The Finance Committee of the Board of Education began a review of staffing needs for the 2010-2011 Norwalk Public School budget at their meeting last night. Two programs on the agenda were Early Childhood and Literacy Services. The Committee also performed an inventory of all interim, vacant and soon to be vacant positions.
Early in the meeting, Finance Committee Chair Steve Colarossi and Dan Cook, Interim Chief Financial officer said that a RFP will be drafted for "negotiations of legal services". The BOE will look for a firm with the most competitive legal fees. This move is the a result of a review of Legal Services which occurred at the last Finance Committee meeting.
Mary Budrawich, Early Childhood Education Specialist who will be retiring at the end of the school year, made a presentation about early childhood services in Norwalk. Since many of the programs she helps to oversee are not within the school system, she said that she has “one foot in the schools and one foot in the community.”
Partnering with the City, Ms. Budrawich works with 12 early childhood sites providers. She was instrumental in developing the preschool program at Brookside Elementary and the Brighter Futures Program, which is currently located at Marvin. In addition, she oversees a $4.5 million State School Readiness grant and $2.7 million Head Start grant.
Prior to last year’s budget cuts, Early Childhood services had a four full time staff members, which were funded in combination by the BOE, the City and special grants. After the budget cuts, the executive assistant to the superintendent (who devoted 40% to Early Childhood) was eliminated. In addition, the City eliminated the Director of Youth Services position who spent 60% of her time devoted to Early Childhood.
Ms. Budrawich presented the Committee with a proposal for a restructured staffing plan for next year’s budget. The proposed plan included one city position (funded in part by the city and grants) and three BOE positions: an Instructional Specialist for Early Childhood funded by the NPS operating budget, Early Childhood Manager funded through private and grant funding and School Readiness Assistant funded by the BOE and grants.
“This is a new structure,” said Ms. Budrawich. “We are not asking for any additional funds. This assumes flat funding.”
Committee Chair Steve Colarossi said that early childhood education is important in closing the achievement gap and asked if there was the possibility of expanding preschool programs in the district with this new structure.
Tony Daddona, Assistant Superintendent, said there is a possibility, but it would depend on the availability of space in schools and administrative oversight within the school.
Ms. Budrawich stressed that timing is important in approving this proposal because grant deadlines are in February and March.
Literacy Specialists were also discussed. Mr. Daddona reported that as a result of last year’s budget cuts, NPS lost its literacy specialists. However, as result of state and federal funding made available this year, many literacy specialist jobs were reinstated at elementary schools. Priority School Funding, State funding for school districts with "great academic need”, has allowed part-time literacy specialists to return to all the elementary schools. In addition, Title 1 grants, federal funds made available to districts with a significant free and reduced lunch student population, have provided enough funds for Title 1 schools to have a full time literacy specialists.
“Is that really enough?” asked Mr. Colarossi. “ I’d like to see a full time specialist in every school.”
According to Bruce Mellion, president of the Norwalk Federation of Teachers, literacy specialists are required to have an elementary teaching certification, however he said that many of Norwalk’s specialists have Master’s degrees.
Mr. Daddona spoke about the possibility of buying a district license for Lexia, a literacy software program. It is currently being used with successful results at Marvin, Cranbury and Nathan Hale. He is evaluating his budget to see if he can find funds for it.
Rosa Murray a former Board Member and Mr. Mellion said that the district should make sure that teaching tools, like Lexia, be available to all schools, not just a couple of schools.
“It’s an issue of equity,” Ms. Murray said.
Fay Ruotolo, Director of HR, briefed the the Committee on interim, vacant and soon-to-be vacant position in central office. The following positions are interim: Superintendent (Bill Papallo), Chief Financial Officer (Dan Cook), Budget Director (Donna Vaccarella), Instructional Specialist of Elementary Education (Marilyn Libertore), Instructional Math Specialist (John Keough, consultant) and a Special Education Administrator.
