Worcester School Committee meets Thursday, September 5

You can find the agenda here.
Should you be wondering if the Worcester Educational Collaborative's weekly question for candidates makes any difference at all, you might go read this week's responses on balancing constituent needs and the work of the committee, which was published Tuesday, August 27, and then look at how many agenda items that reflect challengers' concerns were filed on Wednesday, August 28.
Right. So.

There is no report of the superintendent.
As I noted in my own response to WEC's question, there is again an enormous number of recognitions and appreciations.
There are some beginning of the year appointments.

There's a response to the item asking about the teaching of cursive in the Worcester Public Schools; this is one of the better responses I've seen in some time, as it cites the state standards, reviews where the state is going, lays out where the district is and plans to be, and brings it home with research. 

There's a question about mold at Columbus Park (see above on filing items that should simply be referred to administration for solution).

There's a one page request for acceptance for an $80,000 security grant upon which the only description is "locks and cameras" with program location "the Worcester Public Schools." That's a lot of money to spend so vaguely.

There's likewise a one page request for acceptance of an innovation pathways grant of $28,683, and...I have no idea what it is being spent on, as here's what it says:

• To support the development of new and effective strategies to scale high-quality career pathways, and significantly expand student access to, participation in, and successful completion of pathways that culminate in meantiful postsecondary and workforce credentials
• To provide participating students with supportive, rigorous academic experiences and career development education relevant to their next stepss after high school
• To enhance a student's ability to gain awareness and prepardness of future employment opportunities

I mean, it's the innovation pathways, so it has stuff to do with getting kids to work, but what is the $28K going to?

xkcd 1860: Communicating

There's likewise a one page request for acceptance for the $116,250 21st Century Exemplar program which is going to Burncoat Middle "to provide activities rooted in project based learning practices that were developed around the need for enhanced literacy programming." So the funding buys...what?

Lest you think I'm being overly particular, I know for a fact that the district had to supply significantly more information than this to the state to get the grant, and the district within recent memory was reporting enough information to know where the money was actually going on grants.

Miss McCullough is asking for a report on the JumpStart orientation programs at the secondary schools. I assume, incidentally, that there will at some point be a report of the superintendent on back to school?

The usual settling up from the prior fiscal year is on here without a backup at this point; it'll be referred to Finance and Operations.

The auditors are coming! The reports aren't attached; this will go to Finance and Operations, too.

Mr. Monfredo thinks there should be:

half day professional development for staff in light of the training provided to principals that dealt with SEL, the impact of homelessness and foster children and on disciplinary alternatives.

Just a reminder that professional development time in the Worcester Public Schools is very, very limited.

Mr. Monfredo also offers this:

Request that the Administration continue its collaborative work with various agencies in dealing with the needs of homeless and foster children and consider reviewing the Cincinnati model entitled “Kids in School Rule.”

Yes, that is really a "keep doing what you're doing" item.

There's a request to pay a prior fiscal year item $2,323.00 to CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP for the student activities account audit which is a little odd.

Mr. O'Connell is coming in with two alternative district policies banning cell phones in different ways, both of which made the rounds of the news this summer: San Mateo and Crestwood. It's always interesting to me which ones get picked; one could just have easily cited Stoughton's: 

Stoughton High School Student Handbook changes for 2019-2020 regarding the Electronic Device Policy.

Parents and guardians please review this policy below with your child & encourage responsible and appropriate use of electronic devices during the school day. @StoughtonPS pic.twitter.com/plisODjFt1

— Alan Bontya (@BlackKnightsAP) August 29, 2019

Note also that, so long as the district both requires technology to complete work and does not provide said technology, having a cell phone ban is literally barring students from doing their work, or requiring that they violate district policy to do so.

The Committee is requested to accept donations:
– $67.55 from a donor to the Worcester Public Schools
– $100.00 from a donor to the Patricia Falcone Memorial Scholarship
– $3,820.00 from Worcester Area Mission Society for the Summer Cubs Program held at Woodland Academy

Mr. O'Connell has put the updated superintendent rubric on the agenda for consideration; note that the redraft is only for superintendents, not for district administrators as on the agenda.

The Committee is also being asked to accept (surely we could even just group these together?) the Comprehensive School Health grant for $200,000. While the backup on this one is of no more use than any of the other grants on the agenda, luckily we know from the FY20 budget what this grant is going for: "trauma informed teams" that would go to schools in most need (that's on page 262). More specifics about how many positions are being hired should be included here, however.

Mr. O'Connell (on August 28) suggests that the School Committee should establish goals for itself. Note that during Mr. O'Connell's extensive tenure, I do not believe he has ever before made this proposal.
...and wants to review the siting of Doherty (citing the city charter, which I don't think is going to carry weight with the MSBA).
...and wants to send leftover food home with kids (as you no doubt saw on Facebook this summer).
...and wants to know when site councils are meeting (as he does this one time each year; it does not get connected to goals or evaluation at any point).


Mr. Comparetto asks for an update on ongoing transportation issues. Note that the Committee was to have the Durham bid and the WPS report on the in-house alternative by now. Keep your eye on the schedule of Finance and Operations meetings, as that report will appear there first. This is the appropriate place to bring your concerns about WPS transportation. I would think it would have to happen before the next full committee meeting on September 19. UPDATE: Note Scott O'Connell's article on this; Finance and Operations expected to meeting 9/1716, with the full committee taking it up 9/19. Again, this is the right place to bring your transportation concerns.

There is another prior year payment of $5,252.25 to Harbor Networks; since there's no backup, we don't know for what, but they do "managed IT services" which leaves more questions than answers, really. 


Mr. Comparetto, on an item co-sponsored by Mr. Foley, Miss McCullough, and Mr. Monfredo (that's interesting) calls for:

Request the establishment of an inclusive and transparent process for selecting and implementing a comprehensive Sex Education Curriculum that is age-appropriate, evidence-based, medically-accurate and LGBTQ inclusive in the Worcester Public Schools.

And yes, the candidates have been asked about that quite a bit.

Miss Biancheria would like a count on Worcester Tech enrollment and applicants; a list of Ch. 74 programs and enrollment; and AP courses, enrollments, and results (they won't be able to do a full list of this as some of the sizes will be too small; FERPA violation); and to "highlight its successes in the STEM/STEAM programs" during a week in October.

There's prior fiscal year payments totalling $7800 going to nurses, which does actually have a backup.

Miss McCullough, no doubt noting the ongoing calls these past weeks for class supply lists, request clear links to such lists, as well as calendars and forms. Might we go a step further and remind all involved that such lists can only always be optional, which is not something I saw emphasized nearly enough? For these to be expected in a district like Worcester is, bluntly, wrong.

And there's an executive session at 6: three collective bargaining sessions and three litigation consultations.