From: "L. Rogers" <sender@edline.net>
To: "Undisclosed Recipients"
Sent: Monday, March 7, 2011 9:45:55 PM
Subject: Scheduling for 2011/2012
March 7, 2011
Dear ORHS Parents and Other Residents of the ORCSD:
Every year at this time, we begin building a schedule for the coming year. Students attend our Electives Fair, meet with Guidance Counselors in class groups to hear about requirements and then sign up for courses. To insure that parents are in the loop, the Guidance Department sends out an email to all parents through Edline, letting them know about deadlines, providing the link to the Program of Studies and listing additional information that might be helpful during the process. After making their requests, students meet with their guidance counselors to make sure their desires fit their four year plans and that prerequisites have been met for the courses they have selected.
After students have completed their course selections, we send tallies (course request numbers) to department heads and ask them to schedule meetings with their department members. During these meetings department members discuss who will teach which courses and which courses we will run during the upcoming year. Their requests come back to me and I support them or, when there are decisions that are not so clear cut, I continue discussion with the department heads about the best course of action.
This year, we have made the decision not to run several courses during the 11/12 academic year, just as we have during every other scheduling cycle since I have been at ORHS. This year is different, however, because some of those classes are AP or courses labeled as “Advanced”. So that everyone can have accurate information, please let me clarify the reasoning behind these decisions.
First, please be aware that all of these classes are impacted by the fact that next year we will have the smallest ORHS senior class in a decade. The class of 2012 has 156 members, over 20 students fewer than the class of 2011 or that of 2013. Part of our low numbers in senior classes can simply be attributed to this single year’s dip in enrollment. The following courses seem to have caused particular concern.
Advanced Chemistry: Only one student signed up for this course. That could be because we are offering Advanced Biology (which we plan to offer with the AP designation in 2012/2013) for the first time this year.
AP US History: There is a history of low enrollment for this course at ORHS. Whether students are overly challenged by the summer reading requirements or would simply prefer to take our other social studies electives, there has only been one year when enrollment reached the requisite number of 10 since it was first offered in 2002/2003. This year four students requested the course.
AP Spanish/AP French: AP Spanish and French were first offered four years ago. The first year, it was taught as a combined course. This was unsuccessful for several reasons which I will expand upon at the 3/16 Board meeting. This year, the combined requests for Spanish V and AP Spanish totaled 21. 20 students requested French V and AP French. The members of the department feel strongly that we can’t run both without negatively impacting earlier classes, some of which would ultimately exceed 22 if both AP and level Vs were to run.
In addition to these courses, we are not offering (or will be combining) a variety of other courses including Journalism II (6 requests), Advanced Publications (2 requests), Interior Design (5 requests), Intro to Art History (5 requests), Advanced World Cultures and several other classes. These are decisions we make collaboratively, by department, every year. I am disappointed that this has been made into a political issue and has been used to decry the “lack of leadership” at the high school. I am particularly disappointed that, given the amount of rhetoric and accusation concerning the decisions made, only three parents chose to contact me, one directly and two who asked their daughters to come and ask the reasons behind these decisions.
I have been directed by the Board and advised by the ABC to make sure that ORHS builds a schedule in compliance with the Board policy concerning class size standards. I am complying with those requests and trying to insure we maximize the opportunity for a positive academic experience for all of our students. To eliminate classes that received one, four or even eight requests is a clearly articulated expectation according to the policy. For community members to express “moral outrage” because this year a few of the classes we must cut bear the AP label is a concern for me. No one expressed any moral outrage when we didn’t have the requisite numbers to run “Exploring Electricity” or “Topics in Current History” this year.
The teachers who would have been teaching the aforementioned classes are scheduled to lead other courses that have larger numbers of requests. Those would include new courses like Advanced Biology and other offerings like Psychology and British Literature that have seen an increase in student requests for next year. We have also increased the number of freshman classes. Given that we are anticipating an entering freshman class of 185 (an increase of almost 30 compared to our number of rising seniors) the fact that I have not recommended staffing reductions should not be a surprise.
At Oyster River , decisions to run classes are made on an annual basis. All of the classes we have “tabled” for the 2011/2012 year will still be in the Program of Studies for future students to enroll in- or to choose to forgo. I would hope that decisions about which classes run will continue to be made collaboratively by teachers and administrators.
