VII. Unfinished Business
A. Discussion and Possible Approval of Location of 6th Grade Programming (30 Min)
The administration has presented the case for the educational benefits of putting all the sixth graders together in Glacial Drumlin school. It is my understanding that this isn't a significant budget issue, but a practical and educational one. I think we need to do a better job decoupling this from the budget discussion and spend more time educating and hearing from the public on this issue.
B. Discussion of Budget Reduction Proposals (20 Min)
C. Discussion of Possible Consolidation of Maywood & Winnequah Schools (30 Min)
Although these items will be discussed, no decisions will be made.
D. Discussion and Possible Approval of Addition of Modular Units in Cottage Grove (20 Min)
F. Discussion and Possible Approval of Board Rule 343.2- Guidelines for Class Size (10 Min)
VIII. New Business
A. Discussion and Possible Approval of Construction of Structure for Glacial Drumlin Garden –
Kristi Williams (10 Min)
B. Presentation by Deb Lyons: A Comparison Analysis of the United States and the Chinese
Education Systems (45 Min)
C. Presentation on Music Curriculum and Assessment– Janice Stone (15 Min)
Several of the budget items involve our music programming. An overview of the various components of structure and how the different components relate, along with an understanding of our assessments will help the board make the budget decisions.
58 comments:
Do you think that it is too late to start a write-in campaign? It is my simple thinking that someone could get a lot of traction on certain issues-assuming the vote is what I think it will be.
Anonymous. Please be more specific. Write-in about what?
Write-in candidates make for some of the worst public officials, because they often run as single-issue candidates ("Don't close my..."), and that issue is often disposed with -- for good or ill -- before they take office, or shortly after. School boards in particular desparately need candidates and office-holders with a much broader vision of what is at stake with public education today.
Food FIGHT~
Peter-
I certainly hope that there will be other presentations about the music curriculum at GDS other than Janices. Like some data about how much time kids miss from their core classes to go to GIGS-, the impact of that on classroom teachers and core teachers, and some data about parent concern and complaint about the GIG program and the grading of that which there has been alot of over the last few years. Renee Tennant should have all of that information- I hope it is not a one sided conversation.
"Write-in candidates make for some of the worst public official"
Can't be much worse-then the broken promises many of us are holding.
"
Can't be much worse-then the broken promises many of us are holding."
Not by this board. The current board is the one a lot of Monona people wanted. Go to them and ask that your hopes and dreams be realized. All the board members who lead the way for GD and sixth grade in Monona are no longer here.
I don't understand what the big issue is with GIGS. They are a great opportunity for our kids to have small group time with their music instructor. The time missed is a short time from one class once a week. How exactly does it impact core teachers?? How do you know that their has been ALOT of complaints? I have my fourth child in middle school right now and it has never been an problem. My kids really like going. We are so fortunate to have the music staff we currently have.
"Like some data about how much time kids miss from their core classes to go to GIGS-, the impact of that on classroom teachers and core teachers"
Don't core teachers have the option to deny students the opportunity to attend a gig? I find it interesting that some parents and core teachers complain about gigs. They have been offered in almost every imaginable way. My son had an alternating schedule so that he didn't miss a portion of the same class more than a couple of times a quarter. My daughter now is at the middle school. Her gig isn't out of a core class. It seems the teachers have tried to work around parental concerns. Have the parents who still have concerns talked to the music instructors? I find it hard to believe that a schedule change/compromise wouldn't be reached if parents communicated concerns.
The problem with middle school gigs is that it places young children (and their parents) in the untenable position of having to choose between achieving well in their core classrooms and achieving well in their music classes. Students are repeatedly marked on their report cards -- a permanent record -- as having "poor attendance" at their music lessons if they choose to stay in their core classrooms, and the assumption -- stated publicly by middle school music staff at board meetings -- is that their grades will suffer in music if they choose to miss lessons. It also pits the needs of core classroom teachers against the needs of music teachers -- a silly division easily fixed with minor changes in the schedule.
