There’s been quite a bit of discussion here about the city-wide Newton School Committee seat in Ward 2, thanks to a couple of videos by challenger Cyrus Vaghar. But what about the other School Committee contest before voters between incumbent Steven Siegel and challenger Susan Huffman?
Vote in this unscientific poll and then share your thoughts in the comment section.
[polldaddy poll=”9014922″]
Many people in Upper Falls are upset. They want and deserve their own community school. The children are split 3 ways for elementary school and must travel by bus. The Zervas project does not serve them well and has caused great dissatisfaction. The U.Fs. people have no voice with the school comm. Susan Huffman will provide a stronger representation for the residents and provide an opportunity to be heard and perhaps better served.
I don’t yet know enough about Susan Huffman’s positions on other issues to make up my mind, but I am in full agreement with her on neighborhood schools. I still feel that the SC has turned a deaf ear to residents of Upper Falls and elsewhere on that issue. Predictably, parents from the Mason Rice and Peirce schools were very unhappy that redistricting their kids to fill seats at Zervas was even on the table. I’m not usually a one issue voter, but I may be willing to make an exception unless the School Committee at least reconsiders its mega-school policy.
Currently, there is another controversy brewing over the taking of park land to create a 60 additional parking spaces over at the Cabot School, which no one seems to be focusing on. Once again, area residents feel their concerns are being ignored. Would love to hear where the candidates stand on that as well.
Finally, on process, after violating the Open Meeting Law this past term, the members of the SC should be going out of their way to be more accountable, open and transparent. What do the candidates have to say about that?
If families with kids keep moving into the city, and they do, then NPS must provide space for them. The only other choice was to continue with overcrowded schools in every section of the city.
That’s nice, Jane. But I would still like to hear from the School Committee candidates.
Ted, I heard a BOA member suggest the taking of park land at the Canot School to resolve access and parking issues.
Ted, from what I can tell there are some neighbors against, some very much for the various Cabot proposals. There is no great solution for parking or access. But I’d welcome a new thread on the topic. And more information.
@Ted, there was a working group brought together to address the issue of Cabot Park by Parks & Recreation Commissioner Bob DeRubeis. Another meeting of this group will take place on August 19 and the Parks & Recreation Commission will discuss again on August 24. It’s my understanding that they have looked at several compromise solutions and still have concerns.
Any decision about the use of Cabot Park will be made by the Parks & Recreation Commission.
Ted – Or you could read the latest Enrollment Analysis Report which begins with this paragraph:
“The Newton Public Schools have experienced ten consecutive years of enrollment growth,
with 1,235 students (11%) added from 2005 to 2014. The steepest growth has occurred
during the past five years when a net of 896 students entered the district. Current 2014-15
enrollment of 12,503 has risen by 62 students since last year. The district is expected to
increase by an additional 659 students (5%) over the next five years, with half of the expected
growth at the elementary and middle schools, and half at the high schools. This school year is
the peak enrollment year for Newton South High School with 1,804 students in attendance.”
Thanks, Margaret.
Jane, that defines a problem but not the solution. Enrollment is reportedly supposed to level off and decrease at some point not too far out. And I still want to hear from the candidates for School Committee.
And once that group hits middle school and high school, what about the infrastructure there?
The solution is quite obvious – increased school space all over the city. There has been no change in the policy about school size that is not directly related to the very significant increase in school population. The reality is that the school committee and the school department is trying to deal with a major influx of students with a variety of measures. Increasing capacity is one necessary part of the solution and the city is doing that.
This is from the latest Centers for Disease Control [CDC] report on August 7th. Please note what the American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP] has to say about starting high school too early in the morning. Read this and tell me why any of the current child abusers/SC members deserve to be reelected…
Adolescents who do not get enough sleep are more likely to be overweight (1); not engage in daily physical activity (2); suffer from depressive symptoms (2); engage in unhealthy risk behaviors such as drinking, smoking tobacco, and using illicit drugs (2); and perform poorly in school (3). However, insufficient sleep is common among high school students, with less than one third of U.S. high school students sleeping at least 8 hours on school nights (4). In a policy statement published in 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) urged middle and high schools to modify start times as a means to enable students to get adequate sleep and improve their health, safety, academic performance, and quality of life (5). AAP recommended that “middle and high schools should aim for a starting time of no earlier than 8:30 a.m.”
