As I have written previously here and here, the board approved a package of renovation projects, and the community will vote on the projects in the Nov. 2 election. Because of changes in Indiana law, school corporations are not allowed to use any taxpayer funds to promote passage of a capital projects referendum. Employees of the school corporation can provide information about the referendum at any time, and they can be in favor of the referendum as private citizens (they can put a sign in their yards, donate to the campaign, wear a button, etc.), but they can't promote the referendum during school hours, on school property, or using school computers or other resources.
The role of the board is a bit different. The law is very clear that board members may advocate for or against a referendum in our role as elected officials.
But the restrictions on the school (which were made to level the playing field and not give schools an overwhelming advantage in a process like this) mean that someone else has to step up and advocate for passage of the referendum.
Fortunately, a group of Lebanon community members has stepped up to form a Political Action Committee and carry the campaign forward. The group is called Support Lebanon Students, their web site is here, and I've linked to their Facebook page at the right. Their job between now and November 2 is to educate the public about the facts of the renovation plans and referendum, and to persuade as many voters as possible to vote in favor of it. They started by having a group of 42 adults and students walk in the Fourth of July parade. They'll be putting out literature, answering questions in public, planting yard signs, reminding voters about registration deadlines and early voting, and working outside polling places. If you'd like to help them, they want as many community members to be involved as possible, or they could use your donations!
This is a group of projects that is conservative, and that focuses on student safety, education needs, and energy efficiency. I hope you'll vote YES, and if you have any questions, I hope you'll contact the Support Lebanon Students group or a board member.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Early Childhood education
There's a great story on page one of today's Indy Star (it's a print-only story or I would link to it) about preschool education in Indiana. Indiana is one of only 8 states not to fund preschool, and kindergarten is not even required. As a result, only 20 percent of Indiana preschool-aged children are enrolled in preschool, while in Oklahoma it's 87% and in West Virginia 73%. Early childhood debates in recent years have been focused on whether to fund full-day kindergarten (which the state has not done). But oddly enough, kindergarten is not even required in Indiana--students aren't required to enroll in school until they're 7--that's first grade.
Not every child needs organized preschool. Some children have parents at home who are fully engaged in their early education, or day-care providers who do a great job of providing early learning opportunities. But many children--especially children in poverty--don't have these opportunities, and without preschool and full-day kindergarten programs they begin first grade well behind their more fortunate peers.
Here in the Lebanon schools, the superintendent and board made the decision several years ago to provide full-day kindergarten for all students at no cost to families. The state reimburses some of this cost, but about $150,000 a year comes from the local General Fund. We choose to spend it on kindergarten because we believe this is where those funds will have the greatest impact. When I visit schools it's one of the few things every single staff member seems to agree on: full-day kindergarten is a huge asset to our students.
If Governor Daniels, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, and the Indiana General Assembly are serious about student achievement, they'll make kindergarten and preschool a higher priority.
Not every child needs organized preschool. Some children have parents at home who are fully engaged in their early education, or day-care providers who do a great job of providing early learning opportunities. But many children--especially children in poverty--don't have these opportunities, and without preschool and full-day kindergarten programs they begin first grade well behind their more fortunate peers.
Here in the Lebanon schools, the superintendent and board made the decision several years ago to provide full-day kindergarten for all students at no cost to families. The state reimburses some of this cost, but about $150,000 a year comes from the local General Fund. We choose to spend it on kindergarten because we believe this is where those funds will have the greatest impact. When I visit schools it's one of the few things every single staff member seems to agree on: full-day kindergarten is a huge asset to our students.
If Governor Daniels, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett, and the Indiana General Assembly are serious about student achievement, they'll make kindergarten and preschool a higher priority.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Alan Cragun, goodbye and thank you
My board colleague Alan Cragun officially finished his term yesterday, after 20 years on the LCSC board. As anyone knows who has worked with a very experienced co-worker, there's no substitute for institutional memory, and Alan has plenty. He and I did not always agree, but he was a very professional board member who focused on the good of Lebanon students, and working with him was a pleasure and an education.