When did we ever get to the point where time spent in core academic classrooms is less important than time spent in music lessons? For that matter, when did achievement in music became just as important as achievement in core academic classes? It's not -- this school district is, by law, held accountable by the state and federal governments for achievement in math, science, reading, English and social studies. It's not held accountable for music achievement. And for anyone happy with the academic achievement in core subjects of our middle school, go to this website and see how we're doing, especially compared to some neighboring districts:
http://data.dpi.state.wi.us/data/selschool.asp
If a child cannot leave their core class for a GIG they need to get their GIG pass signed--and they returned it to the music teacher and talk about another time they can schedule a GIG. It is all about responsibility of the student. If they turn in this signed pass (if they are responsible) they will not recieve a poor grade. The music teachers are excellent to work with. My children have never had an issue with them and they have been in mutiple music classes. Right now GIGS are a wonderful chance for the kids to prepare for Solo Ensemble
But they are not a wonderful opportunity for kids to learn how to read, or apply basic grammatical concepts to writing, or learn basic science lab principles, or any other core subject areas. Time spent in gigs is currently all too often time spent away from learning core academic subjects. (And please spare us the lectures about how music helps kids learn how to read or do math. The most effective way for kids to learn how to read and do math is to spend time in reading and math classes in front of English and math teachers.) Please spend a few minutes looking at some data and tell me you're satisfied with the progress in core academic areas of this school -- not just your child, but all children.
I wasn't aware that 12-year-olds ought to be responsible for deciding how much time they should spend in music lessons vs. necessary core academic areas. That the current gig system places them in such a position is a pretty sad indictment of how we run our schools.
What's a GIG?
A gig is where the student is excused from another class for about twenty minutes to have small-group instuction on thier instument/voice. I never thought they were that much of a problem. Lots of people went to all thier gigs and still did good in class. There were times when I had a gig and we were doing something important in class and my teacher requested that I miss it. But students do have the option of making it up later in the week.
I enjoyed my gigs, mostly because I could work on that one difficult part of that one song. And it was fun hanging out with Mrs. Stone :) because she's awesome.
and GIG teachers get to count teaching minutes when working with 2-10 students. Shouldn't core teachers spending time with groups of this size teaching core academics be more important? I think the arts are an important and valuable part of what our dstrict has to offer but small group instruction should be in reading and math, not music.
Why aren't any of our teachers volunteering to do this?
I really give these folks a ton of credit. This is the way of the world right now.
It would be a shame if selfishness won out.
http://www.channel3000.com/education/22675756/detail.html
I have been to all of the budget hearing sessions and have heard staff members bring up the idea of taking a furlough day(s). Just because it hasn't appeared on News 3, don't assume that the MGSD teachers are not offering suggestions to help with the current budget situation.
But if we are asking the question, have the administrators offered to take furlough days? Perhaps leading by example would be a good place to start.
"I wasn't aware that 12-year-olds ought to be responsible for deciding how much time they should spend in music lessons vs. necessary core academic areas."
It should not be and that is why it isn't. The teachers have that responsibility. It is the students job to get the GIG pass signed and turned in.
'and GIG teachers get to count teaching minutes when working with 2-10 students."
That is because they are teaching.
"Shouldn't core teachers spending time with groups of this size teaching core academics be more important?"
That would be great, but they already teach 4 cores a day, plus AME time and their other duties, I think it would be a lot to ask, they already do so so much.
GIGS are only 20 minutes a week, once a week. My son attends his during his study hall time. They are not always during core subjects. If there are problems speak to our wonderful music staff at GDS. They are really great to work with! :)
To the above poster...yes, the music teachers at all the schools rock. And yes, they are "teaching" during GIGS. I just think the district should value and support core academics at least as much as they do music programs. Small group instruction should be in reading and math if they are in band.
"That would be great, but they already teach 4 cores a day, plus AME time and their other duties, I think it would be a lot to ask, they already do so so much."
