|
MINUTES
WATERTOWN BOARD OF EDUCATION
REGULAR MEETING
WATERTOWN HIGH SCHOOL
TECHNOLOGY CENTER
MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2008 - 7:30 PM
PRESENT: Joseph Apicella
Gina Calabrese, Chairman
Mary Colangelo, Secretary
Kevin Killeen
Thomas Lambert
Mary Dzioba
Richard Mazzamaro, Vice Chairman
OTHERS PRESENT: Thad Hasbrouck, Director of Curriculum and Professional Services
Shirley Oliver, Interim Director of Budget & Financial Planning
Karen Baldwin, Superintendent of Schools
Richard Mastroianni, Student Council Representative
ABSENT: Janice Pond
Todd Griffin
A. Call Meeting To Order
Ms. Calabrese, Chairman, called the Regular Meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
B. Salute to the Flag
Ms. Calabrese, Chairman, led the Pledge of Allegiance.
C. Report from Student Council Representative – Richard Mastroianni
Mr. Mastroianni: Good evening, everyone, Madam Chair and Superintendent Baldwin. Tonight I would like to discuss with the board recent and upcoming school events. First off, last Friday and this Monday many members of the junior class visited Ellis Island. To me, this is one of the most memorable field trips I have ever been on. I went last year, it was great. Seeing the Statue of Liberty up close for the first time was one of the greatest things I have ever done. Also, visiting a place where my ancestors passed through was something I’d always wanted to do. My grandfather always talked about his parents traveling through there. I was amazed when I had the opportunity to see their names etched in stone. If anyone in this room has the opportunity to do so, I highly recommend going to Ellis Island if you haven’t. Next, student council has planned two great events. The first one is the annual school bonfire. Last year, it was a great success. There was food, refreshments and the entire activity in general was a great and safe way for friends to meet and get together. The other event planned is a party for the new coming Spanish exchange students. Because the World Language Club is already throwing them a welcome party, the Student Council has decided that we would bid them farewell. We’ll be serving fall theme foods; apple pie, pumpkin pie and various other desserts. Also, during the exchange student’s stay, they’ll get to shadow Watertown High School Students, go to their classes, do everything we do, and also they get to take a trip to Washington D.C. this year, too, which I think is great. That’s all I have for your tonight and thank you very much.
D. Report from PTA/PTO Liaison
No one present at this meeting.
E. Public Participation
No public participation
F. Budget Summary – (information Only – No Action Required)
Ms. Calabrese: The budget summary is in the board member’s packets for information only. Are there any questions or comments about the budget summary?
No discussion.
G. Committee Reports:
1. Advertising Committee: Ms. Colangelo: no report
2. Athletics Committee: Ms. Apicella: Madam Chair, we had a meeting last week in which we addressed several issues. First, there were some athletic teams who brought uniform proposals to the athletic committee, who had gone through the Athletic Director as well as working with students, parents, coaches and staff and the athletic sub-committee would like to put them forth as an agenda item to be approved by the board. The other topic that we discussed was the pay for play, pay to participate issue. The Gold Circle of Sports as well as other community members had brought forth this as an issue and it was a good starting point to begin our discussions regarding how we can eliminate or restructure the pay to participate fees if you will. The board, as well as the community, I think that we are in agreement that we’d love to eliminate this fee, however, we don’t want to do it at the detriment of our academics. We are reaching out to the community for creative solutions as well as increased support for education overall. We look forward to increased cooperation with Gold Circle as well as the community in trying to resolve that issue and find an equitable solution for everyone.
3. Budget Committee: Mr. Lambert: no report
4. Curriculum & Instruction Committee: Mr. Killeen: Madam Chair, the Curriculum & Instruction Committee met on October 7th. They had an outstanding meeting where the curriculum looks good and part of the high school’s continued to be developed and we’re here tonight for approval on some of those curriculum.
5. Facilities Committee: Mr. Mazzamaro: no report
6. Policy and Labor Committee: Mary Colangelo: no report
7. Cablevision: Ms. Dzioba: no report
8. PBC Representative: Mr. Mazzamaro: no report
9. Education Connection Representative: Janice Pond is absent this evening
10. Town Hall Joint Committee: Mr. Lambert: no report
H. Communications – Secretary
Ms. Colangelo: This is a note from Mary Dzioba and family. “Dear Board of Education members, thank you for the beautiful flowers and for your support during this difficult time. Your kindness is greatly appreciated, Sincerely, Mary Dzioba and family.”
I. Minutes
1. Regular Board of Education Meeting – September 22, 2008
MOTION: (Ms. Colangelo, sec. Mr. Mazzamaro) to approve the Minutes of the Regular Board of Education Meeting of September 22, 2008.
Vote: All in favor
Motion passed unanimously
J. Superintendent’s Recommendations and Report
Ms. Baldwin: Letter J, which details for the Board appointments which have taken place in the school system. You will note that many of them, for lack of a better term are behind a little bit. They are fall coaching appointments for the most part and other new hires due to positions that were either resignations or that were vacated for other purposes. Does the board have any questions relative to section J of the agenda? The other issues is transfers that you see on the agenda, page 3 and that took place at the beginning of the school year, actually and we’re now confirming that in writing to you. And that is the Art teacher who is now the full time Art teacher at Swift Middle School.
