Archive: Around Town

Mark S. Lewis The end of the 2006 calendar year brings to a close the first year of my service to the Lansing school and community—a fitting time to reflect on the year’s high and low points and focus on the future. Although the list that follows highlights some of the more apparent circumstances, it is by no means exhaustive. Lansing is an ever-changing, dynamic school community that continuously endeavors to adapt to the complex needs of Twenty-First Century students. In any event, here goes:

Administrative Leadership
Stable leadership is essential to a district’s effectiveness.

The district’s administrative team consists of eight members: superintendent, business administrator, director of curriculum and staff development, director of special programs, building principals (3), and high school dean of students/athletic director. Four of the eight members of the administrative team were appointed within the past twelve months. There is now more stability and permanence within the district’s leadership ranks than has been the case for some time. A fifth new administrator in a little over eighteen months will be appointed this spring when the new principal of R.C. Buckley Elementary School is chosen to follow interim principal, Earlene Carr.

Facilities Study / Construction Referendum
One year ago, the board of education was wrestling with a $70 million list of potential capital project items. Although this list was ultimately reduced to $38 million, public input was clear: that figure was unacceptable. As a result, a facilities/community awareness group of volunteers worked for six months in a review process that led to the board of education’s adoption of two construction resolutions totaling $20.8 million. If approved by the voters on February 6, 2007, the project would result in expansion and renovation of the high school and infrastructure improvements to the middle school, elementary school, and bus garage. In addition, the district office operation would be relocated to the high school. A spring 2010 completion date is projected.

Compliance with No Child Left Behind
Last year at this time the district was gearing up for the first administration of English language arts and mathematics tests as mandated by the Federal No Child Left Behind Law. These tests were administered in January and March. The first year results indicated a need to focus more resources with certain student groups, especially economically disadvantaged students. These resources will include increasing academic intervention services to students who did not demonstrate competency as measured by the tests. In addition, the law requires all core academic teachers to evidence the fact that they are “highly qualified” to work with students. A review of district teacher certification resulted in the district’s 100-percent compliance with this aspect of the law.

Long Range Plan for Academic Achievement
During the spring of 2006, a collaborative group of teachers, administrators, support staff, board of education members, parents, and community members, developed a district long range plan for academic achievement that would serve as a template for the creation of building level action plans to address eight improvement strategies over the next three years. The three top priorities for the current year include the following:

1. Implementation of a plane to provide effective interventions for academically disadvantaged students, pre-school to grade 12.
2. Continuation of the development of a vertically aligned K-12 curriculum in all subject areas that meets or exceeds state standards and assessments.
3. Develop a comprehensive, sustained professional development plan, based on district priorities and student performance data that provides opportunities to collaborate both within and across buildings.

Action plans have been developed at all three schools in pursuit of these priorities. The collaborative group will review the status of the improvement initiative and report outcomes to the public throughout 2007.

The May 16th Budget Defeat
For the first time in 28 years, district voters rejected the subsequent year’s proposed school budget. During an ensuing public meeting, community residents expressed myriad reasons for the defeat. Foremost among them were issues pertaining to increasing property assessments and property taxes, the potential impact of a sewer line project on taxes, and concern for the manner in which the school budget was communicated to the public. Although the second budget proposal was approved by a wide margin on June 20th, the message regarding communication was clear.

In response, the board of education and administration sought to strengthen and enhance communication. This initiative is considered a top priority as we look to the second half of the 2006-07 school year and beyond. Budget defeats render devastating effects on schools, the communities they serve, and first and foremost, the students. Effective two-way communication can enhance the level of support for the district spending plan and the programs supported by it through mutual understanding of the challenges faced by both the school district and the taxpayers.

K-8 Grade Configuration
March 2006 witnessed an aborted effort to move the fifth grade to the elementary school. The decision was based on the assumption that such a move would meet with the approval of most members of the school community. Support for the change was, in fact, sought and presumed to have been acquired. However, it became clear in a very short period of time that such support was not forthcoming. Communication regarding the proposed move was lacking as well. In many cases, fourth grade students were aware of the decision prior to their parents. Thus, the decision was rescinded. A review of the K-8 grade configuration will occur sometime in the future. For the time being, however, it is on hold pending completion of the construction referendum, principal selection, and budget development.

Effective Communication
Reaction to both the initial construction proposal and the first 2006-07 school budget proposal, defeated on May 16th, sent a clear message regarding the need for the board and administration to strengthen communication bridges and build new ones both within the school and the community. A number of new strategies have been or are in the process of being developed in an effort to increase two-way interaction between constituent groups. A budget committee consisting of school and community representatives has been formed, and a district wide safety team is in the process of being created. In addition, school officials have endeavored to increase utilization of conventional communication channels to create a dialogue with the community. Additional strategies are being developed.

Teacher Center
During the winter of 2006, the district sought and received state funding for the development of the Lansing-Groton Teacher Center. Such centers have been in place for most school districts since the late 1980s. They serve as an effective, economical means to provide staff development programs, training, and instructional support for the district’s teachers. Although the center is still in the process of gearing up, it has succeeded in implementing a wealth of staff developing opportunities for the teachers and administrators of both Lansing and Groton.

Significant strides, interspersed with some stumbles, colored the 2006 calendar year in the Lansing Central School District. Many thanks to all who invested their time, talent, energy, and support during the past twelve months to ensure that Lansing schools continue to be the lighthouse educational institutions they have been for many generations of Lansing students.

Next week’s article will highlight certain aspects of district operation that will demand significant focus as we look to 2007 and beyond.

----
v2i49