Minutes – Oct 13, 2016

BERKSHIRE HILLS REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

Great Barrington               Stockbridge         West Stockbridge

SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING

MONUMENT MOUNTAIN REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL- Library

October 13, 2016 – 7:00 p.m.

Present:

School Committee:    S. Bannon,  J. St. Peter, W. Fields, C. Shelton, K. Piasecki, F. Clark, R.Bradway, D. Weston, R. Dohoney

Administration:          P. Dillon, S. Harrison

Staff/Public:               M. Berle, B. Doren, M. Young, Kate Burdsall, Joshua Briggs

List of Documents Distributed:

BHRSD School Committee minutes September 1, 2016; October 13, 2016 agenda; October 13, 2016 Personnel Report; September 2016 Accountability Letter; Out of State Tuition Rate; DBM Report Card, DBM PARRC, MCAS Summaries, MMRHS Report Card, MMRHS MCAS Summaries, MBE Report Card

MCE PARRC Results Summary; FY16 Q4 Transfer SC; FY 16 Q4 Overview; ED Projection as of June 30, 2016

Length of meeting: 1hr 55min

__________________________________________________________________

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Steve Bannon called the meeting to order @ 7:01pm

___________________________________________________________________

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 

The listing of agenda items are those reasonably anticipated by the Chair which may be discussed at the meeting. Not all items listed may in fact be discussed and other items not listed may also be brought up for discussion to the extent permitted by law. This meeting is being recorded by CTSB and will be broadcast. The meeting is also being recorded by the committee recorder, other members of the committee and members of the audience. Minutes will be transcribed and made public and posted to our website www.bhrsd.org once approved. It is asked that all cell phones be silenced for the duration of the meeting.

___________________________________________________________________

MINUTES:

BHRSD School Committee minutes for September 1, 2016 Minutes:

Motion to approve minutes: D. Weston    Seconded: F. Clark     Approved: Unanimous

__________________________________________________________________

TREASURER’S REPORT:  -None

__________________________________________________________________

SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT:

• Set Rates – Out of State Tuition:

The Committee supported the Superintendent’s proposal per the attached memo.

Motion to approve: R. Dohoney   Seconded R. Bradway    Approved:  Unanimous

• Project Connection-

Josh Briggs: Curriculum – Grant development obtained in amount of $35,000/yr.  for 2 years. Money used to:

1. designing summer service learning curriculum
2. further develop the service learning curriculum at DBM
3. build new curriculum at MBE- partnering with Susan Ebitz- building off standards already followed by 3rd / 4th grade teachers in classrooms (curriculum can be given to 3 /4 teams as one that is already being used and carry over into academic year)

Second year of grant: look into 1st / 2nd grade service learning curriculum

In 2-3 yrs.  PC summer curriculum will have 1st – 8th grade service learning component

1. Clark: What does that look like, service learning at MBE & DBM?
2. Briggs:

• 7 / 8 grade- Fully realized service learning curriculum- After School and Summer Curriculum: hear from community partners, learn of a need, student choice on what problem to tackle and how. Results in great beginning-to-end project.
• 5 / 6 grade- attempted last summer. More challenging- conceptualizing and time available resulting in smaller projects but following same basic model. This year: protecting pollinators & food waste in schools.
• 3 / 4 grade- develop a robust program for these grades based on student ability at younger level
• 1 / 2 grade- may not meet state requirements

1. Clark: How many students, 3 /4? 5 /6?
2. Doren: 5 /6 grades- 30 students 7/ 8 grades- 25 students
3. Briggs: Focused on PC program for services learning with lots of room for growth in the district by means of curriculum development that can go into the school day and not just after school and during summer. Very driven by student voice and their choice showing they can impact the community and the world- from concept to complete development.
4. Weston: How many years of PC grant are left?
5. Briggs: Next year is last year. Then reapply. No guarantee but we are ranked #1 & #2 for sites with exemplary grants so we’re highly optimistic the grants will continue.
6. St. Peter: Is PC fully funded by this specific grant?
7. Briggs: PC is 85% funded by this one grant. Next one would be ~75% for 3 more years. After that, flat set amount of money. PC pushes towards sustainability.

