She says her official announcement is still in the works but Susan Huffman was collecting signatures at the Feast of the Falls Sunday to challenge Steve Siegel for the at large School Committee seat from Ward 5.
For those keeping score at home (or perhaps on the Cape) this would mean at least two of the eight School Committee seats will likely be contested.
Cyrus Vaghar, a recent graduate of Newton North is running for the Ward 2 School Committee seat currently held by Margaret Albright.
I saw her at the July 4th fireworks and was happy to sign her papers to see some new people competing for the school committee.
Welcome to the race Susan!
For the record, I only run against Susans:
Susie Heyman
Sue Rosenbaum
Susan Huffman
I have absolutely no idea what I’ll do if someone with a different name runs…
I’m not a one-issue nag, but first out of the gate for me is her stance on later start times for the high school. I have seen time and again with my children and their friends how these early start times are quite detrimental to their optimal functioning. Mounds of research have been produced on this subject, experts have agreed that later start times for teenagers has huge benefits and it’s way past time to make it so.
I realize they’re putting together a study and committee to form some recommendations but in my case, they’re closing the barn door after the horses have left. Maybe for the next wave of kids coming up, the plans will be finally in place.
I would like to see more about Steve Siegel’s record on the SC than who his opponents have been.
The issue that bothers me most about the schools is the ever increasing rate of spending. The city side of the budget now receives 35% of the spending, down from 50% a decade ago. No wonder the roads are in poor shape.
I believe The $40 million to be spent on Zervas with no state reimbursement is criminal. Many students will be redistricted to Zervas and already are opposed to these dramatic changes.
I would never support anyone who supports the rebuilding of Zervas.
Let’s ask all incumbents for public office if (and why) they support:
* 24% increase in compensation spending (and a 21.7% increase in benefit spending) with a 17.4% growth in staff and only a 7.7% growth in enrollment?
* NPS staff matriculating their children in our school system with no associated cost shown in compensation or in the city’s budget?
* Would they support a general operating property tax override (or possibly a debt exclusion tax override) to compensate for Spending more and getting less with our education dollars in Newton to pay for the short-sighted planning of the City of Newton in our budgeting process?
* Do they believe current proposed land use permits for new growth (Austin St, Turtle Lane) etc. will put an additional financial burden on our public school operating costs (if yes are they supporting these projects and why)?
The SC has failed to address early morning high school start times that have substantial deleterious health consequences for thousands of our students. This SC has stood by and watched as our high school students are systemically subjected to sleep deprivation, a torture technique routinely used by the military and intelligence services on terror suspects. The SC members have been derelict in their duty, perpetuating a policy that has been definitively proven to increase stress levels in humans, with those in their teen years being the most susceptible. Stress has been linked to numerous illnesses both mental and physical, and in some cases can result in teen suicide.
We have a health crisis in our high schools, and the SC has failed our children. So before Newton voters cast a vote for any of these SC incumbents, I seriously hope you will consider how little regard they actually have for our teenage children. To some, my criticism may seem unduly harsh. But I am far more concerned about the health and well being of our students, than I am about hurting the feelings of the SC members who continue to jeopardize their health through sheer incompetence.
I hadn’t planned on “announcing” until my signatures were all in and certified, but maybe I got the process on that backwards. At any rate, the reason I’m running is because as a parent and grandparent, I truly care about our city’s children.
1) I’m very concerned about the budget and what we (the citizens) are getting for our tax dollars being spent. I do not and did not approve of the massive amount of money spent on Zervas as that was not explicitly stated in the override question.
2) I believe in neighborhood schools – particularly for our elementary aged children. In Upper Falls, where I have lived for the past 27 years all of our children have to leave our neighborhood to attend school. They have to cross over either Needham Street or Route 9, so absolutely none of them can walk to school. In my early years here, all of the children attended Countryside, so it wasn’t too terrible. At least there was some sense of community. However now, our school board has seen fit to split our neighborhood up to fill all the seats in Angier and Zervas as well as Countryside. I will note that they changed that a little after some uproar from my neighbors and myself and now our children are only split between Angier and Countryside. I would like to seriously consider a 16th elementary school to see if that couldn’t solve some of the elementary schools problems.
3) I am vaguely aware of the issues that Mark Marderosian brought up above. I know of 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 budget issue. I don’t know what the answer is at this time, I will have to look into that more. But I totally agree that getting children up that early is not a good answer.
If anyone wants to contact me directly about any issues you personally have, my email address is [email protected].
I should also clarify what I said above about Zervas. While I did not approve of the massive rebuild, it is apparently now a done deal, so I’m not campaigning on that. I just would like to make sure that we don’t do something like that again without considering a 16th school first.
@ Susan – Steve Siegel has previously claimed there is no available space for 16th school. Do you have any particular space in mind?
@Susan Huffman– I’m not only disappointed, but frankly astonished that you are only “vaguely aware of the issue that Mark Marderosian brought up.” I was really hoping for a candidate who would relentlessly pummel Steve Siegel on that issue. I know that Siegel has his supporters, and I used to be one of them. But his failure to take action on early morning high school start times cost him my support, and leaves him vulnerable to a challenger who makes that an issue.
Space?
What about the lots next to Marshalls, about to be vacated by Clark?
Susan Good Luck!!! I am looking forward to this campaign for the city.
On a side note: Since the Charter reform looks like it’s going to happen, I would like to see if anyone on the blogs would like to start a special interest group on both Full Day Kindergarten and later start times in the HS’s. If anyone wants to join me in this endeavour please email me at [email protected]. Maybe the citizens of Newton can out enough pressure on our elected leaders to get them to do whats right.
If there is an elected official who knows exactly where the city stands on these two issues, I’d love to hear from you or maybe you can post on the blog so everyone else will know as well.
Thanks.
Mike Striar, I’m apologize for your astonishment and disappointment in me regarding the high school issues. As a two-term member of the Newton Upper Falls Area Council, I’ve been focusing on the needs of the elementary school students. As the campaign progresses, I will of course take your concerns and look into them. However, on the surface of the issues, it looks as though I will definitely agree with you on having later school starting times. Children need sleep.
Sam S – as for space for a 16th school, there is definitely space. My small group has located at least three places within Upper Falls where a school could be located. The space next to Marshalls that Isabelle suggests is certainly worthy of consideration. The main problem with that is that it is not already owned by the city. The best one in my opinion would be to use a portion of the DPW lot on Elliot Street (which is huge) and put a school there. I at the very least want this option to be seriously considered.
And I still think it’s horrible that a city like Newton does not have Full Day Kindergarten available.
So I’m very much in favor of Full Day Kindergarten and later high school starting times.
Susan,
It’s great that you are running. We all benefit from the challenge and questioning of the status quo. As a SC you’ll have to make difficult decisions. As an example, a couple of questions:
Your first point is that you are “…very concerned about the budget and what we (the citizens) are getting for our tax dollars being spent. ”
Your second point is that you “… believe in neighborhood schools – particularly for our elementary aged children. ”
Both lovely ideals. But they may compete.
IF it is shown that smaller, “neighborhood schools” are more expensive and less efficient in operations and in offering a fluidity of population fluctuations, which do you go with, the economics or the “neighborhood school”?
Looking forward to a great campaign season!
Is it not true that both Full Day Kindergarten as well as Pre-K are pretty much agreed by everyone to be Good Things, but no one seems to be able to figure out how to pay for them? Folks running for office may be full of Good Ideas but one should always ask the bummer question: where are you going to get the money for this? Just wondering.
@Tom, a high school start time working group was approved at the school committee meeting on June 15. It will begin work in September.
Newton’s school committee has also submitted a resolution to the Mass. Association of School Committees asking them to support legislation before the House/Senate education committee that would create a path to move to later start times statewide.
Change is hard. Support for change is key to getting there.