The IT Director is currently a vacant position.
Soon to be vacant positions include: Instructional Specialist of Early Childhood (Mary Budrawich), Director of Pupil Personnel (Janie Friedlander), Health Services Coordinator (Leah Turner), Principal of Briggs High School (Alaine Laine)
Ms. Ruotolo said she has serious candidates for the IT position and the Elementary Education Instructional Specialist positions.
Board Chair Glenn Iannacone said it is important to start looking for the soon-to-be vacant positions, especially for key jobs like the Director of Pupil Personnel.
Ms. Ruotolo asked for the Board's assistance in finding parents and community members to sit on interview committees.
During the meeting, Ms. Ruotolo also briefed the Committee on the amount of benefit obligation NPS has to laid-off employees. The district is required to pay unemployment benefits for 46 weeks and 65% of their health insurance premium for 6 months, which is reimbursable through the federal government.
Dan Cook, Interim Chief Financial Officer, said he is monitoring this year’s budget very closely, on a month-to-month basis. “We are not running a serious deficit on any of our accounts,” he said.
Mr. Cook said that the RFP is out for an architectutal firm to perform the elementary school facility study. A shortlist of candidates will be presented to the Finance Committee and later to the entire Board.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Also, I heard the IT director must also have a teaching cerification. A little strange I think since this would limit the number of candidates.
ReplyDeleteWhy would the IT Director need to have a teaching certificate. Please explain. Moina can you find out?
ReplyDeleteThe IT director needs to understand the uses of hardware and software for educational purposes. Also, this position oversees some of the vocational departments in the district. Restructuring could make this a non-certified position, such as it was a number of years ago, when it was run by someone I would rather forget because of his personality and attitudes toward his responsibilities, as well as toward people who needed his support.
ReplyDeleteLexia is the solution to all of the literacy problems in Norwalk? Is that the best solution? Effective literacy specialists are important. It makes sense to let Lexia or another such program supplement the work of literacy specialists, but not replace it.
ReplyDeleteWould someone please look at the impact/lack of impact that the literacy specialists have had on the system? Mr. Daddona is correct in looking elsewhere. The literacy specialists, most of them, are not having an impact in the schools.
ReplyDeleteIt is irresponsible to hire more of the same teachers in a program without doing a study of the effect of the program itself. The literacy specialists, to my knowledge, have never been brought before the boe with a longitudinal look at how the program is doing. Let's get real here and not jump on a bandwagon because 'it looks good, so let's hire more.'
ReplyDeleteDadonna suggesting upgrades of technology in the classroom? Murray, checking the list, checking it twice. Innacone doing roll call and Colorossi pulling back hard on the reins of the sharks? Wow, "way to go people". Now we have a start. Let's keep it rolling. One step at a time and before we know it, we will actually be accomplishing something worth the all the efforts. We will be preparing our children for the challenges that await them. Mrs. Fuller said it best, "lots of work ahead but we will, get there". The harder the fall, the bigger the bounce. Fallin pretty hard, we have, now lets do the bounce...
ReplyDeleteA couple of points here:
ReplyDelete1. Literacy specialists work well in other districts, mine for example, so why can't they work well in Norwalk? (I am not a literacy specialist, but I work with them, and the ones I know are excellent.) Is there a good literacy curriculum for them to follow in Norwalk? Is there appropriate supervision of the specialists? Did the principals try to use the specialists as they saw fit (rather than as literacy specialists) and then wonder why literacy wasn't improving among their students?
2. Lexia (or any literacy software) isn't a cure-all for all students. If correcting literacy problems were as simple as buying software, there would be no problems with literacy because it would be a relatively inexpensive fix. Unfortunately, it isn't. At best, it will supplement the work done by specialists.
I'm still looking for leadership in correcting literacy and the other learning issues in Norwalk. The 7:55 posting was cute but it doesn't say anything of real substance. I hope that the board of education is sharp enough to do its own homework.
