Although all eight seats on the Newton School Committee are up for reelection every two years, only one seat is contested this year. All Newton voters can chose between Margaret Albright and Andrea Steenstrup.
Who’s getting your vote? Weigh in on our poll and then explain why in the comments section.
[polldaddy poll=”7420269″]
Anyone interested should take a look at the candidate’s web sites: http://www.margaretalbright.org, http://www.andreasteenstrup.org. There are vast differences between these two candidates. Simply look at their records and their issues/priorities.
Also, from what I can tell Andrea is running the classic endorsement campaign focusing on getting the political network on board, whereas Margaret is issue focused and in addition, for the first time in years, would bring real professional experience in K-12 education to the School Committee. Andrea’s work experience is in the financial sector and the School Committee already has that well covered with Matt Hills.
Further, Margaret has a real record of achievement to show and would have pretty much no learning curve as she has been intensely engaged in improving Newton education for years.
When Jim Marini was interim Superintendent in 2009-2010, Margaret met with him and showed him the data on co-taught classes for special education. Jim went ahead with a pilot and today we have 26 co-taught classes with much improved outcomes for our kids. Further, since the co-taught classroom model essentially replaces 4-5 aides by a fully qualified special education teacher, each co-taught class saves from $50,000 to $100,000 each year. The savings achieved so far amount to at least $1 million/year.
So not only has Margaret been a key factor in improving special education, she has had a huge impact on our finances. Those savings are a large part of the current $1.4M budget surplus the school system is seeing.
Every week Margaret is in touch with principals and superintendents around the state collaborating on projects which bring best educational practices to their classrooms.
We have a unique opportunity here to add real educational experience to the School Committee and that will help enormously in 2014 when the School Committee ramps up its focus on improving education.
If Margaret does not win then there is something seriously wrong with the agenda of those on the SC. What are they afraid of and why are they recruiting Steenstrup over Albright?
This is a sad reality but clearly the modus operandi of the status quo in Newton education. We are losing Geoff before his time is up which is not good for Newton’s children. Any non establishment person can see there is a rigid lock on who is elected to the SC and those winners are not objective, independent thinkers.
Hi All, I recently moved to Newton and will kids in the school system in a few years. This will be my first time voting! I just looked at both of the candidates’ website and, if I were basing my decision just on those, the obvious choice would be Margaret Allbright. Both candidates seem to have been involved as volunteers at the schools, so that’s a wash. Seems to me that Margarets background would be perfect because she could ask the right questions of school leaders and make informed suggestion. Andrea Streenstrup might be better at financial number crunching, but my understanding is that the School Committee is not responsible for that. So, can someone educate me – what exactly to current School Committee members look for when endorsing someone? Perhaps I’m totally naive, but is the School Committee as political as the city government? I assumed that group would take a more “high road” approach, but maybe not.
The School Committee has typically been more political than the city government. For years people in the community have complained about the political power centered in the School Committee. Even the aldermen grumble about that.
Although a number of the continuing School Committee members would agree that Margaret would bring remarkable know how in education to the School Committee, they have political network obligations which they are having trouble avoiding. Since Margaret is a really independent thinker and places the education of our kids far ahead of political buddy networks, it is not possible for them to endorse her. They have to endorse Andrea to keep their political connections intact.
Pretty much all of Andrea’s endorsements fit this mold. None of the endorsers is providing any detail on their positions. None of them would be able to say that Andrea brings any experience or know how about K-12 education to a committee which is going to focus on just that in 2014.
When I ran in 2005 and lost, and then ran in 2007 and won, the entire School Committee and a majority of the aldermen endorsed my opponent. Fortunately the second time, the electorate was focused on education rather than political correctness.
The same thing happened the first time Steve Siegel ran and lost. The second time around, the electorate realized that having someone on the School Committee who knew something about construction would be a big asset, as we faced such extensive facility problems.
In general, my view is that if some candidate has a list of endorsements as long as your arm, you need to set that aside and pay special attention to their platform and the way they think.
The political network work brought us Newton North and for years blocked any inquiry into how we might improve education in Newton, as that would be an affront to their notion that we are already excellent.
Whenever a candidate says we want to ‘maintain excellence’ you can bet they are not on board for real improvements, as they never want to hear the facts about how we are doing for fear that somewhere we might be ‘excellent’.
Politicians rarely like to disclose where things they are responsible for are not working.