1. Appointments – (Information Only – No Action Required)
a. Mr. Keith Borkowski to the position of Assistant Football Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,130.00 payable at the end of the season.
b. Ms. Denise Brown to the position of Varsity Field Hockey Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,128.00 payable at the end of the season.
c. Ms. Catherine Castle to the position of One to One Paraprofessional, Category #1, at John Trumbull Primary School starting September 29, 2008, for 6.0 hours paid per day, at an hourly rate of $12.23.
d. Mr. Paul Catuccio to the position of Girl’s Soccer Coach at Swift Middle School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $1,824.00 payable at the end of the season.
e. Ms. Sherry Cosmos to the position of Cheerleading Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,738.00 payable at the end of the season.
f. Ms. Randilynne Crudele to the position of Resource Program Paraprofessional, Category #2, 20.0 hours paid per week, and Cafeteria Paraprofessional, Category #5, 7.5 hours paid per week at Judson School starting September 24, 2008, at an hourly rate of $12.23.
g. Ms. Katie Elwood to the position of Field Hockey Coach at Swift Middle School for the 2008-2009 school year, at a contractual stipend of $1,691.00 payable at the end of the season.
h. Ms. Diane Gaulzetti to the position of Newspaper Advisor at Swift Middle School effective for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $950.00.
i. Ms. Kim Hailstones to the position of Resource Program Paraprofessional, Category #2, at John Trumbull Primary School starting October 6, 2008, for 16.5 hours paid per week at an hourly rate of $12.23.
j. Mr. Kris Kuegler to the position of Cross Country Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,607.00 payable at the end of the season.
k. Mr. Mykal Kuslis to the position of Assistant Boys’ Varsity Soccer Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $1,824.00 payable at the end of the season.
l. Ms. Cara LaFlamme to the position of Resource Program Paraprofessional, Category #2, at Swift Middle School starting October 20, 2008, for 30.0 hours paid per week, at an hourly rate of $12.23.
m. Mr. William Leifert to the position of Cross Country Coach at Swift Middle School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,217.00 payable at the end of the season.
n. Mr. Scott McQueeney to the position of Assistant Football Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,870.00 payable at the end of the season.
o. Mr. Tony Mucciaro to the position of Girl’s Soccer Varsity Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,000.00 payable at the end of the season.
p. Mr. Roger Ouellette to the position of Varsity Football Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $5,083.00 payable at the end of the season.
q. Mr. George Palomba to the position of Assistant Football Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,130.00 payable at the end of the season.
r. Ms. Carrie Prausauckas to the position of Assistant Field Hockey Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,217.00 payable at the end of the season.
s. Mr. Garry Smith to the position of Girls’ Swim Varsity Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,130.00 payable at the end of the season.
t. Mr. Dane Street to the position of Boys’ Varsity Soccer Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $3,130.00 payable at the end of the season.
u. Mr. Jerry Valentino to the position of Assistant Football Coach at Watertown High School for the 2008-2009 school year at a contractual stipend of $2,870.00 payable at the end of the season.
v. Mr. Jerry Valentino to the position of Corridor Paraprofessional, Category #5, at Watertown High School starting October 6, 2008, for 6.0 hours paid per day, at an hourly rate of $12.23.
w. Ms. Jane Blakeman to the position of Resource Program Paraprofessional, Category #2, at Swift Middle School starting October 20, 2008, for 6.5 hours paid per day, at an hourly rate of $15.38.
2. Transfers – (Information Only – No Action Required)
a. Ms. Michelle Bunnell from .40 Art Teacher at Polk School and .60 Art Teacher at Swift Middle School to 1.00 FTE Art Teacher at Swift Middle School effective with the 2008-2009 school year.
3. Three School Project Update
Ms. Baldwin: I am pleased to report to the board that through communication made late this afternoon from O & G, the construction management company, that Mr. Joe Vetro will be back on sight as the project supervisor here at Watertown High School effective Monday, October 20th. He will replace Raymond Swiford, so that’s good news for us and the project. We’ve had very positive experience with Mr. Vetro with the Swift Middle School project and so we’re hopeful that this will help us with all of our current challenges here at the high school. In terms of the work and the scope of the work at the high school, we are still doing abatement. We did engage in abatement this past weekend. We will also inform the department of Health that we’ll engage in abatement for the next three Saturdays. Mr. Geary’s working with O & G to get those communications out to the school community so that the building is free of students so that we can leave them at work, but that’s important to keep us on our timeline. We continue to do this abatement in the demolition area and Mr. Ceniccola from the school system has been working to make sure the mechanicals are in place so that we will have heat, especially in these demolished classrooms, next to the demolished area. Everything looks like we’re on sight for that and in progress.
