(For details, see the comments here.)
Still no response from the bored-on-vacation cat-got-his-tongue high official.
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Ask and Ye Shall Receive...
Thanks to the artist. It doesn't have the cachet of a crossed-out-Reithmeyer Stop The School shirt, but I like it!
(For details, see the comments here.)
Still no response from the bored-on-vacation cat-got-his-tongue high official.
(For details, see the comments here.)
Still no response from the bored-on-vacation cat-got-his-tongue high official.
Schools News Around the Blogosphere
Are You a Bully?
A Connecticut school administrator, commenting on his district's decision to include teacher behavior in its anti-bullying policy, complained that it would be difficult to distinguish between bullying behavior and classroom management strategies. What about you? Can you tell the difference between behavior management and bullying?
Standing Up for Average Students
Teacher/coach Tom Krause worries that real learning and the average student's needs are getting lost in the pressures of greater accountability and assessments.
Another Edison Schools achievement claim falls apart under scrutiny
The Examiner
Caroline Grannan
The minor flurry of news about the failed for-profit school manager Edison Schools - and an indignant post here by an Edison supporter or employee - spurred a longtime Edison critic who is an indefatigable number-cruncher to take a close look at Edison's newest claims about achievement in its Philadelphia schools.
Math Scores Show No Gap for Girls, Study Finds
New York Times
By TAMAR LEWIN
A study paid for by the National Science Foundation has found that girls perform as well as boys on standardized math tests.
Math IS harder for girls . . . and also, it seems, for the New York Times.
By Heather MacDonald
The New York Times is determined to show that women are discriminated against in the sciences; too bad the facts say otherwise. A new study has "found that girls perform as well as boys on standardized math tests," claims a July 25 article by Tamar Lewin-thus, the underrepresentation of women on science faculties must result from bias. Actually, the study, summarized in the July 25 issue of Science, shows something quite different: while boys' and girls' average scores are similar, boys outnumber girls among students in both the highest and the lowest score ranges.
People in leadership roles are ubiquitous, but leaders are in short supply.
Hayes Mizell
Guest Columnist EducationNews.org
Introductory remarks of Hayes Mizell on July 14, 2008 before moderating Session B01 at the National Staff Development Council's Summer Conference, held at the Marriott World Center Resort in Orlando, FL.
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
EdNews
by Nicholas Carr
Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?" So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial
For Many Student Athletes, Game Over
New York Times
By WINNIE HU
As cash-strapped school districts across the nation scale back sports programs, some fear that the tradition of the scholar athlete is at risk.
Teaching Life Lessons Through Sports
Organized athletics originally were viewed as mechanisms for teaching social values and selflessness, but society has changed and so have sports. Mitch Lyons suggests that athletics still can be a springboard for valuable lessons, if the approach is changed.
A Connecticut school administrator, commenting on his district's decision to include teacher behavior in its anti-bullying policy, complained that it would be difficult to distinguish between bullying behavior and classroom management strategies. What about you? Can you tell the difference between behavior management and bullying?
Standing Up for Average Students
Teacher/coach Tom Krause worries that real learning and the average student's needs are getting lost in the pressures of greater accountability and assessments.
Another Edison Schools achievement claim falls apart under scrutiny
The Examiner
Caroline Grannan
The minor flurry of news about the failed for-profit school manager Edison Schools - and an indignant post here by an Edison supporter or employee - spurred a longtime Edison critic who is an indefatigable number-cruncher to take a close look at Edison's newest claims about achievement in its Philadelphia schools.
Math Scores Show No Gap for Girls, Study Finds
New York Times
By TAMAR LEWIN
A study paid for by the National Science Foundation has found that girls perform as well as boys on standardized math tests.
Math IS harder for girls . . . and also, it seems, for the New York Times.
By Heather MacDonald
The New York Times is determined to show that women are discriminated against in the sciences; too bad the facts say otherwise. A new study has "found that girls perform as well as boys on standardized math tests," claims a July 25 article by Tamar Lewin-thus, the underrepresentation of women on science faculties must result from bias. Actually, the study, summarized in the July 25 issue of Science, shows something quite different: while boys' and girls' average scores are similar, boys outnumber girls among students in both the highest and the lowest score ranges.
People in leadership roles are ubiquitous, but leaders are in short supply.
Hayes Mizell
Guest Columnist EducationNews.org
Introductory remarks of Hayes Mizell on July 14, 2008 before moderating Session B01 at the National Staff Development Council's Summer Conference, held at the Marriott World Center Resort in Orlando, FL.
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
EdNews
by Nicholas Carr
Dave, stop. Stop, will you? Stop, Dave. Will you stop, Dave?" So the supercomputer HAL pleads with the implacable astronaut Dave Bowman in a famous and weirdly poignant scene toward the end of Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. Bowman, having nearly been sent to a deep-space death by the malfunctioning machine, is calmly, coldly disconnecting the memory circuits that control its artificial
For Many Student Athletes, Game Over
New York Times
By WINNIE HU
As cash-strapped school districts across the nation scale back sports programs, some fear that the tradition of the scholar athlete is at risk.
Teaching Life Lessons Through Sports
Organized athletics originally were viewed as mechanisms for teaching social values and selflessness, but society has changed and so have sports. Mitch Lyons suggests that athletics still can be a springboard for valuable lessons, if the approach is changed.
Public Records in PA
From the Reading Eagle.
Editorials : Boards still trying to hide open records
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Boards still trying to hide open records
The Issue: A Delaware County judge orders a school district to pay court costs and an attorney’s fee after improperly denying an open-records request.
Our Opinion: If this is any indication, public officials may have a difficult time complying with the new Open Records Act when it goes into effect next year.
One of the reasons Pennsylvania’s outgoing Open Records Act was considered one of the weakest in the nation was that public officials could violate it with impunity knowing there was little likelihood there would be any repercussions.
In most cases when an agency was ruled to have violated the law, it simply had to make available the record it withheld from the public. The instances when fines were imposed or boards were required to pay the court costs and an attorney’s fee for the person requesting the public document were few and far between.
So it is more than a little ironic — but no less satisfying — that a Delaware County Court judge not only ruled that the Radnor School District had to provide former school board member Judy Sherry with the documents she requested but also ordered the district to pay her attorney’s fee of $26,070 and court costs of $2,901.
Judge Robert C. Wright said a salary study prepared by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association clearly was a public record and the school board willfully or with wanton disregard withheld it from Sherry, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Wright ruled that the study directly resulted in increased compensation for four district administrators, making it a public record.
According to the Inquirer, the judge pointed to a comment made by Kathy Fisher, school board president at the time, as one of the reasons he ruled the school board acted willfully or with wanton disregard.
Fisher had said if the board gave Sherry the information she requested, she would ask for more information.
That hardly seems like a reason to deny a resident something that the law says she clearly is entitled to have.
John McMeekin II, current school board president, defended the decision to withhold the study, saying it was prepared for determining labor compensation, the Inquirer reported.
But even the old Open Records Act, which will be replaced by a new one on Jan. 1, indicated that documents used by directors to make a decision should be open to the public.
The school district has asked Wright to reconsider his verdict and his decision to compel the school board to pay court costs and the fee for Sherry’s attorney, but the judge made the right decision. The people have an absolute right to know what their elected representatives are using to make their decisions.
Yet Wright’s decision was unusual. Under the old law, still in effect, all information is presumed to be secret and could be released only if those making requests could prove the documents they were seeking meet the law’s narrow definition of a public record.
The new law reverses that presumption and should eliminate cases such as this one. All information will be considered public unless it falls under specific exemptions, and the burden of proof that the information can be withheld will fall on the official who denies the request.
The new law also establishes an Office of Open Records that will mediate disputes. It has a provision for fines of up to $1,500 per violation, and authorized additional fines of up to $500 for each day an official fails to comply with any court order to produce requested documents.
If the attitude of the members of the Radnor School Board is any indication, public officials in Pennsylvania may have a hard time next year adjusting to the new Open Records Act. But it will be a boon for anyone who wants to know what his elected officials are doing and why.
Editorials : Boards still trying to hide open records
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Boards still trying to hide open records
The Issue: A Delaware County judge orders a school district to pay court costs and an attorney’s fee after improperly denying an open-records request.
Our Opinion: If this is any indication, public officials may have a difficult time complying with the new Open Records Act when it goes into effect next year.
One of the reasons Pennsylvania’s outgoing Open Records Act was considered one of the weakest in the nation was that public officials could violate it with impunity knowing there was little likelihood there would be any repercussions.
In most cases when an agency was ruled to have violated the law, it simply had to make available the record it withheld from the public. The instances when fines were imposed or boards were required to pay the court costs and an attorney’s fee for the person requesting the public document were few and far between.
So it is more than a little ironic — but no less satisfying — that a Delaware County Court judge not only ruled that the Radnor School District had to provide former school board member Judy Sherry with the documents she requested but also ordered the district to pay her attorney’s fee of $26,070 and court costs of $2,901.
Judge Robert C. Wright said a salary study prepared by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association clearly was a public record and the school board willfully or with wanton disregard withheld it from Sherry, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
Wright ruled that the study directly resulted in increased compensation for four district administrators, making it a public record.
According to the Inquirer, the judge pointed to a comment made by Kathy Fisher, school board president at the time, as one of the reasons he ruled the school board acted willfully or with wanton disregard.
Fisher had said if the board gave Sherry the information she requested, she would ask for more information.
That hardly seems like a reason to deny a resident something that the law says she clearly is entitled to have.
John McMeekin II, current school board president, defended the decision to withhold the study, saying it was prepared for determining labor compensation, the Inquirer reported.
But even the old Open Records Act, which will be replaced by a new one on Jan. 1, indicated that documents used by directors to make a decision should be open to the public.
The school district has asked Wright to reconsider his verdict and his decision to compel the school board to pay court costs and the fee for Sherry’s attorney, but the judge made the right decision. The people have an absolute right to know what their elected representatives are using to make their decisions.
Yet Wright’s decision was unusual. Under the old law, still in effect, all information is presumed to be secret and could be released only if those making requests could prove the documents they were seeking meet the law’s narrow definition of a public record.
The new law reverses that presumption and should eliminate cases such as this one. All information will be considered public unless it falls under specific exemptions, and the burden of proof that the information can be withheld will fall on the official who denies the request.
The new law also establishes an Office of Open Records that will mediate disputes. It has a provision for fines of up to $1,500 per violation, and authorized additional fines of up to $500 for each day an official fails to comply with any court order to produce requested documents.
If the attitude of the members of the Radnor School Board is any indication, public officials in Pennsylvania may have a hard time next year adjusting to the new Open Records Act. But it will be a boon for anyone who wants to know what his elected officials are doing and why.