Jane, increasing capacity can be achieved by enlarging existing schools or adding additional neighborhood schools so that Upper Falls students, for example, are not compelled to get on a bus. And, not that I am not enjoying our little colloquy, but I would still really like to hear from the candidates on this issue.
I went to Cabot, so I am familiar with the constant “lack of space” issue that has been talked about for years. I remember when I was there, CASP aka the afterschool program, got into a big fight with the teachers because the teachers wanted their rooms after school, yet CASP wanted them too. etc.
The point I am trying to make is that the SC has known about space issues for years so anyone who is acting like it is a huge surprise is not telling the truth.
In regards to parking at Cabot, hopefully if/when the new building is made, they can get rid of the “modulus” (sorry, unsure of spelling. aka those mini buildings that the city threw up over the years to deal with more kids entering the schools). They take up a lot of space since they are only one story, so hopefully some parking could be freed up there. It would definitely not be 60 spaces, but maybe 15-20.?
I know I will get some heat for saying this, but there is definitely some free space in Cabot Park. Ted, which part are you talking about, is it near the trees by the softball field?
I’m going to look into this further, but those are just some thoughts I had off the top of my head.
Question: When the new Angier was being designed, I thought the use of the City owned playground for additional parking was off the table. Why is Cabot’s playground being offered as a possibility? I thought the State had some say in this. Anybody know?
Sallee:
I don’t believe the Cabot playground is going anywhere. This is Cabot Park we are talking about across the street. Look online and you can see the various plans.
Sally, There will be additional parking built on the Angier playground, I think it’s about 25 spaces. It was somehow justified as parking for the recreation area (playground). Not sure what legal restraints affect Cabot.
@Terry & Sallee – The parking at Cabot was explained the same way to those of us on the Cabot School building committee – parking spaces shared with the recreational use.
As I mentioned in my earlier post, the Parks & Recreation Commission is empowered to make the decision. They approved the shared use at Angier.
Since the subject of this thread began with a poll, voting for Susan Huffman or Steve Siegel, I have 2 cents on that.
I agree with the issues brought up by Colleen and Ted, but given that Susan and I are polar opposites on almost everything else, from national and local issues to presidential candidates, I cannot imagine her support for neighborhood schools outweighing what could be her other choices for our schools.
How is her support for the confederate flag, her support of Trump’s “illegal aliens” statements as “courageous,” her support of eliminating “gun free zones” to solve mass killings, her belief that spanking children teaches them respect for others, her belief that it’s impossible to govern without God and the Bible and her support for returning to “our country’s conservative roots,” such as a Bishop’s “fatherly duties to instill Catholic moral values” instead of “operating under liberal ideas” such as abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage a good fit for the NPS School Committee.
Looks like this thread has always been hijacked, but I don’t think much of these polls anyway.
Sallee, I think the “big” field at Angier, if that’s the one you’re talking about, was off limits because of the a restriction when the property was donated/deeded to the city.
Fig, so we all have the same point of reference, what’s the most recent set of options? I’m looking at the presentation from May 7th
I’m appalled to see that the “jack-in-the-box” drive-thru model is still being proposed by the consultant, apparently with the backing of the committee. It’s only going to encourage driving and result in more congestion, with the cars close to the front of the school. Does the neighborhood really think this is a good idea? Have we learned nothing?
Marti,
I enjoy your posts, but, not knowing anything about Susan Huffman, I’m not sure how your last post was meant to be taken. Is this comedy or is this your impression of her positions? Really? Perhaps Susan could address this…
Thanks Terry, I enjoy yours as well.
It would be great if Susan would address what I posted. I am hoping she will. But she may not notice it hidden away amongst these parking issues, although her friends post here too. Too bad it’s not just my weird humor.
Everything I posted comes directly from her.
Good evening!
There are a handful of points I’d like to respond to here.