So we need to keep the politicians out of the School Committee and make sure we elect real, independent thinkers.
We have Matt Hills covering finance and collective bargaining.
We have Steve Siegel covering buildings.
It’s time we had someone actually covering K-12 education!
The individuals who are the power players on the SC are very active behind the scenes. They call various people active in the community and encourage them to run for office. People that reflect the agenda of the powerful members.
Susie Haymen and Anne Larner who are former presidents of the SC are still very active pushing people to run for office.
They and those now in power want their agenda for the city fulfilled. These people believe firmly that the schools are the most important entity in Newton. They are big spenders and want new schools built. They support high wages for teachers and excellent benefits. All these items are important but can we still afford to spend at the same levels as the past? They also believe in high spending for special education.
One issue they fail to take seriously enough is the provision of high standards for the average student.
I would love to see a shift to concern for Stem education and also more attention be given to the welfare of the majority of students rather than the minority.
Sigh. Colleen’s comment is spot on:
“If Margaret does not win then there is something seriously wrong with the agenda of those on the SC. What are they afraid of and why are they recruiting Steenstrup over Albright?
The current school committee is a well-oiled political machine and it’s frightening how quickly and deftly they are able to fire up the lawn signs and enthusiasm for a less-qualified candidate. (Not to mention get their entire network over to this poll to vote for Andrea Steenstrup.) It’s hard not to be cynical.
Geoff, how do you think you and Steve Siegel were eventually able to overcome such a powerful force and get elected?
Margaret Albright for Ward 2 School Committee. Case closed.
SC incumbents are wary of independent thinkers. Margaret asks the tough questions. Margaret has her pulse on K-12 education in her “real” 9 to 5 job.
I’m very disappointed that only one seat is contested.
I’m sure that A.S. is capable of making a positive contribution, maybe in a few more years. I have met her, and she is pleasant, intelligent, and outgoing. However, she admits she doesn’t know the issues, she is being coached by the current incumbents, and she has 5 weeks left to get a grip on very complex topics.
Margaret has the benefit of many years in a related career, and she has also attended school committee meetings for close to six years. A.S. just went to her first SC meeting last night. Please vote for Margaret Albright on November 5!
My take is that I got elected on a Math & Science platform and that Steve Siegel got elected on a facilities + Math & Science platform. Those areas drew broad support and the losing contenders had no clear issue for voters to latch onto.
I think it should be the same in the Ward 2 race this time.
Margaret has such a strong platform for improving K-12 education. Her opponent has absolutely no support visible for Math & Science nor for any other educational issue at all. There is nothing at home on education.
So if voters want us to keep on making real improvements in education. Margaret is the clear choice.
If the 20,000 parents of students in the system knew that we could really become the #1 school system in MA if we went ahead full steam on improvements, they’d turn up and vote.
I hope that enough of them are interested in their kids’ education to turn up on November 5th!
I’ve met Margaret Albright and can personally attest to the fact that she does not have two heads or snort fire. In fact, she seems to be reasonable person with good ideas and good manors. So it is a little puzzling to me why so many of our elected officials and insiders don’t seem to like her, especially given she clearly really, really, really (yes, that’s three “reallys”) wants to serve.
And yes, Geoff Epstein is right to say that if Albright is elected I suspect these insiders will come to respect her in the same way they now respect Steve Siegel, which is to say they’ve discovered someone who is bright, passionate, ready to work hard and showers regularly.
That said, there’s nothing insidious about political coalitions forming to support one’s interests/perspective.
But I’d really like to know more about Andrea Steenstrup in order to make my own informed decision on Nov. 5.
I’ve never been impressed by long lists of endorsements. But since she has lots of them — and close to 150 people have voted for her on this poll — can someone please tell us what you think she brings to the table? Or does everyone like her simply because she’s the anti-Albright? I’m not being coy here, I’m an undecided voter looking for insights.
Of course, Andrea, you’re welcome to join the conversation too.
.
Greg is on the right track. It would be great to hear from the Andrea side. What is there apart from the appearance of being a chosen one from the political insider camp that appeals?
What will she contribute that is substantive? What direction does she want the School Committee to move in. Is she happy will all of the past decisions and priorities? What does she think of the accountability direction Matt, Steve and Margie are pushing in recent meetings?
What problems does she see that we need to solve?
There has to be more to her priorities than is evident from her website!
