Now that the public forums have been conducted at all four elementary schools, much about the proposal to change the elementary schools to primary and intermediate centers has been discussed. The questions and comments at each of the forums provided me and the Board with a great deal of information that is necessary for deciding if we should move forward with the proposal. What information presented at the forums, from either me or community members, did you find most important to help shape your opinion about the merits of this proposal?
New family thinking about moving to Forest Park
My wife and I are considering moving to Forest Park and the public school system is extremely important to us. Have there been articles published concerning the success of the proposed system? Is there a world language department or plans for one in the future? When will the final decision be made for the proposal? Thanks in advance for your response. Good Luck.
Sorry for the delay in
Sorry for the delay in posting your comment and responding. I am glad that you are considering a move to Forest Park. It is a wonderful community! While there are few scientific studies that address the success of grade level centers, there are some published articles that speak to it in general. Our Citizen's Advisory Council did a very complete literature search and presented their finding to our Board. All of the research, as well as other information that was provided by board members and administration, can be found in the "news" link on this website.
The Board voted unanimously at the December board meeting to approve the proposal for grade level centers.
Communication and Clarification
Dr. Cavallo,
I am very appreciative of the fact that you realize that there are many issues with communication and busing that still need to be addressed.
Regarding the preschool families I spoke about, I was actually speaking to both matters you mentioned (projected enrollment and information). As we acknowledge a lack of communication, I have been considering ways to get the entire community involved in this major decision. I have talked to many people who aren't directly affected by this proposal because they don't have children, but are concerned with the idea - whether it's because change is hard, they worry about the reputation of our schools and how that affects their home values, or simply because they have voted for every referendum the schools have asked for and are concerned that our district is not as financially stable as they thought. Do you have any ideas as to how the district can ensure that all taxpayers and voters are as informed as possible?
One thing that has been a major disappointment to me throughout this process is lack of parental involvement. As you know, (and probably wish otherwise :) ), I have been present at many of the meetings and wondered why more parents weren't in attendance. In talking to some parents from all four schools, I have realized that it is not a lack of concern that keeps them away, but rather, a lack of knowledge as to the scope of this choice or that they have a right to express their opinion. Is it possible to send to every parent a more detailed version of the letter that was sent out originally?
In my opinion, these issues should be addressed before the final vote on this proposal.
Respectfully, Lisa
P.S. Do you have any idea as to when the new busing guidelines might be available to the public?
Please keep in mind all that
Please keep in mind all that we did do to communicate and seek input from the community including 5 public forums, monthly discussions with Citizens Advisory Council where we asked that each school representative share information with their respective PTA/PTO, discussion at every board meeting, two letters sent home to parents, all information posted on the website, this blog, at least four stories in the newspaper, a Village Council Meeting, regular agenda items at faculty meetings, a whole-staff institute day to discuss this, and administrative meetings twice a month. All of these methods of communication were planned but there was also many phone calls and emails from individuals. We have reached out to all constituents including parents, teachers, administrators, Village officals, and the community at large.
As far as your perception of that more parents have not been involved, all forums were well attended and literally hundreds of comments and questions were received from the public.
More bus information including an alternate plan will be presented at the December meeting.
going green
It was said that busing the children is better for the environment than having parents drive every day. However, parents drive to one school now. Once their children arrive at their home school, they will be bused somewhere else. This actually adds a trip. How is that "green"? And if parents with children at two schools do not want to wait 45 min. from the time the bus leaves with one child until the other child goes into their building, they will drive rather than take the bus. This is even worse in terms of traffic and impact on the environment because instead of driving to one school they will be driving to two.
Currently, we bus children
Currently, we bus children all over town to class balance. The same number of busses will be run as now but with shorter distances. If the parents take advantage of this opportunity, it will be more "green." We are planning to propose an alternative bus schedule at the December meeting that eliminates the 45 min wait.
Board Members
If I want to hear the board members thoughts on any of these questions, do I need to e-mail them directly or are they welcome to post their comments on the board for public viewing? On the same note, are the teachers encouraged (anonymously if necessary) to post their thoughts, either pro or con? Barring the teachers posting, would it be possible for you to post some of the more specific comments from the staff after their meetings were held?
Sorry it has taken me awhile
Sorry it has taken me awhile to get to these posts. I've been very busy lately. The board, through their training through Illinois Association of School Boards, has learned that the board "speaks with one voice." IASB discourages board members from pubically commenting on issues outside of board meetings. While anyone, including teachers, may post a comment on my Blog, it is really not something that individual board members will likely do. I have, thus far, posted every entry submitted other than the two that I need to post and respond to after completing this one. Teachers have not been discouraged to post comments but I have not specifically encouraged them to post. The input from teachers was provided to the Board but it is an internal document that I will not post so that the teachers, pro or con, do not have to feel that they offended any of the parents of their students.
