PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1
146 South Granite Street
Prescott, Arizona 86303
January 19, 2005
Minutes of the Governing
Board Planning Session Retreat of Wednesday, January 19, 2005, beginning
at 8:30 a.m. at the Mountain Club Clubhouse.
Governing Board Members
Present:
President Andy Newton
Mrs. Dee Navarro
Mr. Steve Campbell
Dr. Joan Fleming
Mr. Tom Staley
Also Present:
Mr. Kevin J. Kapp,
Superintendent
Dr. Chris Reynolds,
Assistant Superintendent
Mrs. Renee Raskin,
Business Manager
Mrs. Andi Mayer, Assistant
to the Governing Board
Others Present:
Bob
Williams Ed Yeager Cindy Brown
Linda
Ryan Jim Williams Mary Anne Kapp
Joe
Howard Nancy Martinez Frank Lawhead
Jim
Wahlstrom Bill Munson Arn
Lavington
Jay
Collier Kelton Aker Marianne Brooks
Judy
Paris Totsy McCraley Don German
Dorrean
Walker Mike Harlan Jim Wells
Hilary
Eller Bill Monroe
CALL TO ORDER AND WELCOME
Breakfast took place from
8:00 – 8:30 a.m. President Andy Newton welcomed everyone, called the
meeting to order at 8:33 a.m. and Dr. Joan Fleming led attendees of the
retreat in the Pledge of Allegiance.
President Newton read a
letter from Gust and Rosenfeld congratulating the Board on their Total
Board Award.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mrs. Dee Navarro
moved that the Governing Board approve the agenda for the retreat as
presented. Dr. Joan Fleming seconded the motion.
Dr. Joan Fleming
voted aye, Mrs. Dee Navarro voted aye, Mr. Steve Campbell voted
aye, Mr. Tom Staley voted aye, and President Andy Newton voted aye.
The motion carried 5-0.
President Newton reminded
everyone of the times allotted for each agenda item.
Mr. Kevin Kapp noted that
the mid-year retreat started several years ago with the purpose of
monitoring the progression of board goals and committees and to discuss
various issues. He suggested using the mid-year retreat more for planning
purposes in 2005-06 for goal setting, discussing budget priorities, etc.
PLANNING SESSION:
GOAL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Academic Achievement
Mrs. McCraley reported
that the Academic Achievement Committee had been meeting through most of
the first semester, and then because so many members of this committee
were involved with PDST (Professional Development Support Team) and
because the two groups were duplicating some of the same work, Mr. Kapp
had suggested meeting the goals of the committee through PDST.
Mr. Mike Harlan reported
that they had looked at the two committees, picked up several new members,
and had decided to work through three sub-committees.
Mrs. Nancy Martinez chairs
one of the committees and reported that her committee will be looking at
the goals, making recommendations and that the four members had divided
the chores among themselves to define the positive things, attend
workshops, and to scale things down to make it easier.
Mrs. Mary Anne Kapp chairs
another committee and reported that the PDST within the district has a
sub-committee with a good cross representation of the district who are
doing a 30 minute PowerPoint presentation at all schools and will meet
with all staff before the February In-Service. She noted that it is very
important for staff to understand what PDST is and does, what the roles
and goals are, and how they tie in with No Child Left Behind.
The third committee is the
data analysis committee which will review software with the Regional
Training Center regarding data analysis, whether to use pivot tables,
graphic models, what will meet the needs of the school district, and then
once determined, begin to train staff members.
Mr. Harlan noted that
there is access through SASI, but that it’s not always user friendly and
often times it is necessary to use IT staff to pull out needed data.
Mr. Kapp noted that there
is one more year of grant funding that pays for the travel for PDST. He
also pointed out that with the Academic Achievement Committee, we caught
ourselves before going too far down the track when a district sets a goal
for “improving reading scores by 10%” does not apply to every school and
every level and that the district needs to do more work with the data
before setting that type of goal. He stated that the two are tied
together and that training will take place at the February 18th
and April 22nd in-services.
