Special Board Meeting July 28, 2011

While the robo-call (and the agenda) said that the only topic to be covered at this special 8 a.m. meeting was the propane contract, that wasn't the case. About half of the 30 minute meeting was spent going over why Cloudcroft did not make AYP this year. There were several handouts provided by Mr. Hancock, which I have included here:

AYP Quick Facts
AYP District Summaries
Cloudcroft Schools Accountability Reports
Advances in New Mexico's Assessment & Accountability System

The bottom line is, way back in 2001-2002, No Child Left Behind (a Federal program), required states to submit plans with benchmarks. The overall goal was that 100% of students would meet proficiency goals in Math and Reading by 2014. In the classic style of kicking the can down the road, New Mexico set the bar low in the first several years, resulting in catch up in the later years. So now, we're in the later years and the bar is getting raised much faster, and the schools that puffed up and touted how great they were because they were meeting AYP in those earlier years (i.e. Cloudcroft) are now disavowing AYP as a valid measurement of anything, and the state of New Mexico is probably going to seek a waiver so it can create its own measurement of success.

To quote our school's superintendent: "There's two ways to make improvement: either really and truly improve, or make the test easier so that it looks like you're improving." So now that only 3 school districts in the entire state are meeting AYP...New Mexico is scrambling around to change the test.

Here is the article covering the meeting from the Alamogordo Daily News.

Special Board Meeting Scheduled for Thursday Morning

Here is the Agenda for the special meeting, to be held at 8 a.m. Thursday morning.

Cloudcroft Sports have been Saved This Year

This was received from parent Paul Comino:

After the Cloudcroft School Administration eliminated the Jr. High sports program for the upcoming school year due to budget constraints, the Cloudcroft Sideliners organization demonstrated what community spirit and hard work can accomplish. The Sideliners vowed they wouldn’t let Jr. High Sports fall by the wayside and immediately went to work expanding their fund raising activities on behalf of the Cloudcroft Bears.

The following is an excerpt from an email by Paul Comino:
It is with great pleasure I can tell you that our Middle School sports program has been saved for the coming school year. Wendy McCourt, the President of Sideliners, issued the check (hard earned money) this last week  from the Sideliners account to Cloudcroft Schools to make sure that we have sports in Cloudcroft next year.  Everyone involved should be very proud of what was accomplished this summer on a very short notice.  It goes to show you that if we get involved we can make a difference with our Sports program here in Cloudcroft.

This summer started out with just trying to determine how much was needed and when it was needed by. We not only have exceeded the amount needed for middle school sports, but, we also got it done comfortably before the deadline. 

Sideliners has a ambitious list of goals for this year and there is a group of people on the Sideliner board that are working their tails off to make sure we hit those goals.  Our work is not done.  In the coming months we need to continue to organize, get the message out that as parents, athletes and community we need to get involved in our sports program.

I think many agree Cloudcroft’s Sports Programs have not been what they can be.  There are many reasons, however, what we can impact as parents and community we must.  In the past, maybe you were never asked for help.  That has changed.  We need your help and we are asking for your help. Whether it is assisting in a fundraiser, working a concession stand, donating money, making phone calls, making posters, attending sports events, showing your support for Cloudcroft Sports at School Board meetings, or just frequent the businesses that are supporting Cloudcroft Sports.

We can make a difference. Sideliners is the vehicle to do just that.

This summer's fundraisers so far have been:

• Car Wash at Culligan Water in Alamogordo
•  Alamogordo Street Fair
• Walmart Dominos pizza discount cards fundraiser
• Summer Dance
• Pancake Breakfast
• Mayfair
• BAMM Music Festival
• July Jamboree
• Pet Show
• Cookie Dough fundraiser
• Corporate Sponsors
• Private individual donations
• Jennifer Stone Sold Cookies at Weed Store this summer
• Special mention Alex Miller that sold 95 tubs of cookie dough & $117 in donations. ($649)

That was a full schedule for the summer and I want to thank everyone for all their hard work.

