Sue Flicop

In the past few months,  number of people have asked me if I support all-day kindergarten.   I don’t feel it’s a simple “yes” or “no” answer, though, and that can sometimes frustrate those who have asked.  Technically, Newton does have all-day kindergarten.   Certainly the teachers are there all day, though the class size is cut in half in the afternoon.

And that is trade-off right there.  If we want full-day kindergarten, we will not have the two afternoons with only a small number of children in the class.  We will have four afternoons with the full class.

The current system was the result of compromise between parents who wanted their children in school the full day and those who felt that the full schedule or the full number of students were too much for their children in their first year of public school.   I recognize that this is a difficult and exasperating schedule for working parents, exacerbated in recent years by the expenses and space crunch in aftercare programs.

This is certainly a decision the School Committee can revisit and would require discussion about our values and priorities with the community and with the teachers.

In perusing some of the School Committee websites of nearby communities, I’ve observed that there are some standing committees that we don’t have in Newton.  In particular, I think we should consider establishing a Finance Subcommittee, which would be useful in supporting the development of a long-range financial planning system, and a Curriculum Subcommittee.  In both cases, the members would be the “point people” who can communicate with the public specifically on these issues, as well as review and comment on the recommendations of staff.

As the school year gets under way and the search for a new, permanent school superintendent begins in earnest, I feel more strongly than ever that we must be sure to hire an exceptional leader in the education field.

We know that the quality of the teacher is the most important single element in a child’s education. We must have a school system that is led by someone who intimately understands what it takes to hire, create and support high-quality teachers–someone with a high level of expertise in teaching and learning.

Our school system is large–11,500 students, and a budget of $165 million. The new superintendent must be able to manage a large organization, and to propose and implement a budget that reflects educational priorities shared by our community.

Additionally, the Newton Public Schools need a leader who is a strong communicator and a good listener. We must have a superintendent who is responsive to the needs of all the stakeholders in our schools–students, parents, staff, and the community at large. A strong belief in the importance of communication will then begin to “trickle down” to all levels of the school system.

In addition to hiring the new superintendent, my other areas of focus are:

* Implementing long-range financial planning in our school system–essentially planning how to finance our schools more than one year at a time;
* Focusing on high-quality teaching–hiring, training, supporting and evaluating the best teachers; and
* Improving communications between the School Committee, the school administration, and the community.

I recently wrote this on the Newton Parents Group listserve in response to a question about the problem of class size in Newton.

I think the issue of class size is complicated–it’s not just about money. Over the years I’ve been involved in the schools, the problem has been a moving target, affecting some schools for a year or more, and then jumping to others in the next years. Adding teachers can solve the problem temporarily, until class size issues hit the next school.

If one were to add enough teachers to keep class sizes at the ideal level every year, we would run out of space in some schools. A few years ago, Bowen had the problem of getting a reasonable number of teachers for an endlessly growing student population, but not enough classrooms for them. Even after adding one modular, we still had two teachers sharing a classroom space. But the current plan to add extra capacity as schools are rebuilt/renovated to alleviate some of the potential space crunches in Newton’s future hasn’t received a lot of support.

Our community also values neighborhood schools, which also puts stress on class size. Margaret [Albright] suggests redistricting, but this is an extremely painful process–people volunteer neighborhoods other than their own to be moved to another school. To me, it’s not fair to redistrict unless you can at least “grandfather” in the current students and their families. This means that redistricting is not a short-term solution that can alleviate immediate class size problems.

I met with a Swampscott School Committee member and their superintendent last spring–they changed from neighborhood schools to a system where the school department added new families/students to schools that had capacity in the appropriate grades. This essentially did away with large class sizes across their three elementary schools. However, Swampscott is far smaller–both in terms of population and geography. Still, there might be some hybrid solution in Newton, if we are willing to be more flexible and feel that smaller class sizes are worthy of rethinking an established element of our school system.

These issues haven’t been discussed very much, partly because parents are often focused on their own school and don’t get a chance to see what is happening from a larger perspective. The idea of changing neighborhood schools is also a bit of a “third rail” in terms of discussions. It’s been far easier to figure out how to add a teacher or an aide rather than work on the underlying problems.

