The June 1 School Committee meeting covered many topics in public comment (Math Pathways, homework policy, and anti-semitism) and in the Committee’s deliberations on:
- Sports-related early dismissals
- Plans for Ward and Underwood Elementary Schools
- NPS’s long-range building plan
- Preschool curriculum
- Homework policies
- Students’ use of electronic devices
- Time-outs, seclusion, and physical restraint of students
- Superintendent’s evaluation
Public comment
Public comments at this meeting covered three topics:
- Math Pathways and the implementation for this year’s 7th/8th graders, especially the plan for Bigelow Middle School,
- The homework policy to be discussed by the School Committee this evening, and
- Antisemitism at Newton North.
Math Pathways: Contrary to the hypothetical situation about Math Pathways for 8th graders next year that the School Committee was discussing during the May 18 School Committee meeting, there are not nine students at each middle school who passed the 7th Grade assessment with 90% to skip 8th grade math. As detailed by parents in their public comments, at Bigelow there was only one student who qualified. Newton Public Schools (NPS) offered this student a choice of either transferring to Day Middle School for 8th grade or being placed in regular 8th grade math at Bigelow with some support from one of the new math specialists for enrichment activities, but not the full Integrated Math (IM) curriculum.
Several parents asked the district to consider what excluding Bigelow from this program for next year would mean for the future of the Math Pathways program, including considering that without Bigelow offering the class, there is no on-ramp at the school next year for students who are demonstrating mastery of the Grade 8 curriculum during the year. The parents also noted that Bigelow teachers would also not be learning to teach it as teachers at other middle schools are in preparation for future years. All of the commenters stated that they support Math Pathways conceptually, but not if it is not implemented at all schools. There was variation in what parents asked for in implementation next year, including asking for students to be allowed to retake the test in the summer or the early fall, treating Year 1 as a flexible pilot year allowing for trial-and-error in student assignment, allowing students to opt-in to an elective Integrated Math I math class if motivated, and an independent-study program of the full IM I curriculum.
Homework: Two parents spoke of their desire that homework in NPS provide meaningful, purposeful, age-appropriate assignments that would help students develop strong academic habits. One of them said specifically that his 4th and 7th graders have 20 minutes of homework per week, with 7th grade homework including Duolingo and general directives for independent reading, and this did not seem appropriate.
Anti-semitism: A 10th grader at Newton North detailed that he had tackled understanding the problem of antisemitism at school by interviewing 85 peers. He said that the overwhelming amount of responses indicated that students heard anti-semitic jokes on a daily basis. He requested that the district cover more Holocaust education in its curriculum, as he felt that better understanding of this history would help to curb this problem.
Sports-related early dismissals at the high schools
The Committee’s discussion in the Superintendent’s Update focused on the intersection of athletics and the high school schedule. Because the Newton High schools have a start time of 9AM and other districts in the same athletic conference have much earlier start times, Newton athletes have been released early from classes in order to participate in sport competitions. As Vice Chair Jason Bhardwaj indicated, for most sports, this lost time is relatively minimal, only 0.4% or 0.5% of classroom minutes in a school year. For certain teams, however, especially the golf teams, lost time was in the range of 7-10% of class minutes. Committee Member Linda Swain specified that this was often from core courses, as the homeroom and WIN blocks are being held in the middle of the day, and she expressed concern that this instills the message in students that sports are more important than academic classes. She also mentioned that the later start time, intended to help high school students manage their sleep better, masks another challenge for athletes: that practices are often starting at 7AM. As she put it, “even worse than early start times is a varied schedule, which many varsity athletes have now.”
Superintendent Anna Nolin expressed that her primary concern in this area is that NPS “will not withstand DESE audit on instructional minutes,” however she described that changing the start time at the high schools to 8:30AM without changing the times at elementary and middle schools would mean NPS would need to double its bus fleet, at significant cost. She also mentioned that schedule changes are subject to collective bargaining with the school staff unions.
All the Committee members who spoke were in agreement that attention should be given to this issue, whether it involves making minor changes to the existing schedule or making bigger changes, as it impacts more than half of Newton high school students.
Ward-Underwood analysis and recommendation
City of Newton Chief Operating Officer Josh Morse presented the same presentation he gave last week to Ward/Underwood community members (Fig City report), with minor tweaks and some probing from School Committee members.
When Mr. Morse described the hours of evening and weekend time he had spent exploring all the angles of this question in the last few months, Dr. Nolin quipped, “You need a better hobby!” The Committee’s comments overall highlighted gratitude for Mr. Morse’s thoroughness and clear-sighted analysis. As Jason Bhardwaj put it, the presentation “captures most important data and failure points; range of scenarios with long-term factors.” Committee Member Tamika Olszewski said, “This is the type of analysis that we should be doing as a district on every project going forward,” although she added that she thought the School Committee should have seen the presentation before community members in order to better respond to community questions.