ACCOUNTABILITY, OPENNESS, AND TRANSPARENCY – The SC violated OML around executive session and we were appropriately reprimanded for it, including a primer from city attorneys regarding areas of the law that we misunderstood. At this point to say that we are assiduous in following it would be an understatement.
The comment regarding Mason-Rice and especially Pierce parents underscores how well OML can work: This spring the Student Assignment Working Group (SAWG) updated the SC in open session as required by law. Our early thinking (I serve on both bodies) was in full view and the public had a chance to weigh in. Pierce families organized quickly and big to make sure that the working group and the SC knew their perspective – their insights and those from other neighborhoods influenced our final recommendations. OML can have an awkward fit for some processes (for example canvassing for elected-body leadership positions, which by law may only happen in public) but the public has a right to observe the thinking and deliberations of their elected officials.
MASON-RICE STUDENTS TO ZERVAS – the proposal to reassign some current Mason-Rice neighborhoods to Zervas is not about filling Zervas; it is about relieving a seriously overcrowded school with additional positive upriver impacts on Bowen and Countryside. Zervas was built larger specifically to provide space relief for these schools.
UPPER FALLS BUFFER ZONE – We listened to Upper Falls families who asked that we reduce or eliminate buffer zones in their neighborhood so that a family will know, by virtue of the street they live on, which elementary school their children will attend. The SAWG recommendation is to eliminate the southern half of the UF buffer zone and permanently assign it to Countryside. The northern half would technically buffer (for now) to Angier and Zervas, but the intent and hope is to permanently assign this half to only Angier. We looked at whether we could permanently assign the entire UF district to a single elementary school but we could not effectively address overcrowding elsewhere if we did.
MEGASCHOOL — The term “megaschool” gets tossed about and I’m not sure what that term means or how to respond to it. I’ll share information about Newton elementary school size – Of 15 schools, Countryside, Bowen, and Mason-Rice have enrollments between 450 and 500 students. Five other schools have enrollments between 400 and 450. Our current plan calls for Angier and Cabot to go from the low 400s to the mid-high 400s. It calls for Zervas to go from the low 300s to the high 400s. These three new schools have the desirable attribute of being “right-sized” for current teaching and learning models based upon state guidelines for space definition and square footage. This means that a 480-student Zervas will be much better functioning than a 480-student Bowen.
NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL — What’s happened to our “neighborhood school” model? In 1967 Newton had 18,400 students in total, with over 10,000 in 25 elementary schools. This resulted in an average of 400+ students per school. School enrollment declined steeply for the next two decades and by 1988 we had 9,100 students in total, with 5,000 in 15 elementary schools. As schools were closed the City sold them off to private interests. Our enrollment has gradually climbed to 12,600 students in total, and 5,900 of these are elementary students. How many students per elementary school is this? 393, or less students per building than when Newton had 25 schools.
Newton has had 15 elementary schools for 30 years. Our student population has been growing but average travel distances to schools is essentially unchanged. This school committee has done nothing to change our neighborhood school concept – unless one thinks we abandoned it by not building a 16th school.
BUILDING NEW SCHOOLS – Why don’t we build a new elementary school in Upper Falls? I used to be a vocal advocate for a 16th school in Upper Falls. Then as I learned more my thinking gradually changed. An UF school would have a small population, as low as 250 students, and ongoing student population growth in this area is speculation, not fact. Newton has developed a teaching and learning model that allows us to best serve students when school populations are over 400. Suggested locations such as one side of the Eliot Street DPW Yard or Braceland Park have profound issues, with trade-offs that have been generally ignored by their supporters (I fully appreciate that at another time with a different set of facts and needs Newton may choose to tackle these issues and accept trade-offs that we might not now). I’ve concluded that maintaining and upgrading our 15 current schools, and adding capacity for flexibility to each school we touch is the best use of our financial resources and allows us to fund the best education possible for every Newton student.
Yes, this means that there is not a safe walking route for Upper Falls students to get to their elementary school. Yet this is the same issue faced by students of Lower Falls, and Oak Hill Park, and Hammond Street, and Nonantum Road, and the east face of West Newton Hill, and Islington, and west of the Eliot T station…. Just as for these neighborhoods, there are situations where it is sounder judgment to bring the student to the school than to try to build a school next to the student.