In terms of what to do right now, we should be looking carefully at the new model this year at Countryside and Peirce–instead of thinking about 1 teacher to 25 students, they are thinking of a whole grade with a team of teachers, aides, and other support staff. In the end, we are all concerned all about how well the school system meets our students’ educational needs–perhaps this new model can do this well and allow more flexible staffing.

I’m back after some summer relaxation! Below are the questions candidates received from Stand for Children, as well as my responses. For a look at the responses of all the candidates, please go to Stand for Children Candidate Survey.

1. How would you describe the quality of education that NPS provides? Has the quality changed?

While the Newton Public Schools still provide a high-quality education, we must continue working to ensure that each child’s classroom experience is outstanding. Our students do well on standardized tests, and Newton students go to some of the finest colleges. Many students report that they feel well-prepared for higher education.

However, I hear from people who are nostalgic for the innovative, experimental curriculum for which Newton was once famous. Some parents worry that Newton’s MCAS scores no longer place Newton schools at the very top in Massachusetts and believe that Newton is “coasting” on its reputation.

I strongly believe that the new strategic plan will reinvigorate the focus on learning and innovation to ensure that all Newton students receive a top-notch education. I will be a strong advocate for some of the exciting recommendations of the strategic plan, including collaborative work among students, interdisciplinary curricula, and 360-degree evaluations of staff.

2. If elected, what would you do to improve the quality of education?

I would hire a great superintendent who understands how to make each child’s classroom experience outstanding. Having the right person to lead the organization is essential to making any other changes.

Next, I would focus on enhancing high-quality teaching in our schools, because this is the most important element in our children’s education. Parents know it and research shows it. Ideas such as regular teacher surveys, job-embedded professional development, and improved evaluations can help identify the best ways to hire, train and retain Newton’s top teachers.

In addition, we need to take a fresh look at our curriculum and bring teachers and curriculum coordinators together to determine what works best. We must ensure that all levels of staff work together to find what works best in the classroom. The School Committee should provide the necessary resources and must hold the staff accountable for improvements.

3. How will you address equity across the school system?

Providing an equitable education for all Newton students is critically important. All of the neighborhood schools merge into 4 middle schools and 2 high schools, and children from each elementary school should be equally prepared.

Each elementary school has its own character, and the communities that they serve are not the same — some PTOs are able to raise significantly more funds than those at other schools. The School Committee must make it a priority to ensure that children from all Newton schools have access to comparable educational resources. It must work with the PTOs and citywide groups such as the Newton Schools Foundation to address this issue.

Today, principals work collaboratively and collegially to do their best to ensure equity. The School Committee’s equity policy must continue to minimize the educational effect of the differences in fundraising ability among elementary schools.

4. How would you communicate with all of Newton’s citizens about the state of the Newton Schools and the actions of the School Committee?

How will you bring the community together to see that the school system is a community-wide resource and should be a primary shared investment?

One of my top priorities is to improve communication and community involvement. As PTO Council Chair, I worked hard to keep PTOs and parents informed about what was happening with the budget through regular email updates. The school department should collect email addresses to enable more frequent electronic communications with parents.

In addition, there needs to be more two-way communication, such as an interactive website (with a chance for parents to ask questions and get answers), more regular open-ended public forums (focused on specific issues and questions), more communication through newspapers and other local sources, and more visits to the schools. The School Committee needs to make the effort. It’s neither an easy nor a quick solution; it’s hard work, and requires time and effort, but it will be worthwhile and residents will be more engaged with the schools and the decision-making process.

5. What recommendations from the CAG’s school cost structure report would you implement?

The CAG report opens up a new realm of discussion about how we deliver education (both regular and special education) and supporting services, such as the lunch program and transportation. With our budget constraints, we need to think creatively about how to organize and manage these services more efficiently. I support evaluating and discussing all the areas the CAG studied.

One of my top priorities is to develop and implement a long-range financial plan, as recommended by the CAG. Using this planning tool and discussing potential trade-offs with the community (i.e. transportation fees v. fewer resources going directly into education) is critical for us to live within our means.

While the current School Committee is already making progress on the lunch program and special education, I would also like to see a more in-depth evaluation of the maintenance program and how to make it more efficient and cost-effective.

