43 responses so far ↓

• 1 Denise Cohn // Mar 23, 2007 at 12:09 pm

  I was at the meeting and voiced a fair amount of opposition to this change, for many reasons. I can’t speak for all the parents but here is what bothers me the most.
  1) I did not hear an adequate educational rationale to make such a drastic change in our school. We have a fabulous school with a high academic level of achievement - what needs to be fixed?
  2) Can someone, any one, determine this change is needed based on three months of living and working in this community? I understand the decision was made very early in the school year and put in to place December 1. Based on what? What could have been learned in three months to make such a drastic change? Something that no other principal determined?
  3) I don’t buy the social issues. I grew up in FV and now raise my three children here. The children always have, and still do, socialize with children of all ages, during and after school. The thought that a child indicating they don’t like another child creates absenteeism is just not true. Not here. Parents talk to one another and work it out.
  4) Faculty support is paramount in making such a program work. I went on-line after the meeting because we certainly did not get any answers as to how this system would work, and read as many studies as I could on how the program works. I must admit, there are a lot of positives noted. BUT, for a program like this to be succesful you must have the support of the parents and the staff - right now, the program has the support of neither.
  5) Repeatedly we were told the K,1,2 program is extremely succesful(which I agree) and should be used as a model. If it’s so succesful why in the world would you tear it apart?

  I am not opposed to “change” but I am opposed to being rail-roaded. A committee is formed of faculty, board of ed members and parents any time a new principal is hired - why wasn’t the same consideration given to dismantling an education system that has proven to be one of, if not the best, in the region? We ARE involved with the school -unlike so many inner city schools - we volunteer, we stay in touch with the staff, we pay attention to what’s happening and we should have known about this before the decision was made, not after!

  Why can’t this be tested and incorporated slowly?

  There have been no budget cuts requested by the BOS or the BOF to determine this need - so why are we doing this?

• 2 Lisa Fallon // Mar 23, 2007 at 5:51 pm

  I was also at this meeting,(and helped organize it and get parents there) and voiced a fair amount of opposition. ( I absolutely agree with Denise’s comments). I am not opposed to change if it is beneficial to our children and their education.

  What I am opposed to however is that a change of this magnitude to a small school who has proven its track record for education for many years and that was just formed in a matter of months is not beneficial to their education. I believe that further research needs to be done by forming a committee that involves Parents, Students, Teachers and Board members as well as the principal, over a period of time.

  If at the end of this research, this plan is what needs to happen, then lets plan it gradually, and together and see how it goes.

  I also agree that when the K,1,2 was first formed there was a lot of mixing feelings and hesitation
  among a lot of people about this change. There are still a lot of mixed emotions about this program, especially to newcomers. But time has proven itself to this program (which was created and researched by the teachers and supported by the teachers.) So why make such a drastic change to this program when so much time and research has gone into it? (15 years).

  The current changes proposed are not supported by a lot of the teachers, hence no teachers were present at the meeting.

  A lot of new families bought homes in Falls Village only because they want their children at Lee Kellogg school. We are a small community with a wonderful education system. I was a part of it myself, and am so glad my 2 children are a part of it. Why change a system that has proven to be so successful, and that the teachers and parents have contributed so much too?

  There are a lot of questions that need to be answered, and my family for one of them would like to hear them. We are supposed to be a close-knit community, so why leave the most important people out of these decisions - The “children and the parents”. After all, our children are “OUR” future!!

• 3 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 24, 2007 at 7:41 am

  Maria Bulson was hired to run the business that is Lee H. Kellogg School. She was hired by community members, with input from the Region 1 Board. The Falls Village Board of Ed has given their stamp of approval to this change. The FVBOE was elected by those that saw it important enough to vote for them.

  That being said, the only problem I have with this decision is that we were not notified in December, when the original plan was presented to the faculty and staff.

  As a relatively new resident in town, I remember reading and hearing about the K-2 change. As a parent with 4 children that have been in that unique program, I saw the benefits of the interaction between older and younger students in academica. I had the unique perspective of having 2 children in k-2 at the same time. To this day, they are more supportive of each other academically than their siblings.

  Currently there is a blending of students in the middle school, as well. Again, with my children directly involved, I can see the benefits of the older students interacting with the younger students. The only group left out is 3-5.

  If it works, why not expand it?

  The length of tenure of the CEO of LHK is irrelevant. However, based upon the meeting, it appears that she was made aware of the population numbers, and was expected to have an action plan when she was hired to address declining numbers, staffing levels, etc. If that is the case, and she did not have this plan being formulated those that hired her would be concerned about their decision.

  As was mentioned at the meeting, this current plan is a blend between Maria’s plan and faculty input. Perhaps there should have been parental input as well; personally I believe that involving children in such decisions is ludicrous. Faculty input has suggested that this be a 3 year program. Faculty input changed the original idea.

  Apparently not all the faculty agree with the idea, so what? Personally, I do not want to be a Stepford husband; any of the women want to be Stepford wives? Having dissent is beneficial; someone is always questioning decisions, wondering “what if..?”

  My question is why didn’t someone on the fauclty suggest the idea of including parents?

  Based upon history in some of the changes here, I think this program is addressing problems that are in the future, that anyone can see coming. This will be another good thing for LHK, and will only serve to improve its academic reputation. Now, if we can only get these children to think, instead of waiting for step by step directions….

• 4 Ross Grannan // Mar 24, 2007 at 9:32 am

  I was not at the meeting, my wife Linda was(not a Stepford wife),since I had to work. I will not comment on the actual details of the meeting but I would like to point to a real problem with this situation is the delivery. I was not informed of this until the day before and that was a notice in my kids backpack. I would think a letter in the mail addressed to each family with a formal invitation to a true forum where parents could have some real input, not one where “it’s a done deal”. Not going to BOE meetings or a parent teacher group is not often an option for many people who work long hours and and don’t have 9 to 5 jobs. Communication is vital in this situation, a letter(not a backpack flyer) from the principal and/or the BOE outlining this proposal would have been appreciated. The principal did invite parents last fall to meetings in the evening never once alluding to the true portent of the the subject matter. If I had any inkling I certainly would have scheduled some kind of meeting.