Isn't AME time generally a study hall? The core teachers only keep the students that don't have band, orchestra, or choir. The 4 cores a day equate to how many teaching minutes? Some posters have complained about gig instructional groups of 2-10. How many students are in the classroom during AME? At least the music teachers plan and deliver new instruction during gigs.
I just finished listening to the tape of the 2.24 meeting. Here are my thoughts:
1. You, Manning and Ace are correct there is very little information about moving 6th grade out to GDS. I am not sure why certain brd members want to shove it through so quickly.
Bluntly, I do not know how I feel about it, but if my kids are eating lunch at 10:30-I am going to complain-just a little.
2. Manning's questions about furloughs is a darn good one. The President's point about it being symbolic is the point and everyone should remember it.
As well, Ace's point is a great one about furlough.
3. I think your point about strangling programs is also good one.
4. But why do your and Manning/Sobol's opinions have to be OR-can't they be both/and?
enough for now-
"there is very little information about moving 6th grade out to GDS. I am not sure why certain brd members want to shove it through so quickly."
Maybe because the educational administrators -- principals and superintendent -- think our 6th graders should be educated in one building, together. And, it's surely going to cost less in the long run, if for no other reason the district won't be paying teachers to drive -- not teach -- to and from two buildings.
Besides, what "information" do you need? 6th graders have historically been educated together in this district. Isn't it simply a matter of recalling how that was done?
"if my kids are eating lunch at 10:30-I am going to complain-just a little."
Is that really your chief concern about this move? Lunch hour trumps the educational experience of running a combined 6th grade program?
Administrative furloughs are pennies on the dollars; most salary is taken up by staff in classrooms. Not that we can't save pennies on the dollar in this climate, but everyone should remember that most of the administrators in the district are principals and assistant principals who are running our schools every day. Previous attempts to reduce the presence of principals at our schools (proposed half-time Maywood principal a few years ago) have been met with vocal opposition in the past.
"Is that really your chief concern about this move? Lunch hour trumps the educational experience of running a combined 6th grade program?
"
Did you listen to the (*&#$#$)tape or go to the meeting by the admintrations own admission, their own admission-
the move will mean the following:
dividers in classrooms (that will need to be purchased), classrooms in open spaces and long lunch hours 10:30 or 10:45 for a start time.
NOW what kind of experience our we handing them with that bag of dog poo? Their current experience has some shortcomings, but this one leaves something to be desired as well. Thus, I just do not understand the push to do this now.
Further, we are going to be having one bus this year and two the year after how do we save money after buying divders and the like?
I highly, higly doubt this move is cost neutrual.
Finally, IF and I do MEAN IF-this creates an improved experience and it is important to bring the kids together then why in god's name aren't we bussing 5th grade into Monona to free up room in GDS or to improve their experience?
I am skeptical of the admintrators saying that it will work, when their words do not match and this is the same group who said that 6th grade in Monona would work and now say it does not.
"Previous attempts to reduce the presence of principals at our schools (proposed half-time Maywood principal a few years ago) have been met with vocal opposition in the past."
That is because the idea/deal was done after the referendum and the admin. failed to notify anyone but the board unless it was talked about in close session or something like that.
The only talk of dividers and lunch periods was speculation from Board members, not administrators. According to the admin the only furniture need is for the common areas to make more efficient use of that space. There is plenty of classroom space in that building.
Craig also made a pretty emphatic statement that we would NOT be starting lunch at 10:30.
"The only talk of dividers and lunch periods was speculation from Board members, not administrators"
OK-then the administrators did not disagree-correct?
Further-how can the public here that the bldg is crowded and then suddenly we can stuff 50-75 students into the building.
If I remember correctly, GDS is under capacity, but close to the max. I think it is Cottage Grove Elementary that's crowded, by about 20 kids.
I thought GDS was built with a capacity of 900, but with only 750 lockers, limiting it for the first few years.