Friday, August 1, 2008
Fuel prices force schools decisions
From USAToday
Fuel prices force schools to weigh class, staff cuts
By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY
Fuel and energy costs are rising so quickly for the USA's public school districts that nearly one in seven is considering cutting back to four-day weeks this fall. One in four is considering limits on athletics and other extracurricular activities, and nearly one in three is eliminating teaching jobs.
In the first detailed look at how fuel costs are affecting schools, a survey by the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) finds 99% of superintendents contacted say they're feeling the pinch — and 77% say they're not getting any help from their state.
"No question that schools are being impacted here," says Steven Crawford, executive director of the Cooperative Council of Oklahoma School Administration. "The price of fuel has impacted everybody's budget."
The AASA survey of 546 superintendents, out today, follows an informal poll last month that found fuel and heating costs rising from 10% to 32% over last year.
Other surveys have found that transportation costs are up by as much as 40% in the nation's 14,100 school districts.
The new figures paint a vivid picture, finding that:
• 15% of districts are eliminating bus routes and either eliminating or modifying extracurricular offerings or sports.
• 15% are considering moving to a four-day school week.
• 44% are cutting back on field trips.
• 29% are eliminating or modifying teaching positions.
Crawford, who until this summer was superintendent of Byng, Okla., Public Schools, says two Oklahoma districts are "seriously considering" four-day weeks to trim fuel and heating costs.
Other districts are looking into converting diesel bus fleets to run on natural gas — and a consortium of districts in the western part of the state is considering building its own wind-generated power plant to provide electricity, heating and cooling. They'd sell the surplus electricity for a profit, Crawford says.
"You can reap the benefits for 20 or 25 years or longer," he says.
A 35-year education veteran, Crawford says Oklahoma schools went through similar woes in the 1980s' oil bust and are used to tightening belts. But rising energy prices, he says, could bring a "huge shift," forcing schools to downsize in new ways.
"If it's for a prolonged period of time, it'll change the way we do business."
Who should pay for rising fuel prices? Parents? Taxpayers? The state? The feds? Or should the schools cut back on ?non-essentials? to make up the difference? Share your views below:
Fuel prices force schools to weigh class, staff cuts
By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY
Fuel and energy costs are rising so quickly for the USA's public school districts that nearly one in seven is considering cutting back to four-day weeks this fall. One in four is considering limits on athletics and other extracurricular activities, and nearly one in three is eliminating teaching jobs.
In the first detailed look at how fuel costs are affecting schools, a survey by the American Association of School Administrators (AASA) finds 99% of superintendents contacted say they're feeling the pinch — and 77% say they're not getting any help from their state.
"No question that schools are being impacted here," says Steven Crawford, executive director of the Cooperative Council of Oklahoma School Administration. "The price of fuel has impacted everybody's budget."
The AASA survey of 546 superintendents, out today, follows an informal poll last month that found fuel and heating costs rising from 10% to 32% over last year.
Other surveys have found that transportation costs are up by as much as 40% in the nation's 14,100 school districts.
The new figures paint a vivid picture, finding that:
• 15% of districts are eliminating bus routes and either eliminating or modifying extracurricular offerings or sports.
• 15% are considering moving to a four-day school week.
• 44% are cutting back on field trips.
• 29% are eliminating or modifying teaching positions.
Crawford, who until this summer was superintendent of Byng, Okla., Public Schools, says two Oklahoma districts are "seriously considering" four-day weeks to trim fuel and heating costs.
Other districts are looking into converting diesel bus fleets to run on natural gas — and a consortium of districts in the western part of the state is considering building its own wind-generated power plant to provide electricity, heating and cooling. They'd sell the surplus electricity for a profit, Crawford says.
"You can reap the benefits for 20 or 25 years or longer," he says.
A 35-year education veteran, Crawford says Oklahoma schools went through similar woes in the 1980s' oil bust and are used to tightening belts. But rising energy prices, he says, could bring a "huge shift," forcing schools to downsize in new ways.
"If it's for a prolonged period of time, it'll change the way we do business."
Who should pay for rising fuel prices? Parents? Taxpayers? The state? The feds? Or should the schools cut back on ?non-essentials? to make up the difference? Share your views below:
Leadership 101
Leadership 101...Let's go down the list and tick off the the items that are being omitted and are ticking us off.
Leadership 101, by Colleen Kettenhofen
“If…you can’t be a good example, then you’ll just have to be a horrible warning.” Catherine Aird
Do people willingly want to follow you? The real test of leadership is influence. Would your subordinates describe you as an effective manager, supervisor or team leader? Be honest with yourself. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you want to work for YOU?! If your employees’ pay, perks and benefits were not dependent on doing what you ask, would they still want to follow you? If the answer is yes, you are truly a role model of leadership.
In conducting leadership training around the world for over a decade, here are the key traits I hear over and over that employees want to see in their leaders. And most of these employees are managers themselves.These traits will sound familiar to you. Yet, we need to be reminded of them. Many managers confide to me that they’re so overloaded they forget about practicing many of these qualities on a regular basis.
1 ) Supportive/Good listener: It’s been said the average person listens to what you have to say only 25% of the time. Yes, that’s right. Much of the time we’re caught up in our own “stuff” and we’re not always listening. Listen. Think before you speak. Some people just need to be allowed to vent. Vent within reason of course. Then, they’ll be more likely to listen to you.
2 ) Open-minded. It’s hard to listen without an open mind. At least acknowledge what your employees have to say. It doesn’t mean you necessarily have to agree. In order to gain respect and get your team members to follow you, sometimes you first have to show respect.
3 ) Honest. Do you possess personal integrity? Your team members will look to see if you do what you say you are going to do. This sounds like common-sense and it is. Yet, many in a leadership position forget this important trait. The minute you can’t deliver on your promises you lose all credibility. It will be the one thing your employees will always remember. As the saying goes, “They remember your last act.” Under promise and over deliver. Always do what you say you are going to do.
True Leadership = Inspiration:
4 ) Inspiring. True leadership = inspiration. Real leaders have a passion for what they do. They are able to transfer that enthusiasm to their employees. People want to follow someone they respect and admire. In my leadership training, a lot of managers tell me they also want a leader “who is balanced in their personal as well as professional life.” They see a balanced leader as someone who walks their talk. Employees want to follow someone who has what they want.
5 ) Intelligent. I frequently hear the comment, “In our organization, the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.” Or, “My manager really has no idea what I do for a living. What my job entails, the challenges and the time constraints.” Please educate yourself on each of your team member’s responsibilities. It’s the only way you can speak intelligently to them and gain respect.
6 ) Future-oriented. Upper management should put their organization’s five year, three year, and one year plan in writing and pass it out to every employee. A lot of employees don’t know their organization’s overall goals and objectives. An integral part of leadership is having vision, and being able to convey that vision in a way that excites and inspires team members. A great way to motivate most of your employees is to show each and every one where they fit in with the organization’s big picture. Most of them want to know their purpose and how they make a difference.
Effective Leadership = Effective Social Skills:
7 ) Excellent communicator. Many people are promoted to leadership positions based on their “hard skills” or technical skills. Yet, most managers describe true leadership as demonstrating good interpersonal skills. Excellent leaders and managers aren’t just good communicators in terms of what’s expected on the job. They also make it a priority to take a sincere interest in their employees. Little things go a long way. For example, know your employee’s birthdays, whether or not they have children, and acknowledge their length of service on their anniversary.
8 ) Fair-minded. Employees and managers alike respect leaders in an organization who are fair, objective, and “don’t play favorites.” They want sincere recognition for a job well done. Most employees want to be judged on their performance, not on whether or not they’ve got friends in high places.
9 ) Flexible with change. An effective leader is open to change, new ideas and taking risks. A leader who is a good role model doesn’t take a “my way or the highway” approach. They’re confident enough in themselves that they can give explanations for WHY a change is being made. Employees always want to know why. Managers and leaders who are secure within themselves don’t need to say, “Because I’m your supervisor and I said so.”
10 ) Leadership starts with service. Effective leadership involves rolling up your sleeves and helping others. The term “servant leadership” was coined in 1970 by Robert K. Greenleaf, former AT&T executive and founder of The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership. He wrote, “It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead.”
“A good example is the best sermon.” Anon.
Copyright (c) 2006 Colleen Kettenhofen
Leadership 101, by Colleen Kettenhofen
“If…you can’t be a good example, then you’ll just have to be a horrible warning.” Catherine Aird
Do people willingly want to follow you? The real test of leadership is influence. Would your subordinates describe you as an effective manager, supervisor or team leader? Be honest with yourself. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you want to work for YOU?! If your employees’ pay, perks and benefits were not dependent on doing what you ask, would they still want to follow you? If the answer is yes, you are truly a role model of leadership.
In conducting leadership training around the world for over a decade, here are the key traits I hear over and over that employees want to see in their leaders. And most of these employees are managers themselves.These traits will sound familiar to you. Yet, we need to be reminded of them. Many managers confide to me that they’re so overloaded they forget about practicing many of these qualities on a regular basis.
1 ) Supportive/Good listener: It’s been said the average person listens to what you have to say only 25% of the time. Yes, that’s right. Much of the time we’re caught up in our own “stuff” and we’re not always listening. Listen. Think before you speak. Some people just need to be allowed to vent. Vent within reason of course. Then, they’ll be more likely to listen to you.
2 ) Open-minded. It’s hard to listen without an open mind. At least acknowledge what your employees have to say. It doesn’t mean you necessarily have to agree. In order to gain respect and get your team members to follow you, sometimes you first have to show respect.
3 ) Honest. Do you possess personal integrity? Your team members will look to see if you do what you say you are going to do. This sounds like common-sense and it is. Yet, many in a leadership position forget this important trait. The minute you can’t deliver on your promises you lose all credibility. It will be the one thing your employees will always remember. As the saying goes, “They remember your last act.” Under promise and over deliver. Always do what you say you are going to do.
True Leadership = Inspiration:
4 ) Inspiring. True leadership = inspiration. Real leaders have a passion for what they do. They are able to transfer that enthusiasm to their employees. People want to follow someone they respect and admire. In my leadership training, a lot of managers tell me they also want a leader “who is balanced in their personal as well as professional life.” They see a balanced leader as someone who walks their talk. Employees want to follow someone who has what they want.
5 ) Intelligent. I frequently hear the comment, “In our organization, the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing.” Or, “My manager really has no idea what I do for a living. What my job entails, the challenges and the time constraints.” Please educate yourself on each of your team member’s responsibilities. It’s the only way you can speak intelligently to them and gain respect.
