are several other possibilities. BCC is actually taking on an initiative of their own and their goal is to have every student in every school in Berkshire County graduating with 15 credits and we are very excited about this partnership especially in the context of all the work Sean has been doing, around CVTE and around students who are looking at post-secondary opportunities that might not be our top tier students going off to the top level four year college. That work can benefit any student. The final thing is to make sure we are engaging with the community and that includes our community partners, parents and all of you in helping everyone being involved in the conversation about what are these proficiencies; what is the portrait of a MMHRS graduate and that something we shouldn’t be deciding within the school walls but that should be something that is a community conversation. B. Fields – The 9th grade curriculum in social studies is going to be hit by this new state frameworks which had nothing to do with us. It is the state saying you have to do social studies one. So what is going on there. I see the work in regards to 10th grade which is taking US History and I believe it is going to be US History 2, so the freshman program is now out the window and we are going to add US History 1, am I correct on that? My question is, what is happening to the great program with the great readings that a lot of people went through, is not required by the state but we were one of the first districts to have it, I hate to put you on the spot but what is going to happen to some of these great things in this “state takeover” of our program? K. Farina – we are aligning our content to the state standards which does mean we are going to be, next year, just addressing the 10th grade, the following year we will address 9th grade, and that means US History will span over grades 9 and 10, you are correct, I would argue the content of the curriculum is going to have to change to align to that. I don’t think that means the quality of the program has to change when we do that alignment and that some of the works that you are talking about that were in our 9th grade program were actually being talked about being used at the middle school so I think that this is a larger conversation than just 9th grade. We have to look at it over the span of 6th grade through 12th grade and where some of the things we really believe students need to have exposure to can get put if they are being removed from the 9th grade curriculum. B. Fields – good answer. P. Dillon – I think also as central as some of those texts you mentioned are, some of them need to be updated, we need to look at things from different perspectives and in different voices. B. Fields – when I was evaluated once as a teacher, the assistant principal said to me “don’t you think the Butterfly Revolution and 1984 is pase?” I said no, things like those two books never grow out and of course we now know 1984 when I was using it in the 70s and 80s, it is now as pertinent and more so than ever. What does disturb me is we had an antisemetic incident at the middle school, we have a Holocost program in both 8th grade, we will follow up in the 9th grade, we can’t do enough in regards to that and I am really disappointed that the state has not made it a requirement to be taught in high school. There are 14 states that have required the Holocost teaching, and maybe I am a hypocrite but the state will mandate it and not give us the money I’m sure. I am very concerned about that. I know that the 8th grade program is very strong in that area and I am almost sad that it is not going to be continuing. To say it can be continued through US history is a stretch as to what you are asking students to do historically and teaching wise to that time. The other point that I wanted to have, it sounds like this district is getting together on the same track; my concern when I first joined this committee is everything is going to be a cookie cutter but I am very pleased this does not speak of that at all but I am wondering if the district should at the end of 4th grade, 8th grade and 12th grade answering to the question of a portrait of a graduate and require a portfolio to graduate and not have that you have to pass so many things; they have to do a portfolio that is personal and that says to the district, this is what I learned in my 12 years. K. Farina – two things, one I couldn’t agree with you more about the importance of the conversation and the learning around diversity and culture and respecting people who are different. I think that can’t happen enough in school so any place we can do that, we should. Secondly, in regards to what you just mentioned, that certainly has been a topic of conversation and I think it is something we will be discussing. Where that conversation goes is yet to be seen. P. Dillon – we share you passion for that and the possibility towards portfolios is very much in our line. R. Dohoney – so we are moving toward a format that the extent of their social studies in 9th and 10th grade is going to be a continuum of US History? K. Farina – that is the social studies frameworks, aligned more to their english language arts experience. B. Fields – it is really something Rich, that is political, the whole thing with the state assessments, when you look…..R. Dohoney – ok ok, I know what it is. I don’t care why we are there. Peter and Kristi, do you agree with that because that is for our kids. K. Farina – I don’t feel I have enough information to fully answer that question. I think that we can offer a very robust deep experience for students connected to that curriculum. P. Dillon – I am cautiously optimistic that we will move in a good direction. The state standards are connected to national standards. I think there are some thoughtful thinking about it. Let us do some more work and come back to you. If you implement something really well, it can be wonderful and if you implement something poorly, it is going to be terrible. I think we have the capacity on our staff to teach in a very interesting way and to rearrange some content. R. Dohoney – I agree with Bill’s complete assessment of the broader social studies curriculum at the high school when I was there and what my daughter is going through, but I do think a consequence of that was a de emphasis on pure history. I don’t know how I feel about that but I am curious. P. Dillon – there was a big shift away from civics education; then we are in a situation where people aren’t voting, etc. Kristi, let’s bring back to the whole group some of the teachers who are working on some of this. K. Farina – I don’t think they are far enough along right now. P. Dillon – right, at some point. J. St. Peter – I agree that the real push toward CVTE is critical and necessary for a lot of students but there still a good portion of our students who are in the college prep class and I wanted it assured to them that by adding all these other programs that we aren’t going to the taking away or deemphasizing the kids in those programs. There is competition in other schools and we want to keep all the students in our mix. K. Farina – there are no plans to reduce any of our AP offerings or any accelerated program opportunities we offer. We will offer WISE opportunities and independent studies. All students can benefit from the crossover into both.