HOW LONG HAVE WE KNOWN ABOUT SPACE ISSUES IN OUR SCHOOLS? – A long time. Nearly a decade ago the SC knew we would have to accommodate a growing elementary school population and they commissioned a long range facilities plan that first came out in late 2006. That plan called for Angier, Cabot, Zervas, and Ward to grow into 450-student schools, but the failed 2008 override vote resulted in retrenchment and delay as the City had no funding source for school projects.
LATER HIGH SCHOOL START TIMES – I support later high school start times (yup Mike, I do). I don’t know anyone who questions the science. The study we are undertaking is about looking at various start time scenarios, and fully understanding the impact of each on such items as overall high school schedule, elementary and middle school start times, traffic congestion around town (and think Parker Street in particular), after-school athletics, clubs, drama, jobs, and religious school, athletic field use and nighttime lighting, bus schedules and cost, family impacts including childcare logistics, impacts on teachers getting to and from schools, and more.
Changing start times will have large and small ripple effects in every corner of Newton and there are many besides high schoolers who will be affected. Let’s understand the ripples, and make an informed decision based upon real analysis. Voting “yes” without tying to an optimal start time is the wrong way to proceed.
QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? ADVICE? I’m happy to hear from you – please reach me at [email protected]
Oh, and since this a campaign thread, I’d be honored if you would consider giving me your vote!
Thanks, Steve
Steve, I think you are the first school committee member to publicly announce your support of later school times. As someone who voted for you, held signs for you, and donated money to your campaign, “Thank you!”
How long do you think it will take for the school committee to figure out whether the “ripple effects” or the health and educational benefits are more important? There will always be unknowns. Is there a date when the school committee will have enough information to make a decision? Will we know before the elections?
I support the start time change as well and have worked with the Newton South School Council who originally brought this proposal to the school committee. In June I introduced a resolution for our school committee to vote on and to put before the Mass. Association of School Committees supporting a statewide review of the issue to identify what support districts need to move to later starts for adolescents. This parallel track to our own process in Newton could make it easier to make this change. I’m happy to report that the Mass Association of School Committees will take this to their membership at the fall meeting and if adopted will become a statewide policy initiative.
Newton’s working group that will examine all the issues Steve outlined above starts its work this fall.
Change is hard, and change of long-established school schedules is even harder. The help and support that comes from greater understanding of the issue and greater visibility both locally and across the state can help make that change easier.
Steve, thank you for your response. I may not agree with all your points but I appreciate your continuing willingness to engage online and in person. Thank you.
Two additional questions:
1. Will this be the sitting SC for overseeing the Superintendent’s next term? I really don’t know.
2. Is there any discussion around a full day Kindergarten compromise similar to Needham’s Kase Program which is run by Needham Community Ed? Details here: http://rwd1.needham.k12.ma.us/community_education/NCE_KASE
Note: I am actually NOT for full day but want a solution for those that are. Newton’s own Community Ed is a fantastic organization and the model exists next door. If we’re not looking at this now, then why not? Needham btw uses various public and private spaces. It should definitely be in consideration as the city allocates space at Aquinas and later on, Horace Mann.
Thank you
@Joyce, I have and continue to support full day kindergarten. The KASE program is very interesting. I would be curious about implementing a program like that in a district Newton’s size. Last year there were 938 kindergartners across 15 schools in Newton while there are 363 kindergartners across five schools in Needham.
Newton demographics are different as well with double the % of high needs, low income and minority students and almost 4 times the percentage of students who are limited English proficient.
There are no districts Newton’s size or with Newton’s diversity in Massachusetts that do not have a full day kindergarten program. However I would be interested to explore having a program like KASE added to our pre-school program.
I know Steve Siegel and Margaret Albright are sincere in their support for later high school start times. But sincerity aint cutting it. The health consequences of early start times have been well researched and known for more than a decade. Steve has been on the SC for multiple terms, hasn’t done a damn thing to facilitate a time change, and is still talking about the “ripple effects” that change would bring. Margaret is closing in on the end of her first term, and she’s chosen a legislative approach to changing start times that is likely to take years, if it works at all. Meanwhile our high school students continue to be exposed to the health consequences of sleep deprivation. Talk is cheap. And at some point we have to elect SC members who are capable of actually accomplishing change, rather than talking about it for years.