  I haven’t made a point of going to meetings (worktime aside) because quite frankly I have been quite satisfied with the school and the progress of both of my childrens education. (And yes they critically think as to the previous sweeping generalization).

  The fact there are so many parents upset with this proposal as well as many if not all the teachers warrants a revisiting of this decision with proper notification.

• 5 Denise Cohn // Mar 24, 2007 at 11:32 am

  I disagree with the length of tenure not being an issue. Can you comfortably state that in a few short months Maria, or any one in that position, has enough experience to dictate an entire revamping of an excellent education system? She admitted she hasn’t even had time to observe grades 3, 4 or 5 yet but she has enough time and experience to shred an excellent system based on one year of experience teaching it at a large school?
  If the plan was dictated by the board of ed due to declining numbers and staff cuts, then why sell us the program with the “one a half teachers” when that position will certainly be first to be cut? When that position is cut, then what will the selling point of this program be? What are the educational benefits? What in our current education system dictates the need for such a change? It can’t be due to budget cuts because there aren’t any. “Same number of teachers, less kids” - that was the push. What happens when there are less teachers?

  Most important, every study I have read on this type of program clearly states teacher AND parent support is imperative to the success of a multi-age classroom setting. We have neither! So how will it work? The teachers don’t want it, the parents don’t want it and any kid I have asked, don’t want it (but I do agree the kids shouldn’t have a real say)- so who wants it? How will it succeed?
  Lastly, I and many others have spent much time and energy trying to create an atmosphere that will draw families to Falls Village, God knows we need them. The general public perception of this idea is negative and as of right now, our school is really the only draw we have for families to come here instead of the surrounding towns. What will we have left? I have already heard of two families who moved here within the last year because of our school - now they regret it and one is considering private school, the other is looking in to a neighboring town. That’s 4 kids! I am working with a family right now who is looking at a house in Falls Village, yesterday they asked me if it was true the school was merging all the classes - I said yes - they are now looking in Salisbury. They have three kids. OK, thats 7 kids within 48 hours of the word getting out. Is that OK?

  Is the BOE and the principal willing to put their name on something none of them have any experience with?
  I do not believe any one on the BOE or the principal took the time to look at the big picture. In fact, none of them have given us an answer as to what their big picture is. What’s the plan? How will it be implemented? How will you deal with the lack of parent and teacher support? Who’s idea is this? Why is it needed? How will you convince people considering moving here that this isn’t a bad idea? This isn’t a simple policy change, this effects the entire community - one person living here for a few months does not have the right to cause such chaos and the towns people should have been involved! This should have been thoroughly reseached with faculty input as well as parents the BOS and the BOE. As Terry mentioned, a committee was formed to address a dress code issue, but in FV we don’t even form a committee to address the need, or lack of, to dismantle the best education system in the region. Absolutely ludicrous!

• 6 Denise Cohn // Mar 24, 2007 at 10:05 pm

  Ross, thank you for saying it so well. I think I let my frustration with this debacle get the best of me. Although I believe all that I said, you are absolutely right. The issue is not the new “program” (as we know so little about it) its the way it has been presented and put in to place. When you have parents in a community that are so passionate about their children’s education, its both disappointing and frustrating when we are left in the dark on such a major decision which affects the entire community. I do hope a meeting is held to address this issue. In the 8 years I have been back here, this certainly seems like the most important decision to be made. Let’s hope the BOE and the principal do the right thing. I have to believe they will. I’m keeping the faith.

• 7 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 25, 2007 at 8:50 am

  I would like to see comments on this blog from people that were involved in the interview and selection process.

  What issues were addressed in the process? What goals and action plans was the new principal expected to address?

  I do not see the education system being “shredded, torn apart, etc.” I even stated that my main complaint was the presentation.

  No one can state that “the parents don’t support it.” Let’s poll the parents. But, what would that accomplish? What does anyone know about the nuts and bolts of this idea? Let’s allow the people we hire and elect to run the education system here to do their job.

  I would be interested in a meeting with all involved that would explain, at this point, how they envision this working. I want to hear what the negatives are, as well as the positives.

  Finally, I wonder if the faculty would be honest enough to state whether they are for or against the proposal? Why is this a bad idea? Based upon experience of other bad ideas (K-2) this is a home run.

  Yes, there should be a meeting to allow parents to hear the details. Yes, Maria has apologized for her mistake in not informing the parents. Why didn’t the faculty, which is much more aware of parental involvement, suggest including parents?

• 8 Samantha // Mar 25, 2007 at 10:59 am

  My understanding of this is Ms. Bulson was advised in the beginning to set up a committee involving parents, BOE and faculty - she rejected the idea.
  It is nice to see the parents in FV are still passionate about their town and the education system, as they were when my own chidren were in Kellogg. I hope Ms. Bulson will be considerate enough to hear the concerns from the parents in an open forum - not one which evidently was not to consider the new system, but to state it WAS happening (I wasn’t there but with all the conversation around town, I feel like I was in the room). Working behind the scenes and springing something like this on a small community, one filled with involved parents, will not help her gain the support of the parents, something that is so important to the success of her administration and tenure at Kellogg. I hope in the end, all questions are answered and the end result is the best education system possible for the kids of FV. One that has the support of the parents and the staff - it simply will not work without it, regardless of what the system is.
  Paul B - my understanding on the teachers is that if they are indeed against this idea, you would put them in an unreasonable position to state this with their boss being the one to implement it. I think it is too much to ask of them. I believe the teachers have the full support of the parents - they’ve proven themselves - and the parents will support them through this as best they can.

• 9 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 26, 2007 at 7:29 am

  At this point, this situation parallels the Transfer Station in Salisbury.

  The CEO did something that was quite legal and proper, but did not include all stakeholders.

  The deal is done. People are upset. The CEO has apologized for the error in judgement.

  It is time to move forward.

  This is the first I have heard that parents were suggested to be involved. I’d like to know her rationale for saying no to the idea.

  The “rumor” is that NONE of the teachers support this. I find that hard to believe. During the meeting Maria said that the current plan IS NOT HERS. So, obviously there must have been teacher input. The 3 year program is a teacher suggested idea. It would appear that while some teachers may not agree, enough do agree that teacher support for the program change exists.