3:29, I agree Literacy Specialists can be beneficial, but they are not in Norwalk, for the most part. Perhaps three of the Literacy Specialists are really trained and good. When the union stated that these specialists have master's degrees, the question must be asked, 'When did they achieve their degree and in what subject?' The teaching of literacy has changed immensely in the last 10-15 years. The State understands that, but Norwalk keeps turning a blind eye to that for the newly hired specialists. Some of them do not have a clue what they are doing, and they are supposed to be the role models for teachers in the classroom. That is why the principals use these 'specialists' as they see fit. No one in those schools wants them in the classroom...unless the teacher wants a break from teaching.
ReplyDeleteWhen the first Literacy Specialists were hired, most were Reading Recovery teachers who were very well trained and also received intense training from the State Dept. of Ed. Now it is a totally different story.
There is a yearly survey from teachers that is required by law for the grants that asks teachers how the program is working. If the Board wants the truth, look at those surveys...that is if the principals don't screen them first, and they will...or if the teachers are told not to write negatives by the principals. It really happens! I could not make this up.
The departure of Mary Bud is a HUGE loss for the children of Norwalk. She is a walking encyclopedia of knowledge about early childhood, a resource exceeded only by the generosity of her heart. When every study reveals that the way to close the achievement gap is to address the very earliest years, she may have the most important job in the district-- and she has fulfilled it superbly.
ReplyDelete9:24 posting: I had heard that principals were using the literacy specialists to do things other than the work they were supposed to do, and your response says that that is true. It is another example of people (in this case, the administrators) who are not doing their job of providing proper supervision, guidance and evaluation. It starts at the top because the central office has allowed principals to do their own thing for too long. Looking at the behavior of some principals begs the question: Who evaluates them? People on this and other blogs have often pointed to the former superintendent, but he didn't do the evaluations. You can't blame everything on him.
ReplyDeleteBuying software is easier than getting the principals to do their jobs, and so that is the so-called solution to the problem. I have a better idea: Re-create literacy specialist positions and hire qualified people to do the jobs this time, requiring them to document the work that they do, including the results of that work. Is that too radical an idea for Norwalk?
9:55, you are right. BUT, the last two superintendents made sure that the central office administrators had no authority. Why do you think the job of 'supervisor' was changed to 'adminisrator in charge of.....' (fill in the blank with math, language arts,etc.) This change put the principals a level ahead of the central office staff, authority-wise. Central Office staff could only 'advize' or 'suggest' to the principals. Of course it also meant that these c.o.curriculum specialists only had a 10 or 11 month work year, but additional work days could be added at the discretion of the superintendent. Some c.o. staff work 12 months. I don't know, but I wonder if this overtime actually winds up costing more than a posted supervisor's position used to cost.
ReplyDeleteBTW,the elementary principals are evalauted by the Director of Elementary Ed. The buck stops there.
As for the addition of software to improve literacy, I strongly agree with something that is showing promise. This is a way to reinforce literacy taught in the classroom, not to replace it! The arguments otherwise are from people who don't understand what is needed in the classroom. The more programs that teach literacy that SUPPORT what is going on in the classroom the better. I emphasize again, 'support what is going on in the classroom.' Students enjoy working on computers and get motivated if there is instant feedback. Why would anyone object to this? (Maybe I shouldn't ask! I will say that I will compare my background in education with those who oppose, and I know I have very strong credentials to support my statements)
I also wholeheartedly agree with you that the position of literacy specialist has to be recreated if we are to see the change we need. The Union will have a difficult time with this change, so the Board will have to take a tough stand. Can they do this? There is enough time right now to find ways to evaluate this program. Let's see what happens.
I don't have direct knowledge about what the last two superintendents did to the authority of the central office administrators, but I wouldn't trust any of them to make meaningful decisions about how to run the schools. I would trust one of them (John) to make almost any math decision because he knows so much about his content area, but I doubt that even he would want to make decisions beyond that.