Character Education
Committee
Mr. Joe Howard distributed
a handout and reported that this committee has three sub-goals:
a. Character Counts
for Students
b. Develop Parent
Resources
c. Community
Collaboration.
He reported that for
students the committee is looking at character related assemblies and
in-services for students and staff, as well as tips and ideas for
principals to nurture character counts. He noted that the committee is
also looking at obtaining money for this goal through grants, developing a
resource library, and a website with a student section.
Mr. Don German mentioned
that the high school is doing social responsibility training and shying
away from the character counts company. Mr. Howard noted that it is
important to be site specific and level specific and that there are loads
of different plans available for use. He stated that the elementary and
middle school levels were happy with the character counts program and that
by using the same program it gives them a common language and terminology.
Mr. Howard reported that
for parents, the committee is looking at developing a website and creating
links for the families of PUSD, “Pillars of Parenting,” award letters to
successful parents, character counts newsletters or articles in current
school newsletters, incorporating character counts into current parent
programs, and new character counts parenting classes.
He stated that for
community collaboration the committee was looking at law enforcement
involvement, seeking grants for additional school resource officers for
middle and elementary schools, a city-wide program with newsletter and
banners, involving the Chamber of Commerce, using Cable One air time,
having a city website link about character counts, and possible
advertisements on district buses.
Nutrition and Fitness
Mr. Jim Wahlstrom noted
that obesity has been a hot topic with this committee, which has met five
times already, has been very active, and has the largest membership. He
reported that most of the district nurses are involved, along with
participation from Yavapai Regional Medical Center and the Yavapai County
Health Department personnel. He noted that Congress had reauthorized the
Child Nutrition Act this last June and that all districts participating in
the program must develop a plan for nutrition, curriculum and physical
education. He noted that this tied in with the committee goals very well.
He distributed a handout
and reviewed the Nutrition and Fitness Mission Statement, which is:
Prescott Unified School
District is committed to the research and adoption of sensible and healthy
nutrition and fitness policies, for the well-being of our children, both
physically and academically.
It is the goal of this
District to develop and maintain a comprehensive wellness policy that
complies with the Arizona and United States Department of Agriculture
Nutrition Policy.
Mr. Wahlstrom announced
that our district was selected to receive a Team Nutrition Mini-Grant from
the Arizona Department of Education that will include funding, as well as
a consultant.
He distributed copies of
Arizona’s Nutrition Policy and noted that they were looking at using this
as a guide in all of our schools, but will begin with Prescott Mile High
Middle School, then implementing other schools on the child nutrition
program. He added that Prescott High School is the only school not on
that program.
Mr. Wahlstrom reported
that at Prescott Mile High Middle School the menus will be evaluated,
recommendations for change will be given, there will be changes in the
snack bar and vending machines as far as what is offered, and that healthy
products will be offered with no soda. He noted that they would measure
progress with obesity levels and student weight comparisons. He stated
that this program would include audits from the state.
He noted that the grant
received is just for one school, but that once the district has gone
through the process, we’ll know how to implement the program at other
schools and have the benefit of the consultant.
Other things the committee
is working on include a healthy vending program at the high school,
putting nutritional information product lists at all sites, and including
articles regarding fitness, health or nutrition on the back of menus every
month.
Growth Committee
Mr. Bob Williams
distributed a handout with brainstorming ideas relating to growth and
reported that the committee has been working on refining the brainstorming
ideas that will be given to the Board at a future meeting. He noted that
the district is facing challenges due to growth and dealing with capacity
issues, negotiation issues, formulas for how much goes to salaries, and
the need for additional teachers. He noted that this must be a Board goal
for years to come.
BOND PRIORITIES
Mrs. Renee Raskin reported
that there would be about $3 million to spend in the first phase of
funding and distributed an “A” list of projects and then the full list.