This Summer's Corporate and Community Supporters so far have been:

-         Randy Melton Electrical in Cloudcroft

-         Culligan Water in Alamogordo

-         Penasco Gravel in Mayhill

-         Mountain Magic in Cloudcroft

-         Dr. Dan & Suzanne Schmidt in Cloudcroft

-         The Stove and Spa Store in Alamogordo

-         Weed Store in Weed

-         Remax in Alamogordo

-         Coldwell Banker in Alamogordo

-         Alta Vista Chalet Motel in Cloudcroft

-         Southwest Disposal in Alamogordo

Please note that we have not even started what has been the traditional season of requesting local business support.  Typically that has been done at the end of the summer, however, with the urgency to save Jr. High Sports several new businesses were approached for help and we thank those that came through.  There will be our traditional donors coming forward in the coming months and we will want to thank them as well.

This is a good time to remind everyone to do business with our corporate sponsors and thank them for their donations.

Open Letter from Parent

Parent Holly Hughes sent the following letter for posting to the blog:

Hi Margo,

 

Did want to say thank you so much for this Cloudcroft school blog.  It has been very informative and a useful source of information for us and we had no idea this even existed until just a week or so ago.  Ed & I have been struggling to survive some terrible hits to our business since the economy plummeted and have been working our tails off 7 days a week year round for over 2 years now, so we have been majorly out of the loop as far as school politics/policies during this time, outside of hearsay.  We have a grown son who graduated from the "old" Cloudcroft H.S. back in  2003 and have seen many changes since our daughter entered Kindergarten, now ready to enter the "new" H.S. this year.

 

As we fought hard for ANY information regarding the building/funding of the new H.S. and football field, we ran into one dead end after another and were met with a peculiar lack of transparency during this entire process, left only with rumor/opinion and political jargon.  This is one reason we just could not sacrifice our very livelihood to attend a series of less than entertaining "magic shows" with the school board meetings.

 

Our daughter has been in the "gifted" program since about 3rd grade and while we religiously attend the scheduled IEP meetings, we always voiced that the funding the school was receiving for our daughter was just not reflected with any "action" outside of the laborious, annual IEP meetings.  I now see there is currently an administrative positionfor a "Special Education" coordinator and am absolutely appalled.  I certainly hope this position is not filled as it seems all monies given the CC school district for the "gifted" program, which falls under the category of "Special Education" are spent on the administrator position, the screening process and the paperwork associated with this program.  When we repeatedly asked what tangible benefit our daughter was receiving each and every year, dating back to when "Dr." Jan Hunter was in this position, we were told things like Knowledge Bowl and Science Olympiad were funded by this money.  We of course asked why kids NOT in the gifted program were allowed this benefit and never got a straight answer.  We did go to the State Board of Education several times to try and not only get more information, but report our daughter was NOT receiving the things listed in the paperwork for the IEP meeting every year, but due to our eventual extenuating circumstances, we had to drop this pursuit.

 

If this "special education" administrative position being currently advertised is indeed funded by some kind of Federal or State grant, then that's all well and fine.  However, I'm under the strong impression it is not and my daughter, an honor roll student for her entire school career to date, just as my son was, is STILL not receiving any direct benefit from the funds being repeatedly give to the CC school district on her behalf and we're being coerced to continually sign the official IEP documents that suggest all kinds of lovely plans for her every year that have never come to fruition.

 

I also am frustrated with the CC School district's website (which we suggested years ago to the school board) as even upon its initial inception, we suggested a school supply list, registration dates and orientation dates.  Well, they've managed an elementary and middle school supply list, finally, but there is no information regarding those preparing to enter H.S. for the first time. 

 

Further, when viewing the "District" section, the only mention of any music program is "Marching Band" and there is so very much more to it than that.  I can guarantee you more Cloudcroft students have gone to college on scholarships offered from the music program achievements than the athletic program here in Cloudcroft.  For example, my son, Daniel, graduating with honors in 2003 from CloudCroft, H.S. is still the first and only male student to have made the All State Mixed Choir.  My daughter, who lettered in Band for flute in 8th grade, is hoping to enter the choral music program as well in HS as it was not offered to Middle School students before.  I received a partial vocal scholarship to Julliard in NY and a full vocal scholarship to Westminster in Boston from my choral music achievements while attending Memorial H.S. (Houston, Tx) in the late 1970's and shudder to see how grossly downplayed this extremely valuable music program is.

