Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Monday's Community Forum - What did you think?

After taking some time to digest the outcome of Monday night's community forum, we now want to share some of our thoughts and feedback we have already received with the hope of garnering additional feedback from those in attendance.
We want to thank everyone who attended the forum and particularly those who addressed the administration, school board and the community with their comments and questions. There were very powerful statements throughout the evening both praising and expressing grave concerns about our schools. We know how hard it is to publically express your thoughts and concerns particularly with a topic which generates such great personal and social emotion. It is reassuring to know how many people in this wonderful community care and want what is best for all of the children in our village.



We also wish to acknowledge and thank the School Board for scheduling the forum and for the formation of a new Frameworks Committee which will convene this summer and work through December. We look forward to hearing the reworded background and charge of this committee and who the chosen committee members will be. (Please see this week's School Bell for further information.)
We do want to share that our campaign was not aware that there would be no dialogue from the Administration and/or School Board at Monday's forum. The lack of participation from the Administration and School Board was disheartening and very hard for many to accept.
When our Reconfiguration Committee met with Walter Nardelli, John Terko, and Carter Smith; teachers Al Myers and Margaret Munt; and two school board members, Laura Gigliotti and Deb Moody (who attended as citizens) on May 12th, we were left with an impression that the Administration would answer all of the questions from the May community forum at the future School Board-sponsored forum. At this meeting, Walter also pledged to conduct an "audit" of the number of hours of instruction taking place in all four core subject areas across the Upper Houses and stated that he would present the results of this audit at such a forum.
The goals of this future forum were clearly communicated and agreed upon by all in attendance. We were never informed that written responses via the School Bell would replace a public discussion of the questions and answers. Upon reading Walter Nardelli's written responses, we were left to assume that further exploration and clarification of these answers would take place when we all came together for the forum.
We wholeheartedly agree with those of you who attended on Monday expecting more from this forum. It is unfortunate and frustrating that we all missed a wonderful opportunity for education and answers and, more importantly, an opportunity to exchange ideas with the school. However, we really want to move forward and collaborate with the Administration and School Board to further improve our schools. In order to facilitate change, we need to keep up our efforts to communicate cooperatively and with civility.
We do not agree with Walter's decision to respond to community questions and comments exclusively in the School Bell. This simply cannot be the only avenue of communication between the community and the school. With this in mind, we will attempt to explore a more meaningful and responsive method of communication for the administration to consider and would entertain any suggestions you may have to present to them.
We look forward to your feedback regarding the forum and welcome comments and suggestions from the Board, Administration, and teachers. Please feel free to comment, ask questions, or provide suggestions that will help us continue to work for our children and our schools either via email or on our blog where we will post this letter.
Thank you.

8 comments:

Steve Mount said...

Initially, I was surprised that the administration chose not to respond to comments on Monday, but on reflection, I agreed with their stance. Here's why:

1. Conversation would have left less time for comments. As it was, we ran over.
2. Conversation can lead to argument, and I think everyone was better served by the coolness of all the speakers.
3. Responses often require research, and repeatedly hearing "we're researching that" or "we don't know yet", though true, would have lead to unnecessary frustration.

All this does place the onus on the administration, and I look forward to reading the responses. I also look forward to the results of the audit.

I was heartened to hear the comments of the parent who spoke with her teacher friend. The comments of that friend contradict the comments in another post that said that CVU teachers asked "whether we came from Williston." Both are hearsay, of course, I'd like to hear something more concrete - perhaps the Observer can do a story?

Anonymous said...

I want to formally express my sincere frustration, disappointment and disillusionment regarding Monday night's Community Forum. Well over 125 people came out with the clear expectation that there would be a true "forum" which per Webster's Dictionary is defined as such:
Forum
Noun
1. A public meeting or assembly for OPEN DISCUSSION.

2. A public facility to meet for OPEN DISCUSSION.

3. A place of assembly for the people in ancient Greece.


Walter Nardelli's refusal to participate in "open discussion" with the citizens of this community is unconscionable. This problem of poor communication is what has lead us all to the forum on Monday night in the first place! The District Principal, Superintendent and School Board's lack of participation at the forum perpetuated this problem and magnifies the distrust and low confidence people are experiencing with our schools.

Nobody, except Walter and Mark Banks were even introduced to the crowd. There was no explaination of the format for the evening. If that one woman hadn't asked for Walter to answer her question about the audit regarding the 120 hours of instruction we wouldn't have known that they were going to avoid us! This is so distrurbing and unprofessional!!

With their silence they have essentially lied to this community and have done so repeatedly just as Walter Nardelli stated below in an email on Monday to his staff:

"Good Morning,
There is a forum being held on configuration hosted by the Williston School Board. Everyone who works at the Williston schools is invited to attend and speak - regardless of your opinion. Here is a quote that speaks to silence:

"The one who is quiet about the truth is like one who lies..." Lebanese Proverb

Walter"

Walter Nardelli, YOUR silence speaks volumes. Furthermore, responding to this community's concerns via the School Bell is inappropriate, ineffective and entirely unacceptable. What about community members who may not have children in the schools yet? How will they get your "answers"?

I arrived at this meeting expecting them to turn this thing around and explain how they are addressing the concerns of this town. I was so hopeful and excited. Now I am crushed and defeated.

I truly hope they find a way to remedy this communication nightmare immediately. They are digging themselves deeper into a hole of mistrust and low confidence.

Sorry, but I am going to remain anonymous because of my ties. I know this is hard for many to accept but I really fear retribution.

Kevin said...

Steve, I think some follow-up on WSD students adjusting to High School at CVU would be interesting. Although, that shouldn't be the only measurement we look at as we move forward in this process.