Enrollment Projections
Dr. Cavallo,
Thanks again for being so prompt with your answers. Here is my question of the day.
There are 3 preschoolers on my block alone whose parents have purchased rather expensive houses largely based on the neighborhood schools. Those parents have said they will enroll their children in private school if this plan is implemented. My question is that rather than basing enrollment numbers on a companies projections,(however accurate they may be), has any thought been given as to whether there is any realistic way to reach these young families besides the Review?
Enrollment Projections
I wish I knew how to reach the families of three pre-schoolers who would not enroll their children if this passes so that I could talk to them about their reasons why. Under our current procedures, I can not guarantee them that their children will attend their neighborhood school and I am not sure they know this. One of the main reasons that I proposed this plan was to ensure that all students can attend school in their neighborhood and not be bussed away from their peers to a school where there is room. I know it will mean that they attend two schools instead of one but at least the schools are both close by and the children will always be with their neighborhood friends.
When you ask about "reaching" these young families I am unsure if you mean count them for enrollment purposes or ensure they get information. Either way, I think we need to do a better job. Citizens' Advisory Council had an initial conversation about communication a few weeks ago and it will be a topic of continued discussion and planning. We will be looking for ways to improve both.
Busing
Can the bus schedules, routes and cost analysis be printed on this site?
Yes, we will get the bus
Yes, we will get the bus information posted today.
After hearing the comments
After hearing the comments and concerns from parents about the staggered start times, we looked at other options for transportation. We will post any new possibilities on the website after sharing them with the Board.
Tonights Board Meeting
Dr. Cavallo,
I would like to thank you and the members of the board for a long and informative meeting tonight. I know how tired I am, I can only imagine how you are all feeling.
A big issue throughout the forums has been the lack of open discussion for the public to voice their questions and opinions. I stated last week that this blog seemed to be a little stale. I have noticed that you really do promptly answer every question posed to you here, so in the interest of perking up the board I have some questions/comments. I would like to encourage other members of the baord, as well as parents, teachers and citizens of FP to chime in if they have any thoughts.
My questions for tonight are -
What are the three most important reasons to change from the current set-up of our schools to grade configuration centers?
Can you give me two of the most important pros and cons for each of the above answers?
Thanks,
Lisa
I, too, thought last night's
I, too, thought last night's meeting was informative and I enjoyed the dialogue and hearing from the public. I love your question. As you know, this is a complex issue and there is not one single reason for doing this and one easy answer. I have tried to point out all of the issues that need to be resolved and how this plan addresses these issues. Your question made me really think about why this was started in the first place. The three most important reasons to change from our current configuration to grade level centers for me are:
1. Currently, all students are not able to attend their neighborhood school and must be sent to schools somewhere else in the district where there is room. This class balancing procedure is not in the best interest of the students that have to move and unfair to the families.
"pro" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: ALL students will be able to attend their school K-8 with their neighborhood peers in a school within less than a mile of their home.
"con" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: half of our students will be in a different building next year but still with their peers.
2. Maintaining class sizes of 20 was identified as a core value by the community and staff and it is impossible to maintain this value under our current configuration. Class sizes of 20 are in the best interest of students and allow us to better meet the needs of all kids. I currently (before class balancing) have class sizes of well over 20 at some grades in some schools and some that are 15 or below. The only way to maintain class sizes of twenty with our current configuration is to move kids around the district (point #1). I would like to keep class sizes at 20 but need a different system to do so.
"pro" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: I can effectively keep all class sizes at around 20. (they will never all be at exactly 20 because I would need an exact multiple of 20 kids to make that happen).
"con" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: While class sizes of 15 or below are not fiscally responsible, they probably were not a bad thing for the kids that are in them. We can't afford very low class sizes for ever, but for those that are in them now, it is probably a good learning environment. Under the new configuration, we will eliminate the very low class sizes.
3. By clustering grade levels together in buildings by primary and intermediate, we can focus resources (both physical and human) on the needs of that age group. Teachers will have the opportunity to collaborate daily about instruction and will no longer teach in isolation. They can share materials, ideas, and expertise. Extracurricular activities and enrichment can be geared toward the age group.
""pro" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: While solving issues related to enrollment and class balancing, we can create a learning environment that is great for the kids!
