Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Commentary on Recent Board Meeting

The NASD spending decisions that have been made in light of budget cuts have clearly upset taxpayers, parents, and seemingly done nothing to improve morale within the NASD.

Jeff Dietrich of Lower Nazareth had a letter to the editor that made it into both the Express-Times and Morning Call. Don't often see that happen, so congrats to Jeff.

He made several points to demonstrate recent Board decisions and I won't list them all here, but the essence of these is stated quite clearly early on: "The logic of our educational ''leadership'' is beyond my comprehension. "

Joe Owens lampoons Lesky and the Board on his blog (an updated link is now on the sidebar) taking the approach of being absurd to point out the absurd. At least I think that is where he was going. You can read it here.

I've noted previously that I'd like to see cuts come in areas that don't directly impact education and to focus our spending on those that do. I don't have granular knowledge of the spending and can only see top line numbers, but it would seem that instead of calling everything we've done previously essential we are limiting our ability to create a lean budget that allows for an efficiently run school.

On a separate note, the "PSSA police" caught my attention as well. At the meetings I've attended there appears to be an outright dislike of state government by the Administration and Board. It was apparent in the discussion on Act 1 and to me at least clear in this comment. While the NASD may want to be independent of state control, it is there for a reason. Does that mean everything the state does will make sense? No, but neither does everything the NASD does either.

The bigger issue is that being adversarial with the state and against the PSSA tests from the highest level of administration will carry through to the principals, teachers, and students.

What kind of performance do you think will result?

I like the concept of the PSSA because it requires all students in all districts throughout the state to take the same test. It is the one test that allows schools to compare themselves to one another and to track student progress from grade level to grade level.

Conversely, I believe this is why districts don't like it. PSSA results become the new reality of the perceptions we hold.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

noc news states:
The NASD spending decisions that have been made in light of budget cuts have clearly upset taxpayers, parents, and seemingly done nothing to improve morale within the NASD.

If so then why have there been so little public response---one editiorial an uprise does not make--seems to me the opposite---look at the public comments on your blogs--little to none--
feel that parents and taxpayers really won't be upset about all the spending et al until it directly effects them--such as overcrowded classrooms, programs cut etc

can't speak for the educators just the lack of public outcry belies the actual truth--

just my observation

kelley joseph

RossRN said...

Sorry, should have clarified, by recent, while Monday's Board meeting was the latest, I meant this entire budget and building process.

When people comment, attend meetings, sign petitions and are met with an unresponsive body they tend to give up and become disgruntled, but live with it.

And that is what I think you are seeing now.

Yes, people will be upset when they have to pay taxes and pay to participate in extra-curriculars. They will be upset when they pay more in taxes and see larger class sizes and less services.

And they will be upset when we've run out of room at the high school, have a half filled MS, and can't afford to build another building.

When those things come to fruition, though, that Board's hands will be tied by the decisions that this board has already made against the wishes of the people.

The large public outcry in my opinion was over when the board made it clear they didn't care what people thought - they were building the building with every last item included, they are giving Lesky a raise, they are renovating the stadium with new fencing, a new all weather track and a turf field, they are in short doing what they want and how they want it - future implications be damned.

Now you will get a handful who try to continue to make the point, but most will feel they can do nothing about it so they will grumble when the bill comes and focus their time and attention elsewhere.

It is a shame, but this has repeated itself too many times to believe otherwise and the NASD knows it.

In truth, this is why I prefer attending Council meetings and working with the Downtown Nazareth Association. At Council the members listen and have demonstrated they are responsive to the people enough times to make attending and recommendations worthwhile. They aren't perfect, but have improved tremendously.

The Downtown Nazareth Association is working to build up the community, improve the quality of life, and hopefully expand the tax base.

I'd much rather spend my time at these meetings where a difference can be made, than at one where you may raise points, but they are not acted upon or considered.

At the same time, it is critical to keep everyone in the know, so I very much appreciate everyone who does attend NASD meetings. This information can then be shared as soon as possible to alert people to what is happening, before it is too late.

Sorry for the quasi-rant, hope the clarification is helpful, and enjoy the first full day of spring!

Anonymous said...