While I can not promise/commit to much crusading at this time, I would greatly appreciate anyone who can follow up and follow through with what is NOT happening with the "Gifted Program" (within this "Special Education" umbrella) and explore why there is an administrative position being filled and how this salary is funded, especially for such an extraordinarily small school district.  And, why the entire music program is so trivialized, not properly promoted and celebrated is unacceptable; it's treated as an afterthought, especially considering this is a major vehicle for higher education scholarships.

 

Of course, our jaws are still dropped regarding the outlandish salary of any superintendent for a district this size, let alone having all school employees work less for same or more pay, when much of America is having to do the opposite, including our family.  This absolutely defies any reason or logic and all that can be said is shame on all those responsible for these unethical (bordering on) criminal decisions and those who justify accepting them.

 

I haven't the time nor focus to polish this, but if you would like to use any of this in your blog, please feel free to use any/all and you may use my name.

 

Thank you for your time and attention in these matters,

 

Holly H. Hughes

Cloudcroft, NM 

Formal Request for Better Sound at Board Meetings

Here is my formal request for better sound at board meetings. There have been ongoing verbal requests for about a year, but nothing has been done on a consistent basis. There are some questions as to whether some of these meetings (especially those in the commons) are in violation of the open meetings act since so many people cannot hear what is going on.

Effective Teaching Task Force

This information was sent by High School teacher Carole Merriman-Carter:

http://www.ped.state.nm.us/ttf/index.html

Board Meetings to Move to 3rd Tuesday, PED approves Budget

At the regular school board meeting of July 11, 2011, the board voted to move the regular school board meetings to the 3rd Tuesday of the month, starting in August. It was also noted that PED has approved the school's 2011-2012 budget.

To hear a complete podcast of the meeting, visit http://cmsbears.podbean.com. Here is the article that ran in the Alamogordo Daily News.

Other items that were discussed included the inability of the school board to access their email addresses that are listed on the school's website (all ending with cmsbears.org), pay to play, how the school might spend the salary difference between what the assistant superintendent made and what the school intends to pay a new special education director, the rumors that 4 people had received raises since the last meeting (only 2 have), the difficulty many people have in hearing the school board meetings (and whether this is a violation of the open meetings act), and whether there are any plans to attempt to repair the division that was caused in the community by the 4-day week (there are no plans).

Agenda for July 11 School Board Meeting

Here is the agenda for the July 11, 2011 school board meeting.

Open Letter to Secretary Skandera

Parent Amanda Woeger submitted this letter to State Education Secretary Hanna Skandera and invites anyone who agrees with it to use it as well.

Amy Lane Resigns

Arlan Ponder posted on his blog, http://voteforarlan.blogspot.com that Amy Lane resigned after Monday night's school board meeting.

In my opinion, Amy was a competent, professional administrator. I have not always agreed with everything Amy has said, but I have never, NEVER been treated unprofessionally or discourteously by her.

I will preface my next remark by saying that I have not talked to Amy about her reasons for resigning.

I pretty much expressed my opinion back in my June 17 posting when it looked like her new title was "special education coordinator" versus "assistant superintendent." I think she got jerked around and could only take so much. She got pushed to the point of leaving, and our school is NOT better off because of it.

Hancock's Cut in Pay Comes With Fewer Days Worked

At Monday night's meeting, Mr. Hancock offered to take a 5% cut in pay and associated benefits, citing the savings to the school at around $5000. What few people caught was his proviso that it be accompanied by a 5% reduction in the number of days worked.

Here is a copy of the new contract. The line at the very bottom was not on his last contract, which I posted on June 7th.

Cloudcroft School Board Approves 4-day Week

Here is the Alamogordo Daily News article covering Monday night's meeting.

Here is the powerpoint presentation given my Mr. Snoddy to support the 4-day week. Here is the handout Mr. Snoddy provided.

The podcast of the meeting can be found at http://cmsbears.podbean.com. The horrible acoustics in the commons make it hard to understand the podcast at times. I'd suggest getting in a quiet place and using headphones. I will be making a formal request to the school to move these large meetings to the middle school cafeteria, as I understand that people who were at the meeting were also having a tough time hearing what was said.