"con" for changing to grade level centers regarding this: While there is evidence that achievement can improve by doing this, we also know that transitions are generally not a positive thing for students. We may create several positive learning opportunities and, at the same time, create a negative. Knowing that transitions are not positive, however, means we need to plan accordingly and ensure that we minimize the affect of the transition through programming.
Test Scores & Open House
Why are the test scores from all the schools missing? I opened them a couple of weeks ago but now they don't show up?
Also, during the open house day, are we allowed to drop in at a school that would affect us if the developmental centers come to pass? How about the middle school?
Open Houses
I would encourage you to visit the other schools! That is a great idea!
I was not aware that the
I was not aware that the scores were missing until I read your entry on the blog and you are right, they are missing. We contacted our webpage administrator to report this and he is fixing the problem. We are also in the process of updating the Illinois School Report Card link to include this year's scores. All scores should be posted in the next day or two.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
Last night
I was wondering if you could put up the papers that were handed out last night. I arrived late and did not got to see or hear what it was all about.
Do you feel that this is a viable plan and/or feel you will have enough time to explore this option before the December vote?
Yes, I will post the
Yes, I will post the infomration on the website. I will post it under "news" about developmental centers and call it "alternate proposals".
I am currently investigating the proposal for multi-age classrooms. I am contacting schools that have this, talking with our teachers and administrators in our district, looking at research and looking at the feasibility for our schools. I will give a thorough report at the board meeting in November.
Multi-age was discussed early on prior to recommending grade-level centers and did not seem to be the best option. It is, however, certainly worth a more thorough look.
I am glad that there will be
I am glad that there will be a meeting for people to present alternative ideas and hope that the School Board will listen and take them seriously. There is a ton of research that shows that Grade level centers are not academically better for students than neighborhood schools. In fact, neighborhood schools are shown to be better for children socially. Typically parents are less involved as their children get older, but if younger siblings are at the same school they tend to stay involved in that school. I don't believe the teachers are involved in this decision, and the school board should be talking to the teachers personally to find out if it's really difficult for them to function with our current structure. Or, give them an anonymous platform to voice their opinions so they feel comfortable and not fear for their jobs.
I believe this proposal is more beneficial for the administration than the students, and there are other less drastic ways to solve our problems and keep our families and teachers happy.
There is research to support
There is research to support both configurations. In fact, in the study titled Grade Configuration: Who Goes Where, the authors conclude that no grade configuration is right for all. Districts must consider all factors when making grade configuration decisions. The Citizens Advisory Council research subcommittee is gathering research to help us examine all aspects of this.
Teachers were not involved in making the decision to propose this. They are, however, providing input on the proposal. The staff will be spending the half-day in-service on November 7th examining the benefits and concerns with this in an anonymous way. Please keep in mind that this is not just about "for or against" It is more like "more or less for this than higher class sizes" or "more or less for this than closing a school" or "more or less for this than split grade-level classes" or "more or less for this than class balancing." This is not a simple two-sided discussion. There are multiple considerations and we are trying hard to get input from everyone - parents, teachers, administration and the community at large.
Top Down Leadership
Please reply to the following:
1. I have been listening to what is proposed, yet still do not have a clear, concrete idea of your vision for learning centers. The logistics of getting kids where they need to be and yet still reduce the waste in bus transportation is vague at best. Where are the details on the costs?
Along those lines,why do children get picked up at home by school buses? Why do we not use Bus Stops like other districts? I have watched a bus honk and wait for 3 minutes on a child to get out of the house and on the bus. It is NO WONDER the busing schedule is too costly!
2. Why haven't more specific details been distributed district wide? The email that "announced" this plan was short and lacked any real substance on the reasons for and timing of this MAJOR change. Not to mention it was forwarded to me--not sent from the school or district.
3. Why is closing Betsy Ross unacceptable? "Because it would not look good for the village?" That needs explanation if it, in fact, is the concern. IF the concern stems from losing government money, then tell us this! Schools close. Why not step forward with the knowledge that in the next 4 years, we have to deal with a shrinking school population?
4. Speaking of time....
WHAT IS THE HURRY? The short time frame for the learning center restructuring is shocking!
You introduce the idea in 9/08 to everyone concerned (besides the superintendent and the board) and then implement the plan in LESS THAN A YEAR!
The shrinking attendance at Betsy Ross was described as critical by 2012. Why not spend a year developing community understanding and support? Why not give teachers and administrators time to research and plan for the BEST way to use the new structure? While this addresses the concern for ownership of this drastic change, the physical demands are great as well.