Judson Elementary School, we are almost finished with the abatement. We are a little bit behind schedule relative to the demolition and the abatement. We are hopeful to get a revised construction schedule from O & G tomorrow night. There is a public building committee meeting tomorrow night and Mr. Miller from the Board of Ed will be attending.
Polk Elementary School, TriStar contractors are on sight right now actually verifying the status of the backup boiler at Polk. As you may recall, there was discussions last year to replace that backup boiler, but because of what we thought would have been a construction timeline that would have had us in construction this past July, we did not replace that boiler. Therefore, we are trying to get an estimate for repairs for that boiler as we start the heating season very soon, so once I have that information for you, I will get it to you. Kaestle Boos has completed their redesign of the building to accommodate the flood plain work so once this and other engineering work can be confirmed, we will move toward the State Department of Ed for approvals on Polk. Are there any questions on the Three School Project Update?
Mr. Killeen: Is anyone planning on being around on the 500 year flood plan?
4. CMT/CAPT Presentation – (Information Only – No Action Required)
Ms. Baldwin: Good Evening, it is my great pleasure to present to you this evening the results of the 2008 Connecticut Mastery Test and the Connecticut Academic Performance test. These are the results from last spring, 2007-2008 school year. Before I begin, I do want to thank Helen Reinke in Mr. Hasbrouck’s office in helping with the report document that you received in your packet that you received over the weekend, and also with helping with the PowerPoint construction as well. As I think board members and members of the public are aware, the CMT and CAPT test was a very rigorous, high standards assessment that all children in grades 3 through 8 participate in as well as children in grade 10. That is the Connecticut Academic Performance test. These tests test children on important objectives in reading, writing, math and science and they’re absolutely the skills and knowledge that we want all children to be able to accomplish by end of each grade level. These tests absolutely strengthen our accountability system, holding each one of us responsible for children’s outcomes across the school system, and they help in guiding our professional development, our areas of emphasis, as well as perhaps most importantly tracking the results of student progress over time. We call that cohort data, and you will see some of that tonight. Tonight you will see charts and graphs that display student performance in reading, writing and math at each individual grade level, and you will also see that over time in different groups of 3rd graders, different groups of 4th graders, over time and you will also see a cohort analysis. What’s important to note is that our student performance is strong. There are areas of great strength in Watertown, and there is good work being done in the school system. Our challenge now is to strengthen that work and in many areas, replicate it.
These are the results of grade 3 students. You can see the 2007 results and the 2008 results. In reading, writing and mathematics, there are varying demanding content standards being tested. In math, there are 25 different content strands that are clustered in five domains. Those domains are integrated understanding, algebraic reasoning, probability and statistics, geometry and measurement and numerical and proportionate reasoning. So those are lofty big ideas in mathematics that we are testing 3rd grader’s knowledge in. In reading, there are four big content strands basically focusing on reading comprehension skills. And in writing, there is a holistic writing test as well as children’s ability to understand content and finished products in terms of revising and editing. Those contents strands are present in grades 3 through grade 8. Basically, in order for children to be at goal, it means that they have to understand them to the level to be successful in a subsequent grade, so this is rigorous student assessment. One of the things that you will note is that we are reporting the percentage of children at or above goal, not the percentage of children at proficiency. The No Child Left Behind Act requires that we have 100% of our children proficient by the 2013-2014 school year. As a leadership team, we are really focusing on students at or above goal. Focusing on high expectations, focusing on rigor and excellence, because you will see throughout this presentation that the foundation is there, and we can take our children from where they are and move all of them forward. So this represents children at or above goal. I don’t know if you can tell, but in the 2008 column, in reading and writing, those two scores are shaded slightly, and they are shaded slightly because they are slightly below the state percentages of children at goal, and so that’s one way that we compare ourselves to similarly situated school districts, we also compare ourselves, obviously, to the state percentages of children at or above goal. And so, clearly, as a district, we are focusing on a better understanding our reading and writing scores and the information in our curriculum to help us improve in that area so that we can see grade 3 performance enhanced over time.
Grade four, again you can see some nice jumps. These are not the same cohorts of children, but in 2007, only 61 ½% of fourth graders were at or above goal, in 2008, a different group of children, nevertheless, our fourth graders performed better. That’s true in all areas this year for the 2008 results. Again, focusing on our writing scores, our writing scores are exemplary. We are really doing good things in our writing curricula across grades 3 through 8 and even at the high school as well, and so our strategies and our interventions, what we are using in writing, we need to replicate that.
Grade 5, look at the writing score, 80.6% of children at or above goal. This is not proficiency, this is at or above goal. So again, this is a very strong performance. This year, in 2008, for the first time, science was tested. It was tested in grades 5 and grade 8 and again, for the first time being tested through the state, 59 ½% of our children were at or above goal. That points to strong curriculum aligned to state standards and I think over time, we’ll see that improve as well.
Grade 6, our reading scores, again in 2007 they were strong. In 2008 they improved even more. Look at the writing in grade 6. Jumped almost a little over 5 percentage points. Mathematics is slightly shaded and again that is because it is slightly below the state number of children meeting goal.
