`
While the names of units do not fully describe what is happening in the classroom, it does inform as to what is taught where. This organization of subject matter provides clarity and focus for the meaningful and effective design and re-design of instruction. The next steps involve determining what the learning expectations will be and what the instructional details will be.
Mr. Naso explained how he collected information about what is taught in science in each grade in meetings with the teams and science teachers. He created the Science Unit Overview. He then created a template for collecting additional information about each unit. On December 15, Mr. Naso met with all science teachers and K-5 teachers. He then introduced the template which provides a format for teachers to communicate: (1) whether a unit is taught to all students within a grade, (2) to identify the length of time devoted to a unit and the time of year it is taught, (3) whether a unit needs design work, and (4) the instructional materials used in teaching a unit.
Mr. Naso will meet again with the science teachers and the K-5 teachers on March 16 to consider three areas: (1) missing or misplaced subject matter content, (2) specificity of learning expectations, and (3) the strength and effectiveness of resources. The next steps will be to: (1) determine priorities for summer curriculum work, (2) create first drafts of science curriculum descriptions for selected grades that include both unit names and learning expectations, (3) assess the greatest needs for materials, textbooks and other resources, (4) plan 2-3 science specific professional development offerings for 2005-2006, and (5) analyze how to best use science education expertise in the district and community.
The School Committee thanked Mr. Naso and the teachers for this work. They discussed how to handle differences across campuses, repetitions across grades, delivery of science learning and use of the Lincoln School Science Specialist, use of community resources both natural and human. They also discussed how to make progress in a reasonable amount of time, getting the faculty to buy-in to curriculum change and creating conditions favorable to the faculty taking on more responsibility for curriculum work. A concern was voiced about students being turned off to science instead of being engaged in the subject, and whether additional resources are needed to make faster progress on the science curriculum work.
The Committee emphasized that this is critical work in order to maintain the program quality that parents expect, and that this work cannot be done without appropriate and sufficient administrative resources to lead the effort. The School Committee said that this direction is sound but expressed desire for the work to be done more quickly. Mr. Naso said that the resource that is most needed is time so that they can be tenacious in keeping to schedule and that there are only so many Wednesday afternoons when he can meet with teachers. Mr. Naso said that he is setting the stage for change and that he has observed a lot of failed curriculum reform efforts. He observed that teachers are willing to go forward if they know that someone will be there with them and that the effort will not be halted. The Committee thanked the science teachers from the Lincoln school who attended the meeting and participated in the discussion and a member expressed regret that the Hanscom and Lincoln department heads did not attend.
Terry Green, the Science Specialist for grades 1-4 on the Lincoln campus and a Lincoln resident said that teachers were very excited about this work at the December meeting and that she believes that teachers want to go forward as long as they have support and resources. Ann Doyle thanked Mr. Naso for his work and suggested that in assessing curriculum he look at the students’ preparedness for the two high schools to which they matriculate. Andrew Singer asked where things can fall short procedurally, economically, or physically. He also asked whether there are issues related to the facilities we have for teaching science. As the School Committee considers facilities, it will consider whether they are adequate to support needed programs. Cathy Rogers asked whether there has been any attempt to ask students for their input about what units they are excited about as a way to assess what units are working. She also suggested that the district look for more opportunities to interweave math and science instruction. She also suggested that she would like to see this work be on-going with the curriculum regularly being fine-tuned. Mr. Naso said this curriculum design and re-design is intended to be ongoing. She also suggested that the school could have a science night as a means of keeping middle school parents involved.
The School Committee considered a draft written by Mr. Peery of the five-minute presentation its members will make to various town groups. He will prepare another revision to reflect the feedback, for discussion at the next meeting.
Ms. Dobrow will begin a draft of the op ed piece for the Lincoln Journal for the February 17 meeting. The next Communications Planning meeting is on February 16. The Finance Committee annual budget meeting is on March 17. Mr. Picker will attend.
The Committee considered a proposal for how the FAQ document the Committee is creating will be used. The purpose of the FAQ would be to supplement the presentation and to correct misinformation. It would be made available at the presentations, on the web site, on the bulletin boards, at town meeting, and its existence could be noted in a letter to the editor of the Lincoln Journal. The draft of the FAQ was discussed. The Committee agreed that members will send their comments to Mr. Picker who will incorporate into another draft for discussion at the February 17 meeting. He will work closely with Mr. Brandmeyer and Mr. Jack to check the accuracy of the answers provided in the FAQ.
The Committee agreed that the large majority of the work is on track but identified a few items that warrant further discussion: (1) the development of a Middle School Improvement Plan (Middle School goal status will be a topic of the next School Committee meeting), (2) the financial accounting software conversion (the Committee will see what the status of the account reconciliation is at the next meeting), and (3) strategic planning (to be addressed as discussed at last meeting, via a workshop to be held once the two new committee members are seated in April).
The Committee said that it would be helpful for them to know how many FTE’s are spent on compliance reporting work.
Mr. Brandmeyer also reported that the Hanscom Kindergarten has been awarded NAEYC Accreditation, a significant accomplishment. The Lincoln Kindergarten will also be undergoing the accreditation process and Mr. Brandmeyer hopes to be announcing their accreditation next year.
Mr. Brandmeyer reported that Mylar safety film had been successfully applied to a sample of the Hanscom windows. In addition preventing the glass from shattering, it keeps out UV rays and keeps in the heat. The work is proceding.
Mr. Brandmeyer also gave an update on the status of the folding doors of the Brooks Field-house and the Smith building. It will be a maximum of $8,500 to fix the Field-house door. The problem with the Smith door cannot be diagnosed without taking the door apart. This will be done over February vacation. For the $8,500 for the Field-house, Mr. Brandmeyer articulated the following options: (1) go to the Finance Committee, (2) wait until the end of the year and either use left over money or go the Finance Committee, or (3) use FY06 money. The School Committee decided not to take any action.
Respectfully submitted,
Sara Rolley, School Committee Recording Secretary