She suggested picking projects with no design fees and that the list
needed to really be pared down.
President Newton commented
that it would not be possible to do unless a lot of people withdraw their
requests.
Mrs. Raskin noted that the
next funding received would not be until July of 2006.
Mr. Tom Staley reported
that many school employees felt that the gym at Taylor Hicks was a
priority.
Mrs. Dee Navarro asked if
the full funding would be needed the first year for this project and how
long the project would take.
Mr. Arn Lavington
responded that the architectural and engineering would take approximately
three months to design, one month to bid, one month for Board approval,
and five months to get the ball rolling with a minimum of six months for
construction.
Mrs. Navarro stated that
she thought it would be silly to do any parking lots prior to other
construction.
Mr. Steve Campbell stated
that of importance to him were the gym at Taylor Hicks, the four
classrooms at Abia Judd, the bleachers at Prescott High School and the
district-wide locks.
Mr. Bob Williams offered
aspects from the Growth Committee, such as, the high school is nearing
capacity, where would 2nd grade new sections go, adding
sections at elementary schools, and looking at long term growth. He also
added that he disagreed about parking lots and that at his school it is a
safety issue.
Mr. Jay Collier suggested
protecting what we have first by doing the roofing at Abia Judd, Dexter
and Food Service, noting that those buildings were getting damaged
internally. He also noted that fire sprinkler systems were a safety
concern and that locks and hardware could be done during the second phase.
Mrs. Navarro stated that
the number one priority for her was the locks and hardware because that is
a real safety concern should the need ever arise for a lockdown.
Regarding the roofs, she asked if those sites were receiving water
damage. Mr. Collier responded yes.
Mr. Staley recommended
that board members develop their own lists of $3.7 million in projects and
would then have a narrowed down list to work with.
Mrs. Raskin noted that the
projects should only be for $3 million and that the other money would be
used for fees and contingencies.
Mr. Kapp noted that the
DLT had already pared the list down from $12 million to $6 million and
could narrow it down further if the Board would like them to.
Mr. Campbell spoke
regarding the second grade problem and noted that at Abia Judd they would
be moving from four sections into three sections and he noted that water
damage could lead to mold abatement. He asked when the classrooms should
be done – in the second phase?
Mr. Don German suggested
changing mindsets by asking what would we have to do first if the bond had
not passed?
Mr. Kelton Aker suggested
just doing the gym, with the classrooms later, even if it wasn’t cost
effective.
Mr. Bill Munson noted that
the greater need at Abia Judd was for the parking lot and playground due
to the road widening project. He stated that they could live without the
classrooms for one more year. He added that the classroom that is really
needed is for the special needs kids. He stated that the number one
priorities at Abia Judd would be the roofing, parking lot, and field
renovations.
Mrs. Cindy Brown noted
that she already has one bus out of compliance and that using vans for
athletics was not good. She suggested doing a lease purchase, which would
reduce the amount of money up front.
Mr. Staley noted that the
Board had just approved a project through APS for energy savings ($270,000
in savings) and that in the first year the school district has to donate a
certain amount of money that could affect the bond projects.
Mrs. Judy Paris stated
that Dexter had not been mentioned for a number of years because of the
offices. She invited anyone to come walk through the facility on a rainy
day, that there is water that comes through the lights, fire alarms, etc.
She stated that no matter what you do with Dexter, you need to do the roof
and HVAC to preserve that building, and because those projects were
critical health and safety issues.
Mr. Kapp noted that he was
not aware that the majority of schools do not have sprinkler systems in
the classrooms because most of them were grandfathered when that code was
adopted. He noted that the roof would cost $335,000.
Mr. Staley stated that
we’re going to have to get this down and suggested that DLT do that. He
stated that he’d like a better handle on the fees to Mr. Lavington.