6 ) Future-oriented. Upper management should put their organization’s five year, three year, and one year plan in writing and pass it out to every employee. A lot of employees don’t know their organization’s overall goals and objectives. An integral part of leadership is having vision, and being able to convey that vision in a way that excites and inspires team members. A great way to motivate most of your employees is to show each and every one where they fit in with the organization’s big picture. Most of them want to know their purpose and how they make a difference.
Effective Leadership = Effective Social Skills:
7 ) Excellent communicator. Many people are promoted to leadership positions based on their “hard skills” or technical skills. Yet, most managers describe true leadership as demonstrating good interpersonal skills. Excellent leaders and managers aren’t just good communicators in terms of what’s expected on the job. They also make it a priority to take a sincere interest in their employees. Little things go a long way. For example, know your employee’s birthdays, whether or not they have children, and acknowledge their length of service on their anniversary.
8 ) Fair-minded. Employees and managers alike respect leaders in an organization who are fair, objective, and “don’t play favorites.” They want sincere recognition for a job well done. Most employees want to be judged on their performance, not on whether or not they’ve got friends in high places.
9 ) Flexible with change. An effective leader is open to change, new ideas and taking risks. A leader who is a good role model doesn’t take a “my way or the highway” approach. They’re confident enough in themselves that they can give explanations for WHY a change is being made. Employees always want to know why. Managers and leaders who are secure within themselves don’t need to say, “Because I’m your supervisor and I said so.”
10 ) Leadership starts with service. Effective leadership involves rolling up your sleeves and helping others. The term “servant leadership” was coined in 1970 by Robert K. Greenleaf, former AT&T executive and founder of The Greenleaf Center for Servant-Leadership. He wrote, “It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead.”
“A good example is the best sermon.” Anon.
Copyright (c) 2006 Colleen Kettenhofen
New faces in Bristol Township Schools
From the BCCT
New faces joining Bristol Township administrative team
Posted in News on Thursday, July 31st, 2008 at 4:21 pm by Joan Hellyer
Two new administrators who will join the Bristol Township School District before the 2008-2009 school year begins are “excellent” additions to the team, Superintendent Ellen Budman said.
The new hires, Melanie Gehrens and George Ciarrocchi, are among several supervisors who have different responsibilities in the upcoming year.
Gehrens will serve curriculum and instruction supervisor for Bristol Township’s secondary schools following a two-year search to fill the vacant post. Gehrens, the former Morrisville Middle/High School principal, will earn $106,880 per year, officials said.
The interview team recommended Gehrens for the job because of her strong curriculum background, Budman said.
Ciarrocchi, a former elementary school principal in Delaware County’s troubled Chester-Upland School District, will earn $107,147 as principal of Clara Barton Elementary School.
Barton is Bristol Township’s biggest elementary school. It faces improvement efforts because of students’ performance on state standardized tests earlier this year, officials said.
Interview team members recommended Ciarrocchi because of his efforts to improve student performance in Chester-Upland schools, the superintendent said.
Ciarrocchi replaces Cathy Karasakal who takes over as principal of Mary W. Devine Elementary School. Karasakal replaces Rhoda Stein, who retired.
Other administrative changes include:
Edward Dayton who moves from being an assistant middle school principal to a Harry S Truman High School assistant principal; Linda Marquis moves from being a Truman assistant principal to an assistant principal at the district’s freshman academy; John Baradziej, the former John Fitch Elementary School principal, also will serve as an assistant principal at the academy; and, Karen Snedecker, a former Title One teacher at Devine, takes over as Fitch’s principal.
New faces joining Bristol Township administrative team
Posted in News on Thursday, July 31st, 2008 at 4:21 pm by Joan Hellyer
Two new administrators who will join the Bristol Township School District before the 2008-2009 school year begins are “excellent” additions to the team, Superintendent Ellen Budman said.
The new hires, Melanie Gehrens and George Ciarrocchi, are among several supervisors who have different responsibilities in the upcoming year.
Gehrens will serve curriculum and instruction supervisor for Bristol Township’s secondary schools following a two-year search to fill the vacant post. Gehrens, the former Morrisville Middle/High School principal, will earn $106,880 per year, officials said.
The interview team recommended Gehrens for the job because of her strong curriculum background, Budman said.
Ciarrocchi, a former elementary school principal in Delaware County’s troubled Chester-Upland School District, will earn $107,147 as principal of Clara Barton Elementary School.
Barton is Bristol Township’s biggest elementary school. It faces improvement efforts because of students’ performance on state standardized tests earlier this year, officials said.
Interview team members recommended Ciarrocchi because of his efforts to improve student performance in Chester-Upland schools, the superintendent said.
Ciarrocchi replaces Cathy Karasakal who takes over as principal of Mary W. Devine Elementary School. Karasakal replaces Rhoda Stein, who retired.
Other administrative changes include:
Edward Dayton who moves from being an assistant middle school principal to a Harry S Truman High School assistant principal; Linda Marquis moves from being a Truman assistant principal to an assistant principal at the district’s freshman academy; John Baradziej, the former John Fitch Elementary School principal, also will serve as an assistant principal at the academy; and, Karen Snedecker, a former Title One teacher at Devine, takes over as Fitch’s principal.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tech School Budget Meeting Delayed
From the BCCT
Cost meeting delayed
By JOAN HELLYER
A review of how much it costs the Bucks County Technical High School to educate each of its estimated 1,500 students won’t take place until at least September, a school official said.
Members of the school’s joint board committee had agreed before the summer break to meet with business managers from the six sending districts during July to look at all student-related costs.
But tech school officials were unable to arrange the meeting this month because of summer scheduling conflicts, said Sharon Rendeiro, the tech school’s business administrator.
The joint board committee, made up of Bensalem, Bristol, Bristol Township, Morrisville, Neshaminy and Pennsbury school board members, initially asked the business managers in 2007 to examine the comprehensive technical high school’s operating expenses.
They suggested special education costs be paid based on the services each district’s students receive. Special education costs, which vary depending on a student’s disability, are now split among the six sending districts.
If districts had been required to pay for the special education services their own students used in the 2007-08 school year, Bristol Township would have paid about $500,000 less to the tech school and Neshaminy would have paid about $450,000 more, officials said.
Neshaminy representatives protested the proposed changes, asking that the joint board consider actual costs for all students before revising the funding formula.
Rendeiro said she’s trying to set up a meeting with the joint board members and business managers once the new academic year begins at the tech school on Wistar Road in Bristol Township.
Cost meeting delayed
By JOAN HELLYER
A review of how much it costs the Bucks County Technical High School to educate each of its estimated 1,500 students won’t take place until at least September, a school official said.
Members of the school’s joint board committee had agreed before the summer break to meet with business managers from the six sending districts during July to look at all student-related costs.
But tech school officials were unable to arrange the meeting this month because of summer scheduling conflicts, said Sharon Rendeiro, the tech school’s business administrator.
The joint board committee, made up of Bensalem, Bristol, Bristol Township, Morrisville, Neshaminy and Pennsbury school board members, initially asked the business managers in 2007 to examine the comprehensive technical high school’s operating expenses.
They suggested special education costs be paid based on the services each district’s students receive. Special education costs, which vary depending on a student’s disability, are now split among the six sending districts.
If districts had been required to pay for the special education services their own students used in the 2007-08 school year, Bristol Township would have paid about $500,000 less to the tech school and Neshaminy would have paid about $450,000 more, officials said.
Neshaminy representatives protested the proposed changes, asking that the joint board consider actual costs for all students before revising the funding formula.
Rendeiro said she’s trying to set up a meeting with the joint board members and business managers once the new academic year begins at the tech school on Wistar Road in Bristol Township.
Downtown Improvements
Here's coverage from the BCCT on the DJTRB funded improvements in Morrisville
Ground breaks on Morrisville project
Posted in News on Wednesday, July 30th, 2008 at 12:09 pm by Courier Times staff writer Danny Adler
Morrisville and Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission officials broke ground this morning on roughly $1.5 million worth of transportation improvements.
The Morrisville improvements are part of 58 projects in Pennsylvania and New Jersey accounting for about $40 million from the bridge commission, the bulk of which goes to reinvest in communities with bridge commission bridges.
The project, paid for by the bridge commission, will bring new curbs, sidewalks and crosswalks on West Bridge Street from Pennsylvania to Harding avenues and on South Pennsylvania Avenue from Bridge Street to Philadelphia Avenue, officials said.
New traffic signals will be installed at the intersections of Delmorr Avenue and Bridge Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue and Bridge Street. A landscaped median island is planned for East Bridge Street from the Lower Trenton Toll Supported Bridge - the “Trenton Makes The World Takes” bridge - to Delmorr Avenue.
Morrisville improvements
Posted in News on Wednesday, July 30th, 2008 at 12:51 pm by staff photographer Bill Fraser
Tom Morton finishes framing around a water drain before concrete is to be poured for new curbs and sidewalks along Pennsylvania Avenue in Morrisville. Assisting him are Dan Williams (left) and Joe Gruber, owner of Gruber Construction, the company in charge of the job. $1.5 million is being funded by the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission to be spent on various projects to revitalize Morrisville Borough.
Ground breaks on Morrisville project
Posted in News on Wednesday, July 30th, 2008 at 12:09 pm by Courier Times staff writer Danny Adler
Morrisville and Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission officials broke ground this morning on roughly $1.5 million worth of transportation improvements.
The Morrisville improvements are part of 58 projects in Pennsylvania and New Jersey accounting for about $40 million from the bridge commission, the bulk of which goes to reinvest in communities with bridge commission bridges.
The project, paid for by the bridge commission, will bring new curbs, sidewalks and crosswalks on West Bridge Street from Pennsylvania to Harding avenues and on South Pennsylvania Avenue from Bridge Street to Philadelphia Avenue, officials said.
New traffic signals will be installed at the intersections of Delmorr Avenue and Bridge Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue and Bridge Street. A landscaped median island is planned for East Bridge Street from the Lower Trenton Toll Supported Bridge - the “Trenton Makes The World Takes” bridge - to Delmorr Avenue.
Morrisville improvements
Posted in News on Wednesday, July 30th, 2008 at 12:51 pm by staff photographer Bill Fraser
Tom Morton finishes framing around a water drain before concrete is to be poured for new curbs and sidewalks along Pennsylvania Avenue in Morrisville. Assisting him are Dan Williams (left) and Joe Gruber, owner of Gruber Construction, the company in charge of the job. $1.5 million is being funded by the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission to be spent on various projects to revitalize Morrisville Borough.
School Board HR and Policy Committee Meetings
School Board Committee Meeting
Notice is hereby given that the School District of Borough of Morrisville, Morrisville, PA, will hold a Human Resource Policy Committee meeting followed by a Policy Committee meeting in the G-Hall conference room of the Morrisville Middle/Senior High School, 550 W. Palmer St., Morrisville, PA on Thursday, August 7, 2008 at 6:30 pm.
