Tag Archives: meeting

Curriculum If Not Tomorrow, When?

The agenda for the next Board of Education meeting is posted but something is missing. The discussion on new courses being added to the curriculum is not there.  (A link to the agenda will be found at the end of this posting)

If you watched the last meeting you know that new course discussion is supposed to be on this agenda unless there are more important issues that will cause the meeting to run late.  Since there are only two reports now on the regular agenda and one is a report on the culmination of Coventry’s Caring Community Project it is hard to understand why curriculum receives a lower priority.

Perhaps the best way to understand the issue is to listen to eleven minutes of tape from the last meeting.  (A link will be provided at the end of this post) The matter comes up at the end of a presentation on curriculum changes so you can start listening at the 41:00 mark of the meeting.  At that point Mr. Barrett asks the Board, “Since one of our main responsibilities is to approve curriculum is there any time that we will actually be looking at some of these courses to see if we as a Board want to add them?”

Over the last four years 9 new courses have been added and more are being added but the Board has never had a serious discussion as to the need, content, presentation or alternatives.  While discussions of this type are standard with other Boards of Education Coventry has not taken that approach.

While the presentation Thursday will be on a Caring Community Project it is rather sad and ironic that the Board of Education cares so little about curriculum changes on the same night.  Nine new courses since 2007 and they have never found the time to actually have them discussed in-depth on an agenda.

It seems reasonable to expect our Board of Education to review courses as they are added and to have an understanding of what is actually being presented as education in our classrooms.  During the 11 minutes of tape you will hear Ms. Beausoleil say, “I don’t believe we have the time to evaluate every course taught in school”.

If you observe Board of Education meetings on a regular basis and see how they spend their time, and on what issues it is hard to imagine that classroom curriculum can receive such a low priority.  If you are concerned with curriculum and the education of our students watching these 11 minutes of tape may give you a sense of priorities this Board of Education has given to the subject during their term.

Meeting agenda for this week         http://tinyurl.com/5t3otfh

Link to last meeting tape                http://tinyurl.com/62bf4um

You may fast forward the tape to the 41:00 mark – it may take a few moments to fully load

Leave a Comment

Filed under Coventry CT, COVENTRY EDUCATION

Guglielmo and Ackert Announce Town Hall Meeting

Yesterday the Malloy charade was the topic of discussion.  Today an alternative is offered.  Instead of the one hour charade game offered by Governor Malloy Senator Tony Guglielmo and Representative Tim Ackert will meeting with local residents for two and half hours to discuss the new State Budget.

This will provide a real opportunity to learn about the State budget, looming deficits and alternatives to the Governor’s proposed tax increases.  It’s your money, why not attend and have your voice heard.   Attendees will have an opportunity to meet with Tony and Tim to ask questions or have an informal discussion.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under CONNECTICUT ISSUES, EVENT NEWS

Listening Charade By Governor Malloy, While The Answer Remains With Ackert and Guglielmo

Governor Malloy has been going on the road with “Town Hall” meetings to explain his budget and listen to the taxpayers.  The news reports would lead one to believe if you attend you can ask questions and in a small way that is true.

Those that plan to attend a meeting near Coventry should be aware that the Governor today announced a change in plans.  The new agenda reads as follows:

MANCHESTER
March 29, 7-8 PM
Manchester Community College, SBM Charitable Foundation Building Auditorium
Great Path

WINDHAM
March 30, 7-8 PM
Windham Middle School Auditorium
123 Quarry Street

From reading previous news reports you can expect the Governor to speak about his budget for a minimum of 30 minutes.  This of course will leave 30 minutes for questions and comments.  The original plans called for these meeting to be in smaller meeting rooms however due to attendance larger venues are now being used.  Unfortunately no additional minutes are being allotted to hear from the public so listening by the Governor is limited.

If Governor Malloy was really serious about “listening” to the people he would have scheduled these town hall meetings prior to forming his budget to obtain input before the budget was crafted.  Now what you have is opportunity for reaction to a proposal already in place and submitted to the legislature by the Governor, and you get to talk after the fact.

If you have time and want to attend you should do so but if you have limited time there is a better alternative to have your voice heard.  It would be far more productive to be meeting with your State Senator Tony Guglielmo and State Representative Tim Ackert because they are your voice and vote on Malloy’s budget.

Leave a Comment

Filed under CONNECTICUT ISSUES, CT issues

Food for Thought on All Day Kindergarten and More

There are two topics of intense discussion currently burning up phone lines between parents in Coventry, drugs and all day kindergarten (ADK). Parents may want to ask the BOE to take notice of these issues and include funding for action in the proposed budget. Tonight at 7:30 in the Town Hall Annex there will be a special meeting of the Board of Education (BOE) with their annual budget expected to be voted on for approval and forwarding to the Town Council.

