Town School Board Grapples With Public Outreach Process

The Town School Board discussed their public outreach efforts again on Tuesday night and found that even deciding on topics was more complicated than they’d expected.  A small group of citizens attended the meeting to participate in that discussion and what emerged was that the issues raised at the first meeting, held in October at the Brattleboro Co-op, needed to be clarified and expanded on before focus topics could be decided.  In short, the board might have to do more outreach before they can properly do outreach.

After the October meeting, the School Board assigned the outreach issue to a subcommittee consisting of David Schoales and Jill Stahl-Tyler who were tasked with determining an outreach process.  Schoales and Stahl-Tyler looked at issues raised at the first meeting, listed and categorized them, and brought them back to the board to decide on next steps.  After nearly an hour of  discussion, it was decided that the subcommittee would need to be expanded and topics decided.  Public meetings centered around the topics are expected to begin in January.

David Schoales introduced the list of topics, which had been color-coded by category and listed on large sheets of white paper (see below for the full list).  There were sheets for School Board Questions, Concerns, Positives, and Ways To Engage The Public.  Many of the items on the first three lists seemed geared to an insider audience (teachers and educators rather than parents and the wider community) but Ways To Engage The Public listed more accessible ideas such as a suggestion box, easier access to School Board member contact information, updates to the website, and using parent/community events as ways to gather input.

Chair Margaret Atkinson cut to the chase.  “So now what?” she asked.  Peter Yost proposed meetings with board and faculty to get to the heart of some of the complaints heard at earlier board meetings from teachers.  Atkinson suggested a series of public discussions around “focus topics” and asked if the subcommittee could set up such meetings.  So it was back to topics again.  “What do we want to tackle?” asked Stahl-Tyler.

Melissa Johnson, a former guidance counselor at Green Street School, asked what the goal of meetings with faculty would be, saying that she thought faculty would be reluctant to discuss issues openly in front of peers.  Stahl-Tyler said that the board planned to have various methods of outreach, and the board-faculty meetings were just one of these.  

Andy Paciulli, principal of Academy School, interrupted to say that the purpose of these meetings wasn’t just to hear complaints, and that there were a lot of positive things going on in the schools that they would want to talk about as well.  “It isn’t just about concerns,” he said.

Peter Yost acknowledged that this setting would not be conducive to hearing concerns.  He went on to say that while the board wanted to hear concerns, they couldn’t hear “grievable concerns” for legal reasons.

Jen Rice, a parent, said that she saw no reason why they couldn’t at least hear about such concerns even if they couldn’t act on them.  

David Schoales said that they couldn’t even hear about the concerns because there was a legal process that must be followed.  However, he said, he would be open to hearing such concerns if not anonymously, then, confidentially so that the board would be able to look such issues if warranted.  He cited the problem of sexual assault in the military — where women weren’t able to report sexual assaults to their commanding officers or even to that officer’s superior and needed an outside party to be able to get help and redress.  He felt that appointing an independent ombudsman might help.

Margaret Atkinson said that teachers had a union for that, although she acknowledged that perhaps local union reps were not always up to the task.  Ron Stahley said that even if the local union rep was not helpful, that teachers could appeal to the state arm of the National Education Association (NEA) which is the union representing teachers.  Johnson said that wasn’t true, and that in her experience the NEA did not just open its doors to anyone.  

Schoales asked her what she thought the board should do about the flawed union process.  Johnson said she didn’t know.  Peter Yost said that this was a problem that all were grappling with but that it seemed that changes were needed in teacher contract language and board policy.

Andy Davis, Music teacher, spoke next, thanking the board for tackling these issues and raising some additional issues in the process.  He said that there were problems with union reps that teachers were aware of and that they were “on it.”  But, he said, it went beyond that.  “Education is complicated,” he said, mentioning “high stakes testing” as an example of an issue raising concern nationwide.  

“There are a lot of places where teacher evaluations and compensation are linked to test scores,” he said.  “42 states,” David Schoales said, in sotto voce.  

“We’re on the edge of that here,” Davis continued.  He felt that meetings with the board and faculty were a good idea but that in addition to HR issues, they should also address issues around data collection, standardized testing, and the new Common Core curriculum, which are hot topics nationwide.  He said he believed such discussions would be constructive.

“I hate to quote Mao,” he joked, “but may a thousand flowers bloom.”

Melissa Johnson asked that the first meeting be scheduled as soon as possible so that people could start to prepare.  Jill Stahl-Tyler wanted to know the topic.  The board prepared to revisit the list on the wall when I jumped in myself with the complaint that the topics generated thus far were too vague to make good public forum topics and needed to be more comprehensive and comprehensible before we should assign them as such.  

Chris Grotke suggested that the board consult with the Planning Department which just spent considerable time gathering public input on the Town Plan.  He felt that they might have some ideas that would help the board create a more inclusive process.  Members of the board agreed that the idea might have merit.

Atkinson wound up the discussion with a challenge to us all.  “What do we expect from our schools?”, she asked. “What do we want our children to know?”  

_+_

Town School Board Topic Lists So Far

Red *: CLIMATE

Build on positives:

– peer support and collaboration
– best practices- articulate them/share
– pride in own efforts
– high expectations
– using data to inform instruction
– teachers choose own materials
– PLC’s/ Vertical Teams/ Grade Level
– Empowered; positive about measurable success
– Becoming better professionals
– Curriculum support for teachers

………………

Blue* – SCHOOL BOARD Q’s

– 360º Admin. eval
– Parent Climate Survey
– Testing – effect on Quality and breadth
– Data – how used/which used/what data
– collaboration + peer observation
– differentiation
– Ways to hear directly from public
– Limits on Board communications

………………..

CLIMATE

Concerns:

– Fear of speaking out
– No method for anonymity/ no access to board w/out admins
– Process/System broken
– Empowerment – not equitable
– Balance in curricula
– Beaten down/ not feel safe/ scapegoated/ experience minimized
– Less collaborative – more from top

………………….

Ideas for Engagement

– Tweak Parent Climate Survey
eg – individual needs being met; Breadth
(Distribution process)
– Suggestion Box directly to Board in each bldg. & on website
– Easier access to Board contact info
– Website upgrade – guidance on topics/policies/procedures
– Mailbox for Board (to Clerk)
– “Thank you” letter/email/banner
– Use parent/community events (not PTO) to gather input – surveys; tables; Q’s; checklists; etc.