ReplyDeleteWith Dr. Corda gone a certain middle school principal hasn't changed much -- and won't until someone with guts arrives in town. That person isn't here now.
I am a "literacy specialist" in a New York City public school, though we don't use such impressive titles. I'm simply called a reading teacher, even though my students read, write, listen and talk five days a week.
ReplyDeleteTo become a reading teacher, I had to obtain a reading license from the state (the result of earning a Masters degree in reading). I also had to earn tenure working under that license. Many, if not most, reading teachers in New York, at least the ones in my school, have tenure under two licenses -- elementary education or early childhood education plus literacy.
Unfortunately, in Connecticut, I still believe it is possible to become a "literacy specialist" with only an elementary school license and some training. While I realize many elementary level teachers could easily become first-rate reading teachers, filling positions based on seniority can lead to a variety of problems.
New York City schools, however, do have a position that I believe is similar to our "literacy specialists." They are called intervention specialists, work with small groups, and focus primarily on literacy. They are selected on the basis of seniority and generally do fair to mediocre work, at best.
As a result of budget cuts, my school lost four intervention specialists this year. The only folks who really miss them are the administrators who enjoyed using them for everything except reading. That sounds like what's going on in Norwalk with our "literacy specialists." (A grant enabled us to fund one of these positions, but we are certain that there will be no such "specialists" next year.)
One last point: I am evaluated each year. My school's data team, plus the administration, look closely at the yearly progress of every student in the school, especially those who are serviced by out-of-classroom personnel, like me. Thus, to be fair, they rarely pull me away from my primary focus: working with small groups of students six periods each day.
5:38 PM, you have made valuable points in your argument. Most people who have spoken up about Literacy Specialists in Norwalk understand what is going on in this district. Now it is up to the BoE to do their homework, not just add more specialists because it sounds good to the public. Where is your head, Mr. Colarossi? Do you really want to add to the budget because it sounds good? First evaluate a program!
ReplyDeleteWhat I glean from this blog is that many/most of Norwalk's literacy specialists were not working out. Nothing suggests that literary specialists are useless. The answer is not to resort to a computer program, which is not creative thinking; it is to find literacy specialists who are effective and to monitor how they are used so that principals can't take advantage of them. No computer program can replace a good teacher, and the administrators are responsible for assuring that Norwalk hires and retains effective teachers. The administrators are also responsible for removing the teachers who are not effective. It requires work but it is not impossible, and it has been done elsewhere, in places where people are serious about education.
ReplyDeleteIf a school has a bad math teacher, does the district eliminate the position and turn to software to replace the instructor? If the school has an ineffective science teacher, does the district just turn to a computer program and use it to teach science? No one would even consider doing that.
There are people who need to begin doing their jobs, and I mean the people who evaluate the teachers and the specialists, as well as those who evaluate the principals. Instead, people make excuses for why they haven't done their jobs. Some of the blame may well be placed upon Sal Corda, but there is blame to go around to others as well.
Administrators in Norwalk are among the best compensated in the state, and yet, the value the taxpayers get from them is not sufficient to justify the salaries of many of them.
7:53 AM, you are definitely on the right track, but you are not facing the reality that exists in Norwalk. Most, if not all, of these Literacy Specialists have tenure. Principals will have an impossible time getting rid of their Literacy Specialist if he/she is not doing a good job. The Union will see to that. I apologize that I sound very negative, but it is the reality in Norwalk. If a teacher has tenure, it's too late.
ReplyDeleteThe best that can be done is to recreate the position of Literacy Specialist and hire the best people. Of course most of the (current) Literacy Specialists were hired by these same principals in the first place, so I'm not even sure how that will work out....
Perhaps a return to central office decision making would create better choices, but that's just a suggestion.