One would expect that every member of the BOE will be a strong supporter for providing a safe drug free environment on our school buses and in our schools. The only real questions are: 1. How real and how big is the drug problem? 2. What actions should and can be taken to protect our children in Coventry? Parents will be asking the BOE to focus on this problem during their March 10th meeting. This should provide the BOE with an opportunity to perhaps have a forum with input and discussion to fully understand the issue and options for addressing the problems.

More complex is the issue of ADK which some people want included in the budget proposal being brought forward now. Certainly there are some compelling arguments being raised for and against just such a program. Unfortunately for the BOE it is not an easy issue and there is not a lot of time before the budget must be presented for a vote.

Proponents will talk about the values of early education, and increased demands of an ever expanding curriculum. Detractors may point out that early education is in fact important, on that they can agree but this is a local issue and should be looked at with a local context.

Our young students have proven to perform well as a group even with some students already getting additional private education. The performance gap of early education seems to be covered. They point to performance testing in the third grade as proof of the ability of our current programs to reach educational goals. Their concern or question is that if we have addition funding and our current students are performing well by the third grade but having lower performance levels as measured in the sixth grade why are we using the money for ADK and not addressing issues in the 3rd to 6th grade level with that priority?

One alternative is to put our toe in the water and test ADK with a pilot program. Advocates say at least we will be heading in the right direction with students and parents getting some immediate benefit. This would provide a good opportunity to refine the program before it is adopted system wide. Opponents are saying you don’t put your toe in the water until you know the depth of the water or if there are piranha present. To them this proposal lacks goals, guidance, and full planning. They say it would be like diving into water without knowing what is below the surface, always a dangerous gamble. Here we are gambling with the educational foundation of the next generation, which leads into the next talking point.

The State is moving the date of birth which will cause a child to become eligible for kindergarten, recognizing that not all children are “ready” for school at the same age. This brings to question the individual’s development and the impact that ADK will have on all students. Just what is being added to the day? Certainly one would expect more teaching but at the same time is fatigue an issue? Are we adding lunch time, snack time, and nap time to round out the day? How much of the additional time is educational time compared to daycare time? Some would say ADK is often supported to eliminate daycare expense for individual families. These are all valid points for rational discussion.

If we do not offer ADK to all students but do for some are we building in a learning gap that will only create more problems for our staff to overcome? If all students do not receive the benefits and the same opportunities are we building into the system some hint of inequality, some elitism? If the proponents are correct in pointing out the educational benefits of an early foundation will we be making a program that would give some students an advantage over others because we are providing a better foundation for some but not all? Is limiting ADK to only a select group of children by using a gambler’s luck of the draw to select the students a wise decision for the students? Will we allow a lottery to determine who in the first grade will compete with an advantage because the community chose to give them a different and perhaps more complete foundation of learning? If your child is not guaranteed a spot for ADK under some proposals, is it still a good alternative way to start? That needs to be discussed with your input.

The final question is always the financial side of any new proposal. Do the taxpayers have the appetite for this level of spending? Are we realistic in our level of expectations in these harsh economic times? During recent contract negotiations with our teachers, staff was asked to freeze wages, including step increases with the clear understanding that the district needed the freeze to minimize staff reductions and meet our current needs. They agreed to a “hard” freeze for this year.

How would you feel as a teacher? Would you look at this as a new proposal, creating new expenditures with a program that has not been fully vetted by the BOE? Would you feel some of the negotiations had been disingenuous? If you were a teacher you may not want to speak in public, but how would you feel? Look in the mirror, if your employer said sorry no raise this year we don’t have the money then rolled out a brand new corporate jet as a new way for company executives to travel, would you feel somehow cheated?

Just asking questions here and not taking sides or advocating for or against the issue. It is important that we all understand that not all questions coming before the Board of Education have easy solutions. Not all people can be satisfied, no matter how the issue moves forward it is hoped that these points will provide some food for thought and a better understanding of some of the complexity of the decisions that must be made.

1 Comment

Filed under COVENTRY EDUCATION

ACKERT CAMPAIGN DIRTY POLITICAL TRICK AT COVENTRY TOWN COUNCIL

The Coventry Town Council meeting last night featured a new low in dirty tricks for a political campaign, coming directly from the campaign of Republican, Tim Ackert.  Mr. Ackert is running against Joan Lewis for the 8th Assembly District.