I agree with the comments by NOC. I have been an parent within this district for years who has tried to express concerns over issue within the distrct. I have raised issues at the school board and seen members of the board "roll their eyes" and have no respect for me when I was speaking. I have learned from working with this board and administration that they absolutely have NO respect for the parents, taxpayers or student in this district. This board and administration will do what they want, not what the taxpayers want or what is best for the students.

On a separate note, I agree that Ms. Dautrich and the administration have no respect for the Pennsylvania Department of Education. To refer to the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s representative as the "PSSA Police" in a public meeting is unprofessional!

I only wish the state would get wind of how Ms. Dautrich referred to them. I also hope that the findings of the representative are made public. I am sure they were not happy with what they saw at the Middle School. (To bad they visited the Middle School after the students were gone for the day!!)

I also have a student at the middle school that was given a strict time limit (you could go to another room for 30 minutes, but you were made to feel like you were inadequate for needing more time), no bathroom break (instructed that if you went to the bathroom you could not finish the test), and instructed to bring their own supplies (if they did not have enough sharp pencils or calculators they were told none would be supplied by the school). My student informed me that several students missed questions in math, because they did not know where to stop on the test. Also, for the 8th grade writing piece they did not have sufficient time to write a good essay; no time for brain storming, rough draft and then final copy. They just had to start writing, so that they could finish within the time frame given.

The middle school was very different from the elementary schools who only took one test a day, allowed students to take as much time as they needed, use of the bathroom and supplied them everything they would need to complete the tests. I would love to hear how the testing went at the High School.

I look forward to seeing the results on these PSSA scores. If the score do go down, I hope that the administration, especially Ms. Dautrich re-evaluates how she and her top level staff should have “policed” all the schools to make sure they administered the test correctly. Never mind that is a bad idea, because then they would hire another administrative position for PSSA testing and evaluations.

Anonymous said...

Seems to go on and on. More spending and more cuts. Too bad admin is not getting what they would like as far as pssa. So now they can shot from the hip. Publicly they need to watch their p's and q's. They are out of line and taxpayers, parents, and students do not have much control over influencing their decisions on way or another. I do not care for the lack of respect and gestures of not even listening they show to staff,parents, and taxpayers.
Again, this has been the way it is for quite sometime. Too bad for all involved.

Anonymous said...

Seems to go on and on. More spending and more cuts. Too bad admin is not getting what they would like as far as pssa. So now they can shot from the hip. Publicly they need to watch their p's and q's. They are out of line and taxpayers, parents, and students do not have much control over influencing their decisions on way or another. I do not care for the lack of respect and gestures of not even listening they show to staff,parents, and taxpayers.
Again, this has been the way it is for quite sometime. Too bad for all involved.

Anonymous said...

Why does the board dislike the PSSAs? Mabye because it is another state regulation that has been forced down it's throat with no funding behind it. Or mabye it's because every year the state expects kids to know more by the same grade, so we keep pushing the kids harder and harder. Or mabye its because the state is forcing local school districts to teach what the state wants instead of what the local board, parents, teachers and public may want.

So far the board has done a good job keeping Nazareth's PSSA scores near the top of the local schools. I am sure the board has heard the argument before, if we spend too much we won't have lmoney for educational purposes. Sounds like a scare tactic to me. Lets hope hope the board knows better.

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:17-

I am curious, are you aware of current budget discussions? Are you aware of the cuts that NASD has already proposed just to keep next year's tax increase to 4.2%. Giving just one example, NASD has proposed cutting a MS/HS Library Asst who makes $15K/yr. Meanwhile we are getting a new turf field that now costs $1.7M (up from the $1.2M estimate only 2 months ago).

You state "I am sure the board has heard the argument before, if we spend too much we won't have lmoney (sic) for educational purposes. Sounds like a scare tactic to me." Unfortunately, this is a very real scenario. Our service on just debt expenditure alone is increasing two-three fold. We have proposed cutting field trips, after school activity busing, support positions, technology for the elementary schools, etc. etc.

All the earlier proposed cuts so we can still increase taxes. In addition, NASD has applied for exemptions to Act1 which will allow them to raise taxes as high as 7.6% should the above cuts not "cut enough". And in fact, the above cuts are on the low end of projections/estimates because of several scenarios that didn't play out according to plan (e.g., they didn't get all 8 teachers to retire, they only got 7; and the person at CDC decided not to retire; etc.)