  While the purpose of the meeting was to present the change, anyone that did attend cannot say that concerns of the parents were not heard.

  Now that the prgram change will occur, there should be a meeting inviting parents of k-7 students to attend. If all these people get an invite home in the Friday Folder, the onus is on them to attend.

• 10 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 26, 2007 at 7:37 am

  Ross, the education budget is decided by the taxpayers, as you know.

  At the meeting, I addressed the issue of “cutting” at teacher. I used the example of the town saying, no, raise my taxes. Denise Cohn, as a member of the Board of Finance commented that would be a first.

  True, my example was extreme, but it is possible. The reality is that the BOF tells the BOE to cut $X from the budget. They cannot specifiy who or what shuld be cut. Look at the High School Budget. $500k to run the principal’s office. 8 Copy machines leased, on and on… Yet, to cut the budget, the Region 1 Board takes the easy path: cut programs and staff. Obviously, the taxpayers of Region 1 think this is ok, since there appears to be very little opposition to this action.

  Should the taxpayers at some future budget realize that this program is a positive for the town and not the negative that some portray, the monetary cuts may be found elsewhere in the budget, and the teacing position be saved. One example would be a teacher retiring; the replacement would not come in at the same salary level.

• 11 Dan // Mar 26, 2007 at 7:56 am

  A question about the notification process. How would parents of children entering Kellogg next year have known about the meeting? Presumably they would be interested in knowing how the school will be changing.

• 12 Denise Cohn // Mar 26, 2007 at 3:21 pm

  Now don’t misquote me. I was never representing myself as a BOF member at the meeting. I did state that when I am at a BOF meeting I am a BOF member, not a parent. And IF the BOF ever did suggest a cut in the budget, that position would be first to go. However, the BOF, as you stated, does not specify the cuts -they leave that up to the BOE. By stating it would be “first”, I meant by the BOE, which is evidently already in the cards any way.

  Don’t wait on a meeting - doesn’t appear there will be one. Its a done deal, its her “right” to make these changes with so little experience in the community and no experience as a principal.

  Paul isn’t this your quote - “just because its legal doesn’t mean its right” (or proper)

• 13 Terry // Mar 26, 2007 at 4:21 pm

  Paul and Denise,

  A procedural question. Can the BOF order the BOE to make cuts? Last year when this question arose in Salisbury I was told the BOF did not have the authority to do that, but could only make suggestions. Maybe it’s just a question of each town’s bylaws.

• 14 Denise Cohn // Mar 26, 2007 at 8:35 pm

  Terry - I will have to defer the question as I am not 100% sure. All the budgets that I have been involved with have passed without asking for cuts so I am not positive on who dictates what.

• 15 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 26, 2007 at 11:37 pm

  Well, in a perfect world, the PRESS would have reported the proposed changes in the school. ;>} Barring that, the parents of current students would have attended the BOE and Principal Chat meetings to learn of the changes, and spread the news via the usual channels. So, the 2 primary sources did not work. No, I did not attend any of these meetings. I found out in a notice home from my children.

  You are right, Terry. BOF can only suggest making cuts. They do not have the authority to tell the BOE or any group with a budgetary line item to cut a given expenditure. The recommendation can be to cut $XX, and that amount may just be the cost of a salary.

  IF the board in question submits its budget for approval, to the taxpayers, that group can reject the budget as presented. As happened in Region 1 a few years back, if the budget is rejected enough times, the board may seek public input to a specific problem. As I said at the meeting, it is entirely possible that the taxpayers of Falls Village may decide to keep staffing levels as they are should this change be a home run.

  Denise, sorry bout that. I neglected to mention you changing hats when you made that comment, and that it was an example only. You were of course speaking hypothetically.

  I have made that comment in the past, but it does not apply here.

  Maria was hired to do a job by our elected representatives. Since the BOE does not have an issue with the changes, we are left with the decision as it stands. As I queried earlier, what were the particulars discussed during the hiring process? What changes were discussed? What possible solutions were discussed? Something tells me this is a “personnel” issue and we will never know. IF Maria is carrying out the job as the BOE wants, the problem may lie with the BOE.

  You may not be happy; I am uncertain. My belief is that since K-2 was a success, 6-8 Blending is a success, why not 3-5? Granted, all my children will be out of the changes, next year they will both be in Middle School, but at this point I do not see the disadvantages you and others speak of. I see this change as Chicken Soup: It Couldn’t Hurt!

• 16 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 26, 2007 at 11:41 pm

  I should not have used the word “legal” in the prior post. What Curtis did was legal, he sought advice from the Town Attorney. It was proper because he is the CEO of the Town of Salisbury.

  Maria’s decision was proper in her role as Principal, and there was no need for an imprimatur of legal authority. This decision is under her scope of duties.

• 17 One angry grandma // Mar 27, 2007 at 6:28 am

  I agree, this is most likely a personell issue as it is apparent all over town neither the board of ed nor the principal like the fact the faculty, in their words “has so much power”. Sounds more about power and less about education. I am concerned for my granddaughter who was about to take that giant leap into 3rd grade which has been eliminated - that was such an important part of life for those kids. My son is looking in to private school now for his children. According to him, there are 5 families that he knows of trying to see if they can afford private school, they all got together over the weekend to pool information on the ones in the area. Not sure but it appears that is at least 10 children considering private school. Instead of increasing numbers, they are dwindling by the day - then what will be cut? From the conversations I have been involved with, its not the new program that is the most troubling - these parents don’t want their children in a school system where the BOE and the principal make such important decisions with so little research. If they will support this decision with no real basis, no “team” establihed to implement it, no support, what else are they willing to change with so little thought put behind it? Are the positions of the faculty, which the BOE and the principal admit are the “backbone” of the school, going to be eliminated? Is that the next “power” move?