Like so many community-minded people, he did his work well, without attracting attention to himself. In the course of 20 years he saw some strife (balanced calendar discussions, redistricting, building projects) and plenty of challenges. As board president the last two years he ran meetings well and fairly, conducting the school's business with competence and sensitivity. He introduced regular recognition for classified staff members who aren't often recognized, and he kept the board focused on student achievement.
If you see Alan out and about, you might take a moment to thank him. He wouldn't ask for it, but he most certainly deserves it. I wish him only the best as he moves on to other service opportunities. My God go with you, Alan.
Like so many community-minded people, he did his work well, without attracting attention to himself. In the course of 20 years he saw some strife (balanced calendar discussions, redistricting, building projects) and plenty of challenges. As board president the last two years he ran meetings well and fairly, conducting the school's business with competence and sensitivity. He introduced regular recognition for classified staff members who aren't often recognized, and he kept the board focused on student achievement.
If you see Alan out and about, you might take a moment to thank him. He wouldn't ask for it, but he most certainly deserves it. I wish him only the best as he moves on to other service opportunities. My God go with you, Alan.
Renovation and Referendum, part deux
It's all very exciting! At last month's regular meeting the board held a "1028 hearing," in which we authorized putting a question on the Nov. 2 ballot in which the community will vote on a building renovation project.
These renovations have been in the research and planning stage for some time, but until the 1028 hearing, nothing was official. But it's official now, and the next few months will be spent continuing to educate voters and the community about the importance of these projects for the future of the Lebanon schools.
I'll post more details shortly (and I've written about it previously here), but these are the basics: The board approved bonds not to exceed $40 million, to complete a major renovation of Lebanon High School, a new HVAC (that's heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) system at Central Elementary, a secure entry at LMS, a new roof at Hattie B. Stokes Elementary, and updated security measures at all LCSC buildings (mainly surveillance cameras).
Here are some key facts to remember:
These renovations have been in the research and planning stage for some time, but until the 1028 hearing, nothing was official. But it's official now, and the next few months will be spent continuing to educate voters and the community about the importance of these projects for the future of the Lebanon schools.
I'll post more details shortly (and I've written about it previously here), but these are the basics: The board approved bonds not to exceed $40 million, to complete a major renovation of Lebanon High School, a new HVAC (that's heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) system at Central Elementary, a secure entry at LMS, a new roof at Hattie B. Stokes Elementary, and updated security measures at all LCSC buildings (mainly surveillance cameras).
Here are some key facts to remember:
- Because of debt coming off the books over the next few years, we will be able to do these projects without raising the school tax rate.
- Updates to the buildings (including new windows at LHS and new HVAC at LHS and Central) will result in utility savings of $330,000 every year. These are general fund dollars that will be much better spent in our classrooms!
- The renovation to LHS will give us 20-30 years more of useful life for that building.
- LCSC taxes have dropped dramatically in recent years, from $1.76 (per $100 of assessed value) in 2006 to $1.12 in 2010. This is a drop of 36%, and the proposed renovation will not raise the tax rate.
- LCSC has a history of building responsibly. This project continues that tradition, and is designed to address safety, security, educational needs, and energy savings. It is not a plan for a huge new stadium, or an architect's dream project.
Summer School
I've had the chance to attend a couple one-day seminars recently, and came away with some good information and ideas. The Indiana School Boards Association puts on these events to help board members keep up with current issues, and it gives us a chance to talk with members from other boards and compare notes a bit.
In a School Law seminar I learned that school property, although it's paid for by taxpayer dollars, is treated much like private property before the law. Schools can make their facilities available to the public, and if they choose to do so they can't discriminate, but they don't have to. That was news to me. There was also a terrific session on what schools can do about student behavior outside of school hours and property that still has an impact on the schools. Cyber-bullying is one good example of this, where incidents that are begun in school then continue or escalate on social networking sites. There are a couple cases in the courts right now where students made fake, and highly offensive, Facebook pages of school administrators. The law is having to develop quickly in these areas, and it was fascinating to learn a bit about it.
At a School Budgeting and Finance Seminar we heard about Indiana's economic prospects for the next year or so, and how this may impact school funding. If you want more details, drop me an e-mail, but the picture is pretty gloomy. We also heard from superintendents who have had referendum elections in their districts, and with our own referendum coming up, I was listening carefully!
