In attendance

Leadership Team Minutes 12/6/4

In attendance

Jacquie McEvoy, Rich Mozzini, Cynthia Rapaido, Til Tribuzi(Facilitator), Miguel Appleman, Ron Beall, Nate Johnson (Recorder), Martin Ortega, Behrooz Shahvini, Catherine Bunch, Linda Brockett, Gerry Mountain, Judie McDowell, Linda Farnell, Daria Pennington, Allison Silvestri

Summary of Actions:

We discussed the seventh period day proposal facing the district.

Next Meeting: January 10, 2004

Before Next Meeting

Department chairs talk to their departments to discuss schedules. Bring back teacher feedback on:

How many “advisories” do people want a week? (It will probably no longer be called tutorial.)
What would be the problems and issues if 7^th period was only for athletics? What if the whole schedule was 7 periods; would that make a difference for our decision to move athletics?
Do we want to maintain the 1-hour of embedded time we have a week? More? Less?
How flexible will we be about: 2-day block? 3-day block? 4-day block?

Next Meeting

Topic: 7^th period day

Duration: One meeting at least

Facilitator: Til

Recorder: Nate

Goal: discuss staff reactions to the questions on daily schedule; plan for school-wide discussion

Product: A plan for school-wide discussion

Meeting After

To Be Determined

More Detailed Minutes:

Til: I wonder if Allison and Daria can comment about the schedule.

Allison: we have been focusing on the calendar, which will be explained by a letter tomorrow in our boxes.

Daria: we haven’t really looked at all the options for 7-period days because we have been working on the calendar. We will be working on the bargaining team.

Til: Regarding the 7-period day, Sam Johnson wants to make sure that teaching days are the same through the district. Block schedule might be an issue. Do we see any problems?

Linda: the 7-period day means higher costs for the district; teacher raises may take a hit. We need to make sure that we are aware that we may feel the impact on our salaries.

Til: we said last time that we want to keep the block; and we have to decide on how much time for tutorial.

Miguel: My experiment with tutorial was inconclusive. I went around and took pictures but I couldn’t tell from students poses and behavior if they were working or if they were not working. There are very clearly different expectations and different levels of participation. It’s not like walking around during class time.

Linda: I took a survey of Special Ed. Everybody thinks that block works better for our kids.

Nate: O.K. I wonder, why are we here as a team? What are we talking about? What is the goal of our meeting? Is this 7-period day a done deal? Is the train coming down the track?

Jacquie: the sup. and Board want to go to 7 periods, but the change has to be done with the approval of teachers and the union because it is a change in working conditions that would require agreement. Sam asked for something, but the schedules I presented are just jumping off points. For 7th period to count for instructional minutes, every student must have the option to take it, we can’t require it, and we can’t deny them the chance to take it. That was news to the District. About a third of students typically take the 7^th period. There is a lot of controversy about taking away 15 minutes but adding a 7^th period.

Catherine: Does that mean at the end of the year we’ll have less time?

Miguel: Rough estimate: we lose about 3,000 minutes a semester for all classes means about a week less instructional time for each class.

Jacquie: You actually have to have over the time—66,000 to 67,000 minutes—to meet state reqs realistically.

Nate: If we drop tutorial, we gain in real instructional time.

Miguel: if we have 7 periods and still have tutorial, we lose a significant chunk of time.

Til: If 7 periods is going to count for inst. time and include other classes, we are talking still about athletes missing class time 7^th period. CSM classes are a problem.

Jacquie: don’t let the exceptions determine the course of our school.

Til: will we have holes?

Jacquie: kids will be 1-6 or 2-7 and there won’t be a choice, but all students will have the option; teachers’ schedules will need to take the periods they’re given.

Ron: what if there is not the money?

Jacquie: According to district estimate, there will need to be an additional 3 FTEs (15 sections)

Miguel: it sounds like more buses.

Jacquie: the buses don’t run the academic performance

Allison: As a union, we have to proceed carefully; we can’t waive our rights

Jacquie: everything must be negotiated. What will the sup. and the board put on the table to counter the union’s problems with 7 periods? That should be determined by the faculty.

Behrooz: how will the union know the teachers’ feelings?

Daria: we will have to be trusted, though I’m sure we will survey again. But there will be decisions made based on the facts and data gathered by the reps. We are trying to maintain the current situation. We can’t lose ground or set a precedent.

Ron: how soon should the union know about the faculty’s thoughts in order to influence the decision?

Jacquie: I think we realistically need to have a plan by February. Teachers need to have the idea of next year by March. Negotiations need to happen by then.

Ron: it’s going to be all schools or no schools.

Jacquie: yes; otherwise we would have to go through waivers on waivers.

Rich: my fear is a calendar problem and a scheduling problem. If we wait to long we get scrunched for a master schedule.

Nate: what are we to do as a body? No more surveys or emails, but should we have a large meeting?

Jacquie: we need to talk about tutorial, embedded time during the week, and how we can do it all in a 7-period schedule.

Til: do we want 7^th period athletics; do we want brunch, how early, how late? We would need to look at a lot of trade-offs

Miguel: could we work on a non-state supported schedule?

Jacquie: yes, a 6^th period schedule that was a hybrid for athletics.

Ron: that would give athletes an advantage.

Nate: we would be better to talk about instructional minutes.

Miguel: a hybrid extra period would be purely utilitarian. Athletics, random make-up classes would go there.

Nate: why would we go to 7 periods? Can I get a rationale? I don’t know if I can even verbalize the need yet.

Til: Basically, we would go to 7 periods to implement the Core and allow for electives and a variety of classes.

Miguel: a 7^th period would allow for some kids but not all would take advantage of it. The go-getters would take advantage.

Linda: can we take a look at the contract and ground our decision in that.

Til: if there was a hybrid wouldn’t those teachers still teach 5

Nate: wouldn’t that be a back-door 7^th period? Wouldn’t the union have a problem with that?

Til: we need to wrap it up

Allison: feel free to e-mail me concerns.

Daria: we could meet this week?

Catherine: the district wants to do this, but where are they getting the money?

Jacquie: that’s a question for Sam Johnson.

Til: Friday’s department meeting—might be a good time to get people’s thoughts on how many “advisories” a week, 7^th athletics, embedded time? How flexible about the block? 2-day block? 3-day block? 4-day block?

Jacquie: 30-minute advisory would mean special schedules almost every week; we need 45 minutes for the things that we’ll do—assemblies, make-ups, etc.