The tremendous amount of work involved cannot be dismissed.
This includes the following: rearranging 4 school buildings to house a new student population, determining teacher placement, coordinating/changing curriculum, determining building space usage, preparing schedule changes, addressing issues with administration changes, providing grade level teacher coordination, determining logistics of the scheduling for Art, P.E., Library, pull-out programs, Special Education needs, deciding and implementing school-wide themes and curriculum (like Reading Counts),...the list goes on and on.
4. I am AMAZED that as a superintendent you seem completely comfortable making this restructuring occur with little (or no) teacher input! I have learned that the teachers who you assume will embrace and implement this plan learned of it roughly at the same time parents did. This not only seems to disrespect the teachers as professionals who know what works, but also shows NO concern for ownership of this new structure. It marginalizes the most important players in successful education. The teachers are being treated like they should fall in line on this! Patronizing them is a good way to insure we lose the best teachers who expect a more professional environment.
(Please don't mention the Nov. 7 meeting. That was not an opportunity for teachers to share their ideas for solving the problems of class leveling and busing. It was to educate them on this specific plan. Not to mention having it at this late date. That makes it another example of a "top down" leadership.
Authoritative leadership seems incredibly out of place in the educational environment, yet what else would you call this situation?
I personally watched a principle develop school-wide ownership of a block schedule a few years ago. It took time and it demanded sincere listening to and addressing concerns. The success of that change would not have come if the principal announced the change and then gave the teachers a year to be ready to go. Who "owns" this plan?? Most people I talk to consider it all yours. That is not a harbinger of its success.
5. This brings me to my own personal concerns. I want my children to receive the best education they can and we moved to Forest Park confident that Garfield would meet those expectations. We accepted that East Proviso would not be where we sent them to high school, but District 91's quality appeared to insure 8 years before we would have to decide what to do about high school concerns (including the need to move). We paid for this in buying a house at one of the highest prices in town (at that time).
Now, five years have passed and we are no longer confident about sending our kids to District 91's middle school. In the last few years the middle school's reputation has not improved but has become known for its discipline problems and low test scores.
When a superintendent who had middle school experience was hired we were hopeful that the focus would be on improvement at the middle school. We hoped that innovative methodology and strong leadership would lead to a better situation. Instead, the grade schools face a fundamental reconfiguration while the middle school gets a band-aid solution, if it can be called a solution at all. As reported again and again, our grade schools are doing WELL. All of them! Yet, the focus is to "fix" the grade schools.
We are not paying for 7 years of private education for each of our kids, but we also have high expectations for them and will not send them to a school known for having problems. We face needing to move in the next couple of years even though we like living here and have great neighbors and have really enjoyed the small town feel of the neighborhood school (like the village slogan says!).
What specific plans are in the works for the middle school?
Could you please share some insights into why the school most in need of change is set aside in order to work on busing costs and class leveling problems at the successful grade schools.
Thank you for reading and responding.
Thank you for your
Thank you for your questions. I will do my best to try to respond.
1. The detailed transportation plan including cost comparison will be presented at the board meeting on November 13th. In general, we transport two groups of kids right now: those that we moved to another school to balance classes because we didn't have room at their home school and special education students who, by law, must be transported if transportation is in their IEP. This causes us to transport few students greater distances. If the proposal for grade level centers passes, we will move more students shorter distances.
2. I am unaware of any mass email that was sent. That announcement didn't come from my office. I have used several methods to provide detailed information to the public including: 1) sending two letters home, 2) holding public forums at all four elementary schools, 3) posting all information, including the detailed plan, on this website, 4) attending a public meeting called by the Village Council, 5) having information posted in the newspaper and responding to the questions from the press, 6) posting and responding to every entry on this blog, 7) discussing this with Citizens Advisory Council, and 8) discussing this with the Board of Education at every board meeting. The board meetings are public meetings and many details are discussed at these meetings.
3. I have clearly stepped forward with the knowledge that in the next four years we must deal with a shrinking school population. This knowledge, in part, is why this plan is being proposed. But here are the reasons why I do not think closing Betsy Ross is the right choice: 1) Closing a school is one of the indicators of a community in decline and will affect property values throughout the village, 2) While Betsy is the smallest building, Grant-White has the lowest enrollment. It may make more sense to close Grant-White. Either way, the students at Grant-White or Betsy would have to be shifted to the other school on that side of town. I would not be able to maintain the same low class sizes on both sides of town, resulting in one side or the other having considerably higher class sizes and inequity between the two sides of town. 3) Our enrollment fluctuates up and down at specific grade levels at individual schools. While the district as a whole is experiencing a decline, that decline doesn't hold true for individual grades. I need that additional classroom at some grades. 4) As a Garfield parent you are OK with another school closing. Would you feel the same way if it were Garfield that was to be closed? Would you not prefer that I come up with a plan to address declining enrollment AND keep all schools open? Government funding is not an issue with closing a school. We lose funds with loss of students - not buildings.
