"Actions Speak Louder Than Words"

I spent some time thinking this weekend about how there seem to be a number of connections between FORE and the David Taylor lawsuit, even though FORE would say that, officially, there is no connection. I finally came to the conclusion that their contention cannot be accepted at face value. For the reasons why, read on…

My thinking was prompted by the posting on the FORE blog, on Saturday, February 11, of Kenny Rotner’s letter to Fosters in support of the Taylor lawsuit. I noticed that comments for that particular entry had been turned off. An emailed inquiry to the administrator of the FORE blog brought the following response (posted here in its entirety):

Thanks for writing to FORE with your concern. We at FORE have decided that it is best to avoid a protracted debate on the lawsuit on our website and have thus decided to disable the comment feature for issues regarding the lawsuit. FORE as a group has not, and will not, take a position on the Taylor vs. ORCSD lawsuit. FORE is made up of individuals in the community who often have various ideas on specific issues at hand. We are, however, bound together by our mission statement posted on the site.
FORE administrator

This is a remarkable statement, to say the least. First, the assertion that “FORE as a group has not, and will not, take a position on the Taylor vs. ORCSD lawsuit” would appear to be false on its face. FORE has posted a statement by one of its members in support of the suit on its official, public-facing communications outlet, and has taken steps to prevent anyone from debating that statement, pro or con. That sure looks like taking a position to me!

Secondly, it is notable that the reply from the administrator is unsigned. In the past, emails to the administrator of the FORE website have been signed “David K. Taylor”. We have no proof that Taylor actually wrote the email above, of course, but one can see why, if he were the author, he wouldn’t want to sign his name!

Furthermore, Rotner’s assertion that “Mr. Taylor filed his lawsuit, totally on his own and not as a member of FORE. He did not get FORE's sanction to do this…“ also rings false. A reading of the filings in the first case reveals that FORE members JoAnn Portalupi, Jennifer Rief, Kay Morgan and Stephanie Adams all provided documents to Taylor. FORE members John Collins, Jennifer Rief and Stephanie Adams have all attended one or more court hearings, presumably to show support for Taylor. That doesn’t look like “totally on his own” to me!

Therefore, I think that FORE is trying to pull the wool over our eyes. I think that the organization as a whole is behind this suit, and that the diversity of opinion they claim exists within their ranks, doesn’t.

But I could be wrong. So, I have a proposal: FORE says that it “is made up of individuals in the community who often have various ideas on specific issues at hand.” I say: prove it.

Here’s my offer: if FORE will post on its blog, within the next 48 hours, a piece in opposition to the lawsuit written by a bona fide FORE member, I will post on this blog an apology in which I will say uncharacteristically nice things about them (it may take me awhile, but I’ll come up with something, I promise).

Come on, FORE, go ahead…you all don’t like me much anyway, so here’s your chance to make me eat my words.

If, on the other hand, you are unable or unwilling to do so—well, I think that will tell everyone a lot, too.

--Tom Bebbington

---------------------------

Links to Case Materials

David Taylor's Objection to the Motion to Expedite regarding the Superintendent search

District's Response to Taylor's Objection to Expedite Defending the Superintendent Search Process and Timeline

David Taylor's Personal Response

Open Letter to School Board

The following was published as a "Community Commentary" in Fosters on February 13th:

Dear Oyster River School Board:

I am writing this open letter to you for two reasons. The first purpose is to indicate my strong support for your nomination of Dr. James Morse as the incoming superintendent of schools at Oyster River. The second purpose is to distance myself from the lawsuits that are presently obstructing his hire, since by making claims on behalf of ‘the community,’ Mr. David Taylor has implicated me in them.

First, I was pleased to hear your announcement at the deliberative session that you have elected to hire Dr. Morse. As I said in my email dated 1/25, I attended all three public candidate forums and thought Dr. Morse stood head and shoulders above the other two candidates. As I described, I did not anticipate my own reaction and was prepared to write a very different email, urging you to fail the search. I was most swayed because I believe Dr. Morse could forge a common vision at a time when the district needs it most. I applaud your choice.

My enthusiasm was tempered, however, by your subsequent announcement that his contract was being held up by Mr. Taylor’s lawsuit. I have read Mr. Taylor’s charges against you, and I object both to the severity he ascribes to whatever irregularities he perceived in the search process, and to the notion that he represents ‘the community’ in his complaints. I am a member of the community who strongly supports excellent and equitable public schools and he does not represent me. As far as the process goes, I applied to be on the screening committee, was not chosen, but still attended the forums and provided feedback (to which three of you responded), and I felt satisfied that my participation was welcome and valued. It is not universally true that 'the community' feels excluded.