Marlys Mihok, Secretary
Notice is hereby given that the School District of Borough of Morrisville, Morrisville, PA, will hold a Human Resource Policy Committee meeting followed by a Policy Committee meeting in the G-Hall conference room of the Morrisville Middle/Senior High School, 550 W. Palmer St., Morrisville, PA on Thursday, August 7, 2008 at 6:30 pm.
Marlys Mihok, Secretary
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
FERPA
FERPA is the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
Should non-district personnel (read: volunteers) be conducting the re-registration? Tune in for the next edition of "Ask Mike: Tales from the Trenches of Education" on WMVSB, your education channel.
GENERAL
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO) Home
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. The law applies to all schools that receive funds under an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education.
FERPA gives parents certain rights with respect to their children's education records. These rights transfer to the student when he or she reaches the age of 18 or attends a school beyond the high school level. Students to whom the rights have transferred are "eligible students."
Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student's education records maintained by the school. Schools are not required to provide copies of records unless, for reasons such as great distance, it is impossible for parents or eligible students to review the records. Schools may charge a fee for copies.
Parents or eligible students have the right to request that a school correct records which they believe to be inaccurate or misleading. If the school decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student then has the right to a formal hearing. After the hearing, if the school still decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student has the right to place a statement with the record setting forth his or her view about the contested information.
Generally, schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release any information from a student's education record. However, FERPA allows schools to disclose those records, without consent, to the following parties or under the following conditions (34 CFR § 99.31):
o School officials with legitimate educational interest;
o Other schools to which a student is transferring;
o Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes;
o Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student;
o Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school;
o Accrediting organizations;
o To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
o Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and
o State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific State law.
Schools may disclose, without consent, "directory" information such as a student's name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them. Schools must notify parents and eligible students annually of their rights under FERPA. The actual means of notification (special letter, inclusion in a PTA bulletin, student handbook, or newspaper article) is left to the discretion of each school.
For additional information or technical assistance, you may call (202) 260-3887 (voice). Individuals who use TDD may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
Or you may contact us at the following address:
Family Policy Compliance Office
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20202-5920
Should non-district personnel (read: volunteers) be conducting the re-registration? Tune in for the next edition of "Ask Mike: Tales from the Trenches of Education" on WMVSB, your education channel.
GENERAL
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)
Family Policy Compliance Office (FPCO) Home
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. The law applies to all schools that receive funds under an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education.
FERPA gives parents certain rights with respect to their children's education records. These rights transfer to the student when he or she reaches the age of 18 or attends a school beyond the high school level. Students to whom the rights have transferred are "eligible students."
Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student's education records maintained by the school. Schools are not required to provide copies of records unless, for reasons such as great distance, it is impossible for parents or eligible students to review the records. Schools may charge a fee for copies.
Parents or eligible students have the right to request that a school correct records which they believe to be inaccurate or misleading. If the school decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student then has the right to a formal hearing. After the hearing, if the school still decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student has the right to place a statement with the record setting forth his or her view about the contested information.
Generally, schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release any information from a student's education record. However, FERPA allows schools to disclose those records, without consent, to the following parties or under the following conditions (34 CFR § 99.31):
o School officials with legitimate educational interest;
o Other schools to which a student is transferring;
o Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes;
o Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student;
o Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school;
o Accrediting organizations;
o To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
o Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and
o State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific State law.
Schools may disclose, without consent, "directory" information such as a student's name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them. Schools must notify parents and eligible students annually of their rights under FERPA. The actual means of notification (special letter, inclusion in a PTA bulletin, student handbook, or newspaper article) is left to the discretion of each school.
For additional information or technical assistance, you may call (202) 260-3887 (voice). Individuals who use TDD may call the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
Or you may contact us at the following address:
Family Policy Compliance Office
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20202-5920
Should PA Statewide Tests Still be on the Table?
From the Allentown Morning Call
... And new graduation tests are needed, too
July 27, 2008
Pennsylvania's Independent Regulatory Review Commission is charged with examining all new state regulations before they take effect. Usually, it asks technical, arcane questions about minor details within a new set of rules. However, when it looked at plans for a new school district-specific ''graduation test,'' the Graduation Competency Assessments, the commission's question was very fundamental: Why does Pennsylvania need this test at all?
High school students in the Lehigh Valley and all over Pennsylvania are familiar with the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment, or PSSAs. This test, taken in the junior year, measures math and verbal abilities. A student must be scored proficient or better to graduate.
However, Pennsylvania's ''graduation test'' would be tailored to fit individual school districts, instead of being mandated statewide, like the PSSA. The State Board of Education suggested creating 10 subject-specific final exams that a student would take in the senior year. Three exams would be in mathematics, two in English and language arts, three in social studies and two in science. These ''final exams'' may even replace the traditional final exams that the student would normally take at the end of senior year. Starting with the class of 2014, students would have to pass six of the final exams in order to graduate.
Twenty-two other states already use this kind of ''graduation test.''
The Independent Review Commission directed several questions toward the Board about the graduation tests. The commission wanted to know the rationale behind them, how the tests would be implemented, and how much it would cost the school districts throughout Pennsylvania to give, grade and report them.
The State Board and Gov. Ed Rendell, who supports the tests, can make a strong case for them. Unlike the PSSAs, which rate schools and school districts, the graduation tests would rate individual students. Each school will receive individual student scores, which will allow administrators to determine whether a student is ready for higher education, a job, or whatever the student chooses to do after graduation.
The schools already try to do this, but along with the new tests there would be support for counseling, tutoring and other remedial work, as needed. Of course, if the state orders use of the graduation tests, then state dollars to fund the program must follow. So, the tests can help those students who otherwise might fall through a crack. And, it gives the Pennsylvanians who help to pay for the schools one more way to hold them accountable.
... And new graduation tests are needed, too
July 27, 2008
Pennsylvania's Independent Regulatory Review Commission is charged with examining all new state regulations before they take effect. Usually, it asks technical, arcane questions about minor details within a new set of rules. However, when it looked at plans for a new school district-specific ''graduation test,'' the Graduation Competency Assessments, the commission's question was very fundamental: Why does Pennsylvania need this test at all?
High school students in the Lehigh Valley and all over Pennsylvania are familiar with the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment, or PSSAs. This test, taken in the junior year, measures math and verbal abilities. A student must be scored proficient or better to graduate.
However, Pennsylvania's ''graduation test'' would be tailored to fit individual school districts, instead of being mandated statewide, like the PSSA. The State Board of Education suggested creating 10 subject-specific final exams that a student would take in the senior year. Three exams would be in mathematics, two in English and language arts, three in social studies and two in science. These ''final exams'' may even replace the traditional final exams that the student would normally take at the end of senior year. Starting with the class of 2014, students would have to pass six of the final exams in order to graduate.
Twenty-two other states already use this kind of ''graduation test.''
The Independent Review Commission directed several questions toward the Board about the graduation tests. The commission wanted to know the rationale behind them, how the tests would be implemented, and how much it would cost the school districts throughout Pennsylvania to give, grade and report them.
The State Board and Gov. Ed Rendell, who supports the tests, can make a strong case for them. Unlike the PSSAs, which rate schools and school districts, the graduation tests would rate individual students. Each school will receive individual student scores, which will allow administrators to determine whether a student is ready for higher education, a job, or whatever the student chooses to do after graduation.
The schools already try to do this, but along with the new tests there would be support for counseling, tutoring and other remedial work, as needed. Of course, if the state orders use of the graduation tests, then state dollars to fund the program must follow. So, the tests can help those students who otherwise might fall through a crack. And, it gives the Pennsylvanians who help to pay for the schools one more way to hold them accountable.
Center Area and Monaca Merger Update
Merger date could be sooner than first thought
By Michael Pound, Times Staff Published: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:10 PM EDT
CENTER TWP. — When officials from the Center Area and Monaca school districts traveled to Harrisburg earlier this month, they were told that the effective date of a long-discussed merger between the two districts is actually much closer than they believed.
State education officials told Daniel Matsook and Michael Thomas that the merger would take effect upon the approval of the state education Secretary Gerald Zahorchak — an OK that would likely come in September, after the next meeting of the Pennsylvania Board of Education.
At a meeting of the two districts’ merger committees Tuesday night, Matsook, Center’s superintendent, said that announcement gives the two school boards the ability to prepare a joint budget, work on a governance plan and address all the other details of the merger.
And there’s plenty of work to do. Thomas, Monaca’s superintendent, outlined 10 broad tasks that require involvement of board members. Some — like determining how a combined board would be composed — must be done quickly; others — such as preparing a transition plan — would likely continue for the full three years it will take to fully combine the districts.
The others include determining a high school schedule, writing operating procedures for the merged boards, preparing a new policy manual and hiring procedures, standardizing union contracts and addressing the new district’s name, colors and mascot.
“There is other work to be done, but these are the tasks that require immediate attention,” Thomas said. “I would think that governance, staffing and budget are the things that we will spend the most time on in the near future.”
By Michael Pound, Times Staff Published: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:10 PM EDT
CENTER TWP. — When officials from the Center Area and Monaca school districts traveled to Harrisburg earlier this month, they were told that the effective date of a long-discussed merger between the two districts is actually much closer than they believed.
State education officials told Daniel Matsook and Michael Thomas that the merger would take effect upon the approval of the state education Secretary Gerald Zahorchak — an OK that would likely come in September, after the next meeting of the Pennsylvania Board of Education.
At a meeting of the two districts’ merger committees Tuesday night, Matsook, Center’s superintendent, said that announcement gives the two school boards the ability to prepare a joint budget, work on a governance plan and address all the other details of the merger.
And there’s plenty of work to do. Thomas, Monaca’s superintendent, outlined 10 broad tasks that require involvement of board members. Some — like determining how a combined board would be composed — must be done quickly; others — such as preparing a transition plan — would likely continue for the full three years it will take to fully combine the districts.
The others include determining a high school schedule, writing operating procedures for the merged boards, preparing a new policy manual and hiring procedures, standardizing union contracts and addressing the new district’s name, colors and mascot.
“There is other work to be done, but these are the tasks that require immediate attention,” Thomas said. “I would think that governance, staffing and budget are the things that we will spend the most time on in the near future.”
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Project increases $7M in two months
What a novel idea: A plan! "We need to think before we start cutting this and cutting that...If you look at it closely, 1,000 square feet is a classroom and that's $250,000. We're not getting back a lot of money by cutting out space and look at what we would be cutting. You got to look at this in the long term."
Allan Schappert, school board president, warned the board not to focus on the project by building to cost. He said keeping the educational needs and requirements in mind also is important.