Actually the administrators did disagree with the questions about dividers and 10:30 lunches. Craig went on to say that the building has plenty of classroom space, the only complaints have been about lunch and gym space - and if we limited the building use based on the cafeteria then we would be under-utilizing the building.
"Further-how can the public here that the bldg is crowded and then suddenly we can stuff 50-75 students into the building."
Glacial Drumlin being "over-crowded" is a myth perpetuated by people with: a) other agendas; b) complaints about the lunch room being crowded. GD is under capacity, and its capacity is a lot more flexible than an elementary school. If there's a choice about eating in a crowded lunch room and doing science in state-of-the-art lab classrooms at GDS, I hope most parents would gladly put up with the former to have access to the latter.
Also, talk to parents whose kids have transitioned from spending their elementary years with a small set of the same children to a larger school with a broader mix of kids. Many, many parents will tell you they want their children at the 6th grade to have exposure to a larger school. Our school board president recently (and wisely, I'd argue) suggested this as one benefit to bringing 6th graders together.
Exactly. The entire "crowding" issue in Cottage Grove, including CG School is something that has been perpetuated and blown out of proportion by people with other agendas. As it pertains to CG school, the parents and staff in CG have never been all that worried about the situation. As I followed last years study committee, the "crowding" was hammered on by people who wanted to bus CG 4th graders to Monona in order to boost the population in Monona's schools and thus keeping Maywood off the chopping block. There was simply never a reason to consider that otherwise because the enrollment at CG school is not anticipated to keep on increasing. In fact, I believe it has been stated it will decrease (Peter?). School districts deal with crowded buildings all the time. It happens. No district can afford to have all its buildings always under-utilized. In this present economy and housing market there is no reason to assume CG enrollment will be anything but stable or declining over the coming years.
"The entire "crowding" issue in Cottage Grove, including CG School is something that has been perpetuated and blown out of proportion by people with other agendas."
Peter, how is this not hearsay and mine got delted for crimes of hearsay? This poster assumes that I heard this from a person who wants to blow this out of proportion? If my post was hearsay....so is that one.
"Also, talk to parents whose kids have transitioned from spending their elementary years with a small set of the same children to a larger school with a broader mix of kids. Many, many parents will tell you they want their children at the 6th grade to have exposure to a larger school. Our school board president recently (and wisely, I'd argue) suggested this as one benefit to bringing 6th graders together."
I absolutely agree with this. I am so ready for my kid to join with a big bunch of other kids in 6th grade. That happened for my older child, and it was wonderful. In addition, he had a dedicated 2 year math teacher, and much more extra-curricular options, clubs, etc, which simply are not offered at Winnequah to 6th grade. I hope when my second kid gets to that age, she heads to GDS.
Isn't this whole blog heresay since no one signs their names?
"by people with other agendas.""
What people and WHAT are their agendas?
As a previous poster alluded to, some have urged the district to bus 4th and 5th graders in CG to Winnequah and turn Winnequah into a district-wide 4th and 5th-grade school. Thus, the "overcrowded" Glacial Drumlin is relieved of its alleged crowded condition, and Maywood stays open, as it would be the only place to house pre-K-3rd graders.
Of course, this is quite costly, as the expense of running busses all over Cottage Grove (village and town) to pick up 350-some 4th and 5th graders and send them to Monona is well beyond the cost of putting Monona 6th graders on busses already carrying Monona 7th and 8th graders to Glacial Drumlin.
Thus, those in Monona who claim GDS to be overcrowded are cynically seen by some in the district to have an agenda, i.e., keeping Maywood open.
Peter-
So-it is OK on this blog to post about the agendas of people from Monona and not CG?
I want to make sure that it is clear.
Thanks!