As for the computer literacy program, it does have value. I looked at the site that explains the program, and I thought it was much better than the ditto sheets and workbook pages the teachers use now. Obviously it should not replace the teacher, but it should supplement the work done in the classroom. If that is clearly understood by teachers and supported by principals, I am all for the purchase of the program.
My last (?) word, in response to your comment is - There is something missing in Norwalk....Accountability! Accountability! Accountability! I know that is what you are saying, and I agree! While it is too late to start with tenured teachers, we need to hold administrators accountable for the written evaluations for incoming teachers who aren't top notch teachers.
2:44 - Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I think the literacy specialist positions have been eliminated. If that is correct, if the positions are reinstated, the jobs will have to be posted and the interview process will have to begin again. The people who held the jobs before can't simply return to their former jobs. That is a fact.
ReplyDeleteIf the literacy specialists have tenure, they have it as teachers, not necessarily as literacy specicialists, and so they can be assigned to do any job within their certification. Since the people don't have literacy specialist jobs now, that must already have happened. As far as seniority is concerned, even the NFT can't demand that the most senior people get the jobs of their choosing; all they can demand is that the most senior people be given interviews for the jobs. Of course, in the event of a union grievance, the people doing the hiring might be required to explain why they hadn't hired the most senior person, and that must be something relevant to the job.
I agree that the computer program would be better than the ditto sheets and workbook pages you tell us that the literacy specialists have given the students, but it doesn't have to be that way. In my experience elsewhere, but also urban, I don't know of any literacy specialist who does that. The answer for Norwalk is to get good literacy specialists.
If you think the principals can't be trusted (and I don't know if that is the case), let the literacy specialists be central office people assigned to the schools. They can take their direction from a central office person, perhaps whoever is in charge of language arts.
I don't know enough about the computer program to have a strong opinion about its value, but I do object to buying a program as a means of continuing to avoid addressing the greater problem of the lack of fortitude to address some personnel problems. The teachers' union president is one person. Are you telling me that this person is so intelligent and so powerful that the district administration has to bow to him/her? If that is the case, fire the district administration.
If it is true that Norwalk public school students are still working on ditto sheets and workbook pages, we have a much larger problem than I had previously imagined. I cannot remember the last time I used a workbook for literacy instruction. At least a decade ago.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, it's 2009. Ditto sheets?
4:03 AM, I am really glad you are taking an interest in this topic. I need to clarify some of the misunderstandings in your post. First, the Literacy Specialists were reinstated and do exist today. Money was found in grants to pay for their salaries. (I believe Dr. Corda thought it was too difficult to get rid of them because of public opinion.)
ReplyDeleteSecondly, the Literacy Specialists do not hand out ditto sheets and workbook pages, many teachers in the classroom continue to do this. Literacy Specialists are supposed to model best practices for teachers in the classroom and the teacher is supposed to follow up using these lessons. The Literacy Specialist is spposed to then guide the teacher until the teacher feels comfortable with their newly acquired skills. This rarely rarely happens. Each principal uses the Literacy Specialist as he/she sees fit. To be fair, there are perhaps up to three Literacy Specialists who are doing what they are supposed to do.
Thirdly, it is not possible for central office people to be assigned as Literacy Specialists. This particular job requires strong skills in literacy. Perhaps it can be best explained by example...You would not want your family physician performing an open heart surgery on you, right? I know that is extreme, but people do have their specialties even in the field of education.
I don't think my message regarding the computer assisted learning is being heard. Let me clarify again. Computer assisted learning does NOT replace good teaching practices. It supports them. I am not at all suggesting that we replace good teaching with computers. I am suggesting that good computer assisted learning be put into the schools to reinforce skills already taught so that students can master them. Someone taught you to drive, right? But it took practice to master the art of driving. The computer allows practice and instant feedback as well.
I hope this information helped you.
Bruce, sadly ditto sheets and workbook pages never go away. Publishing companies have improved the workbook pages, but they are still in use whether a student has mastered that particular skill or not.