@Mike: I admire you for your unwavering commitment and sense of urgency related to this issue.
I also appreciate Margaret’s efforts to enact change statewide and Steve’s commitment to the issue and willingness to explain the reasons why this is taking longer than anyone would like including:
A later start time is a really, really, really, good idea. But it’s also a good idea to think about the domino effect that this change would have on so many kids, families, commuters, teachers, staff, budgets, businesses, etc. I wonder Mike if you’ve personally explored all of the (as Steve calls) “large and small ripple effects in every corner of Newton” and if you have specific solutions to the specific challenges that slow down this from happening?
Hi Jeffrey, thank you for your past (and future 🙂 ) support!
There is a new Start Time Working Group that will be periodically updating the SC during this coming school year. Many of the “ripple effects” were identified by South Council and Cindy Bergan last year; working out a plan that demonstrates effective management of these ripple effects will be the substance of the working group effort going forward. It is complicated since it impacts so many things inside and outside of our schools, and Sharon, Northampton, and Duxbury took a couple of years to get through them before settling on a proposal that got sufficient support for passage. Natick rushed the process and it failed.
Hi Joyce, Margaret has responded to KASE and I have nothing to add. And David Fleishman’s contract runs to the end of the next term of the SC.
Regards, Steve
Margaret, I think you are the second school committee member to publicly announce your support of later school times. As someone who voted for you, held signs for you, donated money to your campaign, and hosted a home event, “Thank you!”
Greg, I think it is a little unfair to ask Mike if he has examined all of the ripple effects. It is impossible to quantify everything. If we don’t make a decision until we quantify all the ripple effects, we will never make a decision. Don’t get me wrong, we should consider ripple effects, but we can’t focuses on the one student who needs to reschedule her trombone lessons and the one teacher with a 3PM yoga class.
Let’s pretend that on some other planet a town called “Newton” has high school kids start at 8:30, and grade school kids start at 7:30. This has been going on for years and years. Do you think, on this planet, there is a blog discussion right now, to start high school earlier to detriment of the high school students’ health and performance, because of the ripple benefits?
@Jeffrey: Actually I believe Mike has been unfair in the past on this site vowing to never to support the reelection of any incumbent School Committee member because of this issue. I appreciate his sense of urgency, it is a major health issue, but I also appreciate that this change is complicated.
One more thing for Margaret and Steve, I have no regrets about my support. One thing I appreciate is about you (and Ted Hess-Mahan and Emily Norton) is that you are willing to interact publicly with the community. Thanks.
@Greg– How long should it take to implement change? Decades? When the school system is doing something that significantly compromises the physical and mental health of thousands of students daily, that trumps “ripple effects.” Change the start time first, then make the other changes. It’s not rocket science–just common sense.
@Mike: I hear you, my kid just graduated from North and it’s too late for him, just as I know that it’s too late for your kids. But I don’t subscribe to the idea of changing the times first and then dealing with the chaos later. And there will be chaos.
I love the idea of a later high school time (our house has the first bus stop for the high school bus at 7 AM, and I am dreading having to get my kid out in that time). However, I also have younger kids. If you flip the elementary bus to 7 AM, then my little kid is getting out at 2? After cares will need to charge more for their programs, as their costs would increase. Afternoons would be longer and more time to play for the K-5 set.
However, I also believe if we are going to look at start times, we should look at the whole calendar and how many hours the kids (at all grades) need to be in school. And, can we get rid of the Thursday early release days? Those are a logistical nightmare for me.
Looking forward to all of this discussion!
@Mike Striar,
I appreciate your passion for later start times, and this is an issue that directly effects my family because my youngest has two more years in the NPS. For my youngest, I will say that changing the start times won’t make an iota of difference because it will do nothing to change how she allocates the 24 hours she manages each day. Instead, she will have to decide whether to give up swim team because the changed schedule will inevitably mean that she will be miss more classes for away meets – much harder to swing with AP classes. Staying after school during X-block will inevitably mean a walk home in the dark as days grow shorter. It will also mean leaving an empty house in the morning, after Mom and Dad leave for work.