In a School Law seminar I learned that school property, although it's paid for by taxpayer dollars, is treated much like private property before the law. Schools can make their facilities available to the public, and if they choose to do so they can't discriminate, but they don't have to. That was news to me. There was also a terrific session on what schools can do about student behavior outside of school hours and property that still has an impact on the schools. Cyber-bullying is one good example of this, where incidents that are begun in school then continue or escalate on social networking sites. There are a couple cases in the courts right now where students made fake, and highly offensive, Facebook pages of school administrators. The law is having to develop quickly in these areas, and it was fascinating to learn a bit about it.
At a School Budgeting and Finance Seminar we heard about Indiana's economic prospects for the next year or so, and how this may impact school funding. If you want more details, drop me an e-mail, but the picture is pretty gloomy. We also heard from superintendents who have had referendum elections in their districts, and with our own referendum coming up, I was listening carefully!
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
What's a school board for?
The proper role of the board is a fundamental question. I think about it often, and no doubt I'll be learning about this central issue for my whole tenure on the board. The traditional way of saying what the board does is that it "sets policy." But what does this mean in the day-to-day life of a school corporation?
Here's a little bit of my thinking about the role of the board. I have been helped, of course, by many conversations and a fair amount of reading.
The board hires and evaluates the superintendent. This is a huge part of our responsibilities, and it happens every year. Each year when we do a formal evaluation of Dr. Taylor and sign his contract, we are in effect re-hiring him. As in any performance evaluation the board works with the superintendent to recognize strengths and weaknesses and to set short- and long-term goals. The way I think of it, it's our job to make the superintendent better at his job, to the benefit of students, staff, and the community.
Board members sometimes hear that the board needs to "rein in" or "take down" the superintendent, to "show him who's boss" and not just "rubber stamp" his recommendations. There are a few issues here. First and foremost, the superintendent is an experienced, credentialed, education professional, while the board works part-time and is made up of community members who are not education professionals. Second, since we hire the superintendent every year, we should be confident in his abilities--if we have serious doubts about his management style, priorities, or the direction he's taking the schools, we should be thinking seriously about replacing him. As long as we have hired him, we should feel comfortable supporting him, at least most of the time. Third, who benefits by public disagreements between the board and the superintendent? It's fairly easy to score political points by "taking the superintendent down" at a public meeting, and it may make for interesting headlines and sideline chatter. But a contentious relationship between the board and the superintendent rarely serves the students, staff, or community at all. If we're evaluating him effectively and helping him set performance goals, we will see improvement in the areas we've targeted.
The board does not "run" the school corporation. The superintendent is the CEO of the schools. He has the credentials, experience, and expertise to hire and evaluate staff (although the board approves all personnel decisions), develop and implement curriculum, work with state and federal regulations, and manage all the dimensions of this large organization. It is one of the paradoxes of school governance that the board is made up of non-educators. On our current board, not a single member has even one day's experience teaching or administrating in a K-12 public school, and this is pretty common. This is why a well-functioning board takes the superintendent's recommendations seriously, and why a board that micro-manages school operations is setting itself up for real headaches.
The board has a serious fiscal responsibility. The budget process is complicated, but the board is charged with making sure public money is being spent responsibly and honestly. Most educational decisions also have a financial component, and where we spend money is a good indication of our priorities. For instance, the free full-day kindergarten in the Lebanon schools costs more than having only half-day programs, but the board agrees that this kind of early education has an impact that's worth paying for. Our policies have to reflect a balance between providing the best education for Lebanon students and our responsibility to taxpayers. This also means making sure we have safe, appropriate facilities but not overbuilding.
The board sets policy. Our board has help in developing policy from a company that tracks education legislation and drafts policies to be sure we're in compliance with current law. At a local level, recent policy decisions include the corporation-wide dress code and decisions about budget priorities. For any policy change, and especially the big ones, board members do plenty of research, including many conversations with stakeholders in the community. We also carefully consider the superintendent's recommendations, because he's the professional.