The same goes for FDK. There is a way to get there, but support for making that change is key.
Terry, you’ve touched upon the essence of what I think our job is, the quite unglamorous “Management of Trade-Offs”. Supporting arguments can be made for most every issue, and the job of elected officials is to collect information, listen to our constituents, weigh the arguments, and apply our best judgement to find an optimal outcome.
For example an expanded Zervas offers great space relief to three other overcrowded elementary schools but it is on a tight site and puts additional traffic pressure on neighborhood streets. A new elementary school at the Elliot Street DPW yard puts a new school in walking distance to the Upper Falls community but it will place elementary students on an old industrial truck lot next to an active DPW depot down the block from Rt 9. We considered many other factors as I and others have immersed ourselves in study and outreach, and we concluded that on balance, with the facts including updated enrollment projections, a new larger Zervas and no Elliot Street school allows us to best serve our students while best using our financial resources. I completely appreciate that this answer is not all-good for everyone but I think it represents an optimal set of trade-offs.
Later start times offers another example. The entire School Committee is convinced of the science that says that later start times respects the natural sleep patterns and reduces stress in high school students. If we prioritized biology above all else we might simply move start time to 9 a.m. and figure out how to deal with everything else. But the trade-offs around bus schedules and cost, traffic congestion, student safety, after-school athletics and clubs, student jobs, family schedules and childcare are complex. The NPS study group that is being organized around later start times must consider trade-offs such as (and I’m making these up) “A 9 a.m. start time gives students the most sleep but will cause a 90 minute backup on Parker Street and will isolate Newton’s varsity athletic programs from the rest of the region ….An 8:15 start time will reduce the backup to 45 minutes but will add $600 thousand to bussing costs….Swapping high school and elementary school start times will keep bussing costs neutral but will wreak havoc on elementary parent drop-off/work schedules”.
Although the science is clear most MA communities have found that reconciling these trade-offs is too daunting and very few communities have moved forward to date. Newton may choose to do so but I don’t believe that we should without a full understanding and prioritizing of trade-offs.
As a related aside, Mike has suggested that we are endangering the lives of our kids by delaying the implementation of later high school start times. I am not an expert but the mental health and counselling experts who have helped Newton develop deep student support programs since our three teen suicides don’t agree. Can later start times contribute to stress reduction in our kids? The science suggests “yes” and this is absolutely driving our interest. But is reduction of stress via start time change (and we don’t even know what this single factor can achieve) worth doing before identifying the balance of trade-offs that will work best for students and Newton’s other citizens? I am personally glad that we are commencing with the hard study work before drawing any conclusions.
Our student assignment work offers another example of thoughtful trade-offs. Our big-picture objective has been to solve overenrollment issues at many of our mid-city elementary schools and take full advantage of the new spaces we are building, while minimizing disruptions to students and their families. We have chosen to grandfather in students currently enrolled in elementary schools rather than moving them as district lines change – this trade-off is less efficient at enrollment management but is compassionate for students, their families, and their school communities. We have chosen to shrink the large buffer zone in Upper Falls but not permanently assign all Upper Falls students to a single elementary school – this trade-off doesn’t fully mitigate the community change associated with Emerson’s closing 30 years ago, but it does reduce neighborhood disruption while allowing our new school construction to effectively relieve overcrowding at the three mid-city elementary schools.
Elected officials must work with focus to find an optimal balance between always-competing interests. I think this is a fundamental nature of our work, and it is something that I am committed to and find quite gratifying.
Feel free to contact me at [email protected] if you are interested in discussing these or other topics in more detail.
Best regards, Steve
@Steve Siegel– I’m so sick of having this argument with you. Yes, I am suggesting your policy puts some lives at risk. And the facts clearly indicate that sleep deprivation significantly increases stress, and stress causes depression, with teenagers being the most susceptible to it’s negative consequences. If your “experts” don’t agree that sleep deprivation causes stress that can result in depression and lead to other illnesses both mental and physical, then I disrespectfully suggest they are no more “expert” than you. If you have their opinion in writing, be sure to post it here so I can laugh at it.
The thing that bothers me the most, Steve, is that you know what you’re doing is wrong. Causing stress to thousands every day, leaving kids vulnerable, because the School Committee lacks the problem solving skills to create a healthy environment for our high school students. And to even imply that money or a bus schedule should come between Newton students and a good healthy lifestyle simply disgusts me. You’re going to deprive thousands of kids sleep five days a week, because you and the other geniuses on the SC can’t figure out how to change a freaking bus schedule?
Seriously, Steve, I understand you’re a terrific professional engineer. But I’m not pulling any punches, you suck as a SC member. The fact that you can look at this situation, which has been scientifically proven time and time again to have negative health consequences for our children, and fail to respond to that problem in any meaningful way, should tell parents all they need to know about your shortcomings as a public official.
Steve, I know you are making those trade-offs up (and a 9am start time may work better with existing traffic patterns for all I know) but I certainly hope that students’ physical and psychological well being will be prioritized over the automobile. It’s worrisome that such trade-offs are the first hypotheticals that would come up. The fact is, NPS designs its new buildings and parking lots to encourage auto usage, and existing buildings are run the same way. That’s got to change.
Mike, you and I may be on the same side of this debate. I know you’re passionate on this issue, and Steve doesn’t need me to defend him, but as a little exercise, see if you can identify the phrase where you crossed the line and trashed the level of discourse on this thread.
I appreciate the input of Steve and Susan and thank them for their viewpoints.
It is very hard with this, (and most other jobs) to serve the needs of the many, while keeping the needs of the few in mind.
There is also the overlay of financial considerations. I recognize that oftentimes we bemoan ever-rising costs while we fume about not receiving services or programs that we feel are worthy.
But in this area of sleep deprivation and later-start times I feel cost-related issues like bus fees are simply a poor argument and they should not factor into the discussion. And all the experts in the world that Steve cites will never convince me otherwise from what I’ve seen with my own eyes continuously since 1994, in both my very immediate family and their friends. This is serious sleep deprivation and the effects are not mild.
Again, they are closing the barn door after my horses have left but this has been an issue in my family since 1970 and I intend to follow it closely.
@Adam– I’m glad we agree on the importance of changing early morning high school start times. I’ll continue to use my full name whenever I exercise my right of free-speech, to address a public official about public policy in a public forum. I believe the seriousness of the issue at hand, warrants the harsh criticism I’ve levied. Thanks for letting me choose my own words.
Steve, I completely agree with those above who say this issue is not one that should be a trade off with cost-related fees, traffic and other logistics problems. You are really saying that the mental health and counseling experts working with Newton schools don’t agree that lack of sleep is endangering our youth. I’d have to see quotes to believe that and if it’s true, it’s time to find new experts.
Margaret, the working group needs to focus on how to implement change, not looking into compromises and not investigating if later start times are needed.
There are innumerable, reputable, peer reviewed studies that back up the need for later high school start times and letting our teens get more sleep not only endangers them, but all others on the road with them.
The final report of the three-year multi-state research project, funded by the CDC, was published in early 2014. It used data from more than 9,000 students attending eight high schools in three states and found major advantages to switching to a later start time.
“Eight hours of sleep seems to be the tipping point for making healthy choices,” says Wahlstrom, who has been studying school start times for 17 years. With the later start time, “you have double the amount of kids getting eight hours or more of sleep and making healthy choices as a result.”
“High schools that start at 8:30 AM or later allow for more than 60% of students to obtain at least eight hours of sleep per school night.
A start time of 8:35 a.m. allows 57-60 percent of students to get eight or more hours of sleep, but schools that begin at 7:30 a.m. have an average of only 34 percent of students sleeping eight or more hours on school nights.
Teens getting less than eight hours of sleep reported significantly higher depression symptoms, greater use of caffeine, and are at greater risk for making poor choices for substance use.