  I find it very hard to believe that any BOE could justify this decision now that they know the reaction by the parents and already knew the position of the staff. I understand they stand by this decision but they have no basis, they don’t understand the multi-age classroom process, haven’t read studies, haven’t researched it, haven’t a plan in place to deal with the declining numbers that are now, because of this, at an even faster pace, etc., etc. The list is never ending. I don’t know the BOE members personally but it has been made very apparent that they have very little, if any, management or education experience. I would love to know what the reason was for purposely keeping this a secret for so long. And I hope they are willing to take responsibility for their actions - based on what I hear, I doubt they will be re-elected and I wouldn’t be surprised if some resign. With all I have heard and the parent get togethers I was able to be present for, I would say most agree Paul, this is a BOE mistake and it lies on their shoulders. Perhaps it is time the citizens elected members with management skills, education experience, and consideration for the community in mind.
  It is never a bad thing to stand up and face the music. Its not too late to admit this process was a mistake, let’s try again. But based on the stubborness of the principal and the BOE, its not going to happen - and that is appalling.

• 18 Samantha // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:02 am

  Paul - in your comparison of Curtis to Maria and the BOE, you left out one very important part - Curtis sought advice from someone with knowledge and experience. Neither the BOE nor the principal sought such advice from any one. Curtis had the insight to realize this was not a decision he could make without expert advice - evidently the BOE feels they are experts in what is best for the school - based on what? What qualifies them to support such a move? In this case, wouldn’t the faculty who have been there for decades be the “experts” in this issue? Who knows the school and the children the best? The faculty! A responsible BOE would have researched the issue before supporting it to the point of no consideration given to an alternative. Why isn’t this something that can be tested and phased in?

  It’s actually very sad. Sad for the families, sad for the teachers and so disappointing for the children.

• 19 Jeff Jasmine // Mar 27, 2007 at 3:44 pm

  Combining classes like this is nothing new at Kellogg. When I attended, I was in some sort of combined class atmosphere from 4th grade through graduation. Unfortunately the reality of the shrinking enrollment at Kellogg was bound to force some sort of change in the operation of the school. While I have never thought that combining classes like this was in the best interest of the student, I feel that I would rather have my kids in Kellogg in a less than ideal situation than in any other school in the region.

  All that being said, it is still disappointing that the principal and the BOE did not do a better job of informing parents that such a major change was being considered.

• 20 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 27, 2007 at 8:50 pm

  To repeat, again:

  The Principal is hired to be the CEO of the school. She was hired by a committee that had BOE members and public at large members. Anyone that has posted to this blog a member of these 2 groups? Any member of these 2 groups care to comment?

  No one that has posted here or anywhere knows what transpired in the interview process. No one knows what opportunities and challenges were discussed. No one knows what course of action was proposed during the interview process. No one knows what mandates or action plans Maria was asked to implement.

  BTW, as I said, Curtis sought LEGAL advice, which was needed. Anyone ever heard of the CEO of a business, which this school is, making a mistake in judgement? To my knowledge they don’t consult lawyers for such decisions.

  I have heard that a parent taped the meeting and submitted copies to the faculty. Why?

  Why would the faculty not show up at the meeting? Please don’t answer for them. They are big boys and girls, and know how to post to a blog.

  I have also heard that the faculty were “encouraged,” for want of a better term to fight this proposal by a member of the Board of Selectmen. Again, why?

• 21 Denise Cohn // Mar 29, 2007 at 12:19 pm

  Most important question, in my mind is:
  “Why can’t this be phased in slowly?”. Why not take next year, since they have a full staff with no budget cuts, and train the staff, enlist their support by making this a team effort and not one that is demanded, have parent meetings, encourage those willing to be involved, etc. Why not gain the support of the staff and the parents before making such a change. All admit for it to work at all, and basically not fail, Mrs. Bulson needs the support of everyone so why not take the time to gain that support and make this a success instead of an experiment which could easily fail?

  I have not spoken to one person who is opposed to “change” and not supportive of this change, IF it was done correctly. We are talking about our children’s education and the well-being of our community - that doesn’t suggest the need to prepare properly, obtain trainging for all involved and most important, gain the support so desperately needed for this to succeed? I just don’t see the rationale for shoving this down everyone’s throat unless it is as suggested “all about power”, which as said above, would be very sad.
  I have to believe that the BOE and the principal realize the need to institute this process the right way - with support, training and a positive outlook by all involved. I doubt very much someone walked in to Mrs. Bulson’s old school and in three months demanded such a large change be insituted. I would bet it was researched, staff trained and support received before it was put in place. That’s all any one is asking for and quite frankly, its beyond reasonable and just plain makes sense. What could the possible negative be? Future budget cuts? Shouldn’t that be part of the plan any way? Why put this in to place with a full budget plan when the BOE states there will be cuts most likely the following school year. Wouldn’t you plan on that NOW and include that in the training process? I certainly would.

  Let’s walk in to this situation slowly, test a few classes next year combined, gain the support needed and make this a POSITIVE experience for our children - not such a negative one.

  We are one of several families now looking at private schools, which is unfortunate because the school is what brought us back to FV after being away for 20 years. This is not a good situation at all for our daughter and knowing that is was done with a total disregard as to what is really needed here, wasn’t researched, support was not received, a team was not put together, the BOE knows so little about the process, and the list goes on and on, regardless of the pros and cons of this new system, this is not an organization we can support - our fear is - what will happen next?

• 22 Samantha // Mar 29, 2007 at 9:20 pm

  Denise makes a valid point - why can’t this be phased in slowly? What possible reason could there be to not take the time needed to turn this from such a negative to a positive experience for all involved?
  If this many people are looking at private schools - what is the plan for the BOE and the principal to deal with an even steeper decline in enrollment?
  Bottom line - this is serious enough to take a second look and really examine the program and the consequences of moving too quickly. The impact on the community, not just the school, is enormous - SLOW DOWN, RE-THINK IT, GAIN SUPPORT, KEEP IT POSITIVE AND KEEP OUR KIDS AT KELLOGG!
  Looks to me like the ball is in the BOE and Maria’s court - let’s hope they play as a team and everyone wins.

• 23 Samantha // Mar 29, 2007 at 9:24 pm

  And hey Paul - just because it’s within her scope doesn’t mean it’s right! (we are legally in Iraq, does that make it right? NO!) Again, Curtis knew he needed advice to do what he did - Maria should have realized that too and she should have asked for it from our experts - the staff. Last time I asked what made Kellogg so great, I was told by Maria herself that it was the staff (now this was back in September). If she believes that, why weren’t/aren’t they part of the team?

