PSSA's as a Grad Requirement

While the district is mulling over how to motivate students to take the PSSA’s seriously, there is much disagreement over whether or not to make PSSA proficiency a graduation requirement.

From what I’ve observed, most within district staff don’t believe it’s a good idea, but clearly some administrators see it as a quick way to get results even though almost everyone would prefer positive motivation rather than negative reinforcement.

There is tremendous public pressure to raise PSSA scores immediately, and that may drive the decision regarding the issue of proficiency as a graduation requirement.

Getting Educated about Tech Ed

The myth that Neshaminy offers too many Tech Ed classes at NHS seems to have been debunked for now, but some questions do remain. Neshaminy offers 14 Tech Ed classes at the high school as compared to 22 in Bensalem, 29 at Council Rock, 16 at Pennsbury, 9 at Truman, and 9 at Tenant.

Now we have to figure out why our Tech Ed budget appears to be so much higher than those other districts. It’s probably because of how they are being classified (in other words, we aren’t really spending any more on Tech Ed, but our expenditures stand out because they aren’t lumped into another category as they are in other districts).

Out of our $9.3 million Tech Ed budget, $4.1 million is for tuition paid to the BC Tech School, and only a little over $500k is for programs at NHS. This leaves $4.7 million in expenditures that are classified as “Tech Ed” but we’re not sure exactly what they’re for.

Sounds like further research into this subject is needed.

Too Early to Panic

If the 2008/2009 school year budget was cast in stone now, the average homeowner would see a $287 tax increase. But the budget is far from final at this point, and it is standard operating procedure to include worst case scenarios in these early rounds of review. As the budget cycle continues through 1Q08, you’ll start to see some of those expenditures come down (most likely).

Unfortunately there’s a limit to how much we can cut under the current teacher’s contract. For the moment, we cannot make any new assumptions regarding salaries, benefits, class size, etc. Once the new contract is in play, the board and the district should have significantly more latitude in managing expenses. Hopefully that will occur before the 2008/2009 budget is voted on by the Board in June 2008.

You can learn more about the preliminary budget by reading this Courier Times article.

Thank God He is Not on our School Board

We're Not the Only Ones

School board members in North Hills want to micro-manage the hiring process, and critics of this action say it will open the door to sub-standard candidates and who-you-know hirings. Don't these school board members have day jobs?

Click here to read the article.

Putting a halt on Pay-to-Play?

In case you missed the December 3rd board meeting during which I took my oath of office, below is a statement I made with respect to managing the perception of pay-to-play in Neshaminy:

During every political season, one of the most prevalent and controversial issues is pay-to-play where campaign contributors are given lucrative contracts as a form of payback. Pay-to-play is not a Republican thing; it is not a Democratic thing. It is a political phenomenon that exists everywhere. Fortunately Neshaminy is spared the perception of pay-to-play for the most part because school boards are obliged to go with the lowest bidder. One notable exception to the low-bid process is for our solicitor, and appropriately so.
Since we do not want to low bid on a solicitor because good legal counsel is invaluable, we as a school board should do everything possible to give the public confidence that our appointment of a solicitor is not tied into campaign contributions. We can do this by adopting a policy that precludes any solicitor from consideration of employment by Neshaminy if they have made a donation either directly or indirectly to a Neshaminy school board candidate during a recent campaign cycle.
We can make this idea even better by reducing a candidate’s dependency on raising campaign funds by providing them with a valuable communications tool at no cost - the Neshaminy Cable TV network. Through such vehicles as televised debates or candidate profiles, this will be target marketing at its very best. And I am confident that our active community members would appreciate this as an avenue by which to learn more about who they should vote for.
I’m not asking the board for consensus on this idea now - I’ll bring this forward again
in the new year and ask that we refer the idea to Board Policies committee for development. And if we work on this together as a bipartisan measure, we can craft a solution that will help to ease the public concerns over pay-to-play without creating an advantage for any one political party. I hope every board member will support this idea.

So what do you think . . . good idea or waste of time?

Interference not Limited to Just School Board

I was going to devote this post to the school board's controversial appointment of an athletic director (AD), but the public has been doing a better job than I could at taking the board to task over ignoring the recommendations of Neshaminy Administration. So I'll leave this aspect of the story by adding the wisdom of 20-year Centennial school board member Joan Jankowksy who recently told the Courier Times that board members need to remember they are there to govern and set policy for their respective districts — not run the day-to-day operations in the schools.

Sounds like good advice.

There are some other people who could benefit from that advice - people who should know better than to interfere in the hiring process. And I'm not talking about school board members. I am talking about those Neshaminy employees and members of various booster organizations who attempted to undermine other candidates in an effort to improve the standing of the person they supported. It's one thing to write positive letters on behalf of your candidate, but when people start spreading unsubstantiated rumors of scandal/favoritism, or publicly forecast gloom and doom if the wrong candidate is selected, that is a completely different situation. Such behavior is childish, unprofessional, and completely unacceptable.

I may not agree with what our school board did, but at least they did it in full view of the public and are being held accountable. To take a controversial stand that will be unpopular requires a certain amount of conviction and courage. Conversely, to bang the war drums in the anonymous rumor mill without concern for the repurcussions is the work of a coward. And quite frankly, Neshaminy needs to rid itself of such people. Anyone care to disagree?

In the meantime, the newly appointed AD deserves the support of the Neshaminy community. He is a qualified individual who is working to improve the lives of our students. If anyone objects to the manner in which he was hired, remember that your battle is with the school board, not the candidate.