Moreover, the ultimate fear Mr. Taylor indicates in his filing to block an expedited decision – that you were conspiring all along to hire someone who would erode the district’s philosophy – was not borne out. You elected to hire a highly qualified individual who seems to have won wide approval among diverse stakeholders in the district. This is what I would hope from any board and I think it is an extremely positive step forward. I know a forum provides a limited view of a candidate, but none of Dr. Morse’s comments suggested conflict with the basic philosophy of the district. In fact, I thought he shared some compelling ideas that could help articulate the philosophy in innovative new ways.

I think there is a larger issue at stake too – a successful lawsuit risks poisoning the well to the point where any subsequent search could also be seen as illegitimate, contaminated by the forced failure of the original search for seemingly partisan reasons. I am coming to believe that what will ultimately be most destructive to Oyster River’s quality and reputation is the continued escalation of a battle between warring factions. If this continues, Mr. Taylor and FORE will, ironically, have contributed to its deterioration. But there are also reasons to be hopeful; at the 2011 deliberative session, Mr. Taylor won approval for the district to hire a consultant “to investigate the culture of distrust and disrespect in our district leadership and community at large and to report specific recommendations to improve that culture.” Here is an excellent opportunity to address this issue. Board members, you have done your part by electing to hire a top candidate for superintendent. I hope Mr. Taylor does his part by allowing you to do so.

--
With Regards
Jayson Seaman
Durham, NH

---------------------------

Links to Case Materials

David Taylor's Objection to the Motion to Expedite regarding the Superintendent search

District's Response to Taylor's Objection to Expedite Defending the Superintendent Search Process and Timeline

With "Friends" like these, who needs enemies?

The following is a letter to the editor of Fosters, which was published on February 13:

Common sense dictates that Kenny Rotner, in his letter of February 10, has it exactly backwards: it is David Taylor, and his supporters in FORE (the “Friends of Oyster River Education”) who have pushed our District to the brink of disaster.

Let’s start with FORE, a group that Taylor and others organized in the wake of his resounding defeat in last year’s School Board elections. Of the 27 people who signed the letter announcing the formation of the group (on FORE’s website, forenh.org) seven are former School Board members or their spouses. All of those former members were either defeated in recent elections, or chose not to run again. More to the point, almost all of the signatories either no longer have children attending school in the District, or never did. They have no skin in this game.

"Friends” would not seek to deny our children the educational resources they need, whether it be funding or a visionary leader like Dr. Morse, yet Taylor’s second lawsuit has as its sole objective the halting of the Superintendent hiring process. So let’s call FORE what it is: a group of ousted elected officials and fellow-travelers who, having been rejected by the voters, now seek to impose their “vision” on the District through the courts.

Taylor may have the “right” to file suit in order to settle old scores with his political enemies, but he and his and his FORE supporters have crossed a line that should never be crossed: they are holding our children hostage because they don’t agree with the decisions our duly-elected officials have made. They need to stop and consider that what’s only “collateral damage” to them will be devastating to my children’s future.

Sincerely,
Tom Bebbington
Durham



---------------------------
Links to Case Materials


Final Decision in David Taylor's First Case Against the School Board

David Taylor's Objection to the Motion to Expedite regarding the Superintendent search

District's Response to Taylor's Objection to Expedite Defending the Superintendent Search Process and Timeline

Superintendent Finalists Announced

The ORCSD Superintendent Screening Committee has announced the following three finalists: Dr. John Bacon, Mr. Jay McIntire and Dr. James Morse.

Dr. John Bacon


John Bacon is currently the Superintendent of the Barre Supervisory Union in Vermont and has held the position since 2008. The Barre SU has 2,700 students and a budget of approximately $38 million. Previously, Dr. Bacon held the position of Superintendent in the Caledonia Central School District in Vermont (from 2004-2008) and the Assistant Superintendent position in the Bennington/Rutland District in Vermont (from 2000-2004). In his career, Dr. Bacon has also held various positions including Principal, Assistant Principal, classroom Teacher and an Adjunct Faculty position at Antioch-New England.
Dr. Bacon’s educational background includes a B.A. from Dartmouth College and Ed.D. from the University of Massachusetts.

Mr. Jay McIntire


Jay McIntire is currently the Superintendent of SAU 13 in Tamworth, New Hampshire, which has a total enrollment of 800 students and a budget of approximately $15 million. He has held this position since 2009 and prior to that Mr. McIntire held the position of Superintendent in Wiscasset, Maine from 2006-2009. He has also worked in the area of Special Education as a Regional Special Education Director and a Special Education Researcher. Mr. McIntire was also employed by the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) for six years and held the position of Director, IDEA Local Implementation by Local Administrators (ILIAD) Partnership Project for two years.

