Governor visits Franklin’s Jefferson School

It was both refreshing and energizing. Governor Deval Patrick traveled to Franklin yesterday to spend time with the students and staff at Jefferson Elementary School and enlivened the day.

The visit gave the Governor a firsthand account of education spending in action.

The visit was coordinated by Representative James Vallee. “I wanted to bring the governor here to show him just how much funding affects our district,” Vallee said. “Quite frankly, I’m concerned about the future and I want to show the governor and community that we are 100 percent committed to maintaining education funding.”

Complete newspaper coverage of the visit can be viewed by clicking here. As noted in the story, during his visit, Gov. Patrick stressed the importance of education funding through tough budget times. “We have protected funding for public schools,” Patrick said. “That is about the kids and the value we place on them.”

Also during the visit, the Governor participated in Mr. Goguen’s history class using SMARTBoard technology. “The purpose of this technology is to reinforce what I am teaching,” Goguen said.

Following the classroom visit, Gov. Patrick dined with elementary students in the cafeteria.

It was certainly encouraging to have the Governor see our schools and engage with our students. The education of our young is one of the great hallmarks of our community, and the visit highlighted the support we receive in this effort from our state officials in this effort.

FHS building project moving to design phase

The Franklin High School renovation project is advancing and the project’s scope is expected to be presented to the community in 12 to 18 months. School Committee member Ed Cafasso, a member of the FHS building committee, provides this update:

Last week, following approval by the Finance Committee, the Town Council voted unanimously to authorize a $1 million bond for the next phase of the FHS renovation. This funding allows Franklin to hire an Owners Project Manager (OPM) and an Architect to bring the project to the schematic design phase. Under the rules of Massachusetts School Building Authority (SBA), if the Town commits to financing the full cost