6. How should the city plan to pay for ongoing maintenance and improvement of our school buildings?

A long-range financial plan will enable us to change the process of one-year-at-a-time budgeting for maintenance and improvements. When resources are scarce, the School Committee has protected areas like class size and teacher quality instead of fully funding maintenance. It is clear that we can no longer continue avoiding the backlog of work on our buildings, and must take a longer term approach to find the resources necessary. This includes developing realistic and reasonable budgets for renovations and rebuilding projects that the public can have confidence in.

Maintenance of our schools can be more efficiently organized by merging both the school and city maintenance departments. This will save money and increase efficiencies and accountability, so that work will be done in a thorough and cost-effective way. We should also consider outsourcing more of our maintenance, just as the School Committee is looking at the possibility of outsourcing the lunch program.

7. What do you think about raising fees that directly shift education costs to families?

I firmly believe that public education should be equally available to everyone. I do not support charging fees for the regular curriculum. Public schools should not charge for basic and essential elements of education.

Facing serious financial constraints, however, we should seriously consider fees for activities that are outside the regular curriculum. We do not want to create a two-tiered system of education, so I would support fees only as long as there are waivers to allow children from lower-income homes to participate equally.

We all want to offer the broadest curriculum to our children. But we have financial constraints that may force us to consider reducing the breadth of programming in the future. The School Committee must actively involve the community when facing these difficult choices. If we can save some of the vital programs, we should reluctantly consider fees for some of the cost of non-essential activities.

8. What top three qualities will you look for in a new Superintendent?

First, the new Superintendent must be a recognized educational leader. Education is all about what happens in the classroom. We need a leader who understands this and is skilled at making the classroom experience extraordinary for each child.

Second, the new Superintendent needs to be an outstanding communicator and listener. He or she must be able to communicate effectively with and listen to staff, community members and the wide variety of groups in Newton. Only by both communicating and listening will we be able to bring in new ideas and increase support for and pride in our school system.

Third, the new Superintendent should be a skilled manager who can manage our large $165 million budget. The new Superintendent needs to hire top-quality administrators and must be able to ask the right questions and push for better solutions and efficiencies.

9. If you were to attain office, how would you involve and communicate with Newton grassroots organizations like Stand for Children of Newton?

Grassroots organizations such as Stand for Children are a vital part of any democratic society. Stand’s advocacy for the energy saving projects led to important benefits for our community. Additionally, its work at the state level has been informative and very helpful to people interested in education funding.

As a parent leader for many years, I have learned that communication with grassroots organizations requires a multi-faceted approach using a variety of different media, including emails and letters and opinion columns in local newspapers. School Committee members should visit with grassroots groups to meet and share ideas and constructive criticisms throughout the year—not just when on the campaign trail.

These connections need to be made regularly, and they need to work in both directions. Improved communications requires time and patience; I plan on working hard to make this happen and I look forward to working with Stand for Children.

Why don’t we talk more about the middle schools? Let’s face it…parents whose children are in the middle schools or who have moved on to the high schools often believe that the middle schools are really the weakest part of our school system. I don’t mean to imply that there aren’t exciting things going on at the middle school level, or that there aren’t dedicated and passionate staff, but it feels like it happens to a far lesser degree at the middle school level.

In general, middle school parents are less engaged–either because they are “burnt out” from elementary school involvement or because their middle schoolers are trying to keep them at arm’s length. Programs like BRIM (Breaking Ranks in the Middle) are not well explained and parents can’t see the direct connection or benefit to the curriculum. Too often middle school is treated as something for the students to “get through” so that they can reach the wonderful high schools.

As a middle school parent and a School Committee candidate, I want three years where our increasingly independent children are challenged academically, are learning the 21^st century skills needed for future success, and are developing the social skills important for successful and enriching lives. We also want our children to have a memorable three years that maintains that excitement for education that was sparked at the elementary level and the positive connections with teachers who are engaged and challenged themselves.

So what can we do to support and enhance the middle schools? Parents can become more involved and knowledgeable and advocate for more attention TO the middle schools and FROM the middle schools. Let’s figure out what BRIM is about (and explain it to each new batch of middle school parents) and how it fits into the new Strategic Plan. Let’s do more pilot programs at the middle schools—especially those that build upon the strategic plan. Currently there are two classrooms that are piloting new technology, and that number is expected to grow. It would be great to see some surveying done of the faculty and the parents about their perceptions. Can we have more multidisciplinary courses and projects? These are just a few ideas to bring middle schools into the limelight.