The point is, there are several of us who attend school board meetings and ask questions or make our opinions known here on NOC who are seriously concerned with the direction NASD is heading.

RossRN said...

To follow up on Brad's points, several of us who have been following the school issues and regularly contributing here have young children who will be in this school for the next 12 years.

I think it is fair to say that our concern with spending is primarily from the standpoint that there is a limited amount that can be spent and we want to ensure it is focused on educational needs and not the nice but not necessary wants that lock-up your money over time.

With grandparents in the borough, I'm also concerned with the total taxes, but I'm not advocating anti-tax, simply responsible forward thinking/planning.

We could be wrong, but the finance committee's own presentation showed that we can't make ends meet at the current pace. This forces you to ask, what is the easiest thing for NASD to cut to make next year's budget work?

Additionally, regarding the PSSAs,
my daughter took these tests for the first time this year (3rd grade) and each day I asked about them. At this level it is all reading and math, pretty much what I would expect should be the focus.

The results will be interesting, because as I recall and Brad crunched numbers as well, we were not near the top in PSSA's.

My recollection is that we were in the middle locally and a comparison that I did with schools across the state the same size as Nazareth we were mostly between mid way and 2/3 way toward the bottom.

I guess you could argue the reason is that NASD is teaching what kids need, but state is testing on what they don't, or you could say that the kids are not learning/testing as well as others in their grade at other districts.

If the latter is the case, it is all the more important that we ensure our spending is focused on needs and not wants.

A list of articles on the PSSAs from NOC are available here.

Anonymous said...

I just read again Mr Dietrich's letter. His is one of the few published public opinions as of late reg the recent NASD actions, and while I do not agree with, or even understand much of what has occurred at the board meetings I do attend all of them and feel fairly informed about the transactions. So maybe someone can answer the following:

Where has it ever been said that the new turf will only be used 5 days out of the year?

Additionally Mr Dietrich states:
In the real business world, 3 percent annual salary increases are considered good if you are worthy enough. They are never retroactive.

Wrong as I worked for a fortune 500 company and not only recevied 4-8% raises but retroactive ones at that...as has my husband.

Love that we have forums for our opinions but verifying facts before your submittal is advisable.

RossRN said...

8:48, thanks for the post. One thing I really like about this environment is that if someone does make a statement that is not accurate it is often questioned or refuted within the vicinity of the original statement. In the traditional print media, you might get a correction, but most people won't connect it with the statement or the article. As a result the inaccuracy lives on as fact.

While journalists are trained and paid and systems are in place to have facts checked, it doesn't alway work. Letters to the editor, as Mr. Dietrich's was, are not fact checked, it is a person's statement that the paper determines should or should not be posted.

While I try to keep this site open, I have removed comments I've deemed inappropriate. Mostly because they've not been civil. I couldn't possibly fact check every comment and yet I want the most open format possible, so I do rely on readers to call one another on inaccuracies, as much as I try to post when I do have the information being questioned.

Mr. Dietrich, as you say, does express opinions about a few subjects that could be refuted. It would be my observation that 3% is a standard to good annual raise from most local employers. May not be the case for everyone and I'd guess the further you commute the less realistic this is, but it has been my experience and observation within this region.

He also, I believe, has the five days issue a bit off. In the article that addressed the new turf field it stated that the single field would support five sports programs.

This is an impossibility.

The original article and my take are available here.

In the post I actually advocate for having two turf fields, not one. Given the fact that we are building a new track in a new location with a practice field in the middle, why not turf that while we have the workers and materials on site? Again the full argument I made is available on the post linked to above.

Anonymous said...

I agree, the PSSA testing is an accurate test to find out what the students have retained. Although, I heard yesterday that Pennsylvania would like to change the tenure that teachers normally get after 3 years. I think that would have an affect on the students if they keep changing teachers because without tenure you can rotate teachers. How do you feel about that?

Anonymous said...

Did anyone notice on the way into the board meeting last week the construction going on in and around admin. I saw some new walls going up- in the front office right when you walk in the door, and then back in admin- I suppose to make room for the new people. Did anyone see what the cost of these projects are, and if they were included anywhere in the budgeting process?