What kind of issues does the board get involved with? I'm sure this varies from board to board, and from person to person. There's certainly some gray area, but there are also some pretty clear lines. Generally speaking, board members should not be involved with the day-to-day operations of the schools. Student grades, selection or playing time for a sports team, the books a teacher chooses to read to second-graders, what sort of flowers are planted--these are not the purview of the board. If a patron has a problem and has already followed the chain of command to have it addressed without getting satisfaction (by talking to a teacher or coach, then principal, then superintendent), a board member may get involved at that point.
Think of it this way: if a board member were to go into a fourth-grade classroom and start telling the teacher how to do a math lesson, or which books she should choose for reading groups, people would, rightly, say the board member has neither the expertise nor the authority to act that way. If a board member attended basketball tryouts and told the coach which students should make the team, community members would be right to object. If a board member went to the bus garage, got under a bus, and started questioning the mechanic about what she was doing to the transmission, the public should be concerned. If a board member walked into a principal's office and started making suggestions about the master schedule, or who teaches which grade level, that would be inappropriate. Likewise, if a board member is looking over the superintendent's shoulder, giving directions and second-guessing his work, that's inappropriate.
What makes for a good board member? Generally speaking, if someone comes on the board with a very strong personal agenda, that means trouble. For instance, if a board member is determined to remove a particular administrator or coach, or to see a pet program implemented, they won't be very interested in the larger work of the board. While different board members have different skills, as a board we don't get to pick and choose what our work is, and good board members are willing to do even the tedious work thoroughly and carefully.
One of the most challenging things about being on the board is getting good information. Board members tend to make school staff a little nervous, and information we get can be heavily filtered. We tend to hear more from people (staff, community members, parents) who are dissatisfied than from people who are content. As much as I try to keep my ear to the ground, make myself available and responsive, and spend time in the schools and at school functions, there's no way for me or for the board as a whole to know everything we'd like to. So, like everyone else, we take the information we have, engage our best judgment, and move ahead with our work. The better our information, the better our decisions can be. Keep that in mind when you're talking with a member of the board!
Here's a little bit of my thinking about the role of the board. I have been helped, of course, by many conversations and a fair amount of reading.
The board hires and evaluates the superintendent. This is a huge part of our responsibilities, and it happens every year. Each year when we do a formal evaluation of Dr. Taylor and sign his contract, we are in effect re-hiring him. As in any performance evaluation the board works with the superintendent to recognize strengths and weaknesses and to set short- and long-term goals. The way I think of it, it's our job to make the superintendent better at his job, to the benefit of students, staff, and the community.
Board members sometimes hear that the board needs to "rein in" or "take down" the superintendent, to "show him who's boss" and not just "rubber stamp" his recommendations. There are a few issues here. First and foremost, the superintendent is an experienced, credentialed, education professional, while the board works part-time and is made up of community members who are not education professionals. Second, since we hire the superintendent every year, we should be confident in his abilities--if we have serious doubts about his management style, priorities, or the direction he's taking the schools, we should be thinking seriously about replacing him. As long as we have hired him, we should feel comfortable supporting him, at least most of the time. Third, who benefits by public disagreements between the board and the superintendent? It's fairly easy to score political points by "taking the superintendent down" at a public meeting, and it may make for interesting headlines and sideline chatter. But a contentious relationship between the board and the superintendent rarely serves the students, staff, or community at all. If we're evaluating him effectively and helping him set performance goals, we will see improvement in the areas we've targeted.
The board does not "run" the school corporation. The superintendent is the CEO of the schools. He has the credentials, experience, and expertise to hire and evaluate staff (although the board approves all personnel decisions), develop and implement curriculum, work with state and federal regulations, and manage all the dimensions of this large organization. It is one of the paradoxes of school governance that the board is made up of non-educators. On our current board, not a single member has even one day's experience teaching or administrating in a K-12 public school, and this is pretty common. This is why a well-functioning board takes the superintendent's recommendations seriously, and why a board that micro-manages school operations is setting itself up for real headaches.