Academic performance outcomes showed significantly positive improvement with start times of 8:35 am or later, including grades earned in core subject areas of math, English, science and social studies, plus performance on state and national achievement tests, attendance rates and reduced tardiness.”
The number of car crashes for teen drivers from 16 to 18 years of age was significantly reduced by 70% when a school shifted start times from 7:35 AM to 8:55 AM.
“The reduction of teen car crashes may be the most important finding of all as the well-being of teens and the safety of the general public are interrelated,” she says. “From a public health standpoint, it’s pretty important.” says Wahlstrom.
http://www.ccsdschools.com/Community/documents/ImpactofLaterStartTime.pdf
You see Mike, this is not free speech. It’s a website, and you’re bound to the rules set up by its moderators, who will give you more leeway when interacting with public officials but still wish to keep the forum civil. If the moderators don’t like what you say, your comments can be removed. If you show a pattern of disregarding those guidelines, you will be asked to leave the blog (though given technological and manpower limits, we don’t pretend to be able to enforce this) Here’s the free speech part: if you don’t like it, you can go set up your own blog, or stand on a street corner, and call people names.
I get it, Adam. People with fake names and hidden agendas are free to say whatever they want on V14. But someone who uses their real name and actually speaks the truth to a public official is threatened with expulsion. Let me explain something you clearly don’t understand about free speech. Our founders not only included free-speech in the Bill of Rights, they intended it as an ideal for our country. So threaten me all you want. The day you remove another post of mine over something I say to an elected official, will be the day I say sayonara permanently to the good folks on V14. You censor/I leave. You should be more concerned about what our elected officials do [or don’t do], than anything I have to say about them.
Mike, didn’t you already permanently say goodbye, in English? Perhaps you should stick to your word.
I’m concerned about keeping this a civil place to have discussions, free of bullying. Taking input from moderators and from the community, guidelines have been posted. The owner of this site ultimately gets to decide where to draw that line, but to be clear, you do not have free speech rights on a blog. Again, I strongly encourage you to make your own blog. You can make the rules and never censor anyone, if you so choose.
@Mike: I’d hate to lose your voice on this blog but Adam is correct in asking you to tone it down. Also while the First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits governments from making of any law that restricts free speech, it says nothing about non-government entities regulating speech. So, yeah, just as we have done in other instances, we can limit participation in any way we choose.
But better yet, make all your same points but without the pointy sticks in the eye.
@Adam– The only “bullying” going on here, is you thinking you can bully me. Good luck with that! How is it that you find my comments more offensive than the School Committee’s policy that we’re both supposedly opposed to? You kiss Steve Siegel’s behind, and threaten me with expulsion for calling him out. Your bias is clearly showing.
Do you have kids, Adam? Have you watched your kids have their health compromised by sleep deprivation? Are you concerned about the thousands of teens in Newton who are suffering because this SC can’t figure out how to change the damn bus schedule?
You need some help putting things in proper context, Adam. My words mean nothing. The School Committee’s lack of action says it all. You want to paint me as the bad guy, go right ahead. I’m not the one using a torture technique on our high school students.
@Adam and Greg – congratulations on your restraint and reasonable attempts to ask Mr. Striar to tone it down. But I wouldn’t hold out much hope, he does not seem inclined to follow the very simple rules here. If anything it apparently gets him more riled up. I’ve offered to send him $10 so he can set up his own site but he never took me up on it. I bet if you started a fund or a kickstarter or something you could raise the money to pay for his web site for a year, if he would agree to go off on his own.
Greg, you are the last person that ought to be preaching to Mike. Some of the things you write are very offensive to those you disagree with on this blog. Ha Ha. Who is discipling you?
Truth be told Colleen, some of my fellow Village 14 moderators have reigned me in from time to time. I’ve always thanked them for it. But I never realized I could have gotten ten bucks from HL Dewey if I carried it a little further.
Mike, I would never expect you to pull your punches, least of all on this topic about which you have always spoken with passion. And I’m not pushing back on you or anyone else, as I accept the biology and the research and believe that later start times will be of benefit to our kids.
But Marti, and others, once you accept the research the discussion is entirely about trade-offs. Start high school at one time and a whole cascade of consequences relating to student health, transportation, after school activities (including athletics, clubs, drama, religious schools, and student employment), school facilities and field usage, traffic, and family schedules around work and childcare spill out. Start at another time and the cascade may look a bit different but the range of impact is still wide.
And research may indicate the amount of sleep that is the “tipping point” to seeing measurable improvements in student well-being, but what start time is the “right” time in Newton to create that amount of sleep? And what increments of change matter? If (for example) a 9 a.m. start time is determined to be optimal but an 8:45 start will mitigate a host of logistical problems, does this 15 minute change matter to student well-being? Should we consider it?
The study group is all about understanding the implications of various start time options, in an attempt to answer some of the questions above and countless others. Natick serves as the latest example of why good process matters. A post-mortem of their failed 2014 start time change is that the administration pushed it through but didn’t develop community buy-in first, and it was soundly rejected by impacted stakeholders. That’s not how we will do it here.
@Steve– I appreciate the courtesy [and courage] of your response. From what I can tell, the SC rallied around the Superintendent in record time when he was in trouble. Why should it take years to address a situation that you readily admit negatively effects the health of thousands of our students? With all due respect, I know your intentions are good, but if you and your colleagues can’t get the job done, it’s best that you let someone else try. Calling for further study is just a cop-out.
My first 2 children attended NPSs under the old time schedule. They started later had a home room time, were able to switch classes at a slower pace and finished later with a much longer lunch interval. Sports were not an issue. Some times they left early on days the teams travelled to other towns, no big deal.
My 2 younger children had to adapt to the more condensed schedule and I always believed this new method was poorly conceived and not in the student’s best interest. However it was in the adult’s interest particularly the teacher’s union.
State mandates increased the number of teaching hours, so to prevent a much longer day for the teachers which caused salary considerations the school day schedule was compressed to fulfill the mandated changes.
So we are back to where we started and the S.C. will be pressured by the teacher’s union to keep the present status quo.
Do we lengthen the school day do benefit the children or keep this new arrangement which in my opinion is most dysfunctional?
@Marti, the working group will look at each of the possible options and the ramifications of those choices. For example, a district on the south shore moved their high school start time from 7:30 to 8:00. That choice required middle school to start at 7:25 and dismiss at 1:30. It was the choice that this community was willing to make.
We need to have the options outlined in detail in order to make any decision. And then of course there needs to be a plan to implement any change.
Steve, I agree with Mike that the studies have been done. You reference the study I quoted but relate it to the possibility of 9:00 am being determined as an optimal start time and wonder if 8:45 would make a difference.
The part of the CDC study posted plainly says there was significant positive improvement at 8:35 am or later. Try starting there instead of 9:00 am.
There will be trade offs, yes. But nothing you mentioned outweighs such enormous health and safety benefits so the study needed is to determine how to make it work. I’m sure there is a way that won’t be “soundly rejected by impacted stakeholders,” depending on who you are the most important stakeholders.
Margaret, we posted at the same time. I think your last paragraph is exactly what needs to be accomplished.
Kindergarten teachers already work a full day so there would NOT be a huge cost to Full Day Kindergarten. We could start this fall sending kindergarteners home at 3PM four days a week — matching the schedule for 1st-5th graders — and voila, we would have Full Day Kindergarten.
Former superintendent Jim Marini was on the path to implementing it several years ago. It is still not clear to me what we are waiting for.