Thanks Greg, I always appreciate a public sharing of my hygiene habits.
@Steve Siegel – There’s a campaign bumper sticker in there somewhere, trying to get out.
And I voted for Steve because he was an independent thinker NOT a candidate being pushed in by the status quo. Didn’t even care if he showered daily or not.
On a serious note – if you want a candidate that is going to be an independent thinker and has real K-12 Experience, a person that has contributed already by the change in the NPS of co-taught special ed classes with not only improved results but also cost savings, if you want a SC member that puts your children”s educational experience ahead of the Political network than Margaret Albright is your choice.
I have no idea whom I’m voting for in this race. Margaret certainly would add value to the School Committee. I know nothing about Andrea and I couldn’t figure out much from her website. Her priorities are everybody’s priorities.
Here’s what I need to know before she gets my vote: She has an impressive list of endorsers but are they endorsing her because of her strengths or because she isn’t Margaret?
I’d love to learn more about her.
By statute, G.L. c. 71 sec. 37, the school committee has 3 primary responsibilities:
“The school committee in each city and town shall have the power to
*select and terminate the superintendent,
*shall review and approve budgets for public education in the district,
*and shall establish educational goals and policies for the schools in the district consistent with the requirements of law and statewide goals and standards established by the board of education. . .
As to the superintendent, having achieved high marks it seems doubtful that the school committee will be entertaining a new superintendent in the foreseeable future. As to the reviewing and approving of budgets, the committee is well stocked with members possessing financial acumen. The third responsibility is by far the most significant responsibility entrusted to this body because the broad goals and policies provide the administration with the navigational tools they need for bringing our schools forward into the 21st century.
The current make-up of the school committee includes members whose professional expertise encompass finance (Matt Hills), physics, science and technology (Geoff Epstein), earth science and public policy (Jonathan Yeo), high tech administration (Angela Pitter-Wright), public health and environmental policy (Diana Fisher Gomberg), structural design and engineering (Steve Siegel), strategic planning and organizational behavior (Claire Sokoloff), and public health management (Margie Ross Decter).
Singularly absent from this committee is any member with professional educational expertise. We have a unique opportunity to change the make-up of this body politic to include an individual who is both personally and professionally focused upon educating our children for the demands of the 21st century. An individual who understands not simply the demands and challenges as we move towards common core standards, but the tools we need to place in the hands of our educators to meet those state and national standards. To return to my maritime analogy, will we be better served by another purser or a navigator who can interpret the charts and help us steer the course. The choice is obvious: Margaret Albright.
Greg and Gail – there are two candidates in this race. You have both mentioned that one has well-articulated views and positions on the issues and would add value to the school committee, whereas the other has a long list of endorsers but seems to lack a definitive voice or platform. The choice seems pretty straightforward to me.
Tricia – Andrea might be a bad campaigner which does not necessarily mean she’d be a bad SC member. On the other hand, it could mean that she doesn’t have either the time or the passion for the job.
Or maybe she just hasn’t kicked into gear yet.
Wow! Thank you to everyone for sharing info and viewpoints in response to my post/questions – I’ve just learned so much about the Newton School Committee. But I must say, that assuming things are as described (SC being so highly political and wary of independent thinkers), what I’ve learned is so very disappointing. Particularly for a new resident family, as you can imagine. My impression of Newton is/was that it’s the kind of community that welcomed diverse, independent thinker types – I guess that doesn’t extend into the politics. I’m most shocked to learn that there’s not one person with an education background on the SC.
I’d love to hear from an opposing view, particularly from someone on the SC or candidate Steenstrup.
I’ll be sharing this with the moms in my playgroup!
Thanks, Rena
I don’t think Andrea would be a “bad” SC member at all – she gives every indication of being an intelligent, educated person who is active in and committed to our schools. If she were running against a different candidate, she might well have my vote. But Margaret brings a background and expertise in education that, in my opinion, would add a great deal of value to the School Committee.
To Newton Mom of 2: Welcome to our city and our school system! I moved to Newton in large part to send my 4 children to Newton’s excellent schools, and overall I’ve been impressed by the quality of their teachers and education. As a school council member and fundraiser at Cabot, Day and North, and through my work on the override, I’ve worked hard to help make the schools even stronger. I am normally not a blogger, so to Greg, Gail and anyone else who wishes to learn more about me, I’d welcome the opportunity to get together. I wold also like to hear about your experiences with the Newton schools, and your ideas for making them better. Please feel free to email me at [email protected]. I’ve really enjoyed meeting with people across the city and look forward to hearing from all interested voters!
