Santoro after all.. who woulda guessed
By Shawn on May 5, 2010 in Schools
The Greater Lowell Technical High School committee voted to select Mary Jo Santoro as their next superintendent last night.
Anyone surprised? anyone?
Nobody’s happy with whats happening at that school, with respect to the political and budget situations.
This predetermined selection is just another example of a school that is out of touch. Board members asked for her up front. Word got out, so candidates did not apply. The deal was done.
I thought our new representatives were going to try to change things.
Its a good school, but its easy to be good when you have no limits on your funding, and can just toss back any problems to the towns to deal with.
While Dracut could be laying off 20, 40.. 60 teachers over the next few months as we start to realize the extent of the budget cuts, the GLtech is demanding another 19% increase from us — with the power of the State backing them up.
A joint meeting of the member communities was held a couple months ago in Tyngsboro. GLTech Representatives from all the towns, and Lowell were there.. except for Dracut. We had Selectmen O’Loughlin and Zimini in attendance, as well as Town Manager Dennis Piendak.. but neither of our town representatives to the school attended.
Towns and cities across the commonwealth are looking at these schools and starting to question the funding methods that allow them to grow with abandon while the cities and towns cut our programs mercilessly and send fees skyrocketing (did you know that Tyngsboro students pay $500 per sport to participate in HS sports?)
This has to be fixed at the state level, but there are no representatives willing to tough Proposition 2-1/2.. which needs to have the exclusion for regional entities removed.
The funding formula needs to be modified to provide relief to the towns.
Tthe school agreements need to be modified so that our school committees have some oversight as to how many additional students can be enrolled from our town each year.
And as I always say, the slots that we pay for should remain ours. If a Dracut student drops out or is sent back, he or she should be replace by the first Dracut student on the waiting list.
Tags: GLTECH
Loading ...
Brian Flaherty | May 5, 2010 | Reply
Really pathethic, especially since the guy from Malden seemed more qualified.
Another hack job.
Shawn | May 6, 2010 | Reply
And in this morning’s paper we learn that there was another qualified candidate right in the GLTech, who for some reason did no apply for the position but instead is one of the finalists in the Greater Lawrence Tech search.
Karen | May 6, 2010 | Reply
Shawn’s quote:
I thought our new representatives were going to try to change things.
Where did you get that idea? If you watched last year’s Candidates’ Night event, and listened to Victor Olson at Town Meeting, you would know that there doesn’t appear to be any inclination to change anything.
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Climate of Change and Collaboration
Ms. Mary Jo Santoro has been selected as new Superintendent-Director of Greater Lowell Regional Vocational Technical High School. Some may have a difference in opinion on the process however I have the utmost confidence that she is the right person at the right time for the school and the public school vocational technical students our communities will put in her trust. Her leadership style will foster a climate of change and collaboration for the right reasons.
The school has seen major changes in its mission due to education reform, increasing MCAS requirements and changes to state requirements for Vocational Technical Education Frameworks and organization under Career Clusters. Ms Santoro has been Assistant Superintendent/ Principal for the last seven years and in that time has played a major leadership role in transforming the school from a low performing to a well run and respected school.
Ms. Santoro with the Leadership Team “realigned programs, departments, and policies with the main focus on improving student learning and staff performance. The goal of the reorganization was to create a connected system where all the parts work in unison, instead of continuing the practice of operating as independent entities.” Through collaboration the curriculum has evolved so that the academic studies and the vocational technical skills are integrated with career skill development focused on the success of the individual student. Curriculum changes, improved professional development, support to those who deliver direct student services and increased parental involvement initiatives have resulted in continued improvement of student performance. I would like to see these initiatives followed through as we look at new challenges ahead. Her demonstrated hard work and commitment to put the student first is a paramount quality in a school superintendent.
She understands the importance of continuous improvement initiatives and that complacency is not acceptable. Programs must remain viable to the school’s mission in vocational technical education and it is important to maintain relationships with businesses, not only in resource development, but also to serve as advisors on the skills and knowledge that employers need and are searching and will be searching for in our graduates.
Her experience will serve us well in administrative improvement initiatives and improving the school’s presence in our sending communities. Her leadership skills have been recognized throughout her entire career. After listening to her responses to my interview questions, I have gained a greater appreciation of not only her leadership skills but also her collaborative style and willingness to take on the challenge of positive change.
I would like to both congratulate and thank all the candidates for your interest. I am amazed at the dedication and quality of so many of the teaching professionals I have met in my first year on this board and all three finalists are no exception.
It has been an honor and a privilege to have been selected to the superintendent search sub-committee and to have selected our next superintendent, Ms Mary Jo Santoro.
