DRAFT MINUTES (to be approved May 6th)
April 29, 2010
6:30 - 8:30 p.m.
Craftsbury Town Hall
Facilitator: Heidi Krantz
1. Calendar. Heidi Krantz asked participants to review the question of whether or not the work of the group should end in June of this year, continue through the summer or end in the spring and resume in the fall. The preliminary sense of the meeting was that it was impractical to continue with Stakeholder meetings during the summer but a general willingness to continue with a phase # 2 effort in the fall. It was noted that since we are a sub-committee of the School Board, a decision to continue in the fall will depend on guidance from the Board. It was also noted that the composition of the Steering Committee will change if a decision is made to continue in the fall
2. Report Purpose. The group briefly discussed the timing and breadth and focus of the Report to the School Board. A question arose regarding the purpose of the Report and the original charter was reviewed. (“The purpose of the Collaborative is to support the community in developing a vision for the future of Craftsbury Schools…. Potential products include: a review of alternative educational models; a review of alternative affiliations…; an ;analysis of the pros and cons of outsourcing grades 9-12; a recommended plan…. Including the forging of broad citizen agreement….”)
It was also noted that our work should help the School Board “make an informed choice” and “guide their thinking.”
3. Report content. There was a brief discussion of content. It was noted that 1) the Report need not contain detailed recommendations 2) The Report could be offered as an interim effort 3) the timing and content of the Report should reflect developing conditions and opportunities.
4. Academic Offerings. Kate Tagai presented the work of her group comparing the curriculum of different schools in the area. (A copy of this information will be posted on the web site.) Kate noted that the report was factual and not analytical in order to allow people to draw their own conclusions. Some schools had strengths and some had areas of weakness. The following discussion noted the importance of identifying State requirements, that community groups like ours can influence curriculum content and the importance of starting with an overall strategy and developing a curriculum to reflect those goals.
5. School Models: High School/College Collaboration. Ann Morse distributed and reported on high school/college partnerships. (To be included on web-site). Although Sterling and the Academy currently collaborate to a significant extent, there is room for deepening this relationship. In general there is growing interest in college collaboration and some research on this subject. It is important to identify the student population and program goals, convene meetings between Sterling the +
Academy to discuss options, evaluate costs, develop community support and evaluate pros and cons. Preliminary discussions with Sterling indicate considerable interest in moving forward.
6. School Models: Virtual High Schools and On-Line Learning. This is an important emerging area. There is considerable on-going research and web resources are emerging (VHS.org). It is not yet clear that costs can be reduced and the field is competitive.
7. School Models: Magnet Schools. A magnet school is a public school with a unique curriculum that is designed to attract students from adjacent districts or communities in the topical area or thematic area. While magnet schools provide the standard core curriculum, they incorporate a distinctive approach and such as an emphasis on sustainability or the arts. Jen Schoen and Marie Royer gave a report on the Place Based Education magnet school in Burlington. Although only K-5, this School may constitute a model with direct relevance to the situation in Craftsbury. Points made during the discussion:
The Sustainability Academy was visited. The Schools appears to possess energy, vitality and creativity and students appear highly motivated with high levels of parental involvement.
The Sustainability Academy has re-vitalized the community and is a source of community pride.
The thematic contents (community, sustainability, emphasis on place and tradition) would appear to fit quite well with Craftsbury’s identity.
The model would also appear to support and build on the potential for collaboration with Sterling and the Outdoor Center and with the local agricultural movement in Hardwick. (Center for Sustainable Agriculture)
The design of a magnet School would appear to respond to Noel Ford’s point that Craftsbury needs to re-invent the Academy based on our unique attributes if we are to attract a sufficient student population to be financially viable.
The thematic areas (sustainability, ecology, community) align quite well with the professional capacities of Academy and Sterling teachers. As a community we appear to have the human and institutional resources to pursue a model of this sort.
The theme of sustainability is of national importance and interest and constitutes a increasingly important area of educational concentration.
Financial grant support from government, foundations and corporations for the design of this type of educational initiative appears to be available.
A magnet school could be designed in way that would consolidate broad enthusiasm and Town-wide support and bring the community together.
Finally, while magnet schools are technically not Charter Schools, they are similar in important respects and thus may benefit from the increasing national interest in schools that brake away from the traditional mold.
Concerns and questions included the following:
How would we address the needs of those children in the community that are not interested in the thematic area pursued by the magnet school?
How would we know that the School would attract sufficient students from other communities to be financially sustainable?
Can we obtain funds for the considerable amount of research and design work that will be needed?
8. Financial Modeling. Ann Ingerson presented an extremely useful program that she has developed to help us evaluate the financial implications of different scenarios. The Program will allow the user to plug in different assumptions about such things as student enrollment to see the bottom line result. The program uses Microsoft Excel and the Steering Committee will attempt to upload a copy on our web site. Stakeholders are encouraged to “play” with the program in order to get a better sense of the most important variables that will determine financial viability.
9. Next Meeting. The Stakeholders will meet again on May 6 at 6:3o pm at the Town Hall