A Way Ahead for Resolving the 4-Day School Week Issue

The author of this letter is Paul Benshoof. He has also sent this letter to:

Cloudcroft School Board President Bill Denney Cloudcroft School Board Vice President Jackie Cates Cloudcroft School Board Treasurer Doug Porch

Cloudcroft School Board member Gerold Green Cloudcroft School Board member Arlan Ponder

And cc’d:

State Senator Vernon Asbill

State Representative Nora Espinoza
State Representative Yvette Herrell
Secretary of Education Hanna Skandera
Deputy Secretary, Finance and Operations Paul J. Aguilar
Public Information Officer Larry Behrens

Cloudcroft Superintendent Tommie Hancock

Lately, there has been a lot of discussion in the community about a proposed 4-day school week for the Cloudcroft School System.  As a parent concerned about my son’s continuing education in these schools, I—as well as nearly 100 other interested community members—attended the last School Board meeting where this subject was on the agenda.  Unfortunately, the board suddenly decided to defer discussions on this topic to the following week, citing that they desired community feedback and the current attendees did not adequately represent the community.  I’m not sure what type of audience constitutes adequate community representation, but this move signaled that either (1) the board was unprepared to discuss the topic or (2) they didn’t really want feedback from that particular cross-section of the community.  I find both of these options unacceptable and hope the board can correct this perception at next week’s hastily scheduled meeting.  Since I personally will not be able to attend this meeting, I thought I would use this message to share my thoughts regarding the 4-day school week and the board’s decision-making process in hope that we can find a way ahead.

The 4-day school week proposal is a complex issue that deserves dedicated attention.  On the surface, a shortened school week appears to be at odds with U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan’s push for a six day school week to keep up with educational attainment of students from Europe and Asia.  Currently, overall U.S. academic performance appears to be languishing, with some reports suggesting that we are “less than average” when compared to international academic statistics.  Despite this, most of us understand the fiscal limitations we currently face, and something obviously needs to be done.  Perhaps a compressed school week will help reduce the financial burden, but right now the community is unclear as to how much it will help and what unintended repercussions will endure because of the change.  

To gain the community feedback the board claims to desire, there first must be some information on which the community can provide feedback.  However, discussions on the proposed 4-day school week between the board and the community have so far merely been speculative and/or emotional with very little hard data to back up asserted benefits and drawbacks of the proposed schedule.  Certainly, such data exists, since the board members repeatedly suggest that they’ve been studying the proposal for a lengthy time.  This data presumably includes historical case studies from other schools that have implemented a compressed school schedule, an analysis of relative pros and cons, and the board’s conclusions/recommendations based on that analysis.  These recommendations should include a proposed implementation plan, projected savings and other benefits, mitigation strategies to minimize potential problems, and metrics to evaluate the decision once it is put into service.  Without this data, the community cannot provide constructive feedback and, quite frankly, the board cannot make an informed decision.

In lieu of the board’s data, I have tried to collect some of my own.  My Internet search reveals that some schools have implemented a 4-day school week with some degree of success, while others have failed.  However, long-term implications on academic performance remain sketchy at best.  The data supports both academic increase and decline, which suggests that a 4-day school week implementation strategy must be well-conceived in order to be effective.  This is paramount and cannot be neglected: academic performance must remain the priority around which all other decisions are based!  In other words, we cannot afford to compromise our academic quality for the sake of saving money or any other perceived benefits.  In addition to reports of substandard U.S. performance in the international community, New Mexico is ranked last in the nation in terms of state education according to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), and our elementary school is not even within the top third of the state (137/377).  In a school that is already struggling to succeed, our elementary school students are probably the most vulnerable participants in a 4-day school week schedule, as their attention spans might not be ready for longer school days.  Hence, a well-thought implementation plan is essential to ensure elementary classrooms are engaging enough to support prolonged school days so that academic performance is maintained (if not improved).

Our Middle and High Schools seem to be performing substantially better (top 10% and 13% in the state, respectively), so we certainly do not want to impose schedule changes that disrupt these achievements.  Our best teachers will surely welcome longer class periods in order to maximize the classroom experience.  However, my first hand observations sadly suggest that other teachers struggle to fill their current class time with substantive curricula, so it could be a challenge for them to make longer class periods productive. Again, a successful implementation plan is key to maximizing educational benefits and minimizing wasted time, but I have not yet seen such a plan.