Mr. Arn Lavington reported
that the architectural contracts would expire in May of 2006 and
questioned whether the district should wait for the second release of
money in July of 2006. He noted that it would necessitate doing another
RFP without funding to finish off projects if the money is not available
for drawing up designs. He stated that the district would need 8% of $15
million, which is a big chuck of money just to get things going. He
stated that Taylor Architects were the primary architects on these
projects. He noted that the high school paving project would involve an
architect.
President Newton clarified
that architects would not be needed for the roofing projects. Mr.
Lavington responded that engineers would be needed for those projects.
Mr. Staley stated that the
committee was very careful about separating out projects that did not need
design fees and that a total of $952,000 had been set aside for design
fees, with $1.6 million for contingency. He stated that 18% for fees for
the first round was too high in his opinion and suggested splitting out
the fees.
Mr. Lavington stated that
the fee structure would need to be determined (7% for architectural and 1%
for miscellaneous engineering) and find out how long he might hold the
invoices.
Mr. Staley asked, so the
fees are and should be flexible? Mr. Lavington responded, yes – we’d need
to negotiate them.
Mrs. Navarro suggested
sending the list back to DLT for further cuts.
Mr. Staley suggested that
the Board members do separate lists and then give them to DLT to work
from. He also proposed that 10% be used for fees and a contingency fund.
Mr. Collier stated that it
would be helpful for the DLT if the Board would put their reasons down for
prioritizing.
Mr. Staley suggested that
the DLT do their list for $3.2 million, then each Board member do it
separately, and then you’ll have six lists to come out with the final list
of projects.
Dr. Joan Fleming stated
that the projects APS is doing out of the bond money needs to be
considered when making those lists.
Mr. Kapp stated that he
wasn’t sure whether it was coming out of the first or second phase, but
thought that it could come out of the second year bond payment.
Mr. Lavington agreed with
Mr. Kapp.
Mr. Collier stated that if
roofing is a priority, the HVAC’s must be done first, then the roofing.
Mr. Staley stated that the
first $6,300 of bond money was spent on aerial photography, that we
promised the tax payers this is what we would do, and that we need to
adhere to the list and keep an eye on the ball.
Mrs. Raskin stated that
she has been asked about using building renewal funds – if we get about
$700,000 again, can the principals use their portion of that money for
projects?
Mr. Lavington noted that
the School Facilities Board had done approximately $8 million worth of
projects and that the district went through the 10% of contingency fees
without a problem and recommended that the district retain at least 10% at
all times.
Mr. Campbell recommended
sticking to the list, that building renewal money should be used for
things on the list if money is left afterwards, and then worry about other
things – if it’s on the list they can use building renewal money.
Mr. Staley stated that he
had no problem with that.
Mr. Kapp reminded the
Board that the district would have a website for the bond projects and
would have to be clear about the funding and explain it to the public.
After some discussion
regarding projects, President Newton directed the DLT to come up with a
list for $3.2 million for the Board to vote on in February. Mr. Kapp
noted that March 8th was the drop dead date and that he would
schedule a DLT meeting for next week.
Post-It Notes for Bond
Priorities:
Taylor Hicks
Gym $1,500,000
Classrooms – AJ, TH,
MV $ 450,000, $650,000 & $600,000
Locks $ 280,000
Roofing $ 330,000
Field, playground @ AJ
$ 200,000
PHS
Bleachers $ 100,000
Buses $ 100,000
- $1,300,000
Taylor Hicks
Gym $1,500,000
Roofing $ 330,000
AJ Playground &
Parking $ 200,000
$2,030,000
HVAC
$ 375,000
$2,405,000
? = Classrooms
Locks
Buses
2005-06 AND 2006-07
CALENDARS (ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS)
Mr. Kapp distributed
copies of the calendar for the next two years and noted that he had used
the Board’s direction of a 9-1,9-2,9-1 format, with the beginning dates of
August 8 and August 7, and had added in the usual and customary holidays,
with 90 instructional days each semester. He noted that there are just
four days required by law: Fourth of July, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving,
and Christmas. He suggested that teachers come back five days early for
in-service and time in their classrooms.