• 24 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 29, 2007 at 9:51 pm

  I must be missing something here. The original plan was changed with input from THE STAFF. The timeline was changed from a 1 year trial to a 3 year trial with input from: THE STAFF. So, quite obviously, THE STAFF was consulted and was part of the process. So, What am I missing? Other than some adults acting like petulant children. Why is this “such a negative?” NO ONE that has voiced that opinion has provided an answer that is based on something other than emotion.

  The opponents to this plan want it both ways: It’s a bad idea, but phase it in slowly. It works in K-2. It works in 6-8. Let’s see, that leaves 3-5. So, if we blend K&1, and 2&3, a “few” classes as some would like, what happens to 4 & 5? I remember a comment that the teachers proposed the grouping based upon the CMTs. Does this “gradual phase-in” adversely affect this?

  From what I have seen and heard, it is not the faculty that is adamantly opposed, it is the parents. So, why do you oppose the plan? How do you oppose something you know nothing about because the details have not been made public? I have spoken with faculty that do not see this being such a big deal. The general consensus I have is that it’s been done before, we’re doing it again. Denise, you were part of blended classes. Why are you opposed to them, now?

• 25 Paul Bartomioli // Mar 29, 2007 at 9:54 pm

  Samantha:

  If the decision is within the scope of her responsibilites, and since the BOE has not said otherwise, whether it is right or not depends on your point of view. You think it’s wrong. I disagree with you. Iraq has nothing to do with it.

• 26 Denise Cohn // Mar 30, 2007 at 9:04 am

  I was not part of blended classrooms, none that I remember. But if I was (and I just had this discussion with my sister yesterday who was one year ahead of me and she doesn’t remember that either) what I do know is that each time blended classes happened, they went right back to individual classes because they were better for the students and the education process. Each and every time Kellogg has done this they have gone right back to the “old system” - why, because its “better”.
  Its not that its a bad idea, it may be beneficial, but the method it has been implemented is just plain wrong. There has not been any research, the BOE does not have a comfortable understanding of how it works and the principal does not have the experience at Kellogg to determine why the present system must be changed. There is not any research that states the small classrooms are a negative and that comment comes from the principal.
  Paul - why would backing this up, building a team, gaining support, working this in slowly to see how it works, plan ahead for budget cuts, work that in the plan, and make this a positive experience for all - be an issue? Does it not make sense to spend time on this? What is the rush? Why not look at the big picture? Does the effect this have on the entire community not warrant some thought on the impact? What if all these kids do end up in private school - does that not effect the school? anyone consider that? No one has taken the time to look at the big picture, NO ONE who is instituting this plan. Ask those questions Paul -ask how they are going to work the budget cuts in to the system when the teachers will be trained with a full staff, ask them how they will deal with a decline in students, ask them how they will deal with the families who might have moved here but feel this is a negative so go to Salisbury or other towns in the region, ask them how they are going to gain the support of the staff and the parents (a crucial part of making this work). And Paul, if you get an answer to ANY of these, share them with all because no one I have talked to has gotten an answer except to say - 1)it’s confidential or 2) we haven’t had time to consider that yet. And that is just not good enough.
  My daughter is one of the kids so anxious to make that huge leap to 3rd grade - the leap that transforms them from a little kid to a big kid - taking that away from them is a mistake emotionally, socially and educationally. And putting them with the second grade leaves no room for growth. They need that 3rd grade experience.

  I pay these taxes because we have such a great school - I am not going to pay taxes so Maria and the BOE can experiment with my children with no sound basis to do it. I can move to a neighboring town, save $300 a month in taxes and pay for private school. What’s unfortunate is that its the truth and no one involved with this decision bothered to take the time to look outside the box and visualize the big picture. That is sad!

• 27 Denise Cohn // Mar 30, 2007 at 9:12 am

  PS -Paul, I do NOT oppose the program because I know so little about it (along with everyone else). You are missing the point, which is, the program is not the issue, its the method that is being opposed. If there was a plan, maybe there would be some support, but there isn’t. When the only answers are 1) I can’t discuss it or 2) I don’t know yet, how can you NOT be opposed to the method?

• 28 Concerned Parent // Mar 30, 2007 at 5:07 pm

  Paul –

  Your own children will not even be affected by this proposed change. So why are you so hot under the collar?? Petulant children? I think not! The teachers are involved in the change, and now are making plans for this change - because they have too, whether they like it or not! You are one voice among several who most certainly do disagree with you!

• 29 Amy // Apr 2, 2007 at 10:10 am

  If everyone who is considering private school for their children (merely because of a proposed change in grade grouping at LHK) actually enrolls their child(ren), I think it will be best for LHK. Why? The class sizes will be smaller, which will help the children get more individualized attention. Also, it would seem that those who would send their child(ren) to private school are the only ones who are complaining about this proposal (petulant children! I like that.). Therefore, you wouldn’t have parents whining about something that truly seems beneficial.

• 30 Samantha // Apr 2, 2007 at 10:35 am

  The reason for this change, we are told, is because the classes are already too small. How could an even greater decrease in children help the situation? Are you aware, at all, of the program and/or Kellogg?
  Beneficial in what way? Having a class size of 3? Then what? 5 teachers in the whole school? Bus them to North Canaan? What makes you think the only ones complaining are the ones considering private school? If that were the case than the 40 parents complaining would leave the school with 6th through 8th grade. And how is that beneficial? This certainly goes far beyond your grasp of the situation.

• 31 Amy // Apr 2, 2007 at 7:10 pm

  Samantha, your sarcasm detector must be off today. Most of my post was tongue-in-cheek (especially regarding class size). Also, I have more of a grasp of this situation than you want to believe. I have several siblings who have/are attending LHK, and I am VERY involved in their school lives. Don’t even try to tell me that I don’t have a grasp of the situation.