Grade 7, you can see that over time, our student performance improves from grade 3 to grade 7, some real areas of strength here. Reading 84 almost 85% of our children at or above goal, writing 81%. Again, mathematics is not where it needs to be. You will see that across the system and we have plans in place to strengthen that over time. I would tell you that as a district, we need to consider ourselves between the 75 and 80% at or above goal range. That has to be a performance target for all of our kids. It is increasingly difficult to move children when you’re already in the 85 percentage range, but we can do it. We have the ability, we have strong school leaders, we have outstanding school teachers that are working hard on implementing this curriculum, so we need to continue to focus our efforts so that all children are moving towards at or above goal.
Grade 8, strong student performance in reading and writing. Mathematics dipped a little bit, again it’s not the same group of children, obviously, but that performance dipped, but look at strength in science there. For the first time, that test was administered last spring and almost 71% of our children were at or above goal.
What’s important to note in all of these analysis, is that as a district, we’re scoring reasonably well, some areas of real strength in writing, some areas of real strength in reading, grades 6 through 8 and a solid performance in mathematics, but we can do better. What is important to note is that there is what we would call an achievement gap that as much as these numbers look promising, if you were to look at children who come from economically disadvantaged homes, the percentage of children at or above goal is stark compared to children who come from advantaged homes. I would say differential anywhere between 20% difference to even 40%. The same is true with children who have special needs. The performance of children with special needs lags far behind their non-special education peers. That’s an achievement gap. We also have some gender differences that we noticed. Our writing scores are carried heavily by our girls. Our reading scores, the girls out performed boys, but it’s not dramatic. It’s slight. Mathematics, boys out performed girls, but very slight difference and again, I would say our mathematics score as a whole aren’t where we want them to be in terms of being at or above goal.
Mr. Killeen: Superintendent, could you refer to the prior slide for one minute, please? Thank you.
Ms. Baldwin: This is a summary again, it’s not a cohort analysis. It takes a look at the last three years of student performance of children in grades 3 through 8. It’s the same test that they all took, different children, different groups of grade 3, grade 4, grade 5, etc.. You can see that we have been improving since 2006. Grade 3 continues to be a trouble spot. I would tell you that’s true statewide. I don’t think Watertown is unusual, relative to its third grade results. It seems across the state, 3rd graders, I think, have a hard time developmentally sitting and taking this rigorous test. I think that plays a part. Nevertheless, we know that some districts out perform others. We are continuing to examine our curriculum, instruction and assessment, especially at the pre-K to 2 level to make sure that when children leave grade 2, our third grade teachers know what to expect of them entering grade 3. This is all about alignment, coherence, vertical articulation so that when children leave one grade level, the next grade level understands what to expect of them and what level to pitch their instruction. But again, looking at the reading summary, from grades 6, 7 and 8, that is real strong student performance. It’s outstanding and the growth that we can see across all grade levels, again with the exception of grade 3, a little blip, but there is significant growth. That is excellent. We want to attribute that to some of our changes that have taken place in terms of professional development and guided reading comprehensive literacy approaches. All of this is paying off dividends for our children in terms of their performance on this test. Again, writing, our writing performance over time has been strong, when you look at 2006 and compare it to 2008, but overall, we’re still seeing incremental growth. These types of numbers, the 77% of children at or above goal and the 82%, this is where we want all of our kids to be in all content areas, not only on the CMT, but also in the CAPT. This is high expectations. This is no longer saying that proficiency is what the federal government is looking for. We can far out exceed that. It’s not about low expectations. It’s about high expectations and clearly, we’re able to do this work. One of the good pieces about this writing analysis is there’s five bands of student performance, level 5 is the advanced level, level 4 is the goal level, so we are reporting to you here, the combined score of level 4 and 5. When we break this information down further, we can see that 31 to 42% of our kids in grades 4 through 8 were at the advanced level. That’s important. That goes to answering those questions that parents often ask; how are you stretching my child?, what ways is my child being exposed to more rigorous thinking and critical problem solving skills in the classroom. When we see children scoring at the 31 – 42% range in advanced, it means that they are being extended and that’s outstanding. In the previous slide in reading, we had 21-32% of our children in grades 4 through 8 in the advanced band. That’s that concept of continuous improvement for all children, that it’s no longer just band 3 which is proficient, it’s all children moving from proficient to goal, and from goal to advanced. We can do that, there is evidence of that. You can see that right here. 42% of our 8th graders in the advanced range. We need to do that across the school system and all content areas.
The math analysis summary, you can see is relatively consistent. Again, this is children at or above goal. We’re pleased to see that jump in grade 3 mathematics from 2006 to 2008. Grades 5 and 6 are shaded because again, we did not out perform the state performance at goal there. We are optimistic that some of our strengthening that we are doing in the reading program, pre-K through 12, helping children develop an academic vocabulary, improving their reading comprehension skills, improving their thinking skills, we believe will have effect on our math scores. Children in math have to be able to read the problems and understand what the problems are asking of them. And then, solve the problems and write about the problems so to the extent that right now, we’re focusing on our reading program, pre-K to 12, we believe that that will have benefit in our math program. We’re also doing the work of cross-checking between our curricula objectives and the state standards to insure everything’s aligned, making sure, again, it seems very straight forward, but to the extent that teachers know what children are supposed to be able to do at the end of each grade level and then teach to that next standard is important, and so we have work ahead of us in mathematics in understanding grade level expectations and articulating the curriculum objectives across pre-K to 12 and strengthening our assessment system to make sure that we are getting good formative information to enhance our instruction as we move forward each year.