There will be trade-offs for sure, but before the school committee makes a decision on those trade-offs, I would like them to have an opportunity to hear directly from my daughter, from the devotees of drama who spend long nights preparing shows, from the student athletes who are depending upon athletic scholarships to finance college, from the kids who stay after school to help with tutoring, from the middle school students who are also effected with sleep deprivation, and from parents who will be relying upon their kids to get themselves to school in the morning.
As Margaret said, change is hard. But, the hard part isn’t deciding to make the change, it’s finding ways to minimize the negative consequences to achieve the greater good.
Lisap – That was a terrific thumbnail sketch of the complexity of this decision. Once you dig below the surface, it’s just not as simple as it appears. I’m by no means an opponent of changing start times, but first let’s hear from all constituencies.
@Lisap– I always value your opinion. I understand there will be issues created by changing the start time. Our disagreement [yours and mine] is about priorities. With all due respect, I don’t think you’re giving enough weight to the health consequences of early morning start times. Sleep deprivation is an issue with proven negative health consequences for thousands of our students. And I believe the School Committee members who comment on this blog have concurred that’s a fact.
As far as change being hard, I agree. But the difficulty of the task is no excuse for failure. And make no mistake about it, what we have seen is a failure of leadership on the issue of sleep deprivation. While you are free to give Margaret Albright credit for trying, I view her effort a little less charitably. This problem demands a timely [no pun intended] solution. A years long process of changing state law, is simply another excuse for the School Committee to abdicate their responsibility to Newton students.
I readily admit however, I am not an expert on the effects of sleep deprivation. So I choose to listen to those with relevant expertise, and base my opinion on their advice. I think it’s worth reposting this portion of the latest report from the Centers for Disease Control, which includes a reference to the policy guidelines established by the American Academy of Pediatrics…
Adolescents who do not get enough sleep are more likely to be overweight (1); not engage in daily physical activity (2); suffer from depressive symptoms (2); engage in unhealthy risk behaviors such as drinking, smoking tobacco, and using illicit drugs (2); and perform poorly in school (3). However, insufficient sleep is common among high school students, with less than one third of U.S. high school students sleeping at least 8 hours on school nights (4). In a policy statement published in 2014, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) urged middle and high schools to modify start times as a means to enable students to get adequate sleep and improve their health, safety, academic performance, and quality of life (5). AAP recommended that “middle and high schools should aim for a starting time of no earlier than 8:30 a.m.”
The evidence is that the AVERAGE child has better academic performance and better health. Some children will fare even better than average, some will fare worse. Scheduling will improve for some people and diminish for others. There are two sides of the distribution. We can’t make decisions based on a handful of case studies from one particular extreme.
@Mike, I think you misunderstand what I am describing as a ‘parallel effort.’
Advocating for legislation in no way replaces Newton’s need to look at the start time issue on our own. However, as liaison to the state delegation and a past delegate to the Mass Association of School Committees for Newton, part of my responsibility is to make sure that legislation and advocacy that could help and support the students of Newton’s schools goes forward. S.254 which looks at start times was languishing in committee. S.254 has the potential to help Newton students. I have worked to get this legislation to move beyond committee. This is part of my duties and responsibilities as a school committee member.
We keep an eye on all legislation on Beacon Hill that effects our schools. The school committee meets at the beginning of the legislative session with Rep. Khan, Rep. Balser, Rep. Lawn and Senator Creem. We attend the Mass. Association of School Committees legislative day on Beacon Hill. We send a delegate and several members to the annual meeting of the association. We learn a lot from the efforts of other school committees and as the 9th largest school district in the state, we are listened to. I expect lively discussion around start time issues. I don’t expect the state to solve our problems, but I do hope that by working with others it will make it easier for us to make change in Newton.
@Margaret– Let’s just cut to the chase. Are you prepared to assure Newton students that start times will change? If so, when?