• Out of State Tuition- Set Rates-

258. Dillon: Recommend rate is set at most current per-pupil rate determined by DESE as $17,258. Currently have 2 out of state students who pay significantly less.

Make motion to approve suggestion as outlined in Out-of-State Tuition Memo: D.Weston,          Seconded: F. Clark

Discussion:     J. St. Peter: What are current out-of-state students paying?

1. Dillon: Paying current tuition rate paid ~$8,000 by Richmond and Farmington River and the recommendation is to keep their rate the same. Change applies to out-of-state going forward.
2. St. Peter: Number of out-of-state students have we had over last 10-20 years?
3. Harrison: 2 per year
4. St, Peter: Concern that the higher rate would drive students away. With such low numbers, maybe if more out-of-state students then the rate should be increased- spurred by demand.
5. Clark: Recommends one flat tuition rate for all students outside the district based on what the cost is to deliver the services. Current tuition rate is less than that cost.
6. St. Peter: Would like to know if a future student doesn’t attend solely because DESE per-pupil rate based tuition is too expensive. Perhaps consideration can be given (to pay the ~$8,000-$9,000 tuition).
7. Shelton: Tuition rate is same for every grade?
8. Harrison: Yes, it’s based on total district enrollment and total district cost.

Motion Approved: Unanimous

• Resource Allocation and District Action Reports (RADAR) Update-

1. Harrison: We’re a pilot district (between 8-10) and can help develop tools based on needs and desired information and future shaping of program. Only available to pilot districts (not public yet). Will be able to share and make public the information as tools are developed but won’t be able to share the actual tools (as not to be made yet public).

Enhanced data analysis in comparison to other Districts and within our campus schools:  how to make most efficient our resource allocation in order to achieve our goals. Working with Peter to develop a workshop for the District w/the State called “Planning for Success”:

• Looks at District improvement plans.
• Looks at District strategic plans.
• Helps to analyze action for next 3-5 years to reach goals

Also in pilot program where DOE is looking at all our reporting and perhaps modifying it so better information goes into the tools resulting in better information coming out.

Q&A:

1. Clark: Resources devoted by this district to develop a state pilot program. Is state providing monetary grant to assist our devoted resources and the time needed to develop the mentioned workshop? Seems we’re doing the State’s work for them.
2. Harrison: State has a “Planning for Success” workshop where they are given our data and the results are given to back to us.
3. Dillon: We only go after projects that support our work, so this is complementary to our “re-imagination”. Bringing in help that would otherwise need to be paid for in other context. Ex: District Management Council: Hot-shot consultants whose work would cost us tens of thousands of dollars in other context. Invested time will be time that would have been invested anyways.

• Assessment
  • State Assessment: J. Briggs- Slideshow presentation. Large amount of information in packet (attached). Looking at High-Level info.

Scores over time:

1. CPI-Cumulative Performance Index: Benchmarks and data used to generating scores for the schools. If we are at 75, means goals are being met. The 3 report cards show how those numbers come in.
2. SGP- Student Growth Percentile: Calculated by creating a statewide peer comparison by looking student assessment history. Looking not only at individual growth but also growth as compared to like students statewide. A score 40-60, indicates average growth.

** NOTES:

• Comparing our scores to the state is not to meet state average but is a way evaluate the test itself, If our yearly score changes (up or down) are consistent with other schools, could indicate a change in the test vs a change in performance
• MBE PARRC- Started 3yrs ago. Stopping PARRC. Moving forward w/ MCAS 2.0
• State didn’t release PARRC results for the State this year so there is very little to compare our scores to.

1. Bannon: If a new test is being given which provides no historical data and there is not State data for PARRC to compare to, how do we use this as a tool to see if we are performing as we want or allocating resources correctly?