This is great news if you look at this. This is cohort data. So this is the same groups of children over time. So as third graders in reading in 2006, only 54.3% of those children were at or above goal in reading. Today, as fifth graders, they jumped 12 percentage points. That’s great. That speaks to the power of our instruction, that speaks to the power of our teacher’s ability to diagnose children’s needs and to intervene appropriately. Look at grades 4, 5 and 6. Fourth graders in 2006 were at 59%. Look at that jump in 2008. Again, that speaks to the power and the capabilities of our teaching staff and the fine work of the district administrators, many of whom are here tonight. Grades 5, 6 and 7, again, fifth graders in 2008 up almost 20 percentage points from when they were in 5th grade. That’s outstanding. I want to celebrate here. And again, eighth graders, comparing to where they were in sixth grade in 2006, up almost 14 percentage points. And again, the teachers and the administrators can tell you how hard it is when you look to move children from 78.2% to 79.3% at or above goal, that is hard. It’s hard to get a definite number of kids and approve them at goal or advanced, so that’s excellent work. Again, in writing, over 13 percentage points improvement in grades 3 to 5. From grade 4 to 6, almost 13 percentage points again. From grades 5 to 7, roughly 4 ½ percentage points, grades 6 to 8, over 13 percentage points in writing. That’s excellent. That is good work. That is the same group of children traveling through our school system. It means that, to the extent that we have systems aligned, curriculum instruction assessment in these areas, they’re aligned and operating well. Again, mathematics, there is improvement. That’s excellent. At the end of the day, we’re not at the overall percentage level where we want to be, but the good news here, is that we are improving. I would tell you that we are in an improvement level, and we have the capability to continue to move forward in mathematics. Again, cohort date from grades 3, 4 again, in reading in 2007, they were at 56%, just this past spring, they moved forward over 11 percentage points to 67%, so there is strength there. Our children are improving and look at the writing. We’re doing outstanding work in writing and so, again, we’ll need to better understand how writing instruction is being delivered across the school system and to the extent that we can replicate it, we need to do that.
In summary, writing is a very positive focus, grades 4 through 8, grades 6 through 8 reading, very strong and again, I commented on the number of students, the percentage of students who have moved into that advanced range in writing will want to continue to move children into the advanced range in all content area testing. Overall, we all saw, our results at grade 3 aren’t where we want them to be, especially relative to our performance grades 4 through 8. We need to continue to examine that. Mathematics performance overall, in terms of children at or above goal is an area of concern. Scoring in that 55 – 67% range, that’s not where Watertown needs to be. We can see that by evidence in our other content strand results, so we need to continue to examine this. Reading performance in grades 3 through 5 is also not where we want to be, so we’re continuing our efforts in that area. I think the positive note here is clearly the cohort analysis. Very strong evidence in movement into improvement and even beyond improvement towards excellence and the idea for us now is to sustain that level of work.
The CAPT test was administered this past spring to over 240 tenth graders at the high school and focusing on the writing across the disciplines, a tremendous increase there of almost 13 percentage points and that’s through focused, targeted work at the high school with a clear message that says we can do better and we will do better. Look at the results. Every teacher had to focus on the writing process and the writing across the content area professional development was focused at the high school in terms of reading and writing and our results show that. Reading across the disciplines again, 46.7% of our kids were at or above goal. What’s important to note here, is that is I were to show you the proficiency levels, the proficiency levels for writing would be at 90.3. If I showed you the reading, we’d be at 89%. Mathematics, 81% and science, almost 80% as well. And so, proficiency, clearly, we have large numbers of children clustered at that proficient level, and we believe that some of our work that we’re doing is curriculum revision, which the board will see tonight will help to move children out of proficient and into that more rigorous level of thinking and synthesizing information, applying their learning, so that we will have more children scoring at or above goal. But absolutely, in terms of writing across the disciplines, this was a remarkable instructional effort that clearly shows that when the entire school staff focus on goal, that they’re able to teach children to reach these rigorous standards. I would say that for the short term, we want to see those percentages of children at or above goal, at or around 60% on the CAPT. That would be an excellent place for us to chart our performance and to stay there and see at 60% in the next two years if we can’t move that up towards 70%, but that is our performance target for this year is really trying to move in the 60% of children at or above goal. An so that writing score is where we believe the other three content areas can be.
Summary of results: Significant growth in writing and reading, we’re certainly higher than the state performance in writing and reading and again mathematics, you can see that systemically, here that we need to take a close examination of our standards, the state standards, making sure our curriculum is aligned to those standards, that we have best instructional practices in place in mathematics so that we can continue to see children improve in their performance in mathematics.