@Andrea – I think the point of a lot of the comments here is that people want to hear YOUR ideas for making the Newton Public Schools better. What are the issues that you think need to be improved, or do you just think that everything is hunky dory and perfect? By seeking election, you’re trying to transition from being supporter to leader so where will you provide that leadership and how?
Hey Andrea
Thanks for your response. You may not normally be a blogger but I hope you will consider making an exception when it comes to direct discussions about school issues in general and you in particular.
I’d also suggest you might consider it to be a wise thing to do. As I like to say, Village 14 readers aren’t likely voters they will vote on Nov. 5.
Thank you Andrea for joining the conversation. A good suggestion I would offer to you if you want to learn ways to improve Newton schools is this. Schedule a time to meet with Geoff Epstein and also Margaret Albright. Their perspective will be most valuable.
Another suggestion is for you to do some research on the best schools in MA and the nation. Find out what the leaders do in those schools to provide innovative educational experiences for all students.
Studies of Newton have shown that our schools provide a good education. We are blessed with plenty of financial resources but our students achieve at a level below their potential and below the intellectual level of the community.
Yes we have a beautiful new high school but what is going on behind the doors of the fine structures we value so much?
It is great to see Andrea on the blog.
What would be useful, especially given the comment that: “overall I’ve been impressed by the quality of their teachers and education”, would be to see what ideas you have for improvement.
For example, on full day kindergarten, the superintendent, acknowledges that we are achieving small learning groups in K by sending half the class home two days a week. His view is that if we were to go to FDK we’d need to ensure that the small group learning continues. What do you think we should do?
Should we invest money, making some trade offs so that our youngest learners benefit by still having small learning groups but adding 200 more hours of instruction so we align with best practices around the state?
What ideas do you have for constructive change? Do you line up with the move to not only invest in education, but to look at the outcomes and adjust where we have poor results?
A good candidate is usually running because they have accrued experience already from their kids’ experiences, or as you have, from serving for years on school councils at Cabot, Day and North. Surely that experience should have kicked out some obvious areas for improvement. What did all that school council service yield in terms of ideas?
That’s what voters are looking for. We want to hear where you want to head. The next Ward 2 School Committee member will be pretty much immediately making 2014-2015 budget trade offs to make the highest value investments. What things do you think matter, beyond the generalities on your website?
We need more definition to your positions.
What I’d love to know from Andrea is: How do you see the role of the School Committee? Should it be involved in curriculum decisions? Should it operate like a Board of Directors? Are board members liaisons for parents?
For that matter, I’d love to hear Margaret’s answers to these questions too.
I’d like to add a question to Gail’s for Andrea. What strengths will you bring to the School Committee that either Margaret and/or the current School Committee members lack?
I’d be interested in hearing from Andrea’s supporters/poll voters too.
@Gail – I think Margaret has already answered a lot of your questions right here: http://www.margaretalbright.org/issues.html
Gail, thanks for the great questions.
First and foremost a school committee looks out for the education of all our students by providing a vision and direction for our schools and the community’s educational future. It formulates goals, defines outcomes, and sets the course for the future. Vision is not about where we are, but where we want to be – it is about where we are going and what kind of school system we are trying to create now and for the future.
And for me that means engendering a culture of continuous improvement – measuring, assessing and making corrections as needed. The school committee should monitor student achievement, make program corrections as necessary, keep the public informed of the status of programs and progress, and make sure that all functions of our schools work well together. A school committee is accountable to the public for the performance of schools and for ensuring that students get the best education for the tax dollars spent.
My 25 years of non-profit management experience has also taught me that overseeing an organization like schools which are so connected to the public good and the future of our community means that not every decision can be made solely on the monetary value or budget impact. For example, making investments like full-day kindergarten may cost money in the short term, but they are for the future of our school system, look forward to where we want to be and ensure we get the best value for our investment by making sure our youngest students get off to the best start.
A focus on education is truly important at this point in time as we transition to the new Common Core Standards. The Common Core is more rigorous and is squarely aimed at making certain students graduate college and career ready. More than ever the school committee needs to be measuring, assessing, looking at outcomes and making corrections to support the superintendent and his staff as they navigate this major change.