ReplyDeleteIn fairness to teachers, something needs to be given to the other students while the teacher sits with one of the reading groups and instructs that reading group. Are there better practices? Of course!
Computer assisted learning can be helpful. The computer automatically keeps track of an individual's progress so that weak skills can be reinforced for that individual. Isn't that much better than giving every student the same workbook page (or ditto sheet) whether they need it or not? Additionally, instant feedback is given via the computer, so that the student doesn't complete a whole workbook page incorrectly. (That's a perfect example of negative reinforcement in learning)
Let's ask the students if they prefer ditto sheets, workbook pages or computer learning! The Lexia site is easy to find. Just Google it and see for yourself. BTW, computer assisted learning isn't perfect, but it has come a long way since its inception.
ditto sheets = xeroxed sheets
ReplyDeleteI know I'm preaching to the choir, but the real issue isn't Lexia or no Lexia. The heart of the problem is that people aren't doing their jobs. There are too many principals who have become far too comfortable, knowing that the central office isn't going to crack down on them. Anyone who thinks I'm mistaken about this should give me specifics about when the central office ever did this within the past ten years.
ReplyDeletePrincipal and assistant principals have been comfortable, but they eventually retire. What happens after they retire? They return as working retirees, some of them quite often. I don't know the qualifications for doing this, other than that they have to continue their certification. They return even when they are in their 70's. I don't know if there has been an 80-year-old working retiree yet, but that day may come because they have brought back most administrators I know. The same people, continuing the same routines with the same relationships. Is it any wonder that so little changes?
It's time for a clean sweep. The board of education has begun the task, but it's time to begin bringing new people into the district.
In actuality, the problem didn't start with the central office not cracking down on the principals, public opinion has forced superintendents to back down. I remember when Ralph Sloan wanted to mix it up by changing principals around to give them a second chance. It was the fair thing to do. The public outcry was huge. The Board that had supported Sloan originally turned on him when the politics heated up. The new Board members seem ready to take on anything right now, but will they back down too when the parents don't like what they hear? Mark my words, this will happen again. Principals have parents who will support them.
ReplyDeleteBoards get very nervous when they see angry parents. Are these parents justified? Probably not.
Three questions for 7:48:
ReplyDelete1. Your description of what literacy specialists are supposed to do in Norwalk makes them sound more like coaches than actual reading teachers who meet with small groups. Is my interpretation accurate?
2. How exactly are literacy specialists chosen in Norwalk? What role does seniority play in their selection? What formal requirements, if any, are necessary?
3. Do Norwalk schools have coaches? If so, how is their job description different from what you described above for the literacy specialists? If I remember correctly, a few years ago, Norwalk was discussing the addition of coaches to school staffs. Excuse me for being lazy, I just don't feel like checking the BOE budget to answer this last question on my own.
Bruce,
ReplyDeleteLet me try to answer your questions. If anyone wants to support or to correct me, please jump in.
First, a bit of history-
When the Literacy Specialist position was first posted, they were Early Literacy Facilitators, or ELFs for short. These specialists were well trained, well qualified teachers with classroom experience. The job of the ELF was to (1) attend intensive State training specifically devoted to best practices in literacy and then (2) go back to the district and train classroom teachers on these best practices(as coaches).
While this was great in theory, most principals never enforced putting the learning into practice. The ELFs complained time and time again that several building administrators did not effectively support the program.
Let me add that principals were also given training so that they could recognize best practices when they went to evaluate teachers.
Despite the lack of support of several principals, slowly but surely some of the methods caught hold with some teachers. After some time, because the teachers were forced by the State Dept. of Ed. to give running records (an individualized reading assessment), the teaching of literacy in the classroom improved even a bit more.
However, some teachers continued to hold onto the old practices because they believed them to be 'best practices.' Often, one would hear, 'This will pass too, just like everything else.' So these teachers were allowed to teach in their own way. Central Office staff was not allowed to change that.
