Marta McAllister Posted February 25, 2008 Report Share Posted February 25, 2008 Proceedings of the Planning and Development Committee School District No. 2, Yellowstone County High School District No. 2, Yellowstone County Billings, Montana February 20, 2008 The Planning and Development Committee Meeting of School District No. 2, Yellowstone County, Montana, and the High School District, Yellowstone County, Montana was duly held at The Lincoln Center, 415 North 30th Street, Billings, Montana, Monday, February 20, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. Members present: Chair Sandra Mossman, Executive Director of Secondary Education, Kathy Olson, Executive Director of Human Resources, Dan Martin, Trustee Malcolm Goodrich, Margaret Aukshun, Anne Barlow, Ali Manning, and Jim Majerus, Michael Iverson. Guests attending: Superintendent Jack Copps, Thomas Harper, Kathleen Aragon, and Jerry Hansen. Call To Order Pledge of Allegiance Communication from the Public- Jerry Hansen was a participant in the study committee for the high schools. He shared with the committee a construction report from 2007. He found the report very informative about cost of construction and what was going on in the elementary and high schools. He said the last page of the report had a website that had an article about a town in California that redid all of their high schools that were 70 years old and how they did it. He stated the report also contained regional and national data. He reported when Orchard was done it was done under the national average. Trustee Goodrich commented that he would have to pull the two items from the agenda of the Planning and Development Committee. He stated the agenda items were not discussed at the Board general meeting. He stated that agenda items are adhered to so that Trustees and committees are all in agreement. He stated secondly the Board would be talking about the ramifications of a possible bond issue at their Monday meeting. He felt it was most important that there was a discussion if the District will adopt the neighborhood concept and if so, what is it will affect decision-making. Chair Mossman noted item B and C were omitted from the discussion from the current meeting. Neighborhood School Definition- One possible definition of the Neighborhood School is “A neighborhood school is a school where a group of children can be with the same peer group of children from grades K-6”. Chair Mossman informed the committee this was a possible description and the committee was encouraged to add to or change the description. She asked the committee to give feedback on the concept. She stated this term had been discussed several times by the committee but not in any definitive form. The School Board came up with the term “geographical unit”. She commented that specifics could be confining, as there are efficiency and major thoroughfare issues. Kathy Olson said a neighborhood school definition should say, “As it fits”. She reported there are many roads that can affect the neighborhood concept. She noted several roads are Shiloh, Grand, and 32nd street. She cautioned the committee to have a description that could be adhered to. A neighborhood school may not necessarily be walking distance. Chair Mossman claimed Big Sky is not a neighborhood school. She questioned if there should be a caveat in the description. She asked the committee to come up with a definition to bring to the School Board special session meeting Monday, February 25th, 2008. She questioned the committee if it would be the committee’s goal for the future and if so, they needed to be thinking about efficiency and economic issues. Chair Mossman stated Miles Ave. has had a group from Big Sky attending for many years and it isn’t a neighborhood school. Michael Iverson stated he would add the term “geographical unit” and asked the committee what is the goal and why the goal. He stated that neighborhood schools help build relationships and help connect families recreationally. Trustee Goodrich stated the committees’ decision to have a neighborhood school would influence how the District moves forward. He recalled in his youth he was bussed and it was a bad experience. Superintendent Copps noted that research shows neighborhood schools promote better parent environment, greater personal/family/teacher/administrator relationships. That increases student achievement. As there are reduced transitions from school to school, that increases achievement. The neighborhood school concept gives the predictable surrounding that people are comfortable with and have a feeling of belonging. He stated there are several definitions for the neighborhood school concept. He stated the existing facility dictates the definition. He reported schools in dense populations have the availability for students to walk to and from school safely. Trustee Goodrich noted the description is not a collection of schools or a group of students bussed around. He stated it should be a reasonable expectation that the students be with their peers to the extent possible. Superintendent Copps stated when you define neighborhood schools you talk about the size, curriculum that might be offered, and the school itself would be configured in. Anne Barlow commented that she worked in a community where they used the “cluster” concepts. She said when the student enrollment grew they added portables. She noted it was very important to the parents the students stay together. Chair Mossman also was familiar with the cluster schools. She reported the parents preferred portables to bussing. Michael Iverson said to keep the phrase “to the extent possible”. He questioned why we limit the neighborhood school concept to K-6th grades. Superintendent Copps noted that it is important for kids to stay together and that was to include elementary to middle school and from middle school to high school. Jerry Hansen commented where he lived in Omaha people were opposed to bussing until they actually implemented it. Then the parents loved it. He reported there was a high school that was no longer needed in a depressed area of Omaha. The 5th graders were bussed to the school for one year. He said the parents said it was the best thing they did as their kids were exposed to economic hardships and different races. Superintendent Copps mentioned the District could consider that model. Chair Mossman noted bussing could have problems. Superintendent Copps reported that bussing could affect students who have different abilities. He said with a K-8 school you could move an exceptional student to the upper grade. Chair Mossman said unless there were other suggestions from the committee, the comments from the meeting would be brought to the School Board to review. She noted the committee must be visionary. Superintendent Copps noted safety is an issue as waterways, highways and major thoroughfares contribute to neighborhood schools. As there was no further business the meeting was adjourned at 6:30. The March meeting will be postponed until direction from the Board. _________________________ Sandra Mossman, Chair _________________________ Barb Gustafson, Recorder Neighborhood Concept Ideas Increased Parent Involvement Familiar and predictable surroundings Greater personal and supportive connections between students, families, teachers and administrators Reduced number of transitions from school-to-school increase student achievement A seamless transition between learners’s primary and intermediate programs Families have a feeling of belonging Students can be with their peers There can be issues with bussing Other community’s parents insisted on neighborhood schools Use the term “geographical unit” Use term “as it fits” Should include “reasonable expectation to the extent possible” Safety an issue for bussing Use term “to the extent possible” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.