"How much can we shave off before we're making significant impacts in our ability to deliver education to our children?"
Published July 23, 2008 12:15 am - With rising construction costs and the inclusion of more space, the price tag for Danville's elementary school renovation project has risen $7 million in two months.
Project increases $7M in two months
School board must refine plans
By Jaime North
The Daily Item
DANVILLE -- With rising construction costs and the inclusion of more space, the price tag for Danville's elementary school renovation project has risen $7 million in two months.
The plan to upgrade the Danville, Mahoning-Cooper and Riverside elementary schools will now cost an estimated $47 million after the architect, L. Robert Kimball Associates, recently incorporated the building principals' requests for educational needs and made adjustments for the increasing costs of construction, according to Richard Snodgrass, the district's business administrator.
"We need to get a refinement of what the board wants as a scope of work for these schools," Snodgrass told the school board Tuesday night. "The architect is kind of at a standstill."
In May, the district received an estimate of $40 million to renovate and make additions to the three neighborhood schools, totaling 167,000 square feet. Among the added features were multipurpose rooms, music and art rooms and storage space at each school.
Adding in the principals' list of needs, such as computer labs, the project grew to 176,000 square feet.
It's the extra square feet that needs to be addressed next by the school board, Snodgrass said.
"Obviously, the costs of this project are driven by the square footage," he said. "In order to get the costs down, we need to cut square footage out of the project."
Kellie Krum, a school board member, suggested the board set a limit on the square footage and have the architect work with the elementary principals to determine what needs to be cut or adjusted to reduce the size of the project. Krum was shocked at the size of the overall project, specifically the projected growth at Mahoning-Cooper, which is designed to double in size from 24,000 square feet to more than 60,000 square feet.
"If you could've seen what we were dealing with when we first started talking about this project three years ago to what I see now, it's unbelievable," she said. "The amount of square footage that has grown is incredulous. Somehow, we've been able to limp along with 23,000 square feet at Riverside and 24,000 square feet at Mahoning-Cooper and still been able to educate children."
Simply cutting out space is not the answer, according to Steve Schooley, another board member.
"We need to think before we start cutting this and cutting that," he said. "If you look at it closely, 1,000 square feet is a classroom and that's $250,000. We're not getting back a lot of money by cutting out space and look at what we would be cutting. You got to look at this in the long term."
Allan Schappert, school board president, warned the board not to focus on the project by building to cost. He said keeping the educational needs and requirements in mind also is important.
"How much can we shave off before we're making significant impacts in our ability to deliver education to our children?" Schappert said.
"You've grown significantly in square footage, because you're educating kids in inappropriate spaces," Snodgrass said. "Time is passing, and like I've said, time is money."
Allan Schappert, school board president, warned the board not to focus on the project by building to cost. He said keeping the educational needs and requirements in mind also is important.
"How much can we shave off before we're making significant impacts in our ability to deliver education to our children?"
Published July 23, 2008 12:15 am - With rising construction costs and the inclusion of more space, the price tag for Danville's elementary school renovation project has risen $7 million in two months.
Project increases $7M in two months
School board must refine plans
By Jaime North
The Daily Item
DANVILLE -- With rising construction costs and the inclusion of more space, the price tag for Danville's elementary school renovation project has risen $7 million in two months.
The plan to upgrade the Danville, Mahoning-Cooper and Riverside elementary schools will now cost an estimated $47 million after the architect, L. Robert Kimball Associates, recently incorporated the building principals' requests for educational needs and made adjustments for the increasing costs of construction, according to Richard Snodgrass, the district's business administrator.
"We need to get a refinement of what the board wants as a scope of work for these schools," Snodgrass told the school board Tuesday night. "The architect is kind of at a standstill."
In May, the district received an estimate of $40 million to renovate and make additions to the three neighborhood schools, totaling 167,000 square feet. Among the added features were multipurpose rooms, music and art rooms and storage space at each school.
Adding in the principals' list of needs, such as computer labs, the project grew to 176,000 square feet.
It's the extra square feet that needs to be addressed next by the school board, Snodgrass said.
"Obviously, the costs of this project are driven by the square footage," he said. "In order to get the costs down, we need to cut square footage out of the project."
Kellie Krum, a school board member, suggested the board set a limit on the square footage and have the architect work with the elementary principals to determine what needs to be cut or adjusted to reduce the size of the project. Krum was shocked at the size of the overall project, specifically the projected growth at Mahoning-Cooper, which is designed to double in size from 24,000 square feet to more than 60,000 square feet.
"If you could've seen what we were dealing with when we first started talking about this project three years ago to what I see now, it's unbelievable," she said. "The amount of square footage that has grown is incredulous. Somehow, we've been able to limp along with 23,000 square feet at Riverside and 24,000 square feet at Mahoning-Cooper and still been able to educate children."
Simply cutting out space is not the answer, according to Steve Schooley, another board member.
"We need to think before we start cutting this and cutting that," he said. "If you look at it closely, 1,000 square feet is a classroom and that's $250,000. We're not getting back a lot of money by cutting out space and look at what we would be cutting. You got to look at this in the long term."
Allan Schappert, school board president, warned the board not to focus on the project by building to cost. He said keeping the educational needs and requirements in mind also is important.
"How much can we shave off before we're making significant impacts in our ability to deliver education to our children?" Schappert said.
"You've grown significantly in square footage, because you're educating kids in inappropriate spaces," Snodgrass said. "Time is passing, and like I've said, time is money."
Community Plays a Role in Education
From the Inquirer
Beyond the Spin: Don't underestimate the role community plays in education
By George Curry Posted on Thu, Jul. 24, 2008
Inquirer Columnist
Just mentioning the term school reform will open a floodgate of familiar suggestions: Reduce class sizes, end social promotions, raise graduation standards, reform curricula, expand preschool programs, create charter schools, upgrade the caliber of teachers - and the list goes on.
But Hugh B. Price, former president of the National Urban League, says that while those ideas might be good, we are overlooking perhaps the most effective component of school reform: more community involvement. And he doesn't just make that pitch - he shows us how to do it.
I covered Price's tenure at the National Urban League in the 1990s, and I was always impressed that while other civil-rights leaders grabbed for headlines, Price preferred difficult issues unlikely to put him in the spotlight.
One such issue was education. After leaving the Urban League, Price has continued as an education reform advocate and recently wrote a book titled Mobilizing the Community to Help Students Succeed. In an insightful and readable book equally useful for educators and community organizers, he provides the right mix of examples and research studies to bolster his arguments.
His central argument is: "Communities should motivate youngsters to take school seriously and strive to achieve, and should celebrate them when they do. This culture of achievement augments the efforts of engaged parents and helps fill the void created by parents who are not involved."
Price launched a Campaign for African American Achievement at the National Urban League and allowed local affiliates to devise their own ways of rewarding achievement.
Most affiliates celebrated September as Achievement Month, sending a message early in the school year that success was important. Enlisting other groups, they organized back-to-school parades, dinners, county fairs, block parties, and other events to celebrate academic achievement. Students were presented with certificates, legislative proclamations and, in some cases, money.
In Mount Vernon, N.Y., Superintendent Ronal Ross wanted to improve reading in every elementary school. So he announced that every student who read at least 50 books a year would get a free bicycle. The students had to submit a book report on each book.
"Ross originally figured that the number of winners would be modest enough that if he and and members of his cabinet bought several bikes, that would be sufficient," Price recalled. " . . . To his surprise, nearly 170 students completed at least 50 books. Another 520 read between 40 and 49 books. The top scorer was a black boy in the 5th grade who had read 82 books. The runner-up was another 5th-grade black boy who had read 81 books. All totaled, over 1,600 youngsters read 25 or more books that year."
Ross relied on the business community to help him purchase more bikes.
"All of us want positive reinforcement," Ross explained. "These kids are going to be reading long after they stop riding a bike."
It is also important to encourage students who may never be at the top of the class.
"In K-12 education, schools typically recognize and reward the top achievers in any given category, whether for academic accomplishment or community service. This tradition is perfectly understandable," Price observes. "The trouble is that students who are struggling academically or disenchanted with school may perceive those traditional forms of recognition as utterly out of reach.
"Recognizing this, some schools opt to celebrate a broader array of accomplishments. As one Florida principal whose school follows this practice puts it, 'I believe that all students need to be motivated, and when you only recognize the A students, you have lost a group of students who think they can never be recognized. . . . We have students set individual goals for reading, math and writing. When they meet their goals, they are rewarded for their work.' "
A California principal said such an approach is "a way to reward individual students for reaching their potential, not surpassing others."
The role the community plays in education should never be underestimated.
"Children do indeed pay attention to values and norms transmitted by others," Price writes. " . . . Because young children aren't yet adept at self-appraisal, they tend to rely on others' opinions to create their own judgments of confidence and self-worth."
Communities can play a powerful role in helping students reach their potential.
Beyond the Spin: Don't underestimate the role community plays in education
By George Curry Posted on Thu, Jul. 24, 2008
Inquirer Columnist
Just mentioning the term school reform will open a floodgate of familiar suggestions: Reduce class sizes, end social promotions, raise graduation standards, reform curricula, expand preschool programs, create charter schools, upgrade the caliber of teachers - and the list goes on.
But Hugh B. Price, former president of the National Urban League, says that while those ideas might be good, we are overlooking perhaps the most effective component of school reform: more community involvement. And he doesn't just make that pitch - he shows us how to do it.
I covered Price's tenure at the National Urban League in the 1990s, and I was always impressed that while other civil-rights leaders grabbed for headlines, Price preferred difficult issues unlikely to put him in the spotlight.
One such issue was education. After leaving the Urban League, Price has continued as an education reform advocate and recently wrote a book titled Mobilizing the Community to Help Students Succeed. In an insightful and readable book equally useful for educators and community organizers, he provides the right mix of examples and research studies to bolster his arguments.
His central argument is: "Communities should motivate youngsters to take school seriously and strive to achieve, and should celebrate them when they do. This culture of achievement augments the efforts of engaged parents and helps fill the void created by parents who are not involved."
Price launched a Campaign for African American Achievement at the National Urban League and allowed local affiliates to devise their own ways of rewarding achievement.
Most affiliates celebrated September as Achievement Month, sending a message early in the school year that success was important. Enlisting other groups, they organized back-to-school parades, dinners, county fairs, block parties, and other events to celebrate academic achievement. Students were presented with certificates, legislative proclamations and, in some cases, money.
In Mount Vernon, N.Y., Superintendent Ronal Ross wanted to improve reading in every elementary school. So he announced that every student who read at least 50 books a year would get a free bicycle. The students had to submit a book report on each book.