More details: http://www.greatnewtonschools.org/full-day-kindergarten.html
Marti, I suspect that there is a flaw in Newton picking the specific hour and minute to start school described in a CDC study unless they tailored it to Newton. Sound teen sleep is about circadian rhythms which have a relationship to sunup and sundown. What location was the CDC using when pinpointing that time? Today sundown is 52 minutes later in Indianapolis than it is in Newton, though we are both in the Eastern Time zone. Today sundown in Fargo is 55 minutes later than in Houston though they are both in the Central Time zone. Sunup in Newton on November 1st of this year, when daylight savings time ends, is 6:17 a.m. Less than 10 weeks later when students are returning from winter break sunup is at 7:14, nearly an hour later. Can you provide a link to the study?
Thanks, Steve
Sorry Marti, I see there was a link in your earlier post….
This thread has been hijacked.
@jo-louise Allen – yeah, the last mention of Susan Huffman was about 20 or 25 comments back.
Susan, welcome to the race. I know you’ve been keenly interested and involved with various school issues in recent years. Your jumping into the campaign can only be a good thing. I’d love to have every seat in the upcoming election be a contested seat – so thanks for turning it into a real election.
Susan Huffman, welcome to Newton politics. I have enjoyed some of our chats and share your views about neighborhood schools. Caring about our children seems like the best reason to run for School Committee.
Is the hoopla over Mike Striar based on his comment that a sitting member of the School Committee “sucks”? If that is the case, I cannot remember that last time a week went by without at least one person telling me I suck as an alderman. That is just the tenor of the times. I can’t speak for Steve Siegel, but for me, it is like water off a duck’s back. One cannot afford to be thin skinned and survive long as an elected public official. Or, as Harry Truman said, “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.”
Yes, welcome to the race Susan. I’m looking forward to learning more.
And the thread hasn’t exactly been hijacked, like some others, because the thread is about a candidate for SC and the comments are about thoughts on NPS issues, including hers.
Steve, you have gone from Newton’s mental health professionals not agreeing that sleep deprivation endangers students to questioning a study you haven’t read because of it’s not being tailored to Newton, specific hour and minute start times and time zones. You are all over the place. This is considered an important study by those who care about these things so I’m surprised the SC doesn’t know about it, if the SC has been looking into the benefits of later start times, and no, the CDC didn’t fund a study specifically in Newton, but it was in 3 different states. Time zone and daylight savings time explanations, really? You realize twice a year when daylight savings time disrupts everything, school times don’t change.
Emily, kindergarten teachers work full days, but they don’t teach full days. I agree that shouldn’t make much of a difference but it means changing their contracts, I’m guessing. I’m a supporter of teachers and have them in my immediate family, but I’ve been surprised at how detailed and inflexible NPS teachers’ contracts are. If adding a few minutes of “teaching time” to a student’s day caused a ruckus and ended with the ridiculous change in start time in elementary schools which adds no “teaching time,” but satisfies the new Mass law, then it seems the change to FDK may be more complicated than it sounds. It’s shameful that Newton doesn’t have FDK.
Change of any kind in Newton seems to require surmounting an almost impossible barrier.
Marti, kindergarten teachers do teach full days in Newton. They teach fewer children four afternoons a week, because half the class leaves at 12:30 on M & W and the other half on Th & F (everyone leaves at 12:30 on T).
Have to say my two cents (or more)
FDK – it is time to implement NOW – the only additional costs is the aide support that would go from two days a week to four days a week. Kindy teachers are in the school teaching. We need more learning time for these kids. Many kids go from full time preschool/daycare and then have this one year kindy program, which is awful for parents and kids (do I stay late today? How about today? Is today?)
High School – the start time is too early! However, the work we expect our children to do at HOME is IMMENSE!!!!! There is NO reason to assign so much homework and expect so much. College students should NOT come home and say that college is easier than high school. We expect our kids to be in sports and have jobs and community service and do homework. Too much! Even if kids are wired to be up to midnight, that doesn’t mean they should be doing homework from dinner to mid night. It is time to treat our kids as kids, and NOT study machines.
Upper Falls – Neighborhood schools for all. Stop redistricting. It creates havoc in the neighborhood!!!! Doesn’t build community. Newton shut down Emerson, and Newton needs to re-open a school there. If the mayor lived in Upper Falls would he like his kid to go to Anger, and his daughter’s BFF to go to Countryside? Probably not. Upper Falls deserves a walkable school!
Five minutes to get into school – and don’t forget the email all elementary school parents received. All kids get five minutes to file INTO the school and sit down (400 kids into one door) because the state said we need more learning time. Instead of eliminating Thursday early release days or extend by five or ten minutes, we are going to create anxiety in kids. (Or we are going to say they are in their seats at 8:25 AM and lie to the state.).
Don’t get me started that Angier is having two additional half days during December (instead of full days) and not starting until the third school day in January 2016 because of the move. Working parents don’t have unlimited days off and kids deserve to be in school with LEARNING TIME. Don’t tell me I should be grateful because my child get to enjoy a new school for a year. (I’ll tell my boss that when I need two days off at the end of December and two more in January during a busy season at my work.) Don’t tell me that I should take my kids and emerse ourselves in a foreign country during that time (since I can’t afford it). Oh, and the superintendent won’t open during February vacation for makeup days, because you can’t have one school open when everything else is closed. Although, he lied, since Angier and Zervas are open for Columbus Day and the rest of the schools are closed!
Lack of leaders and thought process.
We need real leadership at the head of Newton, and we don’t have a full committee that is willing to be leaders, including the Superintendent. I am willing to vote for school committee members who want change for Newton and the school children who attend NPS. That is who will get my vote!
Thanks, Tricia.
Newton Mom – I notice at least 2 and possibly 3 of your issues require an increase in funding (K classroom aides, building a new elementary school, changing the start time of the HS day as a possible increase) and one will result in overcrowded elementary classes (no redistricting). Given that one person’s expendable program/expenditure is another’s pet program/expenditure, what are you willing to forego to implement your ideas?
I’d love to be able to do it all, but unfortunately we can’t afford to so it comes down to making choices.
Jane, you’re 100% right in that it comes down to choices. The money is there and all they have to do is reprioritize it. If no one is out there considering it, thats what gets people upset.
Steve said that there is a working group for the FDK, I am looking forward to seeing the results from that.
Tom – “Reprioritizing” is another way of saying that you would cut other programs. The problem is no one will say what programs should be cut. What would you cut?
Hi Marti,
Respectfully, no I’m not all over the place. Big picture: I made a point about how a Newton-focused study should consider trade-offs that vary with changes to start time. I hope that is the take-away for V14 readers. I don’t presume that either of us knows “the” optimal time to start Newton high schools; a local study will help us get to this answer.
Then I wandered down the road of questioning whether the specific start time from the CDC study has relevance here. My mistake for musing on a blog, where tone and nuance are often lost.
I buy much of the study contents. It and many other studies like it are compelling enough that NPS is beginning our own work to see what impact a change of start time will have on, well, everything. I believe this local effort is critical and I’m glad we are on it.
Please consider contacting me if you’d like to discuss further – [email protected]. Thank you.
Hi Tom, I’m not sure who you’re quoting regarding an FDK working group as there is not an active working group right now. Oh, and you and Jane are both right, “the money is there” but since the school budget allocation is tightly fixed, additions to one budget area are balanced by deletions to others. This is the trade-off theme I have been speaking about, and the school budget process, where programs are studied, priorities are set, and funds allocated, take up more than 6 months of each year.
Jane,
I am all for exploring the option of Newton joining the GIC. As someone who works in the private sector, with a high deductible health insurance as the only option for my family, and higher co-pays than what teachers currently pay, I would like to explore that option for shifting some spending. If teachers and other city employees pay what some other private sector employees pay for health insurance we might find some savings. It isn’t that I don’t value teachers, but I do believe that exploring costs for the GIC or consolidating health plans could save us enough money for full day kindy.
Of course, had I had the magic wand, I would not have voted to make Zervas a super school. Zervas, Cabot and Angier are schools that needed construction, but I think we used a lot of money for Zervas when it could have been shifted else where.