Lots of information here on the proposed move of 6th graders from MO to CG:
http://www.mgsd.k12.wi.us/cms_files/resources/February%2010%206th%20Grade%20Programming%20Materials.pdf
I think the district should split. It should have been done before the high school was built. In the beginning, when the 2 communities first came together, the Cottage Grove students were sent to Monona to go to school because there were so very few of them and Monona agreed to take them. It started out as just a few farm kids from Cottage Grove. Now, with the population growth and development of Cottage Grove, it's ridiculous that Cottage Grove doesn't have their own school district. The main reason I can think of is that Cottage Grove wouldn't have enough money without Monona's business taxes and property taxes to support their own schools.
There is a far greater imbalance between the number of students coming from CG vs. Monona than in the disparity (roughly 10 percent) in property taxes paid by the communities.
Both of these communities are far better off, in terms of educating their children, together than trying to do so separately.
A Monona-only district would be particularly troubling for Monona's long-term prospects as a healthy community. Every single school in Monona would have to close, save the high school, because all of Monona's shrinking school population (maybe 750 students at best, K through 12) would fit there. A high school defined by limited course choices, few electives, modest extra-curricular offerings, and likely a very large tax increase to create the district in the first place.
Nothing is more of a lose-lose for Monona that going it alone as a district. Parents of elementary-aged children who advocate for it should spend a week at the high school, from 8 a.m.- 8p.m., and then forget about ever having access to much of what is offered there. It wouldn't happen in a Monona-only district.
As a previous poster alluded to, some have urged the district to bus 6 graders in CG from Winnequah and close Maywood an not bus 5th graders into to Monona. Thus, spreading a rumor of a "overcrowded" Glacial Drumlin.
And some want to build a el. school in CG to relieve this alleged crowded condition at GGDS and CG El, and Maywood stays closed and Nichols is sold.
The way the state funding formula works is that if the district split into two, each would have essentially the same funding per student as they do now regardless of the local tax base. The difference is that with 2300 students CG would have a reasonably sized district to run; while Monona, with less than 800 students, would lack the economies of scale necessary to provide all but the basics.
Both communities would suffer however, analysis of districts around WI shows that high schools even modestly smaller than ours can no longer offer the full range of options, classes and activities that we take for granted.
P.S. Monona business and property taxes support about 29% of the district's operating funds, CG is about 24%.
Regarding a "split," there are K-8 districts around the state whose students then attend a unified high school. Has this been looked at? It seems that regardless of the issue, there is always a Monona vs. Cottage Grove thing going on which gets in the way of the educational decisions that need to be made. The perception is that each community always has an agenda. It gets old and it doesn't seem that it will ever go away. Why not give each community control over educating their own K-8 students and let them all come together at a unified high school?
Creating two separate K-8 districts, and then a third and separate high school district, is quite literally impossible under current state law. The state law that puts up considerable hurdles for splitting into two districts doesn't consider the possibility of districts splitting three ways, which is what the two K-8/unified high school model would have to be. (And those questions were asked by district officials during the MG split debate of a few years ago.)
There is a reason state law makes it relatively easy to consolidate school districts, and very difficult to split. (Current K-8 districts existed long before the law regarding splitting districts was written.) The only way to read those two laws is that lawmakers want to make it easy for districts to consolidate, and hard to split apart. The Legislature would have to write special legislation to allow a K-8/high school district arrangement. That's unlikely to happen.
The "K-8 in each community" and the "splitting the district" issues have both been studied recently. You might not like the answere but it was NO. Can we move on to what happens IN our schools.
"Can we move on to what happens IN our schools."
Would that be hearsay?
"Creating two separate K-8 districts, and then a third and separate high school district, is quite literally impossible under current state law."
As I recall, the law does not say we cannot do that, right?
Current state law allows no provision for splitting a district into three distinct pieces. It only address splitting one part of a district apart from a current district. A K-8 district in Monona and CG, and a high school district serving both communities, would mean splitting the current MG district into three entities -- each with its own governing board, own property tax base, own set of students, and own allocations of state aid. The state law regarding splitting district has no provision for creating three entities; you'd have to ask the Legislature to re-write current state law to allow such a three-way split. (Again, current K-8 districts that feed into separate high school districts pre-date the school split law.)