Victor A. Olson, Greater Lowell Technical High School Committee, Dracut Representative
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
You Commented.”can just toss back any problems to the towns to deal with”
I received this e-mail last month. I called Ms Lamarre and asked her permission to share the following.
“My name is Mickey Lamarre and I’m a resident of Dracut. I have a 16 year old autistic son who had reached his potential academically and needed a vocational setting. My son was accepted to and attended the voke. Unfortunately the crowds were too much for him to handle and he began lashing out at faculty and staff. Any other School would have sent him back to the sending District without hesitation. Mary Jo Santoro and the Special Ed staff opted not to do that. They recognized the potential in my son and worked hard advocating for him to be placed in an occupational setting. Their knowledge, experience and dedication to their students helped us procure a place for my son at the Merrimack Special Education Collaborative in Billerica. He is thriving in this setting. To the average person, this seems like no special feat. I’m here to tell you it is so much more. This placement made the difference between my son sitting at home collecting SSI benefilts for the rest of his life and his being a self sufficient, productive member of society. The Greater Lowell Tech TEAM made a huge difference in the quality of the rest of my sons life. For this I will be forever gratefull to Greater Lowell Tech TEAM. …
…
Sincerely…”
As a parent we worry will our kids be settled and self sufficient before we are gone. I can not begin to imagine the heartfelt worry of a parents of a special needs children with the question “who will advocate for them when we are gone.?” I am very happy for Ms Lamarre and was touched to hear of the progress and success of her son.
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Special Needs Students
25% of the students attending Greater Lowell Tech from Dracut have some “special needs” and the percentage from Tyngsboro is up over 40%.
State mandated Special Needs requirements add significant costs to a school budget. The State allows for over $7,000 in additional state funding for each special needs student but caps the percentage of students to 3% for Town Schools and 4.5% for Vocational Technical Schools of total enrollment. Because Greater Lowell has an actual 25 percent special needs population the program is underfunded by the State and resources for these programs and highly skilled professionals and support staff have to be drawn from other areas of the foundation.
Pooling of regional resources under a vocational technical setting provides a great service to our communities and our high school special needs obligations. The Town minimizes the cost for this part of education and the students get a better education under the pooled resource environment.
Enrollment from from Dracut has increased this year from 346 to 386 students with 25 of the 40 student increase with special needs.
Shawn | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Now Victor, you know that my support for special needs is not under question.. what I meant by “any problem” was that your schools have the ability to just toss kids with discipline issues while the town schools do not.
“We don’t want the bad kids, that’s your problem.” a former GLTech School Committee member told us.
And also, where are the controls?
Dracut sent another 40 kids this year.. with no limit on enrollment, the Dracut School District has just been reduced in spending by $160,000.00 when you account for the $4000 per student different in cost of education per student.
Not to mention, we have no idea each year how much of that money actually is spent on educating Dracut students.
There’s a race for State Representative this year, and I know that questions of spending formula and equity to the local districts will be brought up.
The Technical Schools must be limited by prop 2-1/2, and the regional school agreements need some updating to deal with these expensive problems that we just cannot afford.
I’m betting the people of Dracut are going to respond after the budget is set at Town Meeting, and the repercussions to our school district is realized.
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Dicipline Policy Changes:
I can not account for the past but what I now see is that more recent changes have been made to discipline policy.
Collaboration amongst a ten person team of administrators have developed and implemented progressive discipline policy that has had success in reducing the number of students missing instructional time as well as improving outcomes for students. The program has worked to address obstacles to better attendence, including active engagement in assessing mental health, counceling, recognition of and providing substance abuse services while also trying to resolve domestic issues and working with parents.
I disagree in that there is a high level of engagement to work to help students with discipline issues be successfull.
Shawn | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Did you just write “ten person team of administrators” ?
I don’t think we can even afford 3 or 4 at the Dracut High School..
There is a funding problem here, and what is perceived by everyone as an accountablity and transparency problem. (Note today’s Sun editorial).
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
I meant to say team of administrators, discipline staff and teachers but my thoughts got ahead of my typing.
The school has dealt with some of the most severe urban school issues and that experience and professional development can also be a resource for our sending communities in the spirit of professional collaboration to turn problems into success stories. Any out reach would be received.
Shawn | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Well, that is good to hear.
It will be interesting to see how you guys handle the contract extension for Lavoie next week. Any comments?
Victor A. Olson | May 7, 2010 | Reply
Foundation Enrollments
Suggestion For Change To Our State Officials
The State Department of Elementary of Secondary and Elementary Education determines the minimum amount a school district shall spend per student. The total foundation budget or minimum net school spending required by state law is the Foundation per student multiplied by the number of students in the district the previous October.