I also believe that the neglect of past administrations have cost us over and over again. But we can’t fix that. We can learn and move on.
My personal belief is that we should look at the cost of teaching non resident students. I support METCO, however, the program could be smaller. We could stop educating kids of Newton teachers. BUT, before we do either, I want a report that will show the savings. But I don’t believe the majority of the school committee is able to to write and present a non-biased report. There are certain school committee members that I trust but unfortunately I think the majority of the current school committee isn’t able to deliver a non biased report.
Newton saved money by not having the teachers in the GIC, so that doesn’t help. Continued talk about Zervas does not do anything to add to the bottom line. The changes you mention would save a pittance in the face of building/staffing/outfitting a $40m elementary school and adding aides to every kindergarten class.
I’m not opposed to what you’d like to see added to the NPS, but the community needs to understand that when something is added, something else needs to go. I think we can safely assume that no one wants class size to increase or wants a return to the days of deferred maintenance. NPS would need to cut some pretty big ticket items in order to get everything you want. Most importantly – that’s your list and it may very well look different from another parent’s list.
I think it’s clear that I’ve lost all respect for the current SC members over the issue of high school start times. If they held a gun to my head, I still wouldn’t vote for any of them. But I understand there are more issues than high school start times, and Newton Mom did a great job of articulating the bigger picture with her post on July 15th, the one that begins with “Have to say my two cents [or more]”.
The school system puts a tremendous amount of unnecessary stress on kids. From the pressures of standardized testing, to excessive amounts of homework, to the “havoc” [as Newton Mom put it] of redistricting, even the 5 minute footrace to get in the door of an elementary school, all demonstrate that there is inadequate consideration of anxiety and stress when formulating policy.
The SC is clearly at fault for failing to address sleep deprivation in our high schools, and it seems to me they are basically oblivious to the other stress issues I’ve mentioned. But I can’t put all of the blame for these things on the SC. Parents hold the ultimate responsibility for the anxiety and stress the school system puts on our children. It remains a mystery to me why so many of us tacitly accept the premise that it’s okay for school to be stressful.
@Mike,
Kids stress is going to start at Elementary school come September.
It was decided that instead of opening the doors at 8:20 and last bell at 8:35 it would be wise to move last bell to 8:25 so that an extra 10 minutes a day could be obtained to comply with state legislation.
So now we are going to have a lot of “Tardy” kids. We are going to have congestion and I would imagine a substantially greater risk of of accidents occurring given that 400 or so kids are going to descend upon school within a 5 minute timeframe. From what I recall the additional 10 minutes will be dedicated to emotional development!!!
As I’ve said repeatedly in the past, a 16th School located in the lower sections of the Bobby Braceland program would undo the colossal mistake made by the School Committee in 1987 closing Emerson as well as Hyde in the heart of Newton Highlands and Hamilton in Lower Falls.
The Emerson closing was probably the worst as its caused the unconscionable spectacle of kids from Upper Falls being bused forever to at least two and sometimes thy sree schools when their predecessors at Emerson were able to walk to school at no public expense and in a manner that greatly benefited the unity of the neighborhood. The fallout from all three early closings has led to overbuilding in the surr unding neighborhoods and proposed re-districtings that are horrendous to parents who bought homes in walking or biking distance of schools who have been faced with scenarios that would have their kids hauled miles at public expense or parental transport of kids every day. The 16th School at the Braceland playground if properlyl planned and implemented could undo some of this damage in the future.
Much of the damage can not be easily fixed. The current and near future School Committees are locked into a limited menu of options by past decisions of their long ago predecessors.
That leads me to a suggestion for the Charter Commission. Term limits for the School Committee were done as a clumsy attempt to restrain School Committee power. I think it gave them a short term focus that has been harmful to the city.
In the 1987 debate on School closings,one Committee member explained to the angry citizens that their threats not to vote for him didn’t deter him in the slightest because he was term limited and couldn’t run for re-election. I think this attitude writ large may have contributed to a pattern of short- sighted decisionsthat has become apparent only in retrospect. The Charter Review process will us a chance to
review this provision of the Charter and consider it on the basis of experience.
@Newton Mon – Have you ever considered running for SC? I m serious.
@Jane – $40M is nothing to sneeze at. At least it shows the lack of thought current SC has. There always is a process to solicit input, but the outcome is always pre-determined.
Brian – I actually remember when the SC member made that comment. It was completely outrageous and unacceptable.
Sam S – I’m not sure what you mean and would like to hear you elaborate on your comment. My comment was meant to suggest that one person’s essential program is another’s expendable one. Over the years, I’ve heard parents expressing a passionate commitment to a wide variety of programs.
What can I say? I’m a teacher. I’d love to have brand new schools all over the city – all with state of the art programs/materials/space/etc. and I’d be more than willing to pay for them. But I’m in the minority so at some point the city has to be make choices.
@Jane – This post is around SC elections, and NewtonMom hit the nail by drawing attention to Zervas.
The $40M Zervas sucked oxygen out of new school for lower falls, while adding only limited number of new seats. Steve Siegel personally pushed for new Zervas, convoluting the override vote, and framing the decision in a way that favored rebuilding the mega Zervas.
Unless we speak and learn from these mistakes, we will continue electing such people.
I dont know Susan Hoffman yet. However, as an ex-Siegel supporter – I really hope she is thoughtful and without a hidden agenda. Is she meets that mark, I will knock on doors for her.
I am a strong supporter of public schools, and having two kids of my own in the schools have taught me more than I ever thought I needed to know. Closing schools in Newton Upper Falls and Newton Lower Falls, might have seemed like a great idea at the time (I was in high school outside of Newton back in 1987), however, it has created its own issues.
If I were to look for a new home within Newton now, I would not choose a house in a neighborhood that did not have a clearly defined elementary school. I live in a close knit neighborhood, and all of our neighborhood kids are bussed to the same elementary school. The older kids share stories about the teachers with the younger kids. Neighbors share stories of when their kids were younger and went to the same school.
It is “easy” to say redistricting for some neighborhoods, but I notice that Mayor Warren’s family is in one district and one district only and no one proposed a buffer district for them. All of the neighborhood kids attend one school. A school is a community. And I have found our elementary school a great community, where I have found friends and so have my kids. The bussing and the lack of community can’t be measured in dollars and cents, but lost community. Our kids are in the digital age, but a physical community is there to support you in sickness and death and also to rejoice in your celebrations. Different than a digital community. We are taking the physical community away from our kids by having more buffer zones, and not building a 16th elementary school. What is the cost?
I am always shocked that families are to provide basic elementary school supplies every September (paper towels, markers, post it notes, etc). The same supplies that when I went to elementary school were provided by the town. The supplies that I supply for the elementary classroom are for the classroom. I have no qualms providing my middle school child five binders, 40 pencils, etc. since that material will be used by my child only. Why am I providing markers, Kleenex and paper towels for the school? Back in the day when I went to middle school, the school provided me with a copy of the novels for class, and I returned them and another class read them. I now have my own copies of Beowolf, The Giver, etc. Books that I buy my own student for class in middle school.
Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe 86% of the budget is for salaries. There is basically no budget for modernizing technology in the school. I am all for paying teachers a fair wage (and fair benefits), however the other 14% doesn’t go towards elementary school supplies, books for middle school. Things that I thought were included in the budget are not. We have stripped the school budget so much that basic supplies are supplied by parents. One day I would not be surprised to see a Sign Up Genius for weekly trash disposal in the classrooms (okay, that was snarky).
And the testing? My son took PARCC on a computer, and about 50% of the time his computer didn’t work. I would much rather see the time that my son spent taking PARCC on classroom learning. Instead of reading say five novels, read six, and discuss in class. The math program in seventh grade at Brown is amazing! The teachers do a great job of pre-assessment, shuffling kids amongst levels, teaching and then post-assessment. This happens multiple times a year. That is what I call learning. Not time spent on PARCC.