One tweak to this week’s presentation seemed to be the “Next Steps” slide, which said that the City’s intention was to “Advance the Ward and Underwood School projects into feasibility and design. Preliminary Ward and Underwood design enrollment estimate: 308–322 students, with 14 total classrooms.” Mr. Morse clarified that the design enrollment is what a building is designed to accommodate comfortably based on Newton’s preference for 22-23 students/classroom, and it is not a measure of capacity based on fire regulations. While the design feasibility and design process have yet to play out, Mr. Morse suggested that a model that includes four Kindergarten classrooms and two classrooms per grade 1-5 would likely make sense at each site.
Mr. Morse explained that the School Committee will vote on Design Enrollment and there will also be community presentations to gauge support before any vote, so the City can pivot if needed. He has heard from residents throughout the city, including people without children in NPS, and he noted “well over 100 residents [said] keep the schools separate,” in contrast with one who spoke for consolidation.
Chair Alicia Piedalue raised a significant question when she asked if the City “would consider building a 400-student school at Ward and then redistricting students.” Mr. Morse responded that “If redistricting is really on the table, I have to ask the question: How many schools do you want?” He related the example of Gardner, MA, which has an elementary school with over 1,000 students in it; if Newton did that, it would have four elementary schools. “I didn’t do that analysis because, at the end of the day, that gets into what makes Newton Newton, and attractive to families. In our [Zoning Board of Appeals] interviews for new members, I asked ‘What do you like most, least about Newton?’ Three people, from varied walks of life, unprompted, said neighborhood schools are what they like best. People can live in close proximity to Boston, but in a small community that feels like a quintessential town, part of that is their elementary school.” He added that if Newton started talking about redistricting, Newton could close both Ward and Underwood and additional schools. What he is hoping for are design enrollments for buildings that are functional in 2036 and 2136 because these decisions are not easily redone.
Dr. Nolin added color to this discussion, saying that in Natick, it took three years to redistrict a small school, dividing up neighborhoods street by street and deciding who gets moved out of which neighborhood. She also said that the busing implications in redistricting scenarios are not a small consideration.
In discussing the costs of these projects, Committee Member Victor Lee noted that the Ward and Underwood districts are quite large geographically, and Mr. Morse estimated that because of this, consolidating Underwood to Ward would result in a large number of students (likely 50%-75% of Underwood students) who would be bused, at an annual cost of $125,000 per bus, which would largely offset savings in the operational cost of a consolidated school. In terms of capital costs, Mr. Morse said that the capital cost of two separate schools is estimated to have an average annual property tax impact of $17.64 per homeowner, and Jason Bhardwaj said that would be a full-community decision because the City would have to make sure funds were available from property taxes. His opinion from talking to residents is that Newton favors neighborhood schools.
Mayor Marc Laredo stated that he supports Mr. Morse’s conclusion and believes it was reached thoughtfully and carefully.
Long-range building plan
Beyond Ward and Underwood are additional school building projects. Chair Alicia Piedalue noted that the City Council recently docketed funds for a feasibility study to look at renovations at Newton South High School. The School Committee discussed the relative needs and timeline considerations related to both Newton South High School (NSHS) and Brown Middle School.
Mr. Morse explained that the two projects have significantly different considerations and should be worked on in parallel because of the nature of the needs and the order of steps involved in planning and funding. Because of these complexities, neither project should be put off until the other one is completed.
As he described it, the project at Brown likely involves either a complete gut rehabilitation or a tear-down/rebuild situation, making it a good candidate for funding through an MSBA grant. The NSHS project will involve significant, but limited renovations, with portions being completed in stages as students remain attending the school. The NSHS feasibility study could take multiple years, although he hopes not the ten years that Minuteman Regional Technical Vocational High School took. He said that Brown Middle School is a high priority for the City, but if the City is serious about applying to the MSBA for funding it, it does not make sense to start the feasibility study process for that school before applying to the MSBA grant program. The next application cycle will start next winter.
Dr. Nolin detailed the challenges of the Brown building, saying that the 1956 building has one functioning steam boiler, no air conditioning, original plumbing, inadequate science labs, and no sprinkler system or backup water tank – and it needs a roof replacement. She is particularly worried about the ability of the boiler to function until a renovation is possible. Mr. Morse responded that the City understands that Newton will need to continue to invest in those school buildings even as renovations are being prepared, with the critical components being the building envelope and HVAC systems.
Mayor Laredo said that the City is planning to go forward with Ward, Underwood, NSHS, and Brown and that he looks forward to going out to the voters at the appropriate time for money to support these projects and the police station, to get these buildings done as quickly as reasonably possible.
Tamika Olszewski and Josh Morse both said they are looking forward to having closer conversations between the School Committee’s Long Range Planning Committee and the City’s Capital Improvement Plan Committee, and Alicia Piedalue said that School Committee member Jonathan Greene would be a member of the City’s CIP group going forward and would be able to liaise between the two.