"Ross originally figured that the number of winners would be modest enough that if he and and members of his cabinet bought several bikes, that would be sufficient," Price recalled. " . . . To his surprise, nearly 170 students completed at least 50 books. Another 520 read between 40 and 49 books. The top scorer was a black boy in the 5th grade who had read 82 books. The runner-up was another 5th-grade black boy who had read 81 books. All totaled, over 1,600 youngsters read 25 or more books that year."
Ross relied on the business community to help him purchase more bikes.
"All of us want positive reinforcement," Ross explained. "These kids are going to be reading long after they stop riding a bike."
It is also important to encourage students who may never be at the top of the class.
"In K-12 education, schools typically recognize and reward the top achievers in any given category, whether for academic accomplishment or community service. This tradition is perfectly understandable," Price observes. "The trouble is that students who are struggling academically or disenchanted with school may perceive those traditional forms of recognition as utterly out of reach.
"Recognizing this, some schools opt to celebrate a broader array of accomplishments. As one Florida principal whose school follows this practice puts it, 'I believe that all students need to be motivated, and when you only recognize the A students, you have lost a group of students who think they can never be recognized. . . . We have students set individual goals for reading, math and writing. When they meet their goals, they are rewarded for their work.' "
A California principal said such an approach is "a way to reward individual students for reaching their potential, not surpassing others."
The role the community plays in education should never be underestimated.
"Children do indeed pay attention to values and norms transmitted by others," Price writes. " . . . Because young children aren't yet adept at self-appraisal, they tend to rely on others' opinions to create their own judgments of confidence and self-worth."
Communities can play a powerful role in helping students reach their potential.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Relax. Your eyes are not going bad and you don't need to wait for the coffee to kick in. That's a Latin phrase meaning generally "Who watches the watchers?"
I received an email asking an interesting question: Who is physically doing the Morrisville re-registrations? Only Morrisville School District employees can perform this function for confidentiality reasons. The email I received suggested that community volunteers were going to be assisting. Does anyone have the facts?
UPDATED July 31:
VOLUNTEER REQUEST - STUDENT RE-REGISTRATION
The Morrisville School District is requesting volunteers to assist with re-registration of ALL district students. Re-registrations will take place at the Morrisville M/S High School on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday 8:30 to noon and 1:00 to 3:00 during the day as well as in the evening from 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm on the following dates -- August 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21 -- also on Saturdays August 9 and 16 from 10 am to 3 pm.
Please call the Office of the Superintendent 215-736-5930 if you can offer assistance in this process. As always, thank you for your support.
I received an email asking an interesting question: Who is physically doing the Morrisville re-registrations? Only Morrisville School District employees can perform this function for confidentiality reasons. The email I received suggested that community volunteers were going to be assisting. Does anyone have the facts?
UPDATED July 31:
VOLUNTEER REQUEST - STUDENT RE-REGISTRATION
The Morrisville School District is requesting volunteers to assist with re-registration of ALL district students. Re-registrations will take place at the Morrisville M/S High School on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday 8:30 to noon and 1:00 to 3:00 during the day as well as in the evening from 6:30 pm to 8:30 pm on the following dates -- August 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21 -- also on Saturdays August 9 and 16 from 10 am to 3 pm.
Please call the Office of the Superintendent 215-736-5930 if you can offer assistance in this process. As always, thank you for your support.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Green Building Standards
From the BCCT. " 'Builders are finding that a green-certified building is no more expensive than a conventional one as long as it starts from the beginning with design,' Bray said. 'Retrofitting a building to be green can be expensive. Also, down the road, maintenance on these [green] buildings is considerably less expensive and that is where the economic benefits really start coming into play.' ”
Plan would encourage green building standards
By CHRIS ENGLISH
Bucks County Courier Times
LOWER MAKEFIELD -- Next on the list of environmental initiatives in Lower Makefield is a set of green building standards for new construction or renovations on township-owned properties.
Supervisors Chairman Greg Caiola said the Environmental Advisory Council has submitted a rough draft of the standards to the supervisors and solicitor David Truelove. The draft is being reviewed and could be voted on next month or in September, Caiola said.
Sometime before the end of the year, the board hopes to enact a green building ordinance covering new development and renovations, both commercial and residential, on private properties, he said.
“We started with the township itself because we wanted to be setting the example and doing as we say,” said Caiola. “We wanted to be sure we took the lead on the township level before we asked anyone else to do it.”
Building green means using construction techniques and materials designed to protect the environment. They include everything from using renewable energy sources like the sun and wind instead of gas and oil to utilizing non-wood building materials to cut down on tree depletion.
Township officials said they aren't sure if the ordinance governing private development will have strict requirements or just incentives — similar to those adopted in Doylestown — designed to encourage green building but not demand it. Strict requirements might contradict the uniform building code and thus be illegal, said Jim Bray, chairman of the township EAC.
However, green standards for township-owned properties can be strict and the draft guidelines reflect that, Bray said. They require that new construction or renovations on township-owned properties conform to standards of the U.S. Green Building Council, he said.
That includes things like building in a way to take maximum advantage of natural light, recycling waste building materials and using high-efficiency heating and cooling systems.
Some in Lower Makefield already have taken the initiative on their own. An office building on Township Line Road constructed by Liberty Property Trust was built to green standards, and a planned renovation by the Pennsbury School District of its Makefield Elementary School will have many green features.
“Builders are finding that a green-certified building is no more expensive than a conventional one as long as it starts from the beginning with design,” Bray said. “Retrofitting a building to be green can be expensive. Also, down the road, maintenance on these [green] buildings is considerably less expensive and that is where the economic benefits really start coming into play.”
Bray said the township's green building initiatives are being led by EAC member Rick Ewing. The newspaper was unsuccessful in its attempts to reach him for comment.
In Doylestown, a green building incentive system put together by planning director and assistant borough manager Phil Ehlinger can save developers up to 50 percent on their building permit fees.
Points are awarded up to a maximum of 50 for each green building feature. Each point means a 1 percent reduction in the building permit fee, he said. For example, one point is awarded for something as simple as including a clothes line in the plan for a residential project, Ehlinger said. That saves dryer time and thus electricity, he explained.
Plan would encourage green building standards
By CHRIS ENGLISH
Bucks County Courier Times
LOWER MAKEFIELD -- Next on the list of environmental initiatives in Lower Makefield is a set of green building standards for new construction or renovations on township-owned properties.
Supervisors Chairman Greg Caiola said the Environmental Advisory Council has submitted a rough draft of the standards to the supervisors and solicitor David Truelove. The draft is being reviewed and could be voted on next month or in September, Caiola said.
Sometime before the end of the year, the board hopes to enact a green building ordinance covering new development and renovations, both commercial and residential, on private properties, he said.
“We started with the township itself because we wanted to be setting the example and doing as we say,” said Caiola. “We wanted to be sure we took the lead on the township level before we asked anyone else to do it.”
Building green means using construction techniques and materials designed to protect the environment. They include everything from using renewable energy sources like the sun and wind instead of gas and oil to utilizing non-wood building materials to cut down on tree depletion.
Township officials said they aren't sure if the ordinance governing private development will have strict requirements or just incentives — similar to those adopted in Doylestown — designed to encourage green building but not demand it. Strict requirements might contradict the uniform building code and thus be illegal, said Jim Bray, chairman of the township EAC.
However, green standards for township-owned properties can be strict and the draft guidelines reflect that, Bray said. They require that new construction or renovations on township-owned properties conform to standards of the U.S. Green Building Council, he said.
That includes things like building in a way to take maximum advantage of natural light, recycling waste building materials and using high-efficiency heating and cooling systems.
Some in Lower Makefield already have taken the initiative on their own. An office building on Township Line Road constructed by Liberty Property Trust was built to green standards, and a planned renovation by the Pennsbury School District of its Makefield Elementary School will have many green features.
“Builders are finding that a green-certified building is no more expensive than a conventional one as long as it starts from the beginning with design,” Bray said. “Retrofitting a building to be green can be expensive. Also, down the road, maintenance on these [green] buildings is considerably less expensive and that is where the economic benefits really start coming into play.”
Bray said the township's green building initiatives are being led by EAC member Rick Ewing. The newspaper was unsuccessful in its attempts to reach him for comment.
In Doylestown, a green building incentive system put together by planning director and assistant borough manager Phil Ehlinger can save developers up to 50 percent on their building permit fees.
Points are awarded up to a maximum of 50 for each green building feature. Each point means a 1 percent reduction in the building permit fee, he said. For example, one point is awarded for something as simple as including a clothes line in the plan for a residential project, Ehlinger said. That saves dryer time and thus electricity, he explained.
PA State Code: Handicapped Students
Thanks to the emailer who sent in this link to Pennsylvania State Code Chapter 15: Protected Handicapped Students
Parents:
If you have requested the district review or modify your child's existing IEP, or consider evaluation of your child for special needs, you might be interested in the following information (pasted directly from Pennsylvania School Code):
§ 15.6. Parent initiated evaluation and provision of services.
(a) Parents shall request in writing that their child be evaluated and provided services if they believe their child meets one or more of the following conditions:
(1) Should be identified as a protected handicapped student.
(2) Should no longer be identified as a protected handicapped student.
(3) Requires a change in or modification of the child’s current service agreement.
(b) The parents should include available relevant medical records along with their written request for the provision of services.
(c) Whenever possible the parents’ request for the provision of services shall state the following:
(1) The specific reasons the parents believe the student is or is no longer a protected handicapped student.
(2) The specific related aids, services or accommodations the parents believe the student needs.
(3) The specific modifications the parents would like the school district to make in the student’s current service agreement, if the parents are requesting modification of the student’s current service agreement.
(d) Within 25 school days of receipt of the parents’ written request for the provision of services the school district shall evaluate the information submitted by the parents and send a written response to the parents’ request.
(e) The school district’s response to the parents shall be in the parents’ native language or mode of communication and shall state the following:
(1) Whether the parents’ request or a portion of the parents’ request is being granted or denied.
(2) The parents’ right to meet with the appropriate school officials to discuss the issues associated with accommodating the student.
(3) The procedural safeguards available to students and their parents under § 15.8 (relating to procedural safeguards).
(4) Parents using the procedural safeguards in this chapter may also file suit in Federal court under Section 504.
(f) If upon evaluation of the information submitted by the parents, the school district determines that it needs additional information before it can make a specific recommendation concerning the parents’ request, the district shall ask the parents to provide additional medical records and grant the district permission to evaluate the student.
(g) The school district initiated request to evaluate a student under subsection (f) shall be in writing and specifically identify the procedures and types of tests which it proposes to use to evaluate the student and inform the parents that they have the right to give or withhold their written consent to these evaluations.
§ 15.7. Service agreement.