• 32 samantha // Apr 2, 2007 at 7:40 pm

  You’re right - I saw nothing sound (nor comical) in your comments of having smaller class sizes since the smallness is supposedly why this came about- so could only assume you knew nothing about it. Since I now know that you have such a sound grasp on the situation at hand, perhaps you can explain to us what you see as beneficial to this program for your siblings?
  If your comments are indeed “tongue in cheek” does that mean that you too are opposed to the new program, the process, etc? and if not, what are you basing your decision that this is beneficial on?
  I am someone who enjoys hearing both sides of a case, its actually how I made a living for many years, and if you have some insight the readers don’t, please do share it.

• 33 Catherine Paton // Apr 6, 2007 at 11:27 am

  As a LHK alum (8th grade class of ‘77, the biggest–26 of us, and why not add “the best”, just for fun)– I commend the dialogue process happening here in 2007 (that’d be 30 years since graduation from Kellogg for me and my fabulous classmates).

  Kellogg, like most of these small-town schools, serve as community networking centers for families in each town. They mean the world to many of us as childhood markers, with our life stories replete to school-related events in the classroom or on the playing fields or gym, for concerts and even camp outs (before Nature’s Classroom). Changes in the school system do not just mean affecting academics. The social fabric of the class and community is woven in large part through the school experiences.

  The bottom line of funding and maintaining programming that meets traditional and “accredited” standards are impacted by the increase in the cost of living, both with respect to living in a town and raising children. Few mothers can stay home for even a few months with their infants due to the high cost of living. Any mother taking one to five years “to stay home and care for her children” is looked at as an anachronism or worse and suffers financially for life.

  A college-educated working woman (earning a fairly high salary) when “opting out”(taking five years off to rear children) may lose a million dollars in income over her career. “Who can afford to have children anymore?” is an important “big picture” question. Over 6000 children are in foster care in CT, and 10,000 teens are in prison each year.

  The small towns of northwest CT have a rosier outlook for the most part. The children privileged
  enough to attend are expected to succeed academically and otherwise to earn their own living and even to save the world. The timing of their care and education from infancy onward merits careful consideration from parents and partners in childrearing such as counselors, educators, coaches, theater and arts instructors and others who can help children thrive.

  A growing list of recommendations includ character education which gives children clear guidelines for appropriate, respectful behavior, communication, and relationships (including what constitutes liability when discussing issues) abide by the laws of the day and work within group and political systems effectively.

  Parents need to empower themselves, yet protect themselves by not naming names–using “an administrator, or teacher” or someone in a position of decision-making if anything could be construed as a misrepresentation or insult, for instance. Parents can meet in each other’s homes or at a public place if permission is obtained (at town hall for instance or the school), Sometimes a month’s notice is needed however.

  The conversation on the blog is an effective
  forum. Caring about what parents in another town in worthwhile, because all children matter in the region. What happens in one town can impact another. Perhaps a “big picture” community conversation on education in the region would prove beneficial.

  A few years ago, one town was considering what the impact would be if they withdrew from the high school. Some residents of Falls Village were concerned about the town paying the same as others with a larger tax base for students to attend the high school.

  Perhaps some students, particularly in the early grades if 4 or a young 5 or 6 in their grade, would like to consider a cooperative homeschooling program. Placing children in kindergarten at age 6 should be a viable option for every student in the region. This option needs serious inquiry and clarification. Perhaps if children were developmentally more mature from the get-go and throughout their career, they could more effectively socialize. I know of a few children who are one to two years older than their classmates (three of whom won the Sharon School Cup Award in the past 10 years, and one who is 14 in his seventh grade year excelling academically and heading up the school council and enjoying theater and sports).

  Many 13-year-olds and “young 14-yr-olds) go to high school locally or off to private schools. Parents( particularly of young children, or any who are struggling to keep up) need to thing about the pacing of education. Taking a half-year off and “repeating a grade” could be helpful, but is not easily done the older the child is in school.

  I wish Falls Village all the best in maintaining viable options for Kellogg to remain a wonderful hub of networking, learning, and caring. Like dwindling farms and open space 9and local families, we can appreciate the unique history and resource of small towns and schools and take special strides to maintain their well-being and existence. I would be eager to help host a community conversation on any of these topics if that would be helpful and could share other pieces I have written on these themes including the mediation process, Rudolf Steiner schooling, and community networking. I may be reached at cppaton@yahoo.com Peace to one and all

• 34 Catherine Paton // Apr 6, 2007 at 11:56 am

  Pardon my typos, I submitted before proofreading…

  Time is of the essence for the parents considering the issue before them, with many feeling the process needs review for how serious issues are discussed and implemented.

  In general, the roles of parents needs to be better understood in a child’s education. Support for each topic may be one answer, with a few parents giving time weekly or more to enhancing the learning and even social experiences for children, particularly for those “not keeping up”.

  I would urge parents to take a breather before making major changes in their children’s education. I felt forced to withdraw my child after a year of kindergarten because my school would not allow her to attend a second year of kindergarten. I had informed the school initially when I enrolled her as a 4-year-old that was my intent.

  The principal at the time wrote saying that was not school policy, although really there was no formal policy regarding that. Only in the spring did I realize a meeting with the Board of Ed was needed. CT State law said parents had decision-making power about enrollment until a child was seven.

  My child was 5 by spring and I wanted her to do another year in kindergarten. Enrollment did not mean advancement or retention however, we all came to learn. The superintendent had to research the question. Even though one board member said my initial understanding should be honored, others were concerned a ‘precedent” would be set.

  When I asked for a “one time exemption” since we had all been in the dark about the wording (which the superintendent had suggested would be reasonable), I still got a resounding, “No!”. That was hurtful on many levels, with members I had known for years standing up for what they felt was best for the school, not my child.

  Thankfully, I had homeschooled my other children up through ags 5-8, which made it easy enough for us to transition back to that mode. In general, any shifts can be challenging yet eye-opening. My child is well-adjusted now a few years later, and is happy with her learning level and social group.

  Within the next two years, changes to a full-day program were made and the school agreed to inform parent’s of their limited options, namely that all children would get one year of kindergarten unless the teacher and principal felt more time was needed.

  I don’t know that is being done, and few schools feel they can even suggest that parents wait to enroll their younger students. Our communities could work to offer Pre-K type programs for all 3s and 4s through recreation committees and civic organizations. While this may seem “off topic” for the current issues at LHK, future generations would likely benefit from such opportunities whether funding was made available to support existing programs or create new ones.