Dr. Andy Newton stated
that he supported these calendars.
Mr. Tom Staley suggested
having fall break during Thanksgiving week.
Mr. Kapp noted that it
would take Board action to do that, since they already had approved the
9-1, 9-2, 9-1 format.
Dr. Joan Fleming stated
that one of the reasons the Board wanted that format was for remediation,
which you wouldn’t get the week of Thanksgiving.
Mrs. Dorrean Walker stated
that from a teaching standpoint, it would not work educationally.
Dr. Fleming stated that
the Board has already voted on this issue with more than enough discussion
and have already made some concessions.
Mrs. Marianne Brooks noted
that as a former middle school teacher she needed the time at the end of
the quarters and semesters.
Mr. Kapp added that the
district had tried a Friday, Monday, Tuesday off between quarters and it
was felt that it messed up two weeks of instruction. He noted that the
2001-02 calendar was one of the most popular and acceptable calendars the
district has had.
Mr. Staley stated that he
teaches at the college, right up to the last day, and that his grades were
up to date and that he only had to punch in one more test before having
the final grade.
President Newton noted
that this was the calendar the Board had already approved.
Post-It Notes:
-
Holds to: “9-1, 9-2,
9-1” template
-
Keeps “usual and
customary” holidays
-
Semesters balanced, 90
days each
-
1st semester
ends before winter break
-
Move fall break to
Thanksgiving week?
LATE START FOR STAFF
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Kapp noted that the
Board had voted to do away with all half days and in-service days, which
accomplished the goal of longer instructional weeks with fewer
interruptions. He stated that the district now needed to create time for
professional development of staff members, which is critical.
Mrs. Walker suggested
using some of the days at the beginning of the school year for such things
as Structured English Immersion (SEI).
Ms. Linda Ryan stated that
having no parent/teacher conferences concerned her. Mr. Kapp noted that
item was next on the agenda.
Mr. Don German asked, what
about those teachers that have already had SEI training – what would they
do? He suggested that the district have more than one offering for those
two days at the beginning of the school year.
Mrs. Totsy McCraley noted
that in the school solutions team training, which is to help those schools
that are labeled “under performing,” it was noted that those schools
usually don’t have training that is sustained.
Mr. Steve Campbell asked,
what’s the difference between taking the first half of the day off and the
last half of the day off?
Mr. Mike Harlan responded
that with the late start concept, it’s using consolidated time, where for
four days a week you have an extended schedule that makes up the time you
will use for a late start. He stated that the district needs an on-going,
sustained approach for staff development, rather than a shot gun
approach. He suggested doing it weekly because the impact would be much
more significant than two times a year. He stated that in talking with
colleagues and team leaders, they expressed the need for team time from
7:45-8:20 (35 minutes) once weekly; 76% thought an early start or late
release was needed; and 92% felt this should take place on a Wednesday or
Friday every week for consistency. He noted that he had surveyed his
staff and parents on site council and they unanimously supported a Friday
early release. He distributed a handout and reviewed the consolidation of
time proposal, along with the pros and cons of such a schedule. He noted
that this would create a consolidated block of time for teachers when they
are not coaching, etc., that would equal 11 hours a month, which is a very
significant amount of time that would meet the needs for professional
development, teacher planning, staff meeting, and student instructional
time.
Mr. Joe Howard suggested
you could also look at block scheduling to meet the same goal.
Dr. Fleming stated that
she was thrilled with the concept, since her biggest concern has always
been loss of instructional time, yet recognizing the need for more staff
development time.
Mr. Bill Munson noted that
the specifics needed to be discussed, but that he felt it could work, is a
great concept, but might need to “tweak” a few details.
Mr. Campbell asked how
this could include all coaches with an early release? Mr. Harlan
responded that Friday is not a typical coaching or travel day, and would
have to take place after the consolidated time.