Eventually, and rather quickly in the process, the building principals (led by one of the retired principals) decided that ELFs were not what they needed in their buildings. They changed the job description and the title of ELF to Literacy Specialist.
The Literacy Specialist could still be a coach, but was allowed to take small groups, even though this was frowned upon by the State. Pulling students out of a classroom to learn with a completely different approach than is being taught in a classroom only further confuses a child. The classroom teacher liked this method, and it allowed some classroom teachers to give these students no further instruction. In other words, these students would fall further behind in the classroom.
Again, to be fair, perhaps three of the Literacy Specialists coach in the way they were supposed to originally. You would need to visit every school (unannounced) to find out what the other Literacy Specialists do during the day.
Now, to address how Literacy Specialists are chosen. Any classroom teacher can apply as a Literacy Specialist. Perhaps there is a requirement for three years experience in the classroom. Some of the Literacy Specialists that have been hired (more recently) have had no formal training in literacy. They may have attended some workshops, but these workshops could never substitute for real training. Some do not have a Master's degree in reading. I am sure that some of the well seasoned teachers would agree that SOME of the Literacy Specialists are absolutely horrible as coaches.
As for the funding source, if you look at the Priority School grants and the Title I grant, you will find the funding for these positions.
12/13 2:14 p.m. You are an excellent historian! You have given an accurate rendition of the facts, right down to the retired principal who was instrumental in changing the job description. We don't miss her one single bit.
ReplyDeleteI would like to add that the job descriptions have been revised at least twice, once in the change from ELFs to ELTs, and the second when Reading Recovery was disbanded. The two groups of teachers were put into one pool and the Literacy Teachers as we know them now were chosen purely on the basis of seniority. This was due to strong union pressure and resulted in some excellent teachers being passed over in favor of some ineffective and less than hard working people.
It is an awful lot of money spent on a program that has not proven itself. Most of the are making close to $100,000, and that is without a generous benefit package.
There are not that many people around who would have this background knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for the information. Quite interesting. One point on the pulling out of small groups:
ReplyDeleteWhere I work, and at most other New York schools, we're supposed to use a push-in model where the reading teacher works with a small group, or team teaches with the classroom teacher -- depending on what's going on at the time. The way this model is supposed to work, which does not always happen, is that the reading teacher does guided reading while the classroom teacher also does small group guided reading and the rest of the class works independently. I suppose the goal is to ensure differentiated reading instruction on a daily basis.
Problem is, lots of classroom teachers have trouble with this model and still prefer whole class instruction (with students working with books selected according to their particular reading level) while I focus on a small group in or outside of the room.
The push-in model is a preferred method for the student, but not preferred by most teachers. I have always questioned the benefit to the student since the classroom teacher and the reading teacher don't have time to confer on a daily basis. (BTW, in New York, aren't these reading teachers required to have a Master's degree in reading?)
ReplyDeleteThere is probably a creative way to target specific grade levels and decrease class size in schools that are eligible for schoolwide Title I services. Title I funds are used differently once a school is eligible for schoolwide funding. If a targeted classroom could be divided in two, Title I funds might be used for the second teacher. Each teacher would then be responsible for the reading levels of those children. I am not absolutely sure this would satisfy grant requirements, but I'll bet the State would help find a way to make it work.
Of course the drawback would be fewer children would receive supplemental services, but with a combination of Title I funds and Priority School grant funding, Norwalk would get much more bang for the buck.
This is just one model that might work. It would be wise for the BOE to question the possibilities.
Many thanks to all of you who take the time to comment here.
ReplyDeleteI have been trying to schedule our first two Finance Cmte meetings so that we can actually figure out what our particular staffing needs are so that we can then make informed decisions in the Spring when the final budget needs to be approved.
Having the insights and opinions of all of you helps a great deal--- THANKS!