  Consider consulting http://www.steiner.com (or org) for info on the importance of teacher-student and even classmate relationships. If there are positives there, that may well merit hanging in through the tough times. Many children, if younger or if having difficulty keeping up academically, could need a year to grow and learn in new ways, find their confidence and otherwise “get on top of their game” with enriching extracurriculars, apprenticeships, online or other learning venues. Particularly going into high school, students need to be motivated and ready to work hard.

• 35 Amy // Apr 6, 2007 at 7:51 pm

  Catherine, I find it interesting that you suggest homeschooling and private schools (as well as enrolling a child at 6 in kindergarten) as an alternative to the public school system, yet you knowingly burdened the local public school by enrolling your daughter in kindergarted at age 4 and then insisting that she be allowed to re-enroll for a second year. Most would call this taxpayer-supported daycare. I understand the school’s resistance to your request. If you truly wanted your daughter to build her social and academic skills, there are several good daycare facilities in the area that would have been happy to accomodate you, I’m sure.

• 36 Paul Bartomioli // Apr 6, 2007 at 10:21 pm

  Catch up time.

  Why wait? so that the staff can be cut in 2 years? What do the teachers think of your idea to change their idea? How would you break up the school?

  BTW, these questions are directed at any one opposed to the proposed change based.

  I am not hot under the collar. I don’t understand the opposition. You say there is no plan for this change, yet your opposition is based on ????

  So, the parents were not “consulted.” That seems to be the sole reason for the opposition to this proposal.

  Guess what, legally, you do not have to be consulted about anything taught inside the school house. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, June, 2006, I believe. Your opposition is way too little, way too late; unless you plan to mount a challenge to the decision. Such challenge would be hear by SCOTUS, probably in 2008/2009, if they decide that your challenge merited their time.

• 37 Catherine Paton // Apr 6, 2007 at 11:35 pm

  Amy et al,
  The point I was making about my choice to enroll a kindergartner for two years in kindergarten is that many schools in CT have not considered the option even though it may be ideal (and seemed permissible to me by state law which I assumed trumped local law) for a child and the sincere desire of the parent, not for daycare purposes but rather for the benefit of the child (what a concept).

  In Berkshire MA all 4-year-olds going into kindergarten are given two years of kindergarten (for the benefit of the children). Some parents of fives would like that option because they see advantages to the smoother transition into first grade when that happens.

  Overall, I do not think CT has adequate numbers of parents and psychologists on the planning committees in the early childhood and education field. Particularly, bridging those systems needs a lot of work. CT is trying to secure more funding for 3s and 4s to go to pre-K or nursery school (mainly in urban areas) which might lessen the need for some families to send their 4-year-olds to kindergarten.

  Wouldn’t it be worth considering the option to allow fives to stay in Pre=K or have the 4-year-olds (and ideally even the fives) do two years of kindergarten if that were shown to enhance a child’s schooling and development?

  Too often, if children are not performing well in fourth grade (and some veteran teachers say in first grade), the students fall behind and end up as delinquents, dropping out after a year of high school or in the legal system many times as teens. We likely “pay” one way or the other.

  The option to homeschool cooperatively as much as possible should be readily available and seen as supplemental to the public schools, not antagonistic. Ideally, space and some support could be given by a town if not through the school.

  Doing what is best for a child (and most desirable by parents, particularly early on) is the goal to negotiate. A school largely exists to maintain its business and system of accountability and pay scales as determined by unions and other demands. The teachers are not the cause of this, and deserve compensation. Again, however, it is the needs of the child I am considering here. More input (and friendly discussion) is needed to solve the puzzle.

  Some people are recognizing the value of timing an education so students thrive and are less apt to fall behind or struggle socially or otherwise. A fair percentage of students can do well even without the extra time to mature.

  Intelligence may be about 60% (or more) determined by genes, but can be expanded by good programs at appropriate times, such as introducing music (singing on key, and folk songs such as in the Music Together program) before age 6 (and some would say from infancy on). Music may help children do math. Another goal could be to encourage nutrition and fitness habits so children are able to focus and maintain good energy and health during their school years.

  Parental input and better understanding of programs and philosophies( Steiner, Montessori, Mixed-age Group learning, etc) would be worthwhile discussion topics.

  Some schools allow parents to come in and help out, and even present a topic, and others simply do not. Curriculum demands and teaching to the test are common refrains. Perhaps supplementing what is going on in the classroom, grade by grade and otherwise could be pursued.

  Often liability concerns can squelch a lot of enthusiasm (as can accusations of ill intent or of using a system for free childcare or putting kids in later to give them an edge). I was assured that “money was not the issue”, more that it was never entertained before. Now there are two full-day kindergarten programs, and I think those were designed in part to assist parents with childcare but also to meet the rising demands on teachers to meet curriculum standards that are rising steadily.

  Whatever the factors, money, schedules and so on, could be better researched and communicated to parents to let them to know of their options, if any.

  That Kellogg still has time to talk, argue and dream, is great. I realize “time may be running out” to keep Kellogg in business-as-usual if people keep leaving “by choice or otherwise”.

  The more successful children are in the early years, the better they will do in school and likely in life. Not everyone agrees with that premise (although there are studies indicating such), and “success” means different things to different people. There’s plenty more to discuss. So long for now.

  There will be a forum soon in Salisbury on education, so I hope that will spur further interest in this important issue.

• 38 samantha // Apr 7, 2007 at 6:28 am

  The “sole” reason for the opposition is not that the parents weren’t consulted - not at all. The opposition is based solely on TIME. Its April and there is no solid plan to implement this yet. This is NOT the teachers plan - ask any of them - this is the principal’s idea. Nothing the teachers say counts.
  ASK the questions and see what answers you get.

  The “opposition” wants to take next year and phase this in slowly, work with the teachers, work with the parents, work with the special ed teachers - see if it will work. The opposition IS based on research which states this is not something that can be thrown together in a few months, this is NOT something that can be accomplished without the staff and parent support and this is NOT something that should be based on one person’s theory. Take a minute and read up on this subject. You’ll find the request for time to do this properly is not only reasonable - its required for this theory to work.