Mrs. McCraley noted that
on Wednesday club days at least one coach would be supervising students,
which would be one of the volunteer coaches. She noted that at the high
school level there would be more athletic conflicts on Friday.
Mr. Campbell asked if that
would help solve the problem with club day?
Mrs. McCraley responded,
on Wednesday, buses still run at the regular time, some students use it
for tutorial time, make-up sessions, and club meetings. With this
proposal, buses would have to run at a later time and the clubs would be
decimated.
Mrs. Cindy Brown stated
that they do that now and that it shouldn’t be a problem.
Mrs. McCraley noted that
the high school has had Wednesday activity period for the last 25-30 years
and that Wednesday would work better for the high school level than
Friday.
Dr. Fleming stated that
she wanted to explain her position on the elimination of activity period.
She admitted that she was not aware the high school had Wednesday club
day, that she thought it was a great thing, and that she misunderstood.
She noted that they take five minutes off each class period for activity
period, and that she would not be opposed to keeping the Wednesday
activity periods at the high school.
Mrs. Dorrean Walker stated
that she would be concerned with the public perception and that the
district would need to really educate the public and the media.
Mr. Jim Wahlstrom stated
that he supported what they’re doing, however, on early releases now the
food sales go down 30-40% and it could be a problem for food service.
Mr. Staley asked why staff
development could not take place daily from dismissal to the end of the
day? He stated that the Board had voted for no early releases and asked,
how can this be happening?
Mr. Kapp stated that he
was concerned about perception, but noted that this was different, part of
being flexible, and that the district needed to develop routine sustained
time for staff development. He suggested doing a late start on Mondays,
which would address public perception and family concerns.
Dr. Fleming stated that on
Monday morning teachers want to get started.
Mr. Bill Munson stated
that he hoped the Board was open to looking at getting rid of half days
and having a regular schedule with one added early release (with
consolidated time). He noted that this could address both staff
development and parent conferences.
Mrs. Dee Navarro suggested
that the DLT come back with a plan in March or April and that she was open
to the concept. She noted that when she voted to get rid of half days it
was because of the loss of instructional time.
Mr. Kapp noted that the
whole reason for having this topic on the agenda was to see if it was
worth pursuing.
Mr. Staley asked, how much
time does it take to have a staff development meeting? Mr. Harlan
responded, it depends on the activity.
Mr. Staley suggested, why
not have club days at every level – it’s not an early release and is more
sellable to the public.
Mr. Kapp stated that the
Board seemed open to listening to proposals and suggested that the DLT
bring some options to the Board in March.
Post-It Notes:
·
Options?
“Late
Start”
“Consolidated Time” (earlier dismissal or later start time once/week)
*DLT: Bring 2-3 options
to Board in March.
PARENT/TEACHER
CONFERENCES
This item was skipped.
Post-It Notes:
Hold discussion pending
further work on creating time for professional development and other
needs.
CLOSED CAMPUS AND OTHER
OPTIONS
Mrs. Navarro stated that
she thought the district should look at having a closed campus at the high
school down the road with a new cafeteria being built at the high school.
Mrs. McCraley stated that
she agreed that there was a need to provide a secure campus and that she
would like to do that before something happens, rather than after.
Mr. Kapp noted that he had
once chaired a committee on attendance at PHS and that there was a group
of parents at that time that was opposed to a closed campus because they
felt that students needed to learn responsibility. He noted that it
doesn’t have to be all or nothing, that you could give special
consideration to seniors, grade point average, etc. He suggested looking
at that topic now, with the completion of the new cafeteria one and a half
years away, and having every group equally represented in the discussion.
Mrs. Walker noted that a
closed campus would require the expense of new fencing and security.