We should always be open to exploring new innovations in education.  There are many ideas on how to improve education that would be interesting to pilot here in Newton.  With proper planning,  support, and review, we can evaluate which ones are helpful and sustainable over time.

One example to consider is the idea of expanded learning time (ELT).  I recently heard Chris Gabrieli, author of Time to Learn, talk about this subject, along with two staff people from a Framingham school with a longer school day.  It’s true that most of the schools that have an expanded day have very different concerns than we have here in Newton–issues like low graduation rates and low MCAS scores.  But Newton still does have challenges in the school system that might be addressed by having a longer school day.  It is worth exploring this idea and how it might be applied to a school in Newton.

It is important, though, when considering all these different ideas to be sure there is consensus in the particular school community among parents and staff to try a new program.  Additionally, resources needed for a pilot must not take away from those needed in other schools, and should be integrated into a long-range financial plan in order to ensure sustainability.

Now that the Board of Alderman has voted to approve the local hotel-motel tax but not the local restaurant tax, it is unclear whether or not the School Committee will have enough money to bond for four new modulars at Oak Hill, in addition to using the full $1.75 million for capital improvements.

In my opinion, the School Committee needs to more fully explore the possibility of adding two modulars at Oak Hill next year, while still planning and designing for four.  If the student projections remain the same, the second set of modulars could be purchased next year instead.  This might not be the most efficient method of meeting Oak Hill’s space needs–the numbers need to be run and presented before a decision is made.  This could be a pragmatic way to move forward with much of the original CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) list, while still working to solve the space crunch in the system.

As I watched the School Committee deliberate on how to spend $1.75 million in capital funds, I kept asking myself how I would vote if I were sitting at the table.

This is an extraordinarily difficult situation, though quite simple to explain:  there simply isn’t enough money to pay for the capital projects the School Committee would like to undertake this year.  This means that some projects need to be put on hold–the question is how to determine which ones.  Among the choices were:  roof improvements; new second boilers; new windows and doors at an elementary school; an elevator in an elementary school; and four new modulars for a middle school.

There was an extensive discussion that addressed many alternatives and needs.  The only area I would have like to see explored was the possibility of adding only two modulars at Oak Hill next year, followed by two the following year.  While this would not be the most cost-efficient method for design and construction, these inefficiencies might be offset by the ability to continue to move forward with other projects.  I’m not suggesting this is the way to go, but it is another alternative that could have been evaluated.

In the end, the argument that made the most sense to me was to focus on the items that would have a substantial impact on the educational program–the ones that would lead to significant impact on education if they weren’t done now.   To me, this includes the roofs, the elevator, and the modulars.  Clearly, a roof failure could mean a class or classes need to shut down or be moved until repair can be done.  This could also mean a substantial repair expense–far more than a proactive repair would cost today.  The elevator is a no-brainer–it not only means giving all students the ability to move easily around the school, but also it gives them dignity and self-sufficiency.

The Oak Hill modulars are necessary because in September, 2010, a large cohort of students begins entering the school, causing a space crunch.   Not enough space leads to large team sizes (predicted to be greater than 100 students) which will substantially affect students’ education.

I forsaw the Oak Hill space situation  several years ago when Bowen and other Oak Hill feeder schools were struggling with increases in student population.  However, without a comprehensive capital plan that includes both municipal and school needs, it is impossible to properly plan for and meet the capital needs and the associated financing necessary to avoid these difficult situations.

Unfortunately the current funding difficulties require placing the needs of one school over the needs of another, and in the end no decision satisfies everyone.

FYI…clips of me on Laurie Mokriski’s show, The Local View, will be available on this website shortly.

In the meantime, I was recently on Ken Parker’s show, Common Ground.  This show is on the Blue Channel, on Thursdays at 8 p.m. and midnight, as well as Saturdays at 7 p.m., Sundays at 6:30 p.m., Mondays at 5:30 am and 1:30 p.m., and Wednesdays at 5 p.m.

Look for me soon on Tom Sheff’s show, debating my opponent!  I’ll have the schedule up soon.