So as a district, we’re clearly talking the work of improvement, and improvement not because of the state test and accountability, but improvement because it really is the moral imperative. We need to have children who are prepared for this 21st century who can lead this country and this world and absolutely the day to day work that we do in Watertown helps to prepare kids for this world. What we are doing, is we are beginning to think systemically about our work, focusing on best instructional practices, making sure again, you’ve heard this a lot, that the standards, the curriculum, the assessment and instruction is aligned, that they make sense and are working together. We are working on our ability to use data effectively. We do an awful lot of assessment, so there are data available to us, the point is now, how can we extract that data, use that data to make meaningful instructional decisions day to day You can see on the fourth bullet the term common formulated assessments. Those are ongoing assessments in the classroom that help to inform our instruction, help us to guide and target interventions for children so that we can monitor their progress and teach them at their instructional level. One of the great things that takes place in Watertown is the professional development system, and so now we are continuing our efforts to provide job imbedded professional development using that protocol time that is available to take a look at student work, to take a look at data, function as data teams on these improvement efforts. And lastly, but perhaps most importantly, is to hold each one us accountable for improved student learning. It’s not one individual classroom teacher, it’s not just the superintendent, it’s all of us collectively leading this important work. I think that that is essential in a high performance school system. So we are continuing to focus on district goals that say that all children can achieve at high levels. We’re continuing to strengthen those systems of curriculum instruction and assessment, as well as professional development. Focusing on our local assessment data and then, absolutely, supporting the work of data teams, providing them time and resources to further examine the performance date from 2008 and make appropriate instructional decisions.
Again, setting challenges and attainable performance targets, you heard me speak about them. At the high school, we really want to see 60% of our children at or above goal. At the grades 3 through 8 level, we need to be in that 75-85% of children at or above goal. We’re right there in many areas, so now it’s just a matter of again, that systems work of alignment and best practices and instruction. In terms of IEP’s, IEP’s are Individual Educational Plans and those are for our children who are identified with special needs. We want to make sure, because we do have an achievement gap, we’re looking at those IEP’S and aligning them with the performance objectives on the CMT and CAPT. We are right now engaged in professional development that focuses on differentiation of instruction. It is also helping teachers to manage challenging behavior across the classrooms and also continue to strengthen our co-teaching model. We believe that that co-teaching model provides a system of excellence so that all children can see success. We need to continue to strengthen that through PD. One of the other things that we are doing, is that we are using some of our grant dollars to engage a consultant to come in and support the reading and language arts instruction pre-K to12. That individual was in the district last week and spent time with every principal to better understand the reading instruction across the system and then come up with a report to share back with them about how she can help support class instruction and implementation of our new reading materials as well. At the school level, the principals and supervisors and other leaders are focusing on developing goals. You’ll hear from Andy Lees in about six weeks or soon the goals of the Special Education Department. All of our school principals have established school goals with performance targets in place and those are all represented in what I would call an improvement or an action plan. This is part of our accountability, it helps to hold each one of us accountable for improved student learning. In terms of some of our systems work, pre-K to 8, we’re taking a look at the system of teacher evaluation and teacher professional growth objectives and making sure that their growth objectives are aligned to student learning outcomes that they’re rigorous. We’re also taking a look at that professional development system, making sure that differentiation is a key topic. Making sure that the StoryTown reading program is well supported. That we’re also focusing on building academic vocabulary reading comprehension skills as well as behavior management. All of this will help the system to improve and student performance outcomes to improve. Again, focusing on that standards based curriculum. At the high school, you’ll here a little bit about this tonight, but we’re implementing a revised curriculum in grades 9 and 10 in the core academic areas. This will lead to more rigor, which again will lead to more children at or above goal in those four assessment areas that we just looked at in the CAPT. That that revised curriculum is aligned to state standards and is also linked to the academic expectations which are part of the NEASC accreditation process. Every content area at the high school is implementing quarterly reading assessments. This will also help to improve student learning. Again, teacher professional growth objectives are focused on critical thinking skills, higher level thinking and reading for information across the disciplines.
And as in place at the elementary and middle school level, data team meetings are being conducted departmentally and school wide.
So in summary, there are great things happening in Watertown and children are learning at high levels and powerful instruction is taking place in every classroom across the system. We need now to continue to strengthen the broader systems of curriculum instruction and assessment and keep them aligned and focused on standards. We need to build on this past work that’s been done and create coherence around it so that each one of us understands how these systems play into one another and also perhaps, what’s most important, high expectations for all students that are focused on standards and effort. If you have any questions, I’d be happy to answer them.
Ms. Calabrese: Wonderful report, thank you very much.
5. Student Artwork
Ms. Baldwin: I just want to draw the board’s attention to the artwork on the walls here, as well as members of the audience. This student artwork was done by children in grades k through grade 12 and is just another wonderful representation of the strong curricular that we have in place in Watertown, the fine teachers and just the rigorous expectations. I think what’s fun is if you do a little (inaudible) in level 3 at the high school and you can just see the strength of our curriculum and see how it builds one upon the other and it’s that same idea in the core content as well. I do want to recognize these fine students and their artwork this evening.