1. Briggs: It is a standardized assessment and is one of many assessments used so we are able to gather and compare data using other sources. The lack of item analysis does pose the greatest difficulty to use these results to interpret student performance. Broad strokes still given.

Report Cards:

• MBE- Level 3: Well above CPI goal but had low participation. Higher participation= Level 1. Level 3 based solely on low participation number. DBM- Level 2- CPI: Close proficiency gaps- didn’t hit goal.
• MMRHS- Level 2- CPI: Close proficiency gaps- Missed goal by 2 points for all students but made goal for high-needs students.

New MCAS changes- areas of high concerns: No longer a timed test. Testing windows are longer and testing time is dramatically shorter. All Grades: ELA & Math has at least 100 minutes LESS in testing. Some went from 4 sessions to 2 sessions. The test is significantly shorter but because it’s no longer a timed test, some students may take much more time to complete the test.

Grades 8 will be a computer test.

Grade 4 will be paper test this year, based on a waiver to state. Will need to integrate computer work into the classroom for next years test to be conducted on a computer.

Next year: 5th and 7th requirement.

OPT OUT # = 13 for 3rd and 4th grades AND a significant # of those who opted out were school-choice students.

1. Fields: The 95% participation to be a Level 1 was determined by who?
2. Dillon: State’s participation level kept at 95% under the Every Student Succeeds Act
3. Fields: Difference- PARRC test is more difficult than MCAS. PARRC testing material is several grades above the grade level of the student taking the test. Ex. 4th grade was given an essay to read that was at 8th grade level. What determines the validity of a test to be a “standardized test”?
4. Berle: MCAS- every item is field tested over a 3-yr period before it becomes a standardized test item. 2,500 students are field testing an item. Items are also evaluated by a Bias Committee and sub-groups are looked at. Sub-groups have to perform at the same rate as the whole group in order for it to be a valid item. All cultural bias is weeded out. 50% items are taken for student’s own score. 25% of items are equating items that at taken every year and are used to balance the scores and show results can correlate over # of years. 25% of items are experimental items.
5. Fields: Does # of test takers affect validity?
6. Berle: Absolutely. MA would say that no rating can be given because less than 90% of test takers can not prove reliable results. Unofficially, those 13 students expected results would have resulted in about the same score. The spectrum of those who opted-out would be a good representation of the spectrum of the school on a whole.

• High School Incident Update-

1. Young:

Since report brought ~2 weeks, lots of attention and focus has been placed on all the students and the 3 students involved in the report. Focus on honesty and forthrightness of actual events. Some of the news report is not the same as the actual information received from the students and so the inconsistencies have caused much confusion. Report to school was one student staying to another student a really horrific racist remark that was intimidating, certainly could be threatening, about the black student in the room. The African American student brought that comment to the Admin later in the day. School investigations began right away and it took some time to sort out who-said-what-when and to have enough information to take disciplinary action; which was done. The comment has been perceived to be connected to the student who “took a knee” during The National Anthem during a football game the previous Friday night, so the actions taken have proceeded in that way, with a connection between the two. Disciplinary action has been taken; working with Student Support Personnel and P. Dillon to ensure it was reasonable discipline and that the student has access to his education during this time. Special care to check in with student who the racist remark was spoken towards. Talking with student body to discuss where MMRHS is headed. Students were invited to speak. Working Race Focus Groups to continue to hold these concerns in forefront and to not fade away with the publicity.  January X-tech will get 8day “real talk on racism” for all 8th graders. Continue to work with students and community to make/keep this a safe place for all our students.

NAACP in Pittsfield has asked that supporters come to October 14 football game to “stand or take a knee” in solidarity to the player who took a knee at the previous game. MMRHS staff and coaches support the student and welcome anyone who comes in support as well. Any attendance and support from the SC would be appreciated and welcomed.

• Updates:
  • Regional Agreement Amendment Committee (RAAC)-

2016. Dillon: Sent out clean copies today the regional agreement to RAAC with highlighted changes and feedback from State and MARS. May get a vote to approve those changes on Tuesday’s meeting, October 18, 2016.