As for the format of the June 2nd forum, I agree, we did have a packed 2-hours of comments from an awesome community. "Kudos" to those that came and shared their thoughts. What you may not know is that, in previous conversations and meetings with administration and the School Board, statements were made that led me to believe there was going to be some exchange of information, specifically regarding the audit and the answers provided by Mr. Nardelli from questions identified at the previous forum.

All through this process, I believe many of the issues that have surfaced could have been mitigated by better communications from the School Board and the administration. Earlier notification of the reconfiguration objectives, parental involvement in the process, and regular communications as the work progressed could have changed the dialog considerably.

BTW, Thanks for posting as 'you'!

Anonymous said...

I wish the administration or school board would have at least answered the most asked questions from the earlier forum and the last school board meeting. The School Bell is not the place for the questions to be answered. The moderator that was hired could have helped mediate the conversations. It appeared that some making comments did not respect the rules the moderator addressed at the beginning of the forum. All comments were supposed to be done by 8:50. Why is that? Also, does anyone know the criteria for choosing the community members to be on the new committee. What makes one able to join and one not able?

Steve Mount said...

Kevin - I think this has been a learning experience for a lot of people, the administration and Board included. For a long time, issues have been simmering and there has been no organized voice of dissent. I think the reaction took many by surprise - it certainly did me. The administration used its main avenues of communication, via the FAPAC and the School Bell, as it always had. But the people wanted more than this, which I think is good. It is often very hard to get people engaged and involved. If nothing else, this has shown that people do want to be engaged and involved and not just on a one-on-one level, but at a community level. There may be some adaptation necessary considering where we've come from, but I know the administration will adapt, will communicate more and better, and we will work through this. Maybe not to everyone's satisfaction, but we will work through it.

Christina - I think the School Bell is exactly the place to answer questions, though I would agree that it is not the only place. Look, the Bell goes home with every student and, in theory at least, is in the hands of every parent each week. While the forums and Board meetings have been well-attended lately, the parents in attendance have been a fraction of the total parent population. Additionally, for the community as a whole, the Bell is available on line to all members of the community.

There is a time for dialogue. Perhaps perfect opportunities for dialogue have come and gone, but there will be more. This is not a process that anyone should feel can be solved at one meeting, one forum. This committee will be a great way for dialogue to happen, as it discusses issues among the members and, presumably, holds public hearings that will be equally well-attended.

As for the criteria, I cannot speak for the Board, but my guess is that once some time has passed, names will have been taken down and slots filled. If there are more volunteers than slots, some choices will have to be made, and criteria set (even if those criteria are no more than a name pulled from a hat). Normally, there are fewer volunteers than needed, not more, so this is something of a unique situation.

Anonymous said...

The recent reconfiguration meetings have sparked a community-wide dialogue. As we move the dialogue further, I have three modest proposals:

1. I have a great deal of respect for the administration and their efforts. The tone of discussion on the blog should be respectful.

2. Quantitative research is needed to clearly indicate where achievements and improvements are needed within the existing curriculum. The information presented so far provides fodder to initiate future dialogues of how to maintain the integrity of educational autonomy and educational accountability. NECAP results are only one part of the diagnostic puzzle. There needs to be a multiple-measures approach, using valid and reliable data, to provide feedback in a concerted and collaborative effort to work toward program improvement and individual student academic progress.

3. Educational ideology, as heard during the recent public meeting, should be backed up by valid and reliable evidence.

Anonymous said...

I realize this particular thread has more to do with the meeting than the actual issue of the current house system at WCS but felt as if it was an appropriate place to comment anyway. I am a previous student of WCS and CVU and wanted to contribute to the discussion that I enjoyed the house system. In a large school it is comforting to have a small group of students that you are almost always with. It allows students to be more outgoing and creative because the environment is a known and comfortable one. Unless things have changed students are placed into a house when they go to CVU and the setup is very similar to WCS where the students take their core classes only with other students in their house. What better way to help ease the transition to high school than to have students already comfortable in that type of educational atmosphere?

Anonymous said...

I was relieved that the forum, overall, assumed a respectful tone. The frameworks committee being formed--at which all constituencies will be represented---creates an opportunity for healthy dialogue.
I saw neighbors and friends, some of whom I agreed with and some I disagreed with. In my view, we remain friends, even if our educational philosophy may differ.
I was saddened to hear that some folks had negative experiences with the school. I can say with honesty that, when a challenge arose for our family, we were able to discuss it with school personnel calmly---and they listened. I applaud those who had the courage to stand before the microphone, state their names, and speak their truth---most chose to do this in a respectful, life-giving manner. Thank you.
I am heartened that folks are now demonstrating the COURAGE to sign their names to their postings. Thank you Kevin, Steve, Christina, and Jay. This promotes accountability and enhances the author's credibility. We live in a democracy. Fear of speaking our minds paves the wave for diminished freedoms.
I was heartened to hear the comments of teacher educators from UVM offer their views on the QUALITY of the teaching and learning that happens in our schools.
I believe we as a community are blessed with amazingly committed, positive educators. They are not perfect. Neither are we. Neither are our children.
I am pleased a committee is forming to identify best practices, address folks' concerns, and work towards improving the quality of education for all of our children.
I respectfully disagree with the gentleman who spoke near the end of the forum suggesting "We should be kicking butt over Essex" (I took notes at the meeting). In my view, we are not competing with Essex or any other town. I do not raise my child to compete with anyone's children. I strive to encourage my child to challenge herself to be the best she can be, academically and in how she treats others.
Life for me is not a game to be won. As global citizens, the more we know about each other, the better prepared we are to engage each other to work together toward common goals.
Thank you to everyone who has worked to keep this process positive and respectful. I am confident that, by working together, we can improve the quality of education for all of our community's children.