The artwork that is on display this evening was done by the following young artists:
Jorge Cortina -Kindergarten -John Trumbull Primary School
Emily Hinman -Grade 1 -John Trumbull Primary School
Hannah Mehlin -Grade 2 -John Trumbull Primary School
Allesandra Mayo -Grade 3 -Judson School
Spencer Deros -Grade 4 -Polk School
Gabriel Pietrorazio -Grade 5 -Judson School
Selena Mancini -Grade 6 -Swift Middle School
Christine Manalo -Grade 7 -Swift Middle School
Emily Lawson -Art 1 -Watertown High School
Amy Henion -Art 3 Drawing -Watertown High School
Brianna Pitino -Art 3 Painting -Watertown High School
Christina Weaver -Art 4 Drawing -Watertown High School
Nicole Geletka -IS Photo -Watertown High School
K. Report from the Chairman
Ms. Calabrese: The dedication ceremony for Swift Middle School will take place this Saturday, October 18th at 9:00 a.m. Abatement in the demolition area at Watertown High School area continues and the abatement work is completed at Judson School. We continue to focus on improving the outcomes and opportunities for all children so eloquently discussed by Ms. Baldwin during her report. Despite our building projects and our tough economic times, we cannot and will not fail in our commitment to provide an excellent public education for the students of Watertown. The budget development handbook has been distributed to school administrators. Our priorities include funding NEASC requirements for the high school, responding to legislative mandates and a textbook acquisition plan that is aligned with curriculum updates and revisions.
L. Action Items: - Adoption of Items to be Approved by Consent
1. Consideration of the Approval of the Acceptance of Gifts
a. MOTION made by Mr. Mazzamaro, sec. by Ms. Colangelo
Mr. Mazzamaro: That the board to consider the approval of the following gift:
The Woodward Foundation would like to donate a grant for $5,000 to the music department at Watertown High School to be used for the purchase of marching band uniforms.
Discussion: none
Motion passed unanimously
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. MOTION made by Mr. Mazzamaro, sec. by Ms. Colangelo
Mr. Mazzamaro: I move the board to consider the approval of the following gift:
The Watertown High School Gridiron Booster Club would like to donate a Sports Cool powered tanker with cart to Watertown High School to be used by the football team. The value of this battery powered 40 gallon portable hydration system is $1119.99.00.
Discussion: none
Motion passed unanimously
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. MOTION made by Mr. Mazzamaro, sec. by Ms. Colangelo
Mr. Mazzamaro: I move the board consider the approval of the following gift:
Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Bartholomeo would like to
donate tackboard sheets, valued at approximately $99.00,
to Watertown High School to be used by the Art Department.
Discussion: none
Motion passed unanimously
Ms. Calabrese: It is recommended that letters of thanks be sent to donors of these gifts.
2. Consideration of the Approval of W.H.S. Community Day
It is recommended that the Board approve of Community Service Day for approximately 112 students at Watertown High School on Tuesday, November 11, 2008, under the direction of Principal Matthew Geary and Assistant Principal Marc Balanda. According to Webster Insurance, U.S.I., the students will be protected under the Board of Education’s liability insurance coverage. Marc Balanda is present tonight to answer any questions. (See Attachment A.)
The purpose of this activity is:
1.) To engage Watertown High School students in a school-wide community service project.
2.) To provide assistance to senior citizens in the Watertown community.
3.) To foster a positive relationship between the school and the community at large.
MOTION made by Ms. Colangelo, sec. Mr. Mazzamaro
Ms. Colangelo: I make a motion that the board approve a community service day of approximately 112 students at Watertown High School, Tuesday, November 11, 2008 under the direction of Mr. Matthew Geary and Assistant Principal Marc Balanda.
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Consideration of the Approval of New Athletic Uniforms
1. It is recommended that the Board approve of new girls’ field hockey uniforms for Watertown High School. Mrs. Legge reviewed the uniforms and has determined that they meet all of the requirements for compliance with both CIAC regulations and the Board of Education’s policy on uniforms. The uniforms were approved by the Athletics Sub-committee at its meeting on September 29, 2008. The uniforms will be paid by a $3500.00 grant from the Watertown Education Foundation along with $1116.48 from the Athletic student activity fund.
MOTION made by Mr. Apicella, sec by Mr. Mazzamaro
Mr. Apicella: I move that the board approve of new girls’ field hockey uniforms for Watertown High School. These uniforms comply with both CIAC and Board of Education policy.
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. It is recommended that the Board approve of new volleyball uniforms for Watertown High School. Mrs. Legge has reviewed the uniforms and has determined that the uniforms meet all of the requirements for compliance with both CIAC regulations and the Board of Education’s policy on uniforms. These uniforms were reviewed by the Athletics Sub-committee at its meeting on September 29, 2008. These uniforms will be funded by the Booster Organization and the donations from local agencies.