Vocational Technical school enrollment numbers do not fluctuate drastically since their is a waiting list to fill all slots. Vocational Education choice is protected under state public education law and to deny entry from what I’ve learned would be considered a Civil Rights Violation. Enrollments can shift from one year to the next and from town to town pending entrance results.
In sending school districts the enrollment can also change from year to year. The problem comes when there is a sudden drop or increase in enrollments in any given year. The result can mean drastic cuts one year and then dramatic increases in spending the next. These anomolies in enrollment numbers are the most difficult to manage in the budget.
SUGGESTION FOR CHANGE IN STATE FORMULA: I suggest that a rolling 3 year average of total enrollment numbers be used to calculate the foundation enrollment in the state chapter 70 funding formula. In essense this approach would smooth out the year to year changes in funding requirements and allow school distict to adjust to changing enrollment trends over a more reasonable time. This approache will mitigate having to make dramatic changes that impact our school budgets and our towns assessments due to special circumstanses in one year.
This change would have reduced the require assement to the Vocational school this year and would have reduced cuts to the Dracut school distict. If the trend remains constant the burden is spread out over the next year and so on.
Because the enrollment from Dracut is up 40 students and the burden of funding the enrollment is being shifted from the state to the town the assement is up dramatically this year. State funding has been reduced on a per pupil basis and the state requires the town to make up the difference for both the vocational as well as Dracut School District. The Total budget at Geater Lowell Tech has remained essentially flat over the last 3 budget cycles. 0.6%
Enrollment in the Dracut School District is Down 82 students which means that the minimun net school spending or foundation budget is down from $36,272,182 to $34,827,941. Minimum net school spending was set by the state at $36,324,116. Since this is 104.3% of net school spending. Dracut is at risK to have to make $1,414,245 in cuts. From what I understand the state has level funded state aid but has made cuts to districts that are above the minimun net school spending requirements. If the Dracut School system only has to make $160,000 in cuts this year that is good news. However if enrollments don’t bounce back then more drastic cuts may be on the horizon for 2012 which is not good.
Net school spending ar Greater Lowell will not be more than the minimum required.
The suggested rolling 3 year average change would have resulted in less increase in assessments.
Shawn | May 8, 2010 | Reply
Victor,
I like the idea of a rolling 3 year average to be used in the formula.. have you talked to Ms Garry to get it done in writing?
I also still would require that a significant increase in enrollments from a town, or overall, be approved by the local school department. Large increases cost us incredibly at the local district.
Victor A. Olson | May 9, 2010 | Reply
Massachusetts Regulations on Access to Equal Educational Opportunity 603 CMR 26.00 was promulgated in part to insure that all students have equal rights of access and equal enjoyment of the opportunities, advantages, privileges, and courses of study at public schools in the Commonwealth.
To change the school agreements so that our school committees have some oversight as to how many additional students can be enrolled from our town each year from what I understand would be interpreted as a violation of a student’s civil rights. Attendance at Vocational-Technical schools is protected in the same way attendance to Dracut High by a Dracut resident is protected. Admission Policy is required where there are more applicants than space available. The original agreement had a prorated formula by dividing the total number of school age children in public, parochial and vocational schools by the total in all the sending communities combined. State regulation required change to that policy.
Guidelines were prepared by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education for Implementation September 1, 2003 to serve as a guide for developing admission policies and as a standard for evaluating admission policies in accordance with Massachusetts General Law Chapter 74 (M.G.L.c.74) and the Vocational Technical Education Regulations (CMR 603 4.00.) Greater Lowell Tech’s Admission policy follows these guidelines. In order for an admission policy to be approved by the Department, it must conform to the standards established in the guidelines. In addition, the admission policy, because it is an official school document, must be on official school stationery and must receive the approval of the school committee or board of trustees.
Excerpts from State regulation below.
Education Laws and Regulations
603 CMR 26.00: Access To Equal Educational Opportunity
26.02: School Admissions
(1) All public schools in the Commonwealth shall admit students without regard to race, color, sex, religion, national origin or sexual orientation. This includes, but is not limited to charter, elementary, secondary, trade, regional vocational-technical schools and selective academic high schools.
26.03: Admission to Courses of Study
(1) All courses of study offered by a public school shall be open and available to students regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin or sexual orientation.