Margaret, I first learned about the new CCS by listening to you talk about it on NewTv. So I did a bit of research and discovered these new standards will replace MCAS. I think few people even know about this change.
Just a note from 6 years of service on the School Committee, there was never any involvement in curriculum decisions.
Just as Matt Hills does not get in the weeds on finances but uses his financial know how and analytic skills how to help inform board discussion and decisions, and Steve Siegel does like wise for facilities (+ STEM, …), so will Margaret bring very useful information and viewpoints on best practices in K-12 education to the board process.
Absolutely. I have been a parent member of a curriculum review committee. The committee was led, as it should be, by the curriculum coordinator, high school dept. heads, principals and teachers. The work we did as a committee was to review the Massachusetts Curriculum Frameworks for the subject matter and make certain we were in alignment with those standards.
At the moment close to 200 people have voted for Steenstrup on this poll. But not one person has explained why they support her. That does seem to suggest that this is an anti-Albright thing rather than a pro-Steenstrup thing.
In all my years hosting Newton blogs, I’ve never seen anything like this before.
I doubt if these people are anti-Margaret. How could they be as she is so positive and productive? There is a core group of people who worked together to support the tax increases. Their candidate Andrea is their friend and comrade and they will vote for her and that’s the truth.
Now they will have to convince the voters to follow their lead.
Margaret has a fine platform on which to form her campaign. I hope voters will learn more about her and vote accordingly.
Greg,
It is amazing!
Where is the substance to Andrea’s campaign beyond endorsement by a political-social network?
Much is at stake for our children!
I wish we’d hear something from the 200!
Where is the debate on the issues?
How can we discern the differences between the candidates positions on the issues argued directly by them and their supporters.
Geoff,
You know 90% of campaigns are name recognition. I think thats where Margaret will have a big edge.
Newton Mom of 2 said:”that it’s the kind of community that welcomed diverse, independent thinker types – I guess that doesn’t extend into the politics…”
No, it doesn’t. It’s more who you know and if you’re friends with the right people. Then after that it’s about name recognition and the only way you can beat name recognition is through mailings, etc. Most people in Newton barely know who their alderman or school committee reps are. Just like everywhere else.
Proof of lack of diversity is that 32 out of 33 elected officials are democrats. Demographically speaking, roughly 48% (not even half) of the people are dems but they control 97% of the elected officials seats. As long as there are low turnouts, a small group of people will be able to turn back any independent thinker or diverse opinions other than their own. Now these people are with Andrea. What does that say?
Question for both Margaret and Andrea:
What is your absolute No. 1 Priority for Newton Public Schools; what can YOU do to achieve it; and what would you trade-off to accomplish it?
Andrea and Margaret:
How do you feel about full day kindergarten? How do we support it for those parents that want FDK?
How do we get more science into the elementary school classrooms?
Fees? Where do you see fees in the future? Include your view on parking fees at the high schools.
Special Education – how do we achieve the best in this field while watching costs?
Class size – please describe how to keep class sizes low, while the elementary schools are having a surge of students.
Larger Enrollment – how do we ensure our structures (buildings, music and arts facilities, busses) can handle the upcoming larger enrollments?
…also bus fees
@Newton Mom – Margaret has been a champion for full K for several years and is a strong advocate for early learning, particularly, as she cites, since 20 percent of our 3rd grade students are not proficient readers. Twenty percent! Here’s a link to her issues page: http://www.margaretalbright.org/issues.html
The ward 2 School Committee candidates are scheduled to debate the issues on Thursday October 10th at 8:00 p.m. on NewTV. Should be a great watch. Here is a link with the debate schedule: http://village14.com/netwon-ma/2013/09/let-there-be-debates-and-people-to-watch-them/#axzz2g1Ph8vSj
I’ll pop back in somewhere I don’t usually pop anymore to add a brief note about the mindset of the Newton S.C. blob – who have never forgiven Geoff and Margaret for challenging them.
When I was North’s student rep (2007-2010), I was after one contentious meeting about high school programming in which I’d said something in favor of Geoff Epstein’s POV approached by an incumbent school committee member who asked to speak in the hall. This individual then backed me into a corner and said that they and other SC members were (I paraphrase) “disappointed with what you think about this because we’ve been treating you pretty well around here.”
I asked this person if I should interpret that as a threat and they turned around and walked away.