- Community Response to Hate Speech – P. Dillon – We have done a lot of work at the middle school and we are comfortable that students are safe and safe in the building. We did work with the local law enforcement and the district attorney’s office on this. We had meetings with parents. We have another meeting tomorrow morning with parents at the middle school and we are working through that. That being said, almost every year, we have some sort of hate speech incident. It alternates. One year it is something directed at black students, and the next year it is anti-semetic and the next year Latino students are victimized or recent immigrants. There is a pattern and it is not just in Berkshire Hills or Great Barrington or Stockbridge or West Stockbridge. It is all over the country. We have been doing a lot around reacting to it and we also have been doing a lot about trying to be proactive. The middle school and high school are doing a ton of work; the anti-defamation league, advisory work, there is all the stuff going on and we need to do more. We are going to work really hard on that. Hate speech has no place in our schools or our community but as I have said several times, the schools reflect what is going on in our community and nationally. It happens in people’s homes, families, and with strangers. On Wednesday, Ben and I convened a meeting to try to address this. We had almost 25 community leaders and faith based leaders so a lot of priests and rabbis and pastors and folks from other groups and we talked about this in depth in a very serious level. There was also the head of NAACP there, community based organizations, Railroad Street Youth Project, Berkshire South, etc. Out of that we are going to have another meeting and several others after that, but what we agreed to early as a group is that it is important that we stand together against hate and a lot of folks in the group has agreed individually to write a letter to the editor over the next several months. One of the things that we are going to try to do to disrupt this cycle of hate speech is to bring it out into the sunlight and talk about it. Expect to see some of those. We will see where we land. There were some talks of making videos and a whole host of things and one of the things that came up that is obviously very important is to value students in all of this and to make space and time to hear their voices, so we are going to work on that hard as well.
- Extra-Curricular Appointment(s)
|(all 2019 – 2020 unless otherwise noted)|
|Freadman, Holly||Co-Advisor – Class Of 2020 – MMRHS||$653.50|
|Baldwin, Lisa||Co-Advisor – Class Of 2020 – MMRHS||$653.50|
|(above advisors replace S.Flynn & M.Velasco)|
|Wheeler, Sheila||Speech/Language/Pathology Assistant Supervisor – MBRES||$3,792|
|Knight, Nikki||Assistant Ski Coach – MMRHS||$2,722|
|Seminara, Brian||Alpine Ski Coach – MMRHS||$4,358|
|Cormier, Stephen||Assistant Wrestling Coach – MMRHS||$2,722|
|Jones, Simon||Wrestling Coach – MMRHS||$4,358|
|Flynn, Kristen||Varsity Girls Basketball Coach – MMRSH||$4,358|
|Velasco, Marcie||Assistant Coach – Girls Basketball – MMRHS||$2,722 (funded by Booster Club)|
|Perreault, John||JV Coach – Girls Basketball – MMRSH||$2,722|
|Koldys, Randy||Varsity Boys Basketball Coach – MMRHS||$4,358|
|Zigmand, Karl||Assistant Coach Boys Basketball||$2,722 (funded by Booster Club)|
|Powell, Cam||JV Coach – Boys Basketball||$2,722|
|Svrida, Jill||Varsity Swim Coach||$4,358|
|Boudreau, Matt||Assistant Swim Coach||$2,722|
- Public Comment
- Written Comment
MOTION TO ADJOURN – R. DOHONEY SECONDED: J. ST. PETER ACCEPTED: UNANIMOUS
The next school committee meeting will be held on December 12, 2019 – Regular School Committee Meeting, Muddy Brook Regional Elementary School, Library, 7pm
Meeting Adjourned at 8:44pm
Christine M. Kelly, Recorder
______________________________ Christine M. Kelly, Recorder
______________________________ School Committee Secretary