Current state law allows no provision for splitting a district into three distinct pieces. It only address splitting one part of a district apart from a current district. A K-8 district in Monona and CG, and a high school district serving both communities, would mean splitting the current MG district into three entities -- each with its own governing board, own property tax base, own set of students, and own allocations of state aid. The state law regarding splitting district has no provision for creating three entities; you'd have to ask the Legislature to re-write current state law to allow such a three-way split. (Again, current K-8 districts that feed into separate high school districts pre-date the school split law.)
As I recall back during the split brouhaha, the Dept of Public Instruction issued an opinion to the school board stating that current state law would not allow the creation of three new districts (two k-8 with a union high school district) from the existing MG district.
"Splitting the District" It's not just a bad idea, its against the law!
Splitting the district if perfectly legal under Wisconsin State Statutes. It is simply a bad idea for this district financially and especially programs-wise. Besides the "split" train left the station three or four years ago, and those who understood the consequences waved it good-bye.
The goal here should be improving the educational opportunities for every student.
I think people might be very surprised how much support there would be for a split in Cottage Grove. They have enough kids - it would be a matter of whether or not they want the tax increase. The only reason a very large and active group in CG did not circulate and file the petitions with the school board for the split was because the board put up a referendum for a CG middle school. This happened at a very large meeting in Cottage Grove where people decided to hold off on the statutory petition process pending the outcome of the referendum.
We will never make this issue "go away." It is something that will need to be revisited whenever hot button issues come up. Best we make peace with that rather than wish it was not so or treat people like they are ignorant or selfish for bringing it up. It will always be a logical and good question to ask.
I think people in Cottage Grove would be surprised at how large a tax increase they'd have to bear to have their own school district. The tax increase wouldn't just be enormous, it'd be ginormous. CG would have to build an entirely new high school -- a minimun of $20-25 million dollars, on land it doesn't have. In addition, the state law splitting districts requires an allocation of assets between the two districts -- and CG's assets (buildings) just increased by about $25 million with the opening of GDS. That might -- might -- require a transfer of money from the new CG district to the Monona district. And although the village has a done a decent job lately of broadening its tax based, those tax increases would fall largely on homeowners -- hard to imagine the current village leadership wanting that. Monona's diversified tax base is a huge asset for the current MG district.
Folks who casually throw around talk of splitting the district, like it was the equivalant of snapping your fingers, need to understand these things:
-- Splitting is enormously complicated and time-consuming, which takes at least two years to complete, and all the while (among other things that could happen) both districts risk families fleeing via open enrollment during all the chaos.
-- Splitting in Monona is a bad idea largely because of the size and enrollment issues. It's be a tiny district, with little hope of offering much beyond a basic curriculum, with no capacity for growth beyond houses turning over.
-- Splitting in CG is a bad idea largely for financial reasons. The tax increases needed to support the buildings for a district of about 2,300 (and growing) students is well beyond what almost any family can stomach, particularly in these difficult economic times.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/local_schools/article_b1716652-289d-11df-ab61-001cc4c002e0.html
This is why people need to get a grip. Monona Grove is not a special place immune to what is happening everywhere else. I bet the "school consolidations" Madison will need to consider are not going to be across the street from each other. Neighborhoods will be losing schools. How sad. And how sad we think the consolidation of two schools across the street from each other is a crisis at all.
"It is something that will need to be revisited whenever hot button issues come up. Best we make peace with that rather than wish it was not so or treat people like they are ignorant or selfish for bringing it up. It will always be a logical and good question to ask."
I strongly agree with you and like your thoughts and Ido not support a split, but this is a very reasoned post.
Monona Poster
But the semi-regular calls for examining, or desiring, or petitioning for (there is one currently out there) a split, distracts from the very urgent task of debating how this current district can work together better, and continue to offer a solid education to all students.
It's been good to see the occasional public advocates for splitting being opposed at public hearings. People need to realize this district, for all its difficult debates, works far better together than separately.
Post a Comment