Pretty stunning I thought.
Thanks everyone. Newton Mom & Max, here are some answers for you:
The move to full day kindergarten is long overdue. 87% of schools in Massachusetts offer a kindergarten schedule that mirrors that of grades 1 – 5. The Common Core standards make this even more imperative as the expectations of what is learned in kindergarten are far more rigorous. We owe our students and teachers the time they need to meet these standards.
Most districts in Massachusetts already have FDK, so there are many models to help inform our decisions and funding. In addition, the last two years NPS has had an operating surplus. I’m confident an excellent district like Newton and experienced superintendent like Dr. Fleishman can figure out how to implement FDK quickly and cost effectively.
I am opposed to fees on the arts and middle school activities. They are a barrier for many families and are not in the best interests of our students. My mother taught elementary instrumental music for decades and many of her students would never have taken an instrument or become accomplished musicians if it had cost their family money.
As for parking, I attended several Newton North neighborhood meetings around parking issues. The process involved the school, the neighborhood, the Newton police and city officials and resulted in a workable solution. That is the kind of collaboration that should take place. The school committee should institute fees based on this kind of community input.
Science in the elementary classroom is an issue in many schools and is part of the reason that the Common Core curriculum puts more emphasis on non-fiction reading and writing – so science is more integrated into the curriculum. Along with implementing the Common Core, Massachusetts is retaining its science standards and the science MCAS – it is a statewide priority. There is a state STEM council/STEM plan and many programs and resources are available from the STEM-focused companies in our area. I’d also like to explore how NPS can better support, encourage and integrate activities like FIRST Robotics, regional and state science fair participation, Math Olympiad and other STEM activities. These can be transformational and inspirational experiences and more kids should have the opportunity to participate.
My concerns with larger enrollment are how to support our teachers in providing small group instruction. There a good models available which incorporate technology, classroom management and instructional techniques. We should have a district-wide goal about prioritizing small group instruction – a goal with both subjective and objective measures as well as strong professional development. The principals and teachers I’ve spoken with have ideas about what they would like to do to make this happen.
SPED needs to be more focused on outcomes and less focused on inputs. Strong early learning including FDK can help detect and address problems early. And while we’re great at putting together this or that special program, we are less adept at measuring effectiveness. The school committee needs to set the expectation that every program should have goals and measures and regularly look at the outcome data when setting priorities and budgets. We should also explore working more with the regional SPED collaboratives which can be cost effective and provide good outcomes.
To Ben Miller, I have a good idea who intimidated you. I know of a few similar incidents. She was very effective too using those methods. Many independent SC members were quickly silenced by these tactics. Perhaps because various people simply didn’t want to be confrontational.
This person , although not on the SC now, wields great influence behind the scenes in Newton politics.
@Ben Miller,
That is stunning and quite contemptible. Look at it this way – even in high school people recognized you as a formidable foe. 😉
Ben was a worthy student rep. Exactly the kind of student we wish to produce in our school system. An independent mind.
The political insiders are afraid of independent thinkers. They get quite uncomfortable at the facts and new ideas.
It is reprehensible that the SC member attempted to bully Ben this way.
But the bullying era is past.
The SC is in transition. Matt, Steve and Margie are providing a very good example. One that actually is commensurate with the values we try to impart to our students.
For years there has been this disconnect between SC member values and school system values.
Now we can see them starting to line up and SC members can be as independent and inquisitive as our students are encouraged to be.
That should be the measure for all new SC members to be checked against.
If we take the politics out of the SC, we might see a very high performing SC and we might see NPS move back up in the state and national rankings.
@Margaret: Thanks for making the time to respond to the questions here.
@Newton Mom of 2 – you wrote “But I must say, that assuming things are as described (SC being so highly political and wary of independent thinkers), what I’ve learned is so very disappointing.”
This is not just a Newton problem. Sadly, I’ve seen this in other area towns/cities I’ve lived in. And for some reason, in the places I’ve lived it’s been worse for SC than for other town offices, no idea why.
@Margaret – thank you for your articulate responses to the questions. You definitely have my vote.
@mgwa – thanks for sharing that about your other towns … it almost makes me feel a bit better 🙂
I didn’t realize kindergarten is not full time here! I just assumed having come from Boston (JP), which guarantees a full-day K seat for every child although the school assignment process is tricky.