Thank you for asking if I would run for school committee, but at this point, I don’t see myself doing that. I love being a mom, and spending my nights with my family. Having family dinners and hearing about the school day. And reading this blog to hear what others think.
For folks who closely track SC discussions, what has been the stated rationale for not working towards building a neighborhood elementary school that kids in Upper Falls can walk to ?
Other than overall safety issues, I can’t really think of anything more important that providing every child in Newton the opportunity to attend a neighborhood elementary school.
The school committee deals with several big ticket items: overcrowding in the schools throughout the city and the condition of the elementary facilities. Building a school in Lower Falls would not have addressed overcrowding in other parts of the city. We’ll just have to agree to disagree about whether it was clear in the override that Zervas was to be rebuilt and enlarged to help alleviate overcrowding on the southside of the city. I attended numerous meetings during the campaign at which it was stated explicitly that was the plan. As I recall, one of the meetings was in the Zervas School.
Newton Mom – Parcc is a state testing program, so I urge you to contact your state legislators ASAP to let them know where you stand on it. A bill that would place a three year moratorium on high stakes testing is presently in the pipeline at the state house. At this point, neither the school committee nor NPS has any say in the statewide testing schedule for the coming year or which test will be given (the Parcc).
If there’s no money for modernizing technology, then I don’t know where the new laptops, Chrome books, SmartBoards, document readers, etc. are coming from. The technology upgrades in the last 7 years are transforming instruction. Rarely a day goes by that I don’t use some type of technology that we didn’t have in the schools just 7 years ago,
If you don’t want to send Kleenex and markers to your child’s school, then don’t send them. These are requests, not requirements.
Jane,
I will continue to make sure classroom teachers have supplies, but in reality, shouldn’t the city budget these resources? Does the mayor bring in his own kleenex? Does the alderman provide their own papertowels? I believe many of the PTO’s pay for the technology (again, I can only comment on the schools that my kids attend). I believe reading that the PTO can only pay for technology up to a point (to make sure it is evenly spread across the city, which I also believe is a good thing). I believe that Angier PTO paid for the Smart Boards in the old building (which I believe are coming back into the new school.)
Do you know when the city stopped paying for pencils, markets and kleenex for elementary schools? Because if you cut it from the schools, then cut it across every department! The city has made drastic cuts, however there is still contract discussions ongoing. Both teachers and the city have to be willing to make difficult decisions. But the current administration can’t fix the past – pensions, health insurance. But that is a big portion of the budget, isn’t it?
It always impressive when someone responds to an obnoxious comment with productive dialogue like Newton Mom does, instead of more obnoxious comments. The lists sent out to parents in July not only include what your child will need to supply but also what the classroom needs and they either provide them or the class doesn’t have them. There are, of course, many parents who either pay for or donate more than asked because not all parents can afford to stock the classroom.
It’s become ridiculous what parents, and PTO fundraisers run by parents, have to provide to schools and teachers that should be paid for out of the NPS budget and it’s equally ridiculous for a teacher to “not know where” the money for technology comes from. It seems terribly ungrateful too.
Last year Countryside parents paid for classroom computers as did Memorial Spaulding, which is a normal occurrence.
Elementary schools are mandated, but not funded, by the city to have a Creative Arts & Sciences (CA&S) program, that PTO’s pay $18,000+ for.
Most PTO’s need to raise $50,000 to $60,000 each year not to supplement students’ and teachers’ learning experience but to provide essentials.
Doesn’t the city have it’s own fundraising department (besides the PTO’s 🙂 Don’t they raise money for playgrounds, etc.
Can’t they reprioritize their fundraising for school room technology/equipment. There’s a ton of people that would donate money to the schools.
I have always felt like Newtonmom in that I feel it’s the city’s responsibility to furnish kids with pencil, paper, etc.
The estate of the late Florence (Kessler) Pearl of Chestnut Hill has announced a planned gift of $2 million dollars to Newton Schools Foundation. The gift is NSF’s first planned gift and its largest gift ever. Mrs. Pearl, who was a public school teacher and real estate professional, moved her family to Newton because of its public school system, according to her daughter.
And the PTO’s pay for the playgrounds! At least Burr did and Angier did years back. Those are the ones that I know about. . . . . parents fundraised, and used their own muscles to install the equipment.
When I said 86% of the budget is salaries, what is the other 14% used for? We know it isn’t Kleenex, computers, pens, etc. Most of my kids don’t have classic text books (other than math). I believe some PTO’s pay for the copier and paper. I would love to know what the other 14% is used for (being snarky – not a ghostwriter for our superintendent’s graduation speeches).
Before I leave for a couple of hours I’ll try to respond to Newton Moms questiion the best I can. I’m not quite sure what the budget numbers are, but if memory serves the highest paid portion of the budget was special ed. I don’t know what goes into spec ed besides teachers/aides but I’m pretty sure that is the case.
Also, back in Cohens administration he made an effort to pay for some of the playgrounds through CPA (Community Preservation Act funds). Several citizens from the city opposed the move and the city lost the case in court.
As far as where the other 14% of the budget is going, Jane would probably answer that better than I.
Ohhh, I think I just remembered that the playgrounds were on city property, not school property.
The playground at Emerson is on city property. Marie Jackson of the Upper Falls Area Council started a fundraiser, and then we received a state grant which wound up paying the balance beyond what we collected. So my understanding is that no city funds were used for that purpose.
Countryside PTO recently bought a copier for the school.
The other percentage is listed as expenses. The highest percentage as noted by Newton Mom is salaries and benefits.
You can find the detail on the school budget at http://www.newton.k12.ma.us/domain/73. On page 37 of the superintendent’s budget you will find pie charts which indicate how much is spent in what area. As for non-salary expenses, the next two largest categories are tuition for out-of-district special education services and transportation, both for regular ed and special ed.
@NewtonMom, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, appointed by the governor, will be making a decision about PARCC testing this fall. They are holding hearings around the state which are open to the public. You can go here http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/contactinfo.html for more information about BESE, its members, meeting schedule, etc.
@Marti, while PTOs may still choose to purchase technology. If they choose not to, the school will still have the technology to meet our classroom standards. The school committee and school department made that decision this year. Technology is very much a part of the classroom these days and even more so at the middle and high school level. Every year we invest in new software and systems in order to keep pace. So, NewtonMom, you will probably see fewer textbooks as time goes on as more and more of the resources teachers use aren’t published on paper, but in digital format.
Newton Mom – Actually, NPS does provide pencils, Kleenex, etc., and other supplies. Teachers also pay for books, classroom supplies, and educational materials. The practice of having families contribute supplies began about 15 years ago when parents found out how much money teachers were spending on classroom materials. It began quite informally as a few parents sending in a box of Kleenex or two, then it was either the PTO or room parents began to ask teachers for a list so we weren’t getting flooded with boxes of Kleenex once flu season began.
This is my take on it: if it bothers you to send in supplies, then it’s better that you donate your time and energy elsewhere. By no means do all parents send in supplies and it’s simply not a issue within the schools. Over the course of a year, most parents contribute their time, energy, and donations in a way that suits them and their children. Parents offer to help out at Color Day, on field trips, on special holidays (imagine a kindergarten on Halloween!), offer to read to children, volunteer in the classroom for all kinds of activities, and the list goes on. Contribute in whatever way that works for you. It’s all good, and makes for a more cohesive community.
Just to be clear, I know exactly where the money comes from to pay for new technology. I make it a point to keep up to date on all issues facing the school system. But am I grateful for the technology in my classroom? It isn’t a gift to me. It’s equipment that allows me to provide a 21st education to students in Newton.
I’ve always thought it was outrageous that PTO’s have to pay for playgrounds. This should be a city expenditure for many reasons.