4a. To begin answering your question I need to take you back to February of 2007. The day I was named superintendent by the Board, I met with all the administrators in the district and asked "what one thing do you think is a priority and needs to be addressed?" Class balancing was at the top of the list. As one principal put it: "Please let me keep my own kids." While it has been transparent to most parents, we began meeting and addressing this issue even before I was officially on the job. We started last year by clearing up our class-balancing procedures and trying to make decisions that would keep more students in their home schools. When our procedures didn't work well and we needed to also address low enrollment issues, we began investigating other options. The notion that this plan was sprung on people and done so at an "alarming" rate is untrue. A great deal of planning and discussion was put into this. In fact, nearly everthing you listed above has been discussed and we already have a plan for addressing those issues and most have been explained in the public forums. While there is work to be done, the proposed timeline is reasonable. When we talked to other districts that implemented this kind of plan, they advised us not to prolong the discussion because it just causes more division in the community. Prolonging the change will not make the change any more or any less acceptable to those who are opposed.
4b. After developing a plan with the administrators, the very first group I shared the proposal with was the Forest Park Teachers' Association. I told them that I would be meeting with ALL the teachers to gain their input once I received approval from the board to continue investigation of this option. The board meeting was held on Thursday and Friday morning all the district administrators were instructed to share the proposal with the teachers and get input from them. The teachers were the first group to have the opportunity to discuss this after the board heard the proposal. On Monday of the following week, I began meeting with the faculty at each building to discuss this with them. I met with them again about a month later to have further discussion and have offered to meet with them any time they wish. One school did ask that I come back and I met with them a third time. While our contract gives administration "right of assignment" meaning that I could simply assign teachers to which ever building I wish, such a "top-down" approach is not appropriate. This is MAJOR change and the teachers need to have choice and input. In collaboration with the Teachers' Association, we developed a plan for reassignment that allows teachers to have choice as to where they go if this plan is approved. I have also asked the building administrators to keep this on their agendas for faculty meetings and share the teachers' questions and concerns with me. The meeting on the 7th was NOT for teachers to "share ideas on class leveling and busing. " The teachers in all buildings were asked to generate benefits and concerns with this plan as it relates to students, parents and staff. All teachers in the district participated and generated a great deal of positive and negative information about this plan. All of the information will be shared with the board and taken quite seriously. As you can see, the teachers have had many opportunities both face-to-face and anonymously to provide input on this plan, and I have taken their suggestions and comments very seriously and have made several changes based on their input.
5. The middle school began implementing Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) last year. The staff has been working very hard to implement this research-based, school-wide behavior system. While we did not expect to see any results for at least another year, the discipline referrals are significantly lower. The staff has been engaged in a great deal of professional development and on-going discussions and I have been very impressed with their committment to this process. Along with the PBIS, the school improvement team met this summer to revise their School Improvement Plan to address academic succes for all students. The middle school has made some significant improvements and I strongly encourage you to visit the middle school to see for yourself.
I did not feel the meeting
I did not feel the meeting formats were meant to allow for real family discussion. The format seemed more like informercials for the proposal
The forums were, in part,
The forums were, in part, an "informercial." One of our goals for conducting the forums was to provide factual information so I started each forum with the 30 min presentation. I understand that some people did not like writing their question/comment on a card because they wanted to speak. The card format, however, did allow everyone that wanted to express a point of view to do so. At Garfield alone, I had 83 cards and nearly 200 questions/comments. I was able to answer all the questions at the three other forums and answered all but a handful at Garfield. Those that provided me with an email address or phone number on the cards that I didn't get to got a personal response from me.
If 83 people had all limited their comments to 3 min, the forum at Garfield would have lasted until close to midnight. Considering that many cards had multiple questions totaling to nearly 200, you can imagine that it would have been difficult to hold people to just three minutes. So...I was able to allow nearly everyone to "be heard" as opposed to a few. What if the few that were able to speak didn't represent your point of view? How would it impact the Board’s decision if they only heard a few? I chose the card format to allow more opinions to be heard – not to “muffle” people. It may not have been popular, but it worked pretty well.