I don’t know anyone named “Marti” so it’s odd that he/she would claim I’ve communicated to him/her directly on any of the items he/she claims to know my position on. I will say I’ve served for four years on the Newton Upper Falls Area Council with people of all political persuasions and have worked well with all of them. I am a mother and a grandmother and I care deeply about our city’s children and that they grow up with the best education we can provide them. Here are the issues that I believe the next School Committee should work on:
1) Neighborhood Schools: It is much better for a neighborhood to not be split up and their children tossed by the citywide optimization plan of the SC into other neighborhoods for schools. It also is not good for our villages to split up our kids. I of course understand the economics of this, but I do feel that there must be a way to look at this seriously. And I believe that the SC should actually listen and take note of the citizens’ input on these subjects. I did not approve of the massive rebuild of Zervas, but that is now a done deal. However, I would like to make sure that we don’t do something like that again without considering a 16th school first.
2) Full Day Kindergarten, and Pre-K. These are proven to be very valuable to children to help them get on track for 1st grade. It’s been shown that if a child is behind his peers in 1st grade, the child will have difficulties adapting to the new culture of school. If they start school at 4 or 5, then they have a much better chance of doing well throughout elementary school.
3) Appropriate Start Times for All Students. If it means we have to have more buses to get everyone to school at a reasonable time, then so be it. If it means we eliminate the afternoon off one day a week, then so be it. Other middle and high schools across the state use early arrival time so that they can use fewer buses. But there really ought to be a better way to handle that. I think that in Newton, we should be able to care about our children, along with the budget. There has to be a better way. I believe that I can help make that change.
4) I support MCAS as it was created by educators instead of politicians. Plus, it has been proven to work. Many educators across the state have given very bad reviews of how Common Core and PARCC are working in their schools, and they strongly want to go back to MCAS.
If anyone wants to contact me directly about any issues you may personally have, my email address is [email protected]
@Susan Huffman, are you still a member of the group called “Moving Newton Forward”?
@Mike Striar,
How can any single member of the school committee give such assurances at this point in time?
Moving Newton Forward is no longer active.
@Lisap– Like Geoff Epstein and Steve Siegel before her, candidate Margaret Albright ran for office supporting later start times. Geoff served though his term limit, Steve has served multiple terms, Margaret is closing in on the end of her first term, and none of them have delivered on later start times.
In my opinion, when a candidate takes a position on an issue requiring change, but fails to deliver that change after they are elected, the public has every right to call them out on that failure. Or, at the very least that office holder should be able to offer a timeline for change.
@Mike, it takes five votes to make it so. I’m hoping for a good proposed plan from the working group that will get five votes.
The timeline is in process. A working group is starting in the fall and will update the school committee regularly. We anticipate the working group to bring proposals forward this spring. The chair of the school committee will schedule the discussion and vote.
@Margaret– Thank you for the response. Frankly, I’m convinced that if left to their own devices, the SC as currently constituted is incapable of making the change. It’s going to take an outside source to get this job done. Not surprisingly, I have a few ideas about how that might be accomplished.
@Mike Striar – if you have ideas as to how to get this done, then by all means please share them. I am more than willing to tackle this issue along with Margaret.
The problem is that members of the SC who support changing start times continue to take the wrong approach. They ask themselves in-effect, “how do we make this change?” But sleep deprivation among students is such a compelling health issue, it warrants the exact opposite approach. Make the change! Sort out the issues. The benefit to our students will be immediate, and the Earth will not stop spinning.
Susan, every word I said is true and I’m not the only poster on V14 who knows it. I’m not saying I don’t think you are a good person at all, but there are some beliefs that I don’t think would serve our School Committe well. That’s the only reason I would bring any of this into a discussion – appropriateness for serving on the NPS School Committee, for which you are a candidate.
My post:
“I cannot imagine her support for neighborhood schools outweighing what could be her other choices for our schools.
How is her support for the confederate flag, her support of Trump’s “illegal aliens” statements as “courageous,” her support of eliminating “gun free zones” to solve mass killings, her belief that spanking children teaches them respect for others, her belief that it’s impossible to govern without God and the Bible and her support for returning to “our country’s conservative roots,” such as a Bishop’s “fatherly duties to instill Catholic moral values” instead of “operating under liberal ideas” such as abortion, contraception, and same-sex marriage a good fit for the NPS School Committee.”