SELF-EVALUATION
CONCERNS
Mrs. Navarro stated that
at the retreat during the summer, the Board did not have a chance to
review the board responses to their self-evaluation and felt that a
discussion should take place regarding those items receiving a “needs
improvement” such as, “the board makes every effort to get acquainted with
staff.”
Mr. Campbell stated that
he also felt the Board needed to look at those areas that “need
improvement.”
Mrs. Navarro asked if it
should be done at a future Board meeting.
Dr. Fleming suggested
doing it at the next summer retreat in June. She also suggested doing
another self-evaluation, since there was a new Board member.
President Newton directed
Mr. Kapp to put this item on a future Board agenda.
FUTURE SCHOOL CALENDARS
Mrs. Navarro stated that
she felt that now that the Board has adopted a two-year calendar, there
was no need for a calendar committee.
Dr. Fleming and President
Newton agreed.
Mr. Staley stated that he
was confused, that there would be no input from the public on the
calendar, yet changing the decision on half-days.
Mrs. Navarro stated that
if the administration comes back with a plan where there is no loss of
instructional time, she didn’t have a problem voting on that as a separate
item.
Dr. Fleming stated that
she agreed.
Mr. Staley stated that it
was interesting to him that we’re willing to listen to each other about
the calendar, but not the public, and that the perception from the public
is that the Board doesn’t care. There is no calendar committee, we give
them three minutes to state their case and then get cut off. He stated,
that’s part of the perception that the Board doesn’t want to listen to the
public. He stated that he felt the president should have control over
that and that they should be allowed to talk and not be on a timer.
Mrs. Walker stated that
she felt the Board should re-consider having a calendar committee, that it
is a way to empower people, foster communication, give them a buy-in, and
allows them to make a recommendation.
Dr. Fleming stated that
she felt the Board gave community members ample time to discuss the
calendar and that three minutes was sufficient time to get a point across.
Mrs. Walker noted that
this all could have been done in a committee before it got to the Board
meeting.
President Newton stated
that his feeling on a calendar committee was that the calendar should be
approved by the Board and that committee members should be Board
appointed.
Mr. Staley asked, if you
don’t allow a calendar committee, what other committees aren’t you going
to allow?
Mr. Kapp noted that in the
past the calendar committee was comprised of representatives from the
schools and was not Board appointed. He noted that the committee had
representation from every site, including parents. He noted that the
committee did not always get along or reach a consensus and that some
years produced 2-3 calendar options that were voted on by staff and then
recommended to the Board. He also stated that you shouldn’t survey topics
that are lose/lose. He suggested that a compromise might be for the Board
to set some good parameters, such as a template, and let the committee
work from there.
Mr. Jim Williams stated
that the calendar affects morale probably more than anything we do.
GROWTH AND NEW PROGRAMS
FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION NEXT YEAR
Mrs. Nancy Martinez
distributed a handout regarding special education growth and new programs
and reviewed it with those present.
-
December count 2003 –
648 students
-
December count 2004 –
724 students
-
Increase of 76 students
-
Total % increase of 12%
-
Estimate 20 students
have registered since January 3rd
a. Student is
recognized only in their primary category of
disability
b. Does not
include number of times student is seen by
Special Ed
teacher per day/week
-
Duplicated numbers are
when students are counted for each time they are serviced by the Special
Ed teacher per day/week
-
Example: 1 SLD students
whose areas of disabilities are reading, math and written expression,
will actually be seen by the teacher at three different times.
How Do Duplicated Numbers
Work – Elementary
Abia Judd
-
58/29 (58 students
duplicated/29 students unduplicated)
-
58 represents the number
of students actually seen per day
-
Then times that by 4
days and you have 232/116 students per week
-
Fridays are for testing
and paperwork
Miller Valley
-
75/38 (75 students
duplicated/38 students unduplicated)
-
75 students actually
seen
-
300/152 students per
week
-
Fridays are for testing
and paperwork
Middle School Numbers:
Granite Mountain
Prescott Mile High
High School Numbers – L.C.