@Newton Mom of 2: Not for lack of trying!
Geoff, I have to say you are a bit optimistic about changes on the SC. The fact that you are leaving is not a good omen. I watched SC meetings for years and felt so disappointed at the brusk and dismissive way you were treated.
Margie and Steve do make very guarded attempts to provide new ways of solving problems; but both must walk gingerly and express their views very carefully so as not to provoke that dreaded response from the chair that quickly silences their thoughts and non status quo ideas.
Matt Hills has been the key to change.
He has always been for decision making based on sound information. He played a critical role in the contract negotiations where he shifted the other members of the negotiation team (Claire & Jonathan) around to the view that we had to align the contract compensation packages with the 2.5% increase we are guaranteed in city revenues by Prop 2 1/2.
Although this is an obviously sound practice for getting to financial stability, the dominating idea prior to Matt had been that we needed to be competitive with peer districts re compensation and that was all that mattered. I was in the executive sessions for bargaining prior to Matt’s arrival and believe me that was the thinking, even though there was no evidence that teacher turn over was a problem at any level.
Matt changed that and certainly had my support. His financial experience was a huge factor in his credibility and influence as he pushed that change through.
The school committee, with strong elements of the old guard still present till the end of this year, has had much greater difficulty getting a strong enough majority to support change on educational matters. Diana Fisher Gomber aligned all the time with Claire Sokoloff and Jonathan Yeo to block transparency and then action on multiple matters.
There was a fine example in the last SC meeting where Matt was arguing for the school administration to provide the SC data on student participation in activities for which we have fees.
His concern was to get that data to inform the SC as to whether it should change fee policy.
It’s a no brainer, as it is very clear that the more fees you add, the less activity you get. The student activity fee in the high schools cut the number of different student activity groups in half. So we go rid of that. But the concern applies to music fees etc.
I supported Matt along with Steve and Margie. Claire opposed Matt. Matt was clearly pissed off by that. Diana was silent. Angela was silent. Jonathan muttered that fees were part of life in a school system.
Claire used the standard argument (which I have heard many times) that we don’t want to burden the administration down with the onerous task of getting the data. That is an indefensible position.
So even in this case, there was a 4-4 split on the SC. On such an obvious matter.
When Claire and Jonathan term out, how will the SC look on that matter?
I know where Margaret stands. She’ll support Matt, Steve and Margie. It’s clear from her platform on fees.
Where will Ruth Goldman and Ellen Gibson stand?
Ruth’s platform is: support our mission, technology, class size, complete facility projects on time.
Ellen’s is: social and emotional learning, technology, school renovations
Andrea’s is: technology, support our mission, flexible new schools, security, neighborhood schools, careful budgeting.
It’s possible in my view given the support from Fisher Gomberg and Pitter Wright for Andrea, that a new group could form after the election: Fisher Gomberg, Goldman, Gibson, Pitter Wright, Steenstrup which will act to counter the necessary transparency and actions we need. They all have strong alliances.
That’s a 5-3 majority and could be fatal for progress.
My hope is that the group pushing for needed change will be: Matt Hills, Steve Siegel, Margie Ross Decter, Margaret Albright, Ellen Gibson.
That’s a 5-3 majority which could take us places.
Who wins the Ward 2 race will tip the balance of power in the SC.
Yuk, what a mess. Democracy is such a tricky process. Transparency is so important in this political process. Any of those alliances could change when the electorate is aware of the various agendas.
Just think, if you were running for re-election you wouldn’t be able to set out your perspective so directly and honestly.
@Margret Albright – I hope to have a chance to talk with you directly sometime but you did state support for some of my key issues concerning STEM and science fairs. I was recently elected to the executive committee of the MetroWEST Stem Education Network as one of the industry representatives. I have been surprised that Newton has not been involved with this group. I did have a chance to talk to an outgoing SC member about this, and to paraphrase, was told that Newton was doing well with its own initiatives and did not need to look outside. I discovered long ago that even when I am teaching I have an opportunity to learn. I do think that Newton has some great programs and it would be great to lean from a leadership position.
I am sold and hope that you get elected to make headway.
Note that that outgoing SC member was not me!
Newton needs to look outside for best practices.
We can do better!
@Geoff – Sorry, did not want to point fingers at anyone but did get you in the crossfire.
@All – Is was not Geoff
Thanks!