(a) If the parents and the school district agree as to what related aids, services or accommodations should or should no longer be provided to the protected handicapped student, the district and parents shall enter into or modify a service agreement. The service agreement shall be written and executed by a representative of the school district and one or both parents. Oral agreements may not be relied upon. The agreement shall set forth the specific related aids, services or accommodations the student shall receive, or if an agreement is being modified, the modified services the student shall receive. The agreement shall also specify the date the services shall begin, the date the services shall be discontinued, and, when appropriate, the procedures to be followed in the event of a medical emergency.
(b) If the parents and the school district cannot agree as to the related aids, services and accommodations that should or should no longer be provided to the protected handicapped student, either party may use the procedural safeguard system under § 15.8 (relating to procedural safeguards) to resolve the dispute, and the school district shall notify parents in writing of their rights in this regard.
(c) In implementing the service agreement, school entities shall address relevant factors, such as educational resources, physical plant and personnel capabilities.
Cross References
This section cited in 55 Pa. Code § 3270.4 (relating to definitions); 55 Pa. Code § 3280.4 (relating to definitions); and 55 Pa. Code § 3290.4 (relating to definitions).
§ 15.8. Procedural safeguards.
(a) Parental request for assistance. Parents may file a written request for assistance with the Department if one or both of the following apply:
(1) The school district is not providing the related aids, services and accommodations specified in the student’s service agreement.
(2) The school district has failed to comply with the procedures in this chapter.
(b) Request resolution. The Department will investigate and respond to requests for assistance and, unless exceptional circumstances exist, will, within 60 calendar days of receipt of the request, send to the parents and school district a written response to the request. The response to the parents’ request shall be in the parents’ native language or mode of communication.
(c) Informal conference. At any time parents may file a written request with the school district for an informal conference with respect to the identification or evaluation of a student, or the student’s need for related aid, service or accommodation. Within 10 school days of receipt of the request, the school district shall convene an informal conference. At the conference, every effort shall be made to reach an amicable agreement.
(d) Formal due process hearing. If the matters raised by the school district or parents are not resolved at the informal conference, the district or parents may submit a request for a hearing. The hearing shall be held before an impartial hearing officer and shall be governed by § 14.64(a)—(l), (n) and (o) (relating to impartial due process hearings) if no issues under Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs) are raised for decision in the hearing by the parents, school district or hearing officer. If issues under Chapter 14 are raised for decision in the hearing by the parents, school district or hearing officer, an appeal from the hearing officer’s decision shall be governed also by § 14.64(m).
(e) Stay pending judicial appeals. If, within 60 calendar days of the completion of the administrative due process proceedings under this chapter, an appeal or original jurisdiction action is filed in State or Federal Court, the administrative order shall be stayed pending the completion of the judicial proceedings, unless the parents and school district agree otherwise.
Cross References
This section cited in 22 Pa. Code § 15.5 (relating to school district initiated evaluation and provision of services); 22 Pa. Code § 15.6 (relating to parent initiated evaluation and provision of services); 22 Pa. Code § 15.7 (relating to service agreement); and 22 Pa. Code § 15.10 (relating to discrimination claims).
§ 15.9. Confidentiality.
A school district shall do the following:
(1) Protect the confidentiality of personally identifiable information regarding a protected handicapped student.
(2) Require parental consent before releasing personally identifiable information to unauthorized persons.
(3) Provide access to educational records of the student to the parents or a representative of the parents.
(4) Comply with section 513(a) of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 U.S.C.A. § 1232g) and 34 CFR Part 99 (relating to family education rights and privacy).
§ 15.10. Discrimination claims.
Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, an eligible or noneligible student under Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs) may use the procedures for requesting assistance under § 15.8(a) (relating to procedural safeguards) to raise claims regarding denial of access, equal treatment or discrimination based on handicap. A student filing a claim of discrimination need not exhaust the procedures in this chapter prior to initiating a court action under Section 504.
Cross References
This section cited in 22 Pa. Code § 15.2 (relating to definitions); and 22 Pa. Code § 15.11 (relating to rules of construction).
§ 15.11. Rules of construction.
(a) The full description of substantive responsibilities of school entities is set forth in Section 504 and the Section 504 regulations at 34 CFR Part 104 (relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap in programs and activities receiving or benefitting from federal financial assistance) and not in this chapter.
(b) Eligible and thought to be eligible students continue to be governed by Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs), except for the provisions of § 15.10 (relating to discrimination claims).
(c) It is not the purpose of this chapter to preempt, create, supplant, expand or restrict the rights or liabilities of protected handicapped students or school entities beyond what is contemplated by Section 504, the Section 504 regulations at 34 CFR Part 104 or another law. This chapter does not restrict or limit a parent, protected handicapped student, school entity or the Commonwealth from pursuing claims or defenses available, whether constitutional, statutory, regulatory or common law. This chapter does not restrict or limit a protected handicapped student or school entity from filing a cognizable action, appellate or original in nature, to resolve a dispute under Section 504 or the Federal Section 504 regulations. This chapter does not increase or diminish the jurisdiction of any court.
(d) It is not the intent of the Board that this chapter be interpreted as influencing, in either the plaintiff’s or defendant’s favor, the disposition of a particular civil action. However, this chapter is intended to have the force of law and to be so interpreted by the courts.
Parents:
If you have requested the district review or modify your child's existing IEP, or consider evaluation of your child for special needs, you might be interested in the following information (pasted directly from Pennsylvania School Code):
§ 15.6. Parent initiated evaluation and provision of services.
(a) Parents shall request in writing that their child be evaluated and provided services if they believe their child meets one or more of the following conditions:
(1) Should be identified as a protected handicapped student.
(2) Should no longer be identified as a protected handicapped student.
(3) Requires a change in or modification of the child’s current service agreement.
(b) The parents should include available relevant medical records along with their written request for the provision of services.
(c) Whenever possible the parents’ request for the provision of services shall state the following:
(1) The specific reasons the parents believe the student is or is no longer a protected handicapped student.
(2) The specific related aids, services or accommodations the parents believe the student needs.
(3) The specific modifications the parents would like the school district to make in the student’s current service agreement, if the parents are requesting modification of the student’s current service agreement.
(d) Within 25 school days of receipt of the parents’ written request for the provision of services the school district shall evaluate the information submitted by the parents and send a written response to the parents’ request.
(e) The school district’s response to the parents shall be in the parents’ native language or mode of communication and shall state the following:
(1) Whether the parents’ request or a portion of the parents’ request is being granted or denied.
(2) The parents’ right to meet with the appropriate school officials to discuss the issues associated with accommodating the student.
(3) The procedural safeguards available to students and their parents under § 15.8 (relating to procedural safeguards).
(4) Parents using the procedural safeguards in this chapter may also file suit in Federal court under Section 504.
(f) If upon evaluation of the information submitted by the parents, the school district determines that it needs additional information before it can make a specific recommendation concerning the parents’ request, the district shall ask the parents to provide additional medical records and grant the district permission to evaluate the student.
(g) The school district initiated request to evaluate a student under subsection (f) shall be in writing and specifically identify the procedures and types of tests which it proposes to use to evaluate the student and inform the parents that they have the right to give or withhold their written consent to these evaluations.
§ 15.7. Service agreement.
(a) If the parents and the school district agree as to what related aids, services or accommodations should or should no longer be provided to the protected handicapped student, the district and parents shall enter into or modify a service agreement. The service agreement shall be written and executed by a representative of the school district and one or both parents. Oral agreements may not be relied upon. The agreement shall set forth the specific related aids, services or accommodations the student shall receive, or if an agreement is being modified, the modified services the student shall receive. The agreement shall also specify the date the services shall begin, the date the services shall be discontinued, and, when appropriate, the procedures to be followed in the event of a medical emergency.
(b) If the parents and the school district cannot agree as to the related aids, services and accommodations that should or should no longer be provided to the protected handicapped student, either party may use the procedural safeguard system under § 15.8 (relating to procedural safeguards) to resolve the dispute, and the school district shall notify parents in writing of their rights in this regard.
(c) In implementing the service agreement, school entities shall address relevant factors, such as educational resources, physical plant and personnel capabilities.
Cross References
This section cited in 55 Pa. Code § 3270.4 (relating to definitions); 55 Pa. Code § 3280.4 (relating to definitions); and 55 Pa. Code § 3290.4 (relating to definitions).
§ 15.8. Procedural safeguards.
(a) Parental request for assistance. Parents may file a written request for assistance with the Department if one or both of the following apply:
(1) The school district is not providing the related aids, services and accommodations specified in the student’s service agreement.
(2) The school district has failed to comply with the procedures in this chapter.
(b) Request resolution. The Department will investigate and respond to requests for assistance and, unless exceptional circumstances exist, will, within 60 calendar days of receipt of the request, send to the parents and school district a written response to the request. The response to the parents’ request shall be in the parents’ native language or mode of communication.
(c) Informal conference. At any time parents may file a written request with the school district for an informal conference with respect to the identification or evaluation of a student, or the student’s need for related aid, service or accommodation. Within 10 school days of receipt of the request, the school district shall convene an informal conference. At the conference, every effort shall be made to reach an amicable agreement.
(d) Formal due process hearing. If the matters raised by the school district or parents are not resolved at the informal conference, the district or parents may submit a request for a hearing. The hearing shall be held before an impartial hearing officer and shall be governed by § 14.64(a)—(l), (n) and (o) (relating to impartial due process hearings) if no issues under Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs) are raised for decision in the hearing by the parents, school district or hearing officer. If issues under Chapter 14 are raised for decision in the hearing by the parents, school district or hearing officer, an appeal from the hearing officer’s decision shall be governed also by § 14.64(m).
(e) Stay pending judicial appeals. If, within 60 calendar days of the completion of the administrative due process proceedings under this chapter, an appeal or original jurisdiction action is filed in State or Federal Court, the administrative order shall be stayed pending the completion of the judicial proceedings, unless the parents and school district agree otherwise.
Cross References
This section cited in 22 Pa. Code § 15.5 (relating to school district initiated evaluation and provision of services); 22 Pa. Code § 15.6 (relating to parent initiated evaluation and provision of services); 22 Pa. Code § 15.7 (relating to service agreement); and 22 Pa. Code § 15.10 (relating to discrimination claims).
§ 15.9. Confidentiality.
A school district shall do the following:
(1) Protect the confidentiality of personally identifiable information regarding a protected handicapped student.
(2) Require parental consent before releasing personally identifiable information to unauthorized persons.
(3) Provide access to educational records of the student to the parents or a representative of the parents.
(4) Comply with section 513(a) of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 U.S.C.A. § 1232g) and 34 CFR Part 99 (relating to family education rights and privacy).