-
December 2003 count –
162
-
December 2004 count –
167
-
Students are divided
between four L.C. teachers during the day
-
Students receive
tutoring help, learning strategies, vocational opportunities, etc.
Increase in Numbers Means
More Programs
BEST Programs – MIMR/MOMR
-
Autism program is needed
as students are now placed in the BEST Program
-
Taylor Hicks BEST
program has 14 students, 7 of which are autistic
-
Research shows that
autistic classrooms should have only 8 students with 1 teacher and 2
aides
E.D. Programs
-
R & R program – 13
students only 4 are IEP placed
-
ALPS – 13 students –
thank you to the Board for approving an additional half-time teacher
-
Pathways – 13 students,
with 2 more expected to return in the next 6 weeks
-
Pathways – currently has
1 teacher and 2 aides
-
Aides go out to the
regular education classes with students.
Programs
-
ED – Increase in the
number of students placed and referred to this program
-
Currently no cap on
class size
-
Ca on class size is
needed or additional staff
New Program
-
Autism classroom K-3 for
2005-2006
-
Extended Resource for
elementary for 2005-2006
-
Mile High 2006-2007 (GM
already has ER)
-
Special Education
secretary for elementary and Granite Mountain
Current Trends
-
On the average PUSD
Special Ed population has had an increase of 9% to 12% each of the last
2-3 years
-
Increase of more severe
Special Ed students; i.e., multiple disability, wheelchair, homebound
What Does This Mean?
-
We must look at
developing new programs to better serve our special needs population
-
Look at adding
additional teachers, aides, etc.
Dr. Fleming asked if the
secretary at PHS and PMH were solely for special education. Mrs. Martinez
responded, yes, and they are also aides in the classrooms.
Mr. Staley asked how many
dollars are spent per special ed student? Mrs. Raskin responded, about $3
million in weighted funding.
Mr. Staley estimated about
$4,500 for each regular student. He then asked, how much is spent on
gifted? Nancy Martinez responded $100,000 for about 50-60 students. She
added that there is a need to separate the autistic students from the MIMR
and MOMR.
Mr. Staley asked, and you
need two teachers and four aides? Mrs. Martinez responded, yes, we need
to look at the fact that this student population is growing and we’ll need
to do something down the road and now.
Mr. Staley estimated that
$7,500 was the average spent per student in special education and $1,666
was the average spent per elementary gifted student.
Mr. Kapp noted that the
district receives Medicaid money through the hard work of Kitty Tenney.
He stated that the district has been able to not have to take so much out
of the budget for special education because of the Medicaid money. He
also added that the Medicaid money is topping out and won’t be able to
continue in the future. He stated that the district needs to look at
restructuring, etc., as well, rather than just spending more money.
Mrs. Martinez stated that
she just wanted everyone to understand that special education is growing
at a phenomenal rate.
Mr. Kapp added that about
14% of the student population is now special education students.
Mr. Bob Williams noted
that the model for special education students used to be self-contained
classrooms, not mainstreamed. He stated that the model used now is much
better, is no longer a dumping ground, but an inclusion program.
Mrs. Martinez stated that
the district is trying to intervene in preschool in order to decrease
those numbers.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
POLICY
Dr. Fleming stated that
the district approved a limited call to the public and that the title on
the policy needed to be changed. She suggested having the limited call to
the public at study sessions only, and not at the voting sessions.
Mr. Campbell stated that
it seemed reasonable, giving people the opportunity.
Mrs. Navarro stated that
she agreed and that the second time people are just repeating what they
said at the first meeting.
Dr. Fleming reviewed for
Tom Staley the procedure for putting something on the Board agenda.
Mrs. Dorrean Walker stated
that people can’t always make that first study session.
Mr. Jim Williams stated
that maybe the person could change your mind by having a second
opportunity.
President Newton stated
that he did not see a real practical reason for restricting the limited
call to jus |