The Ackert for the 8th campaign was out of line and breached the boundary of good taste when they disrespected the Town Council by attempting to promote their candidate during the meeting.  It was not an accident, it was not unplanned it was clearly premeditated and offensive.

Jeff Shorts, campaign treasurer for Republican Tim Ackert showed a lack of respect for the Town Council and the citizens of Coventry when he wore a shirt promoting Tim Ackert and made a blatant attempt to gain television exposure for the campaign during the meeting.  There is a time and place for campaigning and the Town Council meeting is clearly not the time or place.

Mr. Shorts selected a seat position so as to expose the back of his shirt to the camera on any wide angel shot during the meeting.  He intentionally covered the shirt with his jacket until the meeting was underway and the first wide angle shot was being taken.  He clearly watched the in room television monitor to time the removal of his jacket so as to gain exposure.  He then sat forward to maximize the view of the back of his shirt and the promotion of the campaign name and slogan.

Credit cameraman Dave Lamore, for recognizing the political stunt as the dirty trick that it was and his attempts with new camera angles to remove political posturing from the meeting should be recognized and applauded.  Dave was challenged by the situation but did an exceptional job.  Mr. Lamore understands the need for decorum, decency and neutrality during the Town Council meetings.

Mr. Shorts on the other hand, once thwarted in his stunt made one final act of crass behavior as he rose and walked in front of the camera once again in an attempt to gain exposure.  Yes he could have waited, for a different camera angle, used a different door, covered his shirt or just politely waited but his motive was obvious and predictable.

Candidates can and should have a difference of opinion and offer voters alternatives but there should never be a lack of respect for decent behavior.  The voters of the 8th district deserve good ethical candidates running hard to inform voters about the issues.  The voters do not need dirty tricks, and questionable ethics in any campaign.  This type of behavior should not come from the Republicans or the Democrats.  It should be abhorred by every voter and citizen in the 8th district.

Campaign signs for Lewis have mysteriously disappeared in the dark of night; letters to the editor have referred to ethics and now this tasteless stunt.  The Ackert campaign should reflect the candidate and if this is any reflection Coventry, Vernon and Columbia should support Joan Lewis.

1 Comment

Filed under CONNECTICUT ISSUES, COVENTRY GOVERNMENT ISSUES

TIPPER BARRELS MAY BE REACHING A TIPPING POINT IN COVENTRY

The Opining Quill has learned that the number of emails received at the Town Hall concerning the tipper barrel issue has ignited renewed discussion within the Town Council.  In an exclusive interview with the Opining Quill after meeting with Town Manager John Elsesser,  Councilman Richard Williams said there are current discussions about options in response to the expressed public interest.

Mr. Williams a Republican, has been advocating the discontinuation of the trash bag system in favor of tipper barrels for both recycling and trash with his only support on the Council coming from his fellow Republican Julie Blanchard.  All five Democratic Council members have supported the use of tipper barrels only for recycling and maintaining the use of plastic bags for trash.  Now there are talks going on prior to the next meeting, that may result in additional discussion or action on June 21.

According to Mr. Williams there are four options under consideration:

  1. Taking no action and letting the vote stand.
  2. Having COVRRA on the agenda and opening the door for a reconsideration motion.
  3. Forming a committee.
  4. Having a town vote in some form.

The agenda for the next meeting will be formulated between now and the end of next week.  This provides additional time to contact members of the Town Council and to express your position concerning this issue.

Perhaps Mr. Hall after hearing the input Monday night and receiving a large number of emails will now consider this issue as serious as the voters of Coventry apparently do.  This past Monday night Mr. Hall said there were several serious issues and he felt that the Town Council was “wasting our time” in discussing the tipper barrel any longer.  His concern was to bring forth three more referendum for spending namely a new Town Garage, a fire house project and a school roof project.

Mr. Vinkles may be worried about the political implications and impact with all the interest in this issue.  Mr. Vinkles voiced his concern about making moves or decisions based on politics at the May 17 Town Council meeting when according to the minutes he said, “the public works garage should be sent back out to referendum when the Council feels it is politically appropriate to do so” . Politics should not be a consideration on these or any other issues that involve the health and welfare of the community.  Putting a consideration of politics before the best interest of the people is inappropriate for any elected official.  The Town of Coventry would be better served if the people came before politics in matters before the Town Council.  Mr. Zenko pointed to past elections as an endorsement of Democratic leadership on this issue.

For now mark your calendars for June 21 when the next Town Council meeting is scheduled and check back here at the Opining Quill for issues involving Coventry.  Please see archives for past posting of information and commentary.  The Opining Quill covers issues in Coventry that newspapers often ignore.

Leave a Comment

Filed under CONNECTICUT ISSUES