Mr. McIntire holds a B.A. from the University of Maine, Orono and a Masters of Science from Lesley College.

Dr. James Morse


James Morse is the current Superintendent of the Portland, Maine School District with an enrollment of 7,000 and a budget of approximately $100,000,000. He has held this position since 2009 and previously was the Superintendent in Messalonskee, Maine from 1997 to 2009. In this position, he helped lead the district in creating Maine’s first residential public high school, The Maine School of Math and Science (MSSM). Dr. Morse was also a Superintendent in Limestone, Maine from 1992 to 1997. During his career he has also held the positions of Assistant Superintendent, Principal and Elementary/Secondary Art Teacher.

Dr. Morse’s educational background includes a B.S. and a M. Ed. From the University of Maine, Orono and a Ed.D. from the University of Sarasota.

USA Today: Promise of No Child Left Behind falls short after 10 years

Associated Press article published yesterday in USA Today detailing the shortcomings and problems with the application of No Child Left Behind on its 10 year anniversary.

Promise of No Child Left Behind falls short after 10 years

WASHINGTON (AP) — The No Child Left Behind education law was cast as a symbol of possibility, offering the promise of improved schools for the nation's poor and minority children and better prepared students in a competitive world.

Yet after a decade on the books, President George W. Bush's most hyped domestic accomplishment has become a symbol to many of federal overreach and Congress' inability to fix something that's clearly flawed.

The law forced schools to confront the uncomfortable reality that many kids simply weren't learning, but it's primarily known for its emphasis on standardized tests and the labeling of thousands of schools as "failures."

…

Critics say the law carries rigid and unrealistic expectations that put too much of an emphasis on tests for reading and math at the expense of a more well-rounded education.

Read More …

Fosters: Oyster River superintendent search begins with consulting firm

Fosters reporter Andrea Bulfinch published an article today about the initial meeting of the Oyster River superintendent screening committee last night. She continues, providing an overview of the committee and screening process:

Oyster River superintendent search begins with consulting firm

By ANDREA BULFINCH
abulfinch@fosters.com
Friday, January 6, 2012

DURHAM — The search for a new superintendent for the Oyster River Cooperative School District is under way.

The 11 members of the screening committee charged with the task of narrowing a selection of candidates for the position met with a consulting firm Tuesday evening for the first time. Members were to have again met with the firm nonpublicly Thursday night.

The committee is comprised of two parents recommended by the Parent Teacher Organization, two members selected by the School Board, one student representative, three teachers, one administrative person, and two School Board members.

"They are real busy reviewing credentials," Interim Superintendent Leon Levesque said.

Read More …

Agenda and Backup Materials from 01/04/2012 SB Meeting

Located in the link below are several backup items discussed at last night's board meeting.

They include:

• Report on K-12 Music Program
• Update on Foreign Language in the Elementary Schools
• Report and Findings on Homework Philosophy
• Report on Bus Routes and Data Correlation
• Barrington Tuition Rate for 2012
• Tuition Rates (cost per student per year) for UNH's family housing

Read the reports here...

Durham Resident Responds to Criticism of his Facts

Durham resident Roger Speidel responding to recent criticism regarding his facts and Finland.

Apparently there are people who aren't aware that the Oyster River Schools offered a film last fall about the school system in Finland. It was to inform the public about the excellent quality of Finland's education. 

There have been public responses to three facts I reported in my Dec. 21 Community Commentary. I made no claims; each item I stated is a fact, carefully researched. A claim is a statement as a fact of something that may be called into question. And I never used the word mediocre in that message.

New Hampshire, 28th in the nation in education: "Education Week." Contact them for their methodology.

The number 3 and number 4 ranked high schools in America: "US News and World Report". Contact them for their methodology, also.

The percentage of Oyster River seniors going on to 4-year colleges: "The New Hampshire Department of Education." Go to their website.

Now that that is clear, let's see how the Oyster River school system is really performing.

1. The "No Child Left Behind" testing. Oyster River is now "A District in Need of Improvement."

2. The "New England Assessment" testing. (NECAP). The Oyster River School System ranks 18th in the state and one of our elementary schools ranks 60th. That's abysmal.

3. The number of Oyster River seniors going on to 4-year colleges is 68%.

4. In the "College Readiness Index", Oyster River High School ranks a dismal 22.9.

5. In cost per pupil per year, Oyster River spends $15,510. The state average is $12,062. Oyster River's true cost per pupil is $18,500. The reason for this is that the state pulls out debt service, transportation, and food service before reporting per pupil spending amounts.