Process going forward- RAAC would vote on work to date; then to DESE (the State); back to SC for vote; SC then votes to reach out to the 3 towns about a special town meeting; then to town citizens for vote. (Doreen will email out right away.)

1. Weston: would be nice to get today’s email from Peter sent out to all SC members as a preview of where the agreement stands, understanding there may still be a few changes forthcoming.

1. Bannon: If SC doesn’t vote at next meeting, there may me 3 new members on the committee for final vote. Would be nice to have this committee approve prior to Jan 1, 2017 for sake of closure and timing for the special town meetings.

• Southern Berkshire Shared Services Project (SBSSP)-

1. Dillon: Assistant to Governor’s office, Sean Cronin, is coming back out to meet with Superintendents on that work. Found someone to do a technology audit across the district schools. Put together a good PD calendar with the Superintendent’s Round Table and rest of County.

__________________________________________________________________

SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS:

• Policy Sub Committee- S. Bannon: No date set for meeting. One is needed.
• Building and Grounds Sub Committee- R. Bradway: Have not met.
• Superintendent’s Evaluation Sub Committee- D. Weston- Will have work done for next meeting.
• Technology Sub Committee- P. Dillon: Will schedule one before R. Bradway leaves his position and with Dave Long for a thoughtful presentation.
• Finance Sub Committee- R. Dohoney: Meeting set for Monday Oct 17, 2016 @ 5:30pm

Went over last year’s numbers- highlight is E&D projection is favorable. No new steps taken for new budget. Waiting for next Meet and Confer and waiting for the new planning process.

1. Bannon: There was a complaint filed for the Open Meeting Law for that sub-committee by Eileen Mooney. P. Dillon and S. Bannon will work on a response to the State. Committee has made decision, minus any extenuating circumstances, that they will not go into any Executive Sessions, which will most likely resolve the problem. Not admitting any guilt, just want to be as transparent as possible.

• Regional Agreement Amendment Committee- Oct 17, 2016
• District Consolidation and Sharing Committee- S. Bannon: Met over last couple weeks. R. Bradway is doing proposal to bring to SC concerning money coming Shaker Mountain and what % is going to what staff members and why. Discussing following up with Lee, Southern Berkshire and Farmington River to see if there are any further steps to be taken.

PERSONNEL REPORT:

• No questions from Committee

PERSONNEL REPORT

October 13, 2016 – Revised 10/11/16

Name                                                                   Position                                                    Fund                               Salary/Stipend

                                                                                                                                                    Source                          Effective Date:

BUSINESS OPERATION: S. Harrison (reports attached)

• FY16 Q4 Transfer Report & Overview: Typically larger than others. Budget balancing and End of Year transfers. Closing the budget, like to balance the accounts- makes it much easier to see where overages are- when all invoices are in. More this year because the budget wasn’t closed till end of June. Transfers: all movements shown in detail.

Moved to Approve the FY16 Q4 Transfer Report: J. St. Peter, Seconded: D. Weston Approved: Unanimous

• FY 16 End of Year Report – E&D: Much overage due to mild winter- less overtime and sand/salt. Solar project deposit ~$35,000. Large SPED expense negotiated down by K. Burdsall

Projected E&D balance of $978,000

Auditors are present now and will be certifying that number by end of year.

AT END: recommendation of “not to exceed” number for FY18 budget – $215,000

__________________________________________________________________

EDUCATION NEWS: 

None

__________________________________________________________________

OLD BUSINESS:

 None

___________________________________________________________________

NEW BUSINESS: 

None

___________________________________________________________________

PUBLIC COMMENT:   

 None

___________________________________________________________________

WRITTEN COMMUNICATION:  

 None

Motion to Adjourn: D. Weston     Seconded: C. Shelton    Approved: Unanimous

Meeting Adjourned at 8:56pm

Submitted by:  Rebecca Burcher, Recorder

______________________________

Rebecca Burcher, Recorder

______________________________

School Committee Secretary