The board has a serious fiscal responsibility. The budget process is complicated, but the board is charged with making sure public money is being spent responsibly and honestly. Most educational decisions also have a financial component, and where we spend money is a good indication of our priorities. For instance, the free full-day kindergarten in the Lebanon schools costs more than having only half-day programs, but the board agrees that this kind of early education has an impact that's worth paying for. Our policies have to reflect a balance between providing the best education for Lebanon students and our responsibility to taxpayers. This also means making sure we have safe, appropriate facilities but not overbuilding.
The board sets policy. Our board has help in developing policy from a company that tracks education legislation and drafts policies to be sure we're in compliance with current law. At a local level, recent policy decisions include the corporation-wide dress code and decisions about budget priorities. For any policy change, and especially the big ones, board members do plenty of research, including many conversations with stakeholders in the community. We also carefully consider the superintendent's recommendations, because he's the professional.
What kind of issues does the board get involved with? I'm sure this varies from board to board, and from person to person. There's certainly some gray area, but there are also some pretty clear lines. Generally speaking, board members should not be involved with the day-to-day operations of the schools. Student grades, selection or playing time for a sports team, the books a teacher chooses to read to second-graders, what sort of flowers are planted--these are not the purview of the board. If a patron has a problem and has already followed the chain of command to have it addressed without getting satisfaction (by talking to a teacher or coach, then principal, then superintendent), a board member may get involved at that point.
Think of it this way: if a board member were to go into a fourth-grade classroom and start telling the teacher how to do a math lesson, or which books she should choose for reading groups, people would, rightly, say the board member has neither the expertise nor the authority to act that way. If a board member attended basketball tryouts and told the coach which students should make the team, community members would be right to object. If a board member went to the bus garage, got under a bus, and started questioning the mechanic about what she was doing to the transmission, the public should be concerned. If a board member walked into a principal's office and started making suggestions about the master schedule, or who teaches which grade level, that would be inappropriate. Likewise, if a board member is looking over the superintendent's shoulder, giving directions and second-guessing his work, that's inappropriate.
What makes for a good board member? Generally speaking, if someone comes on the board with a very strong personal agenda, that means trouble. For instance, if a board member is determined to remove a particular administrator or coach, or to see a pet program implemented, they won't be very interested in the larger work of the board. While different board members have different skills, as a board we don't get to pick and choose what our work is, and good board members are willing to do even the tedious work thoroughly and carefully.
One of the most challenging things about being on the board is getting good information. Board members tend to make school staff a little nervous, and information we get can be heavily filtered. We tend to hear more from people (staff, community members, parents) who are dissatisfied than from people who are content. As much as I try to keep my ear to the ground, make myself available and responsive, and spend time in the schools and at school functions, there's no way for me or for the board as a whole to know everything we'd like to. So, like everyone else, we take the information we have, engage our best judgment, and move ahead with our work. The better our information, the better our decisions can be. Keep that in mind when you're talking with a member of the board!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Tom Merritt for School Board
My colleague Tom Merritt is running for a second term on the board. Tom is an exceptionally good board member: engaged, hard-working, willing to spend time on issues that need board attention (even when they're not that interesting!), and truly interested in various points of view. As a small business owner and employer (Merritt Construction) and the parent of one LHS graduate and four LCSC students, Tom knows the impact of the schools on the community.
In particular, I have seen Tom's value as we have begun renovation plans on LHS and other buildings. He's in the construction business, and he knows how to talk with architects, construction managers, and subcontractors. When he looks at a blueprint, a site map, or a contract he knows just what he's looking at and, importantly, what questions to ask. His expertise has already been invaluable, and I hate to think of going forward on building projects without him.
Tom has no personal axe to grind. He's on the board for the good of the students, the community, and the taxpayers. Please vote to give him a second term--he deserves it and you won't regret it.
In particular, I have seen Tom's value as we have begun renovation plans on LHS and other buildings. He's in the construction business, and he knows how to talk with architects, construction managers, and subcontractors. When he looks at a blueprint, a site map, or a contract he knows just what he's looking at and, importantly, what questions to ask. His expertise has already been invaluable, and I hate to think of going forward on building projects without him.
Tom has no personal axe to grind. He's on the board for the good of the students, the community, and the taxpayers. Please vote to give him a second term--he deserves it and you won't regret it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)