Preschool curriculum adoption recommendation
The Preschool Curriculum Committee recommended the adoption of the Three Cheers curriculum for the Preschool level, with Heggerty supplements to address phonological awareness. This curriculum adoption passed easily with minimal discussion. The curriculum committee indicated they thought any of the pilot curricula were strong but that this one was set apart by built-in assessment and progress-monitoring tools, as well as multiple entry-points for Special Education students and built-in adaptations for English Learners.
Homework policies
There was a spirited discussion around the draft homework policy and what is and is not appropriate to include in that policy at the level of the School Committee. Dr. Nolin opened the discussion by saying that she “likes a good, clear homework policy,” and that while “the NTA doesn’t speak as a monolith about homework, a lot of teachers and principals want a more consistent policy,” and that there is agreement that homework should ramp-up over time, “building the muscles in the homework gym.” The draft policy is modeled on Lexington’s current policy. However, she went on to say that she is “deeply worried that some members of the public and School Committee members see homework as the barometer for rigor.” She emphasized that homework does not create executive functioning skills. She also warned against micromanaging educators by dictating the number of minutes, days, or types of assignments, especially when secondary teachers are already chafing at the previous School Committee putting significant limitations on when homework can be assigned because of religious holidays.
Dr. Nolin went on to say that teachers should be able to experiment with the homework for the new curricula in this time of change for the district. She also stipulated that children finish homework at different rates, so strict minute requirements are meaningless, and that district staff are not in a position to discipline teachers who do not follow the policy nor review homework that each teacher is giving.
Several Committee members pushed back hard against Dr. Nolin’s assertion that it was unrealistic to have a policy in place before next school year, with prevailing statements preferring to provide a policy that could be revisited and refined in the coming year. Alicia Piedalue noted that the policy as written is very broad, while the protocols are more specific, and that the Committee seemed to want to debate the protocols.
Areas of significant agreement among School Committee members seemed to be to:
- Have meaningful homework that is connected to classroom content
- Have some level of homework in Grades 4-12
- Steadily ramp up the amount of homework in these grades, rather than having big jumps or dips
- Similarity of homework levels across schools
- Not require parental involvement
- Balance explicit expectations with support for teachers
Tamika Olszewski noted that the School Committee should not enact a policy unless it could be confident it would be implemented with fidelity and apply equally to all staff members. She indicated it would be more appropriate for the curriculum review cycle process to identify opportunities to have robust homework that relates to curriculum.
Dr. Nolin calculated the impact of homework on teachers this way: If students are given 3-5 questions, and their responses would take five minutes per student for the teachers to read, that would require 100 minutes a night of reading for teachers, not including preparing any feedback, and it would take up all of the preparation time that has been negotiated with teachers.
The School Committee agreed to convene the policy team again before the June 15 School Committee meeting to continue working on this.
Students’ use of electronic devices
At the beginning of the discussion around the new Elementary Device Policy, Dr. Nolin clarified that while many parents want to include projections and digital materials in technology minutes, new curricula are impossible to do without projections, and being highly prescriptive about the use of projectors is not compatible with having new curricula. She stipulated that ST Math, a visual logic computer-based game that has been widely used in the district for the past few years, will not be funded in the coming school year, so it will not be in use. However, Tier III supports like Lalilo and Lexia must be used to implement certain IEP provisions.
The current draft of the policy includes this language:
“The District supports the use of technology to support the District’s vision for student learning — to help extend the reach of the teacher, to ensure timely formative feedback, to track student development, and to personalize the student experience.
Use of technology will be directly aligned with curriculum and learning goals within a classroom of purposely planned content and instruction. In alignment with using technology for purposely learning activities, we advise against use of technology during traditional social times such as snack, recess, or play / free choice time within the classroom especially within elementary schools.”
Linda Swain commented that she is very concerned about the amount of time children are on devices at school. She asked, “why do we need tech for art, music, PE? It would prevent the cool 3D art thing, but maybe we are ok with this? Electives should be a little more social, fun, less electronic.” Dr. Nolin protested this idea, saying that “kids are podcasters, music producers, etc; specialists teach modern skills just like classroom teachers.”
Time-outs, seclusion, physical restraints
The state regulations in the area of time-outs, seclusion, and physical restraint of students have changed, prompting an update to the existing policy. There are no proposed changes to physical restraint policies. Changes are limited to what seclusion is and is not, and a prescriptive list of preconditions before seclusion can be used. The staff expressed concern that there could be an uptick in the use of restraints if seclusion preconditions are not met, although physical restraint is stated to be the last resort.
Staff noted that the expectation is that Newton is well positioned in relation to the new regulations from the state, and Victor Lee thanked the staff for engaging with SEPAC on this recommendation.
Superintendent’s evaluation
The discussion of the Superintendent’s evaluation was highly positive, noting the amount of change in the works and the strong community involvement that Dr. Nolin has exhibited. As Alicia Piedalue summed up the general sentiment, “Anyone who can fire on all cylinders across all of these standards even at a proficient level is exemplary.”