MOTION made by Mr. Apicella, sec by Mr. Mazzamaro
Mr. Apicella: I move that the board approve new Volleyball uniforms for the High school. They too, comply with CIAC and Board of Education policy.
Discussion: none
MOTION passed unanimously.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. It is recommended that the Board approve of new cheerleading uniforms to be used for competition for Watertown High School. Mrs. Legge has reviewed the uniforms and the uniforms meet the CIAC regulations and the Board of Education’s policy on uniforms. These uniforms were reviewed by the Athletics Sub-committee at its meeting on September 29, 2008. These uniforms will be funded by the Booster Organization and the donations from local agencies.
MOTION made by Mr. Apicella, sec by Mr. Mazzamaro
Mr. Apicella: I move that board approve new cheerleading uniforms to be used for competition at Watertown High School. They also comply with CIAC and Board of Education policy.
Discussion: Mr. Killeen: Madam Chair, just noting that these uniforms have been funded by various organization including Watertown Educational Foundation, the booster organizations, and some other local agencies and we certainly would like to recognize them for their appreciation and donation to our athletes.
Ms. Calabrese: We share your sentiments. We’re very grateful.
MOTION passed unanimously.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Consideration of the Approval of Curriculum
At the Curriculum and Instruction Committee meeting of October 7, 2008,
the following Watertown High School curricula revisions were endorsed
by the Curriculum and Instruction Committee members. All curricula
have been aligned with the State Standards. These High school courses
are designed to meet recommendations made by NEASC and
ensures academic rigor for all students. Additionally, two Swift
Middle School curricular revisions were approved by the committee.
a) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School Algebra I Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School Algebra I Curriculum Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Mazzamaro)
Discussion: Mr. Killeen: If there were questions concerning financial impact (inaudible), Mr. Hasbrouck has so aptly presented a impact of curricular revisions and he could speak on that and have other staff members speak on it as well.
Ms. Calabrese: It seems very clear. We have all the course that we’re going to be approving this evening.
Motion passed unanimously.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School United States History I, Level 2 Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School United States History I, Level 2 Curriculum Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Mazzamaro)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School United States History I, Level 3 Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School United States History I, Level 3 Curriculum Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Mazzamaro)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School World History (Honors and College Prep) Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School World History (Honors and College Prep) Curriculum Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, Sec Ms. Colangelo)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
e) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School College Preparatory Integrated Science Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School College Preparatory Integrated Science Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Lambert)
Discussion: Ms. Colangelo: Yes I do, this is not listed on our sheet here, or am I missing it?
Ms. Calabrese: It’s in the second column.
Ms. Colangelo: OK, I’m sorry. And there’s new texts for this.
Mr. Killeen: I believe this was in keeping with NEASC objectives and presented a more whole science curriculum to our freshman class. Correct?
Motion passed unanimously
f) Consideration of the Approval of the Watertown High School
College Preparatory Biology Curriculum Revision
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Watertown High School College Preparatory Biology Curriculum Revision as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec, Mr. Mazzamaro)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously
5. Consideration of the Approval of the Swift Middle School Foods: Grade 6 Curriculum
With the realignment of Grade 6, the Grade 6 Food course ensures
continuity in the Unified Arts program.
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve
of the Swift Middle School Foods: Grade 6 Curriculum
as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Lambert)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously.
6. Consideration of the Approval of the Swift Middle School
Advisor/Advisee Program Activities Guide 2008-2009
The Advisor/Advisee Program was piloted in the spring of 2007-2008
and was very well received. This program guide represents the full
implementation of the program for 2008-2009.
It is recommended that the Board of Education approve of the Swift
Middle School Advisor/Advisee Program Activities Guide 2008-2009
as presented under separate cover, effective immediately.
MOTION: (Mr. Killeen, sec. Mr. Lambert)
Discussion: None
Motion passed unanimously.
M. Future Agenda Items and Board Members’ Comments
Mr. Killeen: Madam Chair, I’m not certain if I’ve ever made so many motions at meetings, but I would like to comment on my visit at the open house at Swift this past week. It was a most enjoyable evening for myself. I was impressed, room to room. The teachers were all enthusiastic, their rooms were brightly decorated with learning objectives visually placed. It was just a moving experience for me to see a highly engaged educational environment. I just want to bring those comments to the board for the purpose of recognizing our professional staff.
Ms. Calabrese: Thank you.
N. Public Participation
None.
O. Executive Session
Pending Claim
Discussion of exempt documents pertaining to bargaining unit negotiations.
MOTION: ( Mr. Mazzamaro, sec., Mr. Lambert) To go into Executive Session, with Attorney Paul Jessell, the board members listed as present and the Superintendent at 8:25 p.m. following a brief recess.
Motion passed unanimously.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The meeting came out of Executive Session at 9:45 p.m.
P. Adjournment
MOTION to adjourn (Mr. Mazzamaro, sec., Ms. Dzioba) to adjourn the meeting a `t 9:45 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Colangelo, Secretary
Board of Education
_________________________
Patricia A. Barber, Minutes Secretary
|