@Margaret Albright– I’m curious what it tells you about your job performance that a newly graduated 18 year old kid decided to run against you, pointing specifically at early morning start times as a principal issue?
@Mike,
The fact that “a newly graduated 18 year old kid” decided to throw his hat into the ring says nothing about Margaret’s service. It may speak about him, but it’s certainly not a reflection on Margaret.
As for the start time, I know this is your hobby horse. I also know that it isn’t quite as simple to accomplish as just announcing that there will be a change in start time. Instead, there are a few logistics that need to be considered and worked out such as, for example: will the transportation providers (school bus contractor) be able to accommodate a change in starting and ending times? Does the city’s contract with the bus company even permit such a material change? The same questions apply for the children who receive special transportation services as part of their special education? How does this impact student participation in after school activities? May students be excused from classes in order to leave during our school day in order to attend athletic competitions at other schools? And, of course, this will have to be negotiated with the teacher’s union since start times are included within their contract. And on it goes. It takes more than desire and will, it also takes planning so that we don’t end up with a bolloxed mess and parents upset because their kids are getting home too late.
@Lisap– I always respect your point of view. Regrettably, I disagree with your opinion about Margaret, the significance of her opponents candidacy, and your perspective on the issue of later start times.
Margaret has been an independent voice on the School Committee which is exactly what the School Committee needs. She is not Samantha from Bewitched though, wiggling her nose and magically getting her way. I am also disappointed that things haven’t moved faster on Full Day Kindergarten or later HS start times, but I think the idea of blaming Margaret for these delays is absurd.
Margaret has been an excellent School Committee member. I don’t get the connection between her performance and a candidate entering the race in her ward.
I’m not sure what measuring stick others use to grade the performance of elected officials. Personally, I grade based on accomplishments, not intentions or words. When Margaret was a candidate for SC, she was in favor of later start times. And I understand she’s made some effort toward that change, focused on a change in state law. But the fact is that she’s nearing the end of her term, and not only has the change not been made, there is not even a timeline for making it. So once again come this September, thousands of high school kids will continue to have their physical and emotional health compromised, because the SC has failed to deal with this issue. It is their collective failure. They all deserve blame. There is NO legitimate excuse for having not made this change.
@Mike, I draw a bright line between excuses and reasons. The former seeks to avoid responsibility for misdeeds, the latter provides a factual basis for why a particular thing or idea could not be accomplished. Making excuses is not the same as providing reasons. There are solid reasons why a later start time simply cannot be accomplished by fiat or order. We may certainly disagree, and I too value your opinion. But on this, we do part company. Let me also add that I am very tuned to the emotional and psychological needs of high school students, and the development of significant psychiatric issues in this age group. Lack of adequate sleep is an emotional stressor, but it is a single stressor in a myriad of issues that confront our kids. Changing the start time will help, but it is not a panacea. Oh, if it were only that easy I would stand in front of 100 Walnut Street with a bullhorn every day.
There is a will to change this; there is a path and we have seen progress. It may not be at the speed we wish, but in my humble opinion that does not justify removing one of the most dedicated, intelligent, insightful members to join the board in I don’t know how long.
Mike-The School Committee, NPS, the BOA, and the Mayor have full agendas that addresses many, many issues of concern to a diverse population of residents. You have a few pet issues that you hammer away at and for some reason you expect the city government to say, “How high?” when you say, “Jump”. It’s not the way it works, and for good reason.
I don’t know how to say it more explicitly, but I don’t want the SC, the BOA, or the Mayor to acquiesce to your demands. You are one person in the community and you have every right to vote against everyone, but you have no more right to expect to get your way than anyone else in the community.
“That address…”
@Tom
The city does have a fundraising department – they are called the TREASURY and ASSESSOR. If we can’t manage the $350M + a year we bring in, doesn’t asking for “donations” in addition sound absurd?
@Mike, I am happy to have a discussion on early start times with you. I have been and continue to advocate for a larger statewide change. You may ask why. The school districts which have successfully changed start time have been large districts with more than 100,000 students and well over 100 schools. They are able to control after school sports, activities, etc. because all the children in their county attend one school district. This change will be easier if there is a change throughout Eastern Massachusetts. That doesn’t mean we stop trying to figure out this complex puzzle in Newton (and it is complex and I invite you to have a conversation with me about all the complexities), but I believe that a parallel track to regional change will make it easier for every school district to do this. I will add that the large districts I mentioned took 10 years to get to a change. I don’t want it to take ten years so that is why I am looking to elevate the question to a statewide issue.
In the meantime, the school committee has done a number of things this year and Newton’s response to students’ mental health needs was given commendation by the Middlesex County DA and we also received a major federal grant to address student mental health. All high school students in Newton were screened this year for depression and self-harm. Next year students in 7th, 9th and 11th grades will be screened for depression. The Youth Behavior Risk Survey data will come out this fall and we will be using that to identify further areas where the schools can make a difference.
I continue to work on the issues that are important to our students, including full day kindergarten. We need to get there and I never miss a chance to talk about it. But it takes five votes and a well thought-out plan to get any major change. Change is hard. And as someone who works with school districts in other parts of the state, I can assure you that there is no such thing as rapid change in a system as complex as a public school.
Yes, the pace of change is frustrating but perseverance is key. I’m pretty good a perseverance.
You could not have explained it better Margaret. Thank you.
Janet,
There’s plenty of people who want overrides. Since they like giving more money than they have to, they can donate. It sounds silly to me, too….but to each his/her own.
Hi, I guess I should step in as the “newly graduated 18 year old kid” who has decided to run for School Committee. I want to make it clear that me entering the race has nothing to do with who Margaret Albright is. I just happen to live in the same ward as her, ward 2.
In regards to later start times, it has been made clear by numerous studies that starting school too early has negative psychological, mental, and physical tolls on our students. There are no more legitimate excuses left in the idea to not push back the start times and come this September, once again, our start times have not changed for the better, in fact, they have gotten even worse for the elementary schools.
It is time that that changes and although I have not done to much research into this plan, the most clear way I can see the SC helping the students is a flip of the start times. AKA right now high school starts first, then middle school, then elementary school. The truth is this make very little sense. What I think needs to happen is that elementary schools start first, followed by middle schools, then high schools. The reasons are obvious. How many elementary school students are still awake at 12am? How many high schoolers are still awake at 12am?
Elementary students go to bed earlier, and therefor should start first. There is the fact that they need more sleep, but as I mentioned above, there is a better chance of their parents helping them get to sleep at earlier times, say 9pm or 10pm, versus a parent helping their high school aged kid get to sleep at that time, which is downright impossible based on my experience 🙂 There are also other reasons to do this such as older siblings being able to give rides to their younger siblings to school.
Anyways, I am definitely not a one issue person, and I would be glad to share my opinions on other things that I would question, such as janitors making 110K+ each year while some department heads are making a fraction of that, or the The Youth Behavior Risk Survey, which asks middle schoolers if they have ever had sex, drugs, or alcohol in a questionnaire that is probably over 100 questions, yet as students, we never hear of it again. Many students take it as a joke and although the survey probably provides great “data,” and helps keep someone employed, I have seen little initiative into using that data to help our students understand why drugs, alcohol etc. are a problem. And let me add, DRUGS are a huge problem is the high schools whether you want to hear it or not.
Bottom Line: Whoever gets elected to the SC this November, it’s time that we actually start fixing the schools, because they are slipping.
What Gail said. Great explanation, Margaret.
What Gail and Jane said, re: Margaret.
Cyrus, you are running for public office so, in my opinion, you are open to critism. I wouldn’t usually pick on an 18 yo and I’m not saying I disagree with your positions, but, just a few observations. In your comment you say, to paraphrase,
This September start times have become worse for elementary school students (earlier).