• 39 Catherine // Apr 7, 2007 at 9:43 pm

  Now that I’ve had a little more time to reflect, I do think parents would benefit from considering the potential benefits to not having their 3rd graders make that “big kid leap” as a solo class. The proposed pacing of K-1, 2-3 etc will likely give children much needed and highly beneficial transition time. Continuity for the first two years is in essence “two years of kindergarten”, call it what you like. Being with the same teachers, in the same room, and largely the same children is very nurturing for kids (and parents to come on board).

  Third grade is a big step-up year, with more demanded across the board. The standards go up from there to algebra (and even geometry) for some eighth graders.

  While parents have their plans set, future kindergartners may well benefit from the older entrance age if families could swing it.

  My “variety pack” of educational choices are suggested for those wanting to buy their children a year if they are younger or otherwise needing help transitioning. Kids can “fail” or squeak by better outside of school where more options abound
  to spark their interests, get some internship learning experiences, and review studies as needed with tutors, parents, or homeschooling groups.

  I hope parents feel more empowered and open-minded about educational opportunities for their children. More parent meetings of a positive nature can help keep families networked through developmental stages, ideally without bullying or negative peer pressure.

  The April 13 Education Forum at the Salisbury School Chapel will likely light a fire under this topic. The Litchfield County Times had a summary saying China is making it possible for 30 million in their country to have college degrees in the next 10 years, so the “competition” is going up exponentially.

  In light of all the global pressures, we can appreciate the sheer miracle of having Falls Village exist as it has (thanks to major corporate taxpayers so far and some steadfast natives and newcomers adding enthusiasm along the way). I think of FV as the heart of the NW corner with the high school located there. Canaan really keeps the population afloat in the corner. Each town is a gem, and which hopefully will continue to shine in the hearts of all of the citizens in these parts.

• 40 Catherine // Apr 12, 2007 at 11:08 pm

  Anyone still discussing the grouping and timing issue for kids at Kellogg )and possibly other schools if declines occur?

  Just came from a talk at the Sharon Hospital where police officers and others from here and surrounding areas said drug use is high (Pawling area) and not uncommon locally. Heroin which is 90% pure (compared to the pre 9-11 days when it was 10% pure) is readily available, unfortunately.

  Kids may mix vodka with their OJ before school. We don’t have drug testing, but some schools do. Perhaps parents could look into such tests on their own. The average age nowadays for starting to drink alcohol is just under 12. A lot of info was shared in two hours, and hopefully will be reported. Some was surprising, such as athletes may use steroids (often found at adult gyms) to boost performance. Once at college, many athletes can get hooked on drugs to keep a high feeling on their off seasons.

  Also, most ER visits, and motor vehicle collisions (not considered “accidents” but more DUI) were due to alcohol or drug use. Almost half of those likely were taken as a pattern of self-medicating for undiagnosed bipolar or as part of an addictive behavior.

  The effects of substances on a developing brain were much worse than if on a more mature brain (at 14 yrs vs 21yrs of age, with an 8-fold chance of developing a drug problem if taken in the early teens).

  I gleaned from all of this, that the longer children are in grade school, through ages 14 and even 15, the better chances they have of developing positive behaviors and activities to stave off negative peer pressure in “high” school.

  Hopefully, more parents and educators can consider the seriousness of timing a student’s education for optimal success.

  The current students are likely set, although a year off is an option for instance before going into high school or even to break up the experience, say sophomore year. Sometimes there are relatives to visit, camps to join, apprenticeships or homeschool programs to help a student lagging behind make new strides.

  I think the alternative school programs are no longer viable options (that funding was cut), The more knowledgeable and empowered families feel, the better. Thanks for letting me share. I know we all care about the kids in this area. Peace, Catherine

• 41 Kellogg Parent // Apr 13, 2007 at 5:04 pm

  Catherine–

  While I am sure we all appreciate your comments about the kids in our region,(they are very helpful) they absolutely have nothing to do with the article and responses from this blog. We are talking about muti-age classes for K-1,2-3 and 4-5 (6-7) is already combined, and the concerns we as parents have for this major change, that is supposed to take place this fall. Not about stay at home moms, or the Steiner school, or home schooling, or repeating Kindergarten or Drugs and Alcohol. If you have any research or helpful info about this matter - please do share.

• 42 Catherine // Apr 15, 2007 at 6:24 pm

  Thanks for your candid response. I did not research the topic of multi-age classes. Is the main concern that two age groups or learning levels would be blendedyet may not be effective in schooling the children or might hinder their social development?

  What Steiner philosophy says is that continuity of adult (teacher/parent) care and relationship with a child is important for the child’s spiritual development and gives a solid foundation for taking in more knowledge. That’s in a nutshell, and my instincts and experience say that the less stress adjusting to new teachers in the early years, the better (if they are nice and competent).

  I used to work at a small K-5 school locally, as a gym teacher and sub. Only 8 in second grade and other small classes, which may have been a little too small socially.
  But the whole school would ski and have a morning meeting, and basically, everyone knew everyone else (all of 60 kids there).Some of those kids did very well (many from wealthy families but with their share of troubles nonetheless).

  In one school locally the ideal class size is considered to be about 15, and overall, that has worked nicely for the teachers and students as far as I can tell. Parents are not encouraged to get involved in the classroom, with few other opportunities to network in the early grades other than sports, which is a loss for all involved I feel.

  A good learning environment in terms of being able to concentrate, get adequate individual attention and not get lost in the crowd are all important factors. I think the K-1 would give students a nicer time to transition than including them with the 2nd graders.

  Steiner teaching is pretty strong about not making kids too smart too soon, lest they go about with a ‘too big of a brain for their small bodies to carry without enough maturity to synthesize all the ideas and all the big thoughts coming their way’, While that may sound a little out there, I tend to err on the side of caution and let childhood be mainly play-based and care-free (even though global warming is akin to the nuclear bomb scare I learned of as a teen), so kids will likely have to cope sooner rather than later.My suggestion is to put kids in at age 6 (or at least 5 and a half) if possible. The investment would come back many times over I feel particularly for any kids who need a little more tim