§ 15.10. Discrimination claims.
Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, an eligible or noneligible student under Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs) may use the procedures for requesting assistance under § 15.8(a) (relating to procedural safeguards) to raise claims regarding denial of access, equal treatment or discrimination based on handicap. A student filing a claim of discrimination need not exhaust the procedures in this chapter prior to initiating a court action under Section 504.
Cross References
This section cited in 22 Pa. Code § 15.2 (relating to definitions); and 22 Pa. Code § 15.11 (relating to rules of construction).
§ 15.11. Rules of construction.
(a) The full description of substantive responsibilities of school entities is set forth in Section 504 and the Section 504 regulations at 34 CFR Part 104 (relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap in programs and activities receiving or benefitting from federal financial assistance) and not in this chapter.
(b) Eligible and thought to be eligible students continue to be governed by Chapter 14 (relating to special education services and programs), except for the provisions of § 15.10 (relating to discrimination claims).
(c) It is not the purpose of this chapter to preempt, create, supplant, expand or restrict the rights or liabilities of protected handicapped students or school entities beyond what is contemplated by Section 504, the Section 504 regulations at 34 CFR Part 104 or another law. This chapter does not restrict or limit a parent, protected handicapped student, school entity or the Commonwealth from pursuing claims or defenses available, whether constitutional, statutory, regulatory or common law. This chapter does not restrict or limit a protected handicapped student or school entity from filing a cognizable action, appellate or original in nature, to resolve a dispute under Section 504 or the Federal Section 504 regulations. This chapter does not increase or diminish the jurisdiction of any court.
(d) It is not the intent of the Board that this chapter be interpreted as influencing, in either the plaintiff’s or defendant’s favor, the disposition of a particular civil action. However, this chapter is intended to have the force of law and to be so interpreted by the courts.
National Center for Learning Disabilities
Thanks to the emailer who sent this in.
Welcome to NCLD's Legislative Action Center. Here is where you'll find the latest information and essential tools you need to be an effective LD Advocate.
Learn about critical legislation affecting those with learning disabilities. Keep up to date on what's happening in Washington, and find out how you can take action and improve education public policy by contacting your elected officials.
Active Legislative Action Alert
Tell Secretary Spellings that Due Process Hearing Rights Must be Protected
*Action Required by July 28, 2008 at 5 p.m.**
The U.S. Department of Education (USED) has released proposed regulations for Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education ACT (IDEA). The most important change in these regulations is to limit the use of lay advocates in due process hearings, if this regulation goes through, parents will have limited options for representation of their child's case. The public has until July 28, 2008 to submit comments — now is the time for you to let the Bush Administration know how this regulation will negatively affect students with disabilities and that more time is needed to construct a better alternative. We must act together and let our voices be heard or changes will be implemented that will make it more difficult for parents to have their cases heard in court.
The Administration must hear that this proposed regulation to limit the use of non-attorney advocates as counsel for parents has two potentially negative consequences on future court cases. Because of the limited pool of attorneys qualified to serve as experts in this area, this change will mean for many parents that their choice will be either to represent themselves (which puts them at a disadvantage) or foregoing a due process hearing altogether because they cannot afford attorney fees. Consequently, it is premature for USED, without adequate review and consideration of available research data, to propose, through regulatory amendment, such a potentially disruptive change. Also, given the pending Congressional reauthorization of IDEA, it is inappropriate for USED to move forward with this proposed language at this time. More time needs to be given to this issue before regulatory changes are made.
Please endorse NCLD's recommendation to withdraw this proposed change and let the Secretary of Education know this regulation will have deep negative consequences for parents in their fight to advocate for their child's educational rights. Please follow the directions below to submit the draft letter provided or chose to edit the letter with your personal comments.
Thank you for your continued support on behalf of those with learning disabilities. Your voice always makes a difference!
Sincerely,
Laura Kaloi
Director of Public Policy
National Center for Learning Disabilities
DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Please complete all steps to ensure your comments are submitted
**Comments are due by July 28, 2008 by 5 p.m. **
1. Go to: www.regulations.gov;
2. Go to: "Comments and Submission" and type into the box ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001;
3. On the next screen, under "Commenter Title I" click on "Send a Comment or Submission" (check to make sure ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001 is listed);
4. On the next screen, fill in your personal information;
5. Once you get to the section for comments, cut and paste your comments into the text box provided.
6. Then click on the "Next Step" button;
7. Review your comments and then click on the "Submit" button;
8. Wait for your "Comment Verification Note and Tracking Number;
9. Click on the "Next" button;
10. Your comments have been submitted.
SUGGESTED LETTER TEXT:
Dear Secretary Spellings:
I respectfully submit my comments and recommendations on 300.512 HEARING RIGHTS
of the proposed regulations of: PART B OF THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001.
The Administration must hear that this proposed regulation to limit the use of non-attorney advocates as counsel for parents has two potentially negative consequences on future court cases. Because of the limited pool of attorneys qualified to serve as experts in this area, this change will mean for many parents that their choice will be either to represent themselves (which puts them at a disadvantage) or foregoing a due process hearing altogether because they cannot afford attorney fees. Consequently, it is premature for USED, without adequate review and consideration of available research data, to propose, through regulatory amendment, such a potentially disruptive change. In addition, given the pending Congressional reauthorization of IDEA, I believe it would be prudent to give additional time to debate this issue before regulatory changes are made.
Thank you for allowing me to submit my comments today.
Welcome to NCLD's Legislative Action Center. Here is where you'll find the latest information and essential tools you need to be an effective LD Advocate.
Learn about critical legislation affecting those with learning disabilities. Keep up to date on what's happening in Washington, and find out how you can take action and improve education public policy by contacting your elected officials.
Active Legislative Action Alert
Tell Secretary Spellings that Due Process Hearing Rights Must be Protected
*Action Required by July 28, 2008 at 5 p.m.**
The U.S. Department of Education (USED) has released proposed regulations for Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education ACT (IDEA). The most important change in these regulations is to limit the use of lay advocates in due process hearings, if this regulation goes through, parents will have limited options for representation of their child's case. The public has until July 28, 2008 to submit comments — now is the time for you to let the Bush Administration know how this regulation will negatively affect students with disabilities and that more time is needed to construct a better alternative. We must act together and let our voices be heard or changes will be implemented that will make it more difficult for parents to have their cases heard in court.
The Administration must hear that this proposed regulation to limit the use of non-attorney advocates as counsel for parents has two potentially negative consequences on future court cases. Because of the limited pool of attorneys qualified to serve as experts in this area, this change will mean for many parents that their choice will be either to represent themselves (which puts them at a disadvantage) or foregoing a due process hearing altogether because they cannot afford attorney fees. Consequently, it is premature for USED, without adequate review and consideration of available research data, to propose, through regulatory amendment, such a potentially disruptive change. Also, given the pending Congressional reauthorization of IDEA, it is inappropriate for USED to move forward with this proposed language at this time. More time needs to be given to this issue before regulatory changes are made.
Please endorse NCLD's recommendation to withdraw this proposed change and let the Secretary of Education know this regulation will have deep negative consequences for parents in their fight to advocate for their child's educational rights. Please follow the directions below to submit the draft letter provided or chose to edit the letter with your personal comments.
Thank you for your continued support on behalf of those with learning disabilities. Your voice always makes a difference!
Sincerely,
Laura Kaloi
Director of Public Policy
National Center for Learning Disabilities
DIRECTIONS FOR SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Please complete all steps to ensure your comments are submitted
**Comments are due by July 28, 2008 by 5 p.m. **
1. Go to: www.regulations.gov;
2. Go to: "Comments and Submission" and type into the box ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001;
3. On the next screen, under "Commenter Title I" click on "Send a Comment or Submission" (check to make sure ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001 is listed);
4. On the next screen, fill in your personal information;
5. Once you get to the section for comments, cut and paste your comments into the text box provided.
6. Then click on the "Next Step" button;
7. Review your comments and then click on the "Submit" button;
8. Wait for your "Comment Verification Note and Tracking Number;
9. Click on the "Next" button;
10. Your comments have been submitted.
SUGGESTED LETTER TEXT:
Dear Secretary Spellings:
I respectfully submit my comments and recommendations on 300.512 HEARING RIGHTS
of the proposed regulations of: PART B OF THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT ED-2008-OSERS-0005-0001.
The Administration must hear that this proposed regulation to limit the use of non-attorney advocates as counsel for parents has two potentially negative consequences on future court cases. Because of the limited pool of attorneys qualified to serve as experts in this area, this change will mean for many parents that their choice will be either to represent themselves (which puts them at a disadvantage) or foregoing a due process hearing altogether because they cannot afford attorney fees. Consequently, it is premature for USED, without adequate review and consideration of available research data, to propose, through regulatory amendment, such a potentially disruptive change. In addition, given the pending Congressional reauthorization of IDEA, I believe it would be prudent to give additional time to debate this issue before regulatory changes are made.
Thank you for allowing me to submit my comments today.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Math DOESN’T suck!
That's the message provided by Danica McKellar, the erstwhile Winnie Cooper from "The Wonder Years".
That’s right: Math DOESN’T suck!
In Math Doesn’t Suck, internationally known actress and bonafide math genius Danica McKellar — called a “math superstar” by The New York Times — rips the lid off the myth that math “sucks,” helping to show that math can be easy, relevant, and even glamorous—while providing the tools needed to ace the next big math test!
With Danica as a personal tutor and coach, even the most frustrated student will finally “get” fractions, decimals, rates, ratios, proportions, “solving for x,” and more — the very concepts that, if not fully understood in middle school, have been proven to cause continued problems throughout high school and beyond.
Check out the official Math Doesn’t Suck Web site for more info including a full solution guide for the book, a forum and why you shouldn’t hide your smarts from the boys!
And while you’re at it … you can pre-order Danica’s new book Kiss My Math: Showing Pre-Algebra Who’s Boss today!
That’s right: Math DOESN’T suck!
In Math Doesn’t Suck, internationally known actress and bonafide math genius Danica McKellar — called a “math superstar” by The New York Times — rips the lid off the myth that math “sucks,” helping to show that math can be easy, relevant, and even glamorous—while providing the tools needed to ace the next big math test!
With Danica as a personal tutor and coach, even the most frustrated student will finally “get” fractions, decimals, rates, ratios, proportions, “solving for x,” and more — the very concepts that, if not fully understood in middle school, have been proven to cause continued problems throughout high school and beyond.
Check out the official Math Doesn’t Suck Web site for more info including a full solution guide for the book, a forum and why you shouldn’t hide your smarts from the boys!
And while you’re at it … you can pre-order Danica’s new book Kiss My Math: Showing Pre-Algebra Who’s Boss today!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)