High School should start latest with elementary schools starting first.
Older siblings could drive the younger ones to school.
These statements present a logic problem. If your solution is earlier start times for younger students, then saying September’s start times are worse is contradictory.
If your solution is later start times for high school students, then driving their younger siblings to their earlier start times negates that benefit.
Without doing research, a plan’s benefits are rarely clear.
Aka = also know as
I.e. = in other words
E.g. = for example
I commend you for putting yourself out there, keep working on your positions and good luck.
Hi Marti, thanks for the support about running.
@Margaret Albright– Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Personally, I don’t believe the best way to address this issue is through “perseverance.” If the damage being done to students was more apparent rather than insidious, no one would accept “perseverance” as a pathway toward solution. If students were routinely subjected to anything inappropriate that was able to be captured on video, most parents would demand an immediate change. The people who are willing to accept the SC’s excuses for inaction on this issue, either don’t care about sleep deprivation or are ignorant of its health consequences. I accept no excuses that justify the continuation of a policy which is causing immeasurable harm to thousands of Newton kids every day.
My three children have all graduated NSHS since I began raising public awareness of this issue in the 2005 mayoral campaign. Would it be fair to expect that my future grandchildren will be the beneficiaries of a policy change? I know you are not personally to blame for early morning start times or sleep deprivation in teens. But as a concerned citizen, voter, and former supporter of yours, I am expressing my dissatisfaction with the pace of reform on this issue. People should not have to wait years for an issue as serious as sleep deprivation in teens to be adequately addressed by elected officials.
Cyrus, welcome to Newton politics.
As far as the issue of implementing FDK, I blame the people at the top. I blame the Mayor for not making this a priority. He could easily have stepped up told the super the city needs fdk and find the money. As far as the SC backing fdk, the majority would support anything the Mayor supports. I think late start times is much more complicated because when it comes to after school events like sports, starting times needs to be coordinated with other schools, etc. The frustrating thing about these two issues are that the SC supports both issues. If the sc opposed these two issues you can see why they look like they are dragging their feet.
@Cyrus, welcome to the race. I look forward to meeting you.
The Youth Behavior Risk Survey or YRBS is something every student takes part in and is administered by the Centers for Disease Control. The CDC analyzes and reports on the data that comes to us and all school districts around the state. The data is public and is on the CDC’s website – http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm
At the risk saying the exact same thing that I did in a recent Tab editorial, and the exact same that I said to the school committee.
Recent studies have found strong evidence that later starts are associated with high school students having:
— Improved physical health
— Improved mental health
— Improved attendance
— Better scholastic performance
— Better standardized test scores
— 65 percent to 75 percent lower rate of automobile accidents
— Decreased substance abuse
Given these benefits, how big must the trade offs be to for the school committee to NOT embrace late start times? I don’t get it. I don’t understand why all school committees members are not forcefully saying that a late start time is a priority.
Cynthia Bergen has already produced a study that shows a that late high school can be implemented without ANY extra direct costs. Can someone tell me what drastic indirect costs warrant jeopardizing our teenagers’ health?
Let’s not kick the can down the highway, by saying we can’t do anything until other school districts act first. The time is now.
Perhaps we should give parents at other levels of the school system an opportunity to express support or concern for changing the start times. I taught kindergarten in a system that had an 8:00 start time and it worked very well at the beginning of the day, so I don’t have a bias about it. However, I do think the conversation should include parents from all levels.
Jane,
Changing the start time for high school does not require that we change the start time for grade school. The issue is that is that will cost something. The point of my op-ed was that the numbers are not very high compared with the benefits.
Of course, all parents have the opportunity to express concern. The problem is that those who express concern are not necessarily indicative of the average parent.
We elected the school committee to make decisions. They should be better informed than the typical parent. I hope that they show courage and make the decision that is best for our children and defend this decision. I don’t think a good defense of not changing high school start times, is “it is hard,” “Natick could not do it,” “it will be easier if we wait for the State to do something first,” “some parents won’t like it,” or “some teachers won’t like it.” Good decisions don’t require universal love.
As I said, I’m by no means opposed to the idea of changing start times and have experienced earlier start times for elementary students and know it can work. As part of the decision making process, it’s important to include all stake holders in the discussion.
What Jane said. I’m a parent of a current high schooler and two recent graduates. Changing the starting times will not add more hours to the day, and for my most sleep deprived child will do nothing to alleviate her lack of sleep which is driven by external pressures unrelated to start times. A few more homework free weekends, on the other hand, would do wonders. That, however, is a decision vested in the principal. I would like to like to know where the Newton Teacher’s Union stands on this issue before we start assuming that this is an easy change.
Lisap,
When you ask “where the Newton Teacher’s Union stands” do you mean in regards to homework or start times? For start times, Cynthia Bergen contacted the NTU in putting together her report. The NTU, from what Cynthia said at the school committee meeting, is not an impediment. It is hard for me to imagine why it would be an impediment.
Jeffrey – From my understanding, it is not.
@Jeffrey Pontiff,
Point well taken. I would like to know whether the membership of the NTA would support changing start times. As a recent example of the difficulty of making even the smallest changes, the DESE has required the city to add additional instructional hours to the elementary school daily schedule. On June 22, 2015 the Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Ed informed elementary school families that starting in September, there will be a new start time for elementary students. The doors will still open at 8:20 a.m. It is my understanding that, by contract, elementary educators are not required to be in their classes before 8:20 a.m. Thereafter, the official classroom day will begin at 8:25 a.m. instead of 8:35 a.m., thus squeezing another ten minutes into each day. (I imagine that between 820 a.m. and 8:25 a.m. our elementary schools will resemble the Encierro bullrun.) I would argue that it would be far more sensible to move the entire elementary school schedule back by ten minutes, and have teachers in their classrooms and doors opening at 8:10 a.m. and I suspect that most people would agree. Yet, it is obvious that the district does not have the ability to make a unilateral change to contracted start times. It’s simple enough to have the will, but the devil is in the details to accomplish the way.
“The NTU, from what Cynthia said at the school committee meeting, is not an impediment.” There’s your answer.
Thanks, Jane – but the Collective Bargaining agreement which has been extended several times specifically spells out the hours for elementary school students as four days (M, W, Th, F) from 8:35 AM to 3:00 PM, and one day (Tuesday) from 8:35 AM to 12:35 AM. See page 82. With good negotiators on both sides, I don’t imagine anyone is tipping their hand right now as to what they will or will not give up. 😉
Teachers will not agree to adding time to the school day because it opens a Pandora’s box, but my understanding about start times is the same as Jeffrey’s. The required time in the school day is the law and that’s that.
As an aside, it’s the NTA, not the NTU.
@Jane,
The state mandates minimum standards for structured learning time and the minimum number of days in the school year, but leaves to the local school districts the flexibility to formulate schedules. So, in short, when the school day begins and ends is not “the law”.
@Jeffrey Pontiff:
You wrote: The NTU, from what Cynthia said at the school committee meeting, is not an impediment. It is hard for me to imagine why it would be an impediment.
With reference to the NTA, Ms. Bergin reported that she spoke with the NTA and other stakeholders “really to just let them know that there were discussions happening in case there were specific concerns that they thought their staff would be interested in.” She also identified four major impacts and concerns around a later start time, namely, transportation, traffic impact, after school activities and facilities usage. As to these 4 impacts and areas of concern, she said that “any of these things can be overcome, it’s a question of how much it costs and what the other trade offs are.” That she did not include in her report any areas of concern as reported to her by the NTA could mean either that there are no impediments, or that none were shared with her since the city and the NTA are in the midst of contract negotiations. Not to be too cynical, but I tend toward the latter interpretation and not the former.
Hi Lisap – I said “The required time in the school day is the law,” but did not include that the state mandates when the day begins and ends.
There will be issues to iron out with all the stakeholders.