Publicly, the members of the Board and those candidates who are running in tomorrow’s election have all expressed respect for the teachers of the district and a desire for more open communication. I hope that there will be a greater display of trust for their decisions in the future. The public nature of this conversation, the lack of inquiry and the undertone of accusation contained within has concerned many faculty members. As someone who has come to love this school, its students and the people who work here, I welcome the opportunity to answer your questions, whether you are a parent, student or community member, in an effort to avoid future misunderstandings.
Sincerely,
Laura Rogers
Principal, ORHS
603-868-2375 x1104
PS- Please feel free to post this online and to forward it to others who are not parents, but who have questions about ORHS.
You have received this e-mail because this address was registered at www.edline.net
If you do not wish to receive any more emails, click here to unsubscribe.
Edline
If you do not wish to receive any more emails, click here to unsubscribe.
Edline
From the ABC Report to the School Board 1/4/11:
ReplyDelete"The High School has some class sizes that are significantly lower than the Board maximum target of 22. We recommend that the ORCSD increase and/or eliminate the cap on tuition paying students and increase that number by at least 20 in FY12 and consolidate some of the very small classes at ORHS. Specifically, 2.5 positions could be eliminated saving approximately $200,000. As an alternative, increasing the number of tuition paying students by 20 will also generate $200,000."
Thank you Laura, for giving us parents some information about this decision making process!
ReplyDeleteAs one of the parents that have publically spoken of my concerns, I truely appreciate ANY information. As a parent of 4 children 10 & under, 3 of which are sick, the opportunity to call or meet with you since this discussion was announced has not been available to me personally. And there are no other minutes or online information presented. I watched the tv broadcast of the meeting and the issue was not clear enough for me to understand fully. As the school board meeting is now nearly a week ago, of course discussion is going to happen within the community.
I would also like to remind/assure you & the teachers of this district that 'moral outrage' if that is what my comments where, is NOT directed at teaching staff. It is directed at my concern about maintaining the excellence of our schools in an era of extreme budget concerns and economic conditions.
While not trying to speak for other parents, I assume that we parents want the excellence for our children and not have classes/teachers elmininated due to economic pressures alone.
Again, thank you for your letter which does reflect how/why decisions were made and assures me that these classes eliminated are not permanant decisions.
Letter sent 3/8/11:
ReplyDeleteDear Superintendent Colter and Principal Rogers,
The “moral outrage” regarding the elimination of AP classes at the high school next year could have been prevented if a proper communications plan was in place to disseminate this type of information.
The letter from 3/7/11 from Principle Rogers to the community should have been disseminated BEFORE Superintendent Colter mentioned, in passing during a Board meeting, that most AP courses would be cut next year. This highlights the lack of any communications plan, as well as, a disregard for Board and parent concerns that would inevitably follow this type of important and unexpected announcement.
If the information in this letter had been presented to the Board and community AS PART OF the announcement, perhaps the outcry would have instead resulted in a thoughtful and reasonable dialogue about AP, lack of enrollment, barriers, parent support, etc. Alas, that did not happen and now all parties are angry and frustrated with each other--again.
Further insult came from the tone of this letter which condemned the community and instigates a parent/teacher divide. From the letter, "The public nature of this conversation, the lack of inquiry and the undertone of accusation contained within has concerned many faculty members." This attempt to pretend that this is the public vs. teachers is inappropriate, irresponsible and dangerous. When does the leadership of this District take responsibility for withholding information? The onus is on the people who have the information to disseminate it.
As with the explanation of the .4 Language Teacher after-the -fact, this administration must stop putting the responsibility on the public to ask questions to determine what we do not know. Instead, this administration and the leadership that will be hired in the near future must be committed to honest, pro-active communication and information sharing.
I have a final suggestion. In the letter it states, "I would hope that decisions about which classes run will continue to be made collaboratively by teachers and administrators." I agree. My suggestion is to add parents (and even students when appropriate) to join the conversation at some point in the process. This way concerns can be heard and a plan can be developed to alleviate issues that are identified from the parents at the table. It seems that the academic committee (which already has community members) would be a great place to initiate the conversation and head off unnecessary confusion and frustration.
I hope there will be greater efforts to thoughtfully inform the community regarding significant changes to educational opportunities for our children in our schools.
Sincerely,
Jenna Roberts, Durham
Cc: School Board
I appreciate the concise, clear explanation for the changes to the courses offered at the high school. It really would not make sense to run a class for 2 students. Unfortunately we have to accept the reality of the numbers. Also, we hire well-qualified principals, administrators, and teachers to make decisions for the school. Let's treat them as professionals. If parents were involved in every decision a principal has to make, she would never get anything accomplished. Yes, parent involvement in education is crucial, but there is a limit. It is sad to see this forum used for such negativity when it could be a great source of information.
