I have based my conduct as a town councilor on two
principles: 1) not to speak unless I have something important to say and 2) to
always tell you the truth as I see it.
That’s what I am going to do now.
As I have said in newspaper editorials over the last few
months, I do not support some of the actions taken by the schools. I do not
agree that technology is worth more of
an investment than teachers, and I do not believe that the use of technology is
producing better-educated students.
I base my comments on 35 years in public school education
and the last 10 years at the university level where my colleagues and I have
seen a decrease in the ability of students to interpret and analyze what they
read and write. Can they read for concrete
detail? Yes. Can they understand underlying meaning? No. As for their vocabulary – best learned
through reading – it’s abysmal.
Only the most persistent and motivated students succeed to
the level of their own expectations. The
others demonstrate little reading and writing proficiency beyond scanning on
smart phones and researching on Google. So what is to be achieved by integrating more
technology into a setting that would show better
results from more reading, writing,
and integrated discussion? Should our most important goal be to ensure
that our students are more proficient at taking computerized tests so that they
can make us look better than others? Or do we want them to be able to think
critically so they can actually read and write intelligently?
I teach research-based professional writing in a computer
classroom so I am more familiar than most with the benefits and disadvantages
of technology. I could write a book about the way students can’t read or follow explicit written directions, about how they ignore the written handouts intended to
provide additional explanation, how they cannot
explain the meaning of the assigned reading rather than the concrete
details, how they avoid using the
advanced tools of professional research which require deeper pursuit of the
written word. They regard Google as the
answer to everything. My high school
students of more than 25 years ago could do better.
But that’s not the most important point I want to make. Close
behind my commitment to my own children, I have always been a teacher. Inspiring students to learn is my passion –
sometimes in spite of themselves. In
my opinion, that is the primary role of a teacher, and most teachers agree with
that philosophy. They know that the
students in front of them will sink or swim based on what they learn from
inspiring teachers.
I value good teachers, and everyone sitting up here with me
tonight does as well. There is a great deal of sympathy here for the Middletown
teachers who have been disregarded and treated badly. There is no reasonable
excuse for spending more than $1 million on technology and having no funds to
support the teachers contract.
I see many teachers present at tonight’s meeting. How many
teachers think that spending $1 million on technology at one time was the best
use of funds?
It is interesting that the recent report issued this month
by RIPEC (the R I Public Expenditure
Council) concludes that the primary reason
for the better performance of MA students is that the responsibility for
decisions that impact the education in the schools belongs to the principals and school councils of the
individual schools – school councils that include both parents AND teachers.
How many at the Middletown schools themselves – including
the teachers – were asked if the investment in technology was the way to
improve student performance? So how did
it happen?
The TC was told that the school department needed $300,000
extra for FY 15 (which they received). Then they asked for $144,000 extra for FY16 (which
they did not receive) to meet necessary expenses. Yet in
the same year that they said they needed
another $144,000, they found more
than $1 million for technology. It makes one wonder.
The TC was told that policy called for the funds to be used
for one-time purchases. But policy can
be changed. As we all know, how they spend their money is
up to them, so they bear full responsibility for how they use it – and they deserve both the praise and the
criticism according to how they spend it.
And of course they could have changed
the policy.
The TC was told that the funds were restricted. In January,
I asked the then Finance Director how much of the funding was transferred from
lines in the operating budget. She responded in writing that $661,449
was reported by the school department as unspent
surplus that was applied to the technology purchase. When I asked, she agreed with the following
statement: The schools found $661,449 in surplus operating funds for technology,
but they had no money to replace the librarian or to give the teachers a raise.
I will not even elaborate here about the school budget and
the historical differences between inflated proposed budget lines, the minimally reduced budget lines which
were approved by this council, and
the much lower actual expenditures of
the school department, sometimes in the thousands of dollars.
No wonder they can end up with a $661,000 surplus, not to
mention the $182,000 they just received in Impact Aid which, with a policy change, could have been
used to provide more after school support to improve mediocre test results that
they claim are so important to address. And no
wonder Town Council members ask so many questions. But that is another discussion. The discussion here is about the teachers
contract.
Now, in order to fund the teachers contract, for which they made no provisions, the
school department is faced with a
budgetary crisis that they propose to transfer to the Town Council for a
rescue.
Unfortunately, the Town Council doesn’t have the luxury of
focusing on only one segment of the town. We must concern ourselves with all of
the community, so it is very difficult to impose the burden of poor management
on the entire town. The Town cannot sustain these kind of budget increases and
serve everyone equally – the old, the young, and the in-between. Not everyone can easily absorb the
additional expense of higher taxes, regardless of the state’s assessment about
our ability to pay.
As for the contract itself, I do not regard this as a fair contract in comparison to the other
bargaining units in the town who have sacrificed much for the benefit of the
entire community. They deserve the appreciation of every taxpayer. But as I said before, the teachers have been
treated badly, and now it falls to the TC to right the wrong.
So it is with great misgivings that I will vote to approve
the proposed contract for the teachers. But I do so with a prediction that the
school department will come back next
year and the year after with
similar budgetary requests that will finally become so burdensome that they will
have no one to blame but themselves when regionalization becomes the only
solution.
No comments:
Post a Comment