I am with Tricia here. I am sure Andrea is a very nice person and if I get an opportunity to get to know her better, I may be able to better comment, However, at the moment, I don’t know enough about her to be able to say anything other than admire the long list of names she has on her website.
It’s fairly well known that I do not give endorsements, especially not blind ones, because I do not presume to take away every citizen’s right and responsibility to decide his/her own vote. However, I am willing to share what I know.
This is what I know about Margaret Albright. She has been active and engaged in the Newton community for years and I have had the privilege of not only getting to know her, but working with her on several community efforts including the NewtonParents discussion group. She has educated me and opened my eyes to many aspects of education, especially public education, to which I hadn’t been previously aware and has pointed me to resources I had not previously known existed. This has helped me a lot in my role as an Alderman and as a parent with children in the school system. It has helped me to ask the right questions, like why has Newton resisted Full Day Kindergarten for so long when it’s been long adopted elsewhere? Why were School Council roles so downplayed in the Newton School system? (there are more active School Councils in Newton now than 10 years ago and I am pretty sure Margaret was a part of that solution.) How can we hope to improve our overall STEM program if we do not set the same minimum proficiency practices in math and sciences as we do in literacy starting at the Elementary School level?
That is what I know about Margaret Albright.
No it couldn’t be Geoff. He was the person on the SC always informing us of the importance of STEM.
Many ex-SC members have shared the same narrow attitude highlighted by G.G. Those people often had specific agendas which were often linked to personal/family concerns and priorities. They firmly believed that a mediocre Newton school system was a worthy standard. Unfortunately, their position was at odds with the general needs of the average families in Newton
@Groot Gregory and anyone else, please feel free to contact me at [email protected].
I too support Margaret.We have long needed full day kindergarten. Also Margaret has stated a willingness to analyze and examine the the alleged need for over 200 class periods presently devoted to teacher “meetings”. The present school committee has refused even look into the issue,
Rodney and Margaret, can you provide more detail about the 200 class periods presently devoted to “teacher meetings”?
Joshua, for an explanation of Rodney’s “over 200 class periods,” see his 1/27/11 letter to the TAB where he adds up hours of early-release time in a year equivalent to a total of 236 class periods (150 elementary + 59 middle school + 26 high school). I think, however, that those numbers should not be added together but instead need to be weighted by the number of grades in each school level (6 elementary, 3 middle, 4 high), which would yield an average of about 91 periods per school year, not 235 or 236.
I have a correction to a prior post on this thread.
Angela Pitter was not silent during the fees discussion. She was not there. I had overlooked the fact that she had left the meeting prior to the discussion due to a back problem.
My apologies Angela.
All of the remaining points remain unchanged.
Thank you Bruce.
That’s a refreshing change of pace, someone else researching the information instead of me!
Let me ask a followup question (to whomever is most able and interested in answering it:
We lose 70-177 hours per year (91-236 class periods per year) for “early release time”. Of the 1925 FTEs employed by the Newton Public Schools system, how many of them directly benefit from early release time? It appears that early release time represents a significant benefit to the unions and a cost of $3M to $13.6M annually to Newton residents.
On early release days, teachers and staff meet with literacy specialists and math coaches to differentiate instruction to meet the educational needs of all children, attend IEP meetings, meet with parents, plan for upcoming events, etc. The meetings have a clearly set agenda, a chair/facilitator, develop action plans with a timeline and followup, etc. just as you’d find in any other profession. I’m not sure why the word meeting is in quotes. A meeting is a meeting.
Steenstrup now has more than 200 votes on this poll and there are 60 comments on this thread. And still — other than one comment from the candidate — not one person has made the effort to explain why they support her?
Either someone is spending a lot of time clearing the cookies off their browser or, as I’ve said previously, this is all just an anti-Albright campaign.
…and by the way, there are many people on her list of endorsers who have commented on Newton blogs before.
I have a further electoral fact to add.
If Margaret Albright were to win the vote on November 5th, she would be the first School Committee member from the Horace Mann community since 1973.
With 15 elementary schools and 8 SC members, the average coverage is about 50% for each elementary school. Horace Mann has been out in the cold for a very, very long time in terms of SC representation.
On the other hand, if Andrea Steenstrup were to win, Cabot would have two sitting SC members with children at Cabot: Andrea and Angela Pitter.
That is highly unusual and not the outcome one would generally desire in terms of equitable representation.