It is clear that some board members favor the proposed 4-day schedule, but they have not clearly indicated the rationale behind their advocacy.  Curiously, other board members have not expressed any position at all.  However, if the board really wants meaningful community feedback, then we need to understand their thoughts and concerns.  We can’t comment on a position that hasn’t been revealed, whether it be to criticize or endorse it.  Furthermore, if I suspect a conflict of opinion, I don’t see it as my responsibility to convince board members that they are wrong if they have no desire to convince me that they are right.  A responsible board member will present his/her views in writing to the public and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

In the meantime (while I wait for clearly articulated positions from the board members), I have heard some well-reasoned concerns from the community voiced at board meetings.  These concerns have garnered support from (at last count) 105 petition signatories who anxiously await a thoughtful school board response that directly addresses these concerns.  A thoughtful response will point to qualitative data and the board’s comprehensive analysis to support its conclusions.  As of yet, I have not seen it.

In summary, without a clear understanding of the board’s proposal, all the community can do is ask questions and voice speculative concerns.  We cannot reasonably provide feedback on a plan we have not seen, so for the board to request community feedback in the absence of a published plan is counter-productive.  Furthermore, without a clear understanding of each board member’s individual view on the subject, the community cannot effectively engage the board in discussions to illuminate key issues and concerns and help formulate an agreeable plan.  To this end, I urge the board to release their plan to the public, coupled with the analysis and conclusions that underpin their recommended approach.  Additionally, I recommend that each board member document his/her position in detail and allow the community to review it.  Not only will this help alleviate the perception that the board is formulating its opinion(s) on absent or incomplete data, but it will inevitably stimulate relevant community feedback and meaningful exchange among both parties, thus increasing the chances of a course of action acceptable to all. 

How About Looking at Some Other Options?

Imagine my surprise to find an Agenda with Action Items posted for Monday night's "Special" school board meeting! Feel free to go back and listen to the last board meeting, where they said they wanted to have a special meeting just to get feedback from the community re the 4-day week. "no agenda, no action items." http://cmsbears.podbean.com. One of the action items, by the way, is a vote on the 4-day week. Supposedly one of the school board members asked that an executive session regarding the removal of the superintendent be added to the agenda. It's not on the agenda.

To add insult to injury, they have also changed up the Resolution. (Here is the old resolution). While they cite a survey conducted by the school as showing 80% for and 20% against, a show of hands at the last school board meeting was not considered "representative" enough to even be taken, and the petition with 86 signatures was somehow left out of the wording of the resolution.

Teachers say they are supporting the 4-day week because they don't want to see another teacher fired. Is that something like blackmail? Why is it either a teacher or the 4-day week? Why isn't anyone looking at the quantifiable and more significant cost savings of reducing administrators? Don't forget, teachers are also saying that "over recent years the morale of the district seems to have suffered." My observations would support that statement.

The smoke and mirrors of moving Ms. Lane to Special Ed is insulting to our intelligence. Looking on the school's website, she still has the curriculum responsibilities in addition to special ed. She's just been stripped of the title of assistant superintendent. This is a wash in terms of budget savings and a sham in terms of "reducing" administration...and probably an insult to Ms. Lane, who has worked pretty long and hard for this school, and has pretty long and deep roots within this community.

I know other ideas were floated when budget cuts were discussed. One of them was to remove Hancock and give the title to Ms. Lane. (roughly $130K savings). Another was to have 2 principals and 1 Superintendent. Since Renteria was the last in he would be the one out ($88K savings plus benefits). We only have 400 children in the entire school, we could probably struggle by with 3 administrators, especially if we could line up administrators that could boost morale and respect the staff.

All of this started with a budget crisis, so don't forget that this is all about money now. It has nothing to do with anything else. The "savings" with a 4-day week are not quantifiable. The impact on the quality of education is not quantifiable. Removing Hancock or Renteria is quantifiable, and I doubt that the loss of either would be felt in the classroom. Nothing personal...it's all about the numbers now.

If everything is supposedly on the table, then the board needs to be considering ALL options. But until this Board steps up and starts writing their own Agendas, the "options" will continue to be those that are filtered through the Superintendent's office.

ADN Opinion Piece "Cloudcroft Schools' Budget Shortfall is Questionable at Best"

This opinion piece, "Cloudcroft Schools' Budget Shortfall is Questionable at Best" was in the Sunday Alamogordo Daily News.