ReplyDeleteI agree Lily!
ReplyDeleteLily,
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely correct. While there are decisions that are appropriate to involve parents, selecting which classes run is not one of them. This has never been the case and to be honest, why should it, just because it involves classes with the letters AP in front if it? There were less than a handful of students who signed up for the class so it absolutely should not run. Let the 25 other kids get the elective they so wanted rather than let 4 kids get the history class.
Also, if Jenna feels this was a hostile letter put forth by the HS principal, you should first look at the letter that Ann Lane put forth. Ms. Lane's is ten times worse.
Stephen,
ReplyDeleteI would like to add to the discussion, that there was no information given regarding other classes being cut. The comment was 1/2 the AP classes are being cut. Quite frankly, the attitude that there is some sort of snobbery involved is incorrect & insulting. Many parents are concerned that teaching staff & class diversity will be affected. So when you hear 1/2 the AP classes are cut....you, as a parent, are concerned. I would be equally concerned about hearing that 1/2 the art program is to be cut, or 1/2 the science program is to be cut.
And please remember that class/program offerings are not necessarily all about numbers. Our district mission is to engage every learner. Not just the majority of learners.
The conversation can get very technical when you start to include weighted gpa's vs non weighted gpa's, AP classes vs college classes. As a parent, I want as much available to my children as possible. Whether it is an electrical class or Advanced Chemistry.
Obviously parents can't and shouldn't make every decision for principals and administrators, but let's not forget why those professionals are there in the first place. They are in place to educate the children of the district. As a parent of 4 of those children, you bet that Brooklyn Bridge of your's I shall, will, & should have a voice in the decisions that affect my children by the professionals that I am paying dearly to employ!!
Not every person that questions actions/decisions ought to be labeled as negative. The whole purpose of this blog is to discuss issues within our district. If all anyone had to say was how wonderful they felt about decisions/actions...it would get rather dull.
Stephen and Lily: I think you both raise a valid point: we hire professionals to run our schools and, for the most part, we ought to step back allow them to do so. The problem in this case, however, was not so much with the decision to cut AP classes as it was with the manner in which it was communicated to the community. This incident points up a long-standing problem with communications in this District, of which Ms. Rogers' letter is only the latest example. The fact that Ms. Rogers only communicated the rationale behind her decision to cut certain AP classes long after the announcement had been made—and pundits of all stripes began to weigh in—indicates (to me at least) that our administrators have not fully come to grips with the fact that they, like all public servants, operate under a high degree of public scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteLet me back up for a moment: my background is in corporate communications, and I have spent most of my career working in one of the most reviled industries in America: health insurance. In my current position I am responsible for the overall management of the image and reputation of my company and its products. I’ve spent years dealing with hostile media interviewers. I say this only to point out that I know a little something about institutional communication in a adverse environment—which is very much the context in which the ORCSD operates.
Were I in a position to advise the administration, I would have said that they needed to "get out in front" of the story by getting the facts (however they construe them) out before people began drawing their own conclusions from the limited information that was first made available, as efforts at containment are almost always too little, too late. A few mumbled words at a School Board meeting set off a firestorm of criticism, when it would have been far better and easier to tell the whole story all at once. Sure, there would still be people who are unhappy, but at least they would have been dealing with facts, not conjecture.
Which brings me to my larger point: it is pointless to decry the climate of mistrust and hostility in our District; it is a fact of life and wishing it weren't so (or berating people for their opinions) won't change that fact. It would be far more productive to take proactive steps to address it. Aside from a general mistrust of institutions, the unfortunate truth is that some past actions of both elected officials and members of the administration have given people cause to fear the worst; turning around that perception is going to take time, effort, and a commitment to more open communication from all the stakeholders in the District.
Which is why I am heartened that the proposed budget passed yesterday, because it includes a $15,000 appropriation to fund a study of the causes and cures of the climate of fear and mistrust in our District. It will be money well spent if our School Board were to bring in a reputable communications consulting firm (of which there are several right here in New Hampshire) to advise them on how to better advocate their own positions, and how to accommodate the desires of the public to be involved in what are, after all, their schools.
My thanks to you both, and to all who have commented in this thread.
--Tom Bebbington