Chapter 74 Manual
for Vocational Technical Education
Admission Policies
VII. SELECTION CRITERIA
Definition of Selection Criteria: The factors used by the school to evaluate applicants for the 9th, 10th, 11th and 12th (if applicable) grades. Each selective school in Massachusetts which is selective in terms of admission must use a combination of selection criteria to determine which applicants have an ability to benefit, and therefore, be
admitted to the school, unless the school opts to use first come-first serve or a lottery for admissions. The criteria used shall include academic grades, attendance record, discipline/conduct record, and recommendations from sending-school personnel and may include student interview. However, no one criterion shall exceed fifty percent of the total. Schools may condition admission on a student having passed courses in English language arts (or the equivalent) and mathematics for the school year immediately preceding their enrollment in a selective vocational technical school or program.
General Requirements that pertain to all criteria have been established to ensure that all applicants are evaluated uniformly. These general requirements are listed in Part A below.
Specific Requirements that pertain to only one criterion have been established to ensure that the school’s use of each criterion conforms to state and federal laws. These specific requirements are listed in Part B below and include:
Criteria:
Academic grades
Attendance record
Discipline/conduct record
Recommendations from sending-school personnel
Students interviews (Optional)
A Hypothetical question I asked Mr. Hatch from MA DESE was that if the entire eighth grade class decided to go to GL Tech and scored higher in the evaluation that students from other communities he said YES. To pass the next highest score over for a student in another Town would be a Civil Rights Violation.
Shawn | May 9, 2010 | Reply
The attendance criteria vs civil rights information is interesting. But we should be able to find a way to limit what is happening.
And again, this does not take into account the funding issue of us paying for so many placements at the beginning of the year, and then having some of the students replaced with those from other communities that we would continue to have to pay for (or others pay for one of our students).
Victor A. Olson | May 9, 2010 | Reply
I don’t think that is an issue. For the most part students accepted want to stay in the program, It is Very rare that student want to leave the program.
Shawn | May 10, 2010 | Reply
I’ve been told that historically for every 100 we send at the beginning of the year about 30 don’t make it through the first months (do to behavior, or just deciding to go back).
Now this was 2 or 3 years ago when it was brought to my attention.
Can you get a current count of students per town to verify one way or the other?
Victor A. Olson | May 10, 2010 | Reply
I had a discusion on this very matter this past fall with Roger Hatch From Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Most of the shuffling occurs in the first month but changes do happen over the year. I think since introduction of the progressive discipline policy that it is less frequent than in past years. I would be interested in those changes after October 1.
Mr Hatch said “Foundation Enrollment” is a snapshot of enrollments on October 1 of the previous year for all public school districts in the state that is used in the Chapter 70 funding formula. If you change one town’s enrollment then the formula speadsheet would need to be calculated for all the school districts to reallocate the chapter 70 funding. “Foundation Enrollment” is not the same as attendance.
The state in setting their minimum funding criteria acknowledge that the enrollments could change but the “Foundation Enrollment” is based on the snapshot on October 1 for all school district across the state so it can develop the state budget. It is not a tuition per pupil it is what sets the minimum foundation budget and the amount of chapter 70 aid a school district will receive.
I think if a rolling 3 year average was used instead of only the previous years enrollment you could take the snapshot of enrollment for all school districts on October 1 and could also take another snapshot later in the year perhaps March 1 to also factor into the 3 year rolling average. This would average in any changes over the year.
An Excerpt of the states explaination on how foundation enrollment is calculated Below.
Foundation enrollment is a key factor in determining a school district’s “foundation budget” and “Chapter 70” state education aid.
Foundation enrollment is a count of the number of pupils for whom a school district is financially responsible on October 1st of any given year. It is comprised primarily of local resident school children attending their community’s local or regional school district. However, it also includes students for whom the district is paying tuition, such as those at Commonwealth charter schools, other school districts, special education schools and other settings. It does not include tuitioned-in students from other districts, because their home districts are paying for those students’ costs.
In order to be included, a student must be officially enrolled on October 1st. Those who leave in September or arrive after October 1st are not counted. A student who happens to be absent on October 1st is included nonetheless; this is a measure of enrollment, not attendance.
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education computes foundation enrollment using pupil-specific data submitted by each Massachusetts school district through the Student Information Management System (SIMS).
Because of the timing involved in the state budget process leading to an upcoming year’s Chapter 70 state aid, foundation enrollment is lagged by one year. For example, FY08 Chapter 70 relies upon October 1st, 2006 pupil counts, which were the latest available when the Governor and Legislature were making their FY08 budget proposals during the winter and spring of 2007.
A district’s foundation pupil headcounts are applied to specific cost rates to arrive at the upcoming year’s foundation budget. The foundation budget represents the minimum amount a district must spend in its operating budget in order to provide an adequate education. The foundation budget is perhaps the most important factor used in calculating a district’s Chapter 70 state education aid.
In Massachusetts, the definition of an adequate spending level for a school district is called its “foundation budget.” It is a statistical measure that was developed by a group of superintendents and an economist in the early 1990’s. They developed a “model school budget” which quantified “for the average school district what constitutes an adequate—but not excessive—level of funding .” The goal of the Chapter 70 formula is to ensure that every district has sufficient resources to meet its foundation budget spending level, through an equitable combination of local property taxes and state aid.
Each district’s foundation budget is updated each year to reflect inflation and changes in enrollment. Enrollment plays an important role not just because of the total number of pupils, but also because there are differences in the costs associated with various educational programs, grade levels, and student needs. Districts differ greatly in the percentages of their student population that fall into these enrollment categories. As a result, when districts’ foundation budgets are presented in per pupil terms, there is considerable variation.
http://finance1.doe.mass.edu/chapter70/
Shawn | May 10, 2010 | Reply
Victor, you have been pretty helpful in explaining the current situation.. as well as describing a recommendation for some improvements.
Do you have any opinion, however, on what is probably about to happen to the town school district in cuts, as compared to the Regional School which seems to be getting a huge increase every year at the local district’s expense?
There must be something we can do to limit the growth at the regional schools, especially in such a tough economy.
Victor A. Olson | May 12, 2010 | Reply
That is the Conundrum under today’s financial situation. There is high demand and no funds.
There is a long waiting list and high demand for students looking to enter the vocational- technical school system however the school is at capacity. There is also limited space in the clinical and shop areas. The school is one of the largest of its type already. When times get economically tough having a skill is more valued. I was not on the board when the current freshman class was sent their acceptance letters but I bet a higher percentage decided to actually attend than in other times.
I don’t expect foundation enrollment to grow but there will be a constant shuffling of enrollments between the member communities due to the open policy mandated by the state. Because there is a long waiting list total enrollment does not change much even when enrollments drop from the sending community.
The other side is if you expand the school then you draw more students from the sending communities and in turn it costs the Communities more. The public school funding as it’s said “follows the student”. The same formula is used to calculate minimum spending requirements for all school districts including Dracut and GL Tech. Because both Districts are typically at the minimum required net school spending impacts from cuts in state aid are greater.
In the last 2 years what I’ve seen is a shift of the financial burden from the state to the local communities. The total budget at the school has remained essentially flat and the state has level funded and reduced state funding.
1. The state has by formula required the communities to pay a higher percentage per student foundation COST. If you don’t spend the required minimum the state takes it by reducing the local aid payments.
2. The state has drastically reduced regional transportation aid and member communities are responsible for paying under Chapter 74 and agreement. This goes to the matter where the state promoted regional school model and indicated it would pay for the funding to convince communities to join. I refer to this a back door local aid cut. The Governor cannot in my mind legitimately say we are not cutting local aid and education funding if he cuts transportation funding. The state covered 85% of the transportation cost in 2009, only 52% for 2010 and only 50% for upcoming 2011.
GL tech budget has funded to make up the shortfall in state aid to pay for approximately $1.2 million over the 3 year period including at least $300,000 this year that would have come out of the municipal budgets where they are already looking at direct local aid cuts. Dracut is at 18 percent of the total school enrollment and Dracut’s assessment to the town side was reduced by more than $200,000 over that period. Cuts were made by the governor right until the end of June last year.
3. The state does not fully fund special education. Assumed in-district special education enrollment (column 11 in state formula spreadsheet) is set at 3.75 percent of foundation enrollment (not including pre-kindergarten and vocational pupils) and 4.75 percent of vocational enrollment. These headcounts are “assumed” rather than actual counts of pupils, an approach which is emerging as a common practice in state aid formulas around the country.
ONE Thought : The unfortunate thing is that when actual special needs enrollments are more that 20 percent like at GL Tech. If the program could be fully funded by the state as initially implemented when say special needs enrollments exceed a threshold of 10 to 15 % . Then perhaps the state would allow some of the aid to reduce assessment to the member communities and some to improve programs. It certainly has some regional merit to provide a skilled work force for our local economy.
4. Would the State Fund the difference in cost to send a student to a vocational technical school than to an in town district then it would not matter from a cost perspective from the Town? It certainly has some regional merit to provide a skilled work force for our local economy.
5. Remove restrictions at the high school level for vocational-technical schools to allow for some public private partnerships much like higher learning institutions and universities. I remember the physics department at Northeastern in the early 80’s researching and working on fiber optics funded through grants from private communication companies. The information technology boom would not have happened without optic infrastructure to support it.