Now let's compare apples to apples. I'll leave Finland out of the mix, except to ask Mrs. Sowers where she got her information that average class size in Finland is below 20. I spoke with the Embassy of Finland for an hour—- the class size is between 20 and 30. Also, I never mentioned "average districts" as she claims.

The number 3 and 4 ranked High Schools in America average cost per pupil is $11,580. Their average teacher/student ratio is 1 to 25.8. And their "College Readiness Index "is 100. (the highest possible)

The 2011 New Hampshire "Schools of Excellence" average cost per pupil is $11,613 and their teacher/student ratio is 1 to 18.6. Their cost is $449 per pupil less than the State average.

The number 1 county, in the state (Maryland) ranked first in the nation in education has a class size policy in junior and senior high school of 29 students in English, 33 in all other classes and they spend almost $4,000 per pupil less than Oyster River. 

The goal of education is to prepare students for life. After 12 years in the Oyster River School System only 68% of our seniors go on to 4-year colleges. That certainly is not an appropriate return on an $18,500 per pupil per year education. Also, we don't have a vo-tech program so some students cannot learn to be auto mechanics, electricians, etc. (Good jobs!)

To sum up: The Oyster River taxpayers are paying $18,500 per student per year, but our students are not receiving an $18,500 education.

So, the main issue of contention in the entire Oyster River educational community; parents, teachers, students, and taxpayers, is not the budget, or the taxes, or the "cut or not to cut" divide. The main issue is the amount of waste in the Oyster River School District's operation.

From The Union Leader: Ex-Durham school board member seeks injunction to halt superintendent search

Published in the Union Leader today, reporter Clynton Namuo reports on the David Taylor lawsuit.

DURHAM — A local resident who has battled the Oyster River School District for months over a series of alleged right-to-know law violations filed a petition for an injunction this week to reset an ongoing search for new a superintendent, claiming it has been tainted by yet more alleged infractions.

An attorney for the school district said the allegations are baseless and that the petition for an injunction is meant to secure a political victory, not a legal one.

“I think this board is trying to do it right and the thing that's most troublesome is that no matter what they do, he's going to find a reason to run back to court and it's hard for me to see when this stops,” the school district's attorney Dennis Ducharme said.

Read More...

Durham resident sues to stop search for Oyster River School District superintendent

From Roni Reino in Foster's this morning.

DURHAM — A Durham resident is seeking to stop the current Oyster River School District superintendent search, saying the School Board is violating the Right-to-Know Law.

David Taylor, a former Oyster River School Board member, filed a petition and order for ex parte injunctive relief in Strafford County Superior Court on Tuesday in hopes of immediately stopping the search process.

Taylor claims the School Board has recently violated the Right-to-Know Law in two ways. 

During at least three workshop sessions for the superintendent search, he claims the members made decisions regarding the process.

He said the members have failed to follow their own rules and cited the Oyster River School Board policy BE, which states "no formal action shall be taken by the Board at a workshop or informational meeting."

Taylor says the members made decisions on how to conduct the search, including approving announcements, advertisements and what kind of focus groups would be used during the search. If the members were expecting to make decisions, Taylor said, they should have called a special meeting and informed the public.

He also claims that at a Dec. 21 meeting, the School Board members "basically held a secret ballot" to choose two community members on the screening committee. He claims the board members wrote who they wanted to be on the committee on a piece of paper and placed it in a sealed envelope before the meeting. At the Dec. 21 meeting, he says the student representative choose two envelopes at random.

"We don't know what board member put what member into that envelope," he said, adding the public had a right to know. 

Taylor is asking the courts to require the district stop its current superintendent search immediately so they can go back and restart the process with "appropriate" voting.

This is not the first time Taylor has said he believes the School Board has not followed the Right-to-Know Law. In August, Taylor filed a suit against the district, saying during the interim superintendent search, the School Board held improper meetings in secret to make decisions on how to conduct the search.

"It's somewhat remarkable to me, that after I filed the first one, they continued to violate the Right-to-Know Law," he said.

Interim Superintendent Leon Levesque said the School Board has been doing its best to follow proper procedure for the current search.

"He's looking at some technicalities," he said of Taylor. "(The School Board members) have made a valiant effort to make everything open. Everything has been posted."

The process, he said, has been open since it began this fall.

"It was done very openly and they even employed an outside agent to try to present this in an open, transparent matter," he said. "I believe they are on the right track."

The district has hired consulting firm NESDEC to aid in the process. They are currently going through the process of screening candidates this week. 

The screening committee is made up of two parents, two community members, one student representative, three teachers, an administrator and two School Board members.

"Their goal is to try to present some finalists to the School Board by the end of January," he said.

A permanent superintendent is expected to be in place by July 1 if the process continues as scheduled.