Here...There Part 2

Again, the disclaimer- the views expressed here do not represent those of any School Committee member other than myself, nor should they be construed as representing those of the School Committee as a whole. Or even a half. Nor a quarter. These are my opinions; any resemblance they may have with the facts should be more than coincidental, but they are still my opinions.

Summary Paragraph: In which Menin remembers how the road to hell was paved with good ambitions, how running from "the outside" lengthens the learning curve, and how an unusual partnership with Dick Sullivan began to make an impact.

It recently occurred to me that in the six years I have served on the School Committee, I have worked with 3 different Superintendents.

The first was Cappy Smith, who left before the terms of her contract were completed. I have only indirect knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the disaffection between the School Committee and her tenure. But I did work directly with her on several projects, most notably the Learning Enrichment Center at Kelleher Park; Dan McCarthy and I wrote several grants to get that project started; and he and I wrote a partnership grant with the schools and the Police Department to address alcohol usage in high school students.

In those experiences, I found her to be dynamic, a visionary, and an extraordinarily compassionate person.

On election night, as Dick Sullivan and I were sizing each other up and chatting (there is probably a height difference of 8 inches between us), we made an agreement for going forward. Having watched School Committee meetings for some time, and seeing how our predecessors Bert Reed and Amy Wallace struggled to raise issues for discussion, we agreed that regardless of content, we would second any motion each of us brought to the floor, whether or not we would ultimately vote for it.

That solved the problem of the tyranny of the agenda, and forced the Committee as a whole to dispose of issues it had not really dealt with before. A small, but significant movement towards transparency.

Between the November election, and the swearing in of the new School Committee, the outgoing School Committee selected Assistant Superintendent Mary Murray as the next Superintendent.

I had run for School Committee as an activist, a critic of what I saw was a School Committee that lacked transparency in process and lacked accountability to the community. The Committee I joined was in the middle of some very interesting projects, notably converting literally hundreds of school, administrative and School Committee policies into three simple manuals using the Carver model. The High School reconstruction project was underway.

At that time, the School Committee operated as a Committee of the whole; they had done away with all sub-committees. I was initially told this was in accordance with the Carver model, but I never found that recommendation in Carver's book.

The net result was a "fluid" agenda, an inability to process information before the meeting (we were getting our packets the day before the meeting), and no chance to get additional information before voting thus requiring that we make what felt to me to be uninformed votes or not fully informed votes.

As a result, I tended to become very skeptical of the process, and more inquisitive regarding the information I felt I needed to cast an informed vote. In other words, to quote one of my peers at the time, I became "a real pain in the ass." I recognize that my persistence created tension on the Committee; no one likes to have their recommendations and proposals questioned. Conversely, no one in their right mind wants to make votes on items affecting the quality of education if all the needed information isn't provided by the time the vote is taken.

My notes and meeting minutes of those first two years on the Committee reflect a strong focus on buildings. The High School. A new West-end Elementary School. Other building needs. And policy; a lot of dialogue about policy. Curriculum and student achievement were part of the Superintendent's report, and things always seemed to be going along well, or if they weren't we had a plan to correct them.

In my second year on the School Committee, the state, without warning, reduced their aid to the Schools by $750,000. At the same time, the state recreated Curriculum frameworks to reflect the goals of the No Child Left Behind Act; which was funded at 15% of it's estimated cost to implement. That year, the State also took back all subsidies for non-SpEd transportation.

At the Superintendent's recommendation (although this was not by the unanimous consent of the School Committee), we remained committed to a one size fits all approach to curriculum, the Committee would not look at realignment or reconfiguration of the schools as a cost savings mechanism.

Instead, we pursued two strategies. The first was to turn to the City for additional funds, which the City provided within it's ability to do so. The second was to look at keeping program frameworks intact while chipping away at their innards. The theory was that when happy days returned, and they were just around the corner, it would be easy to simply reconstitute the programs around the bare bones that were left. Also, the crisis did not compel the Superintendent, nor the School Committee as a whole, to consider leveling students (creating an approach to academics that meets kids where they are, and doesn't assume that one approach, one size fits all). I was teaching at the time, and became increasingly disenchanted and vocal about this approach by my second year.

In hindsight, simply shrinking programs without seriously evaluating their value, effectiveness and the impact they would have in their skeletal state was just this side of stupid.

At this time, had I keeled over in the middle of a School Committee meeting in the middle of one of my tirades against these unenlightened practices, I'm sure my peers would have chipped in to have the following carved on my tombstone: "Try thinking your way outside of this box!"

No outside of the box ideas made it off the table, no real thinking about reorganizing the schools to create efficiencies was done. As I remember the Cowardly Lion's preparation for his audience with the Great and Powerful Oz, it was just "snip snip here and snip snip there."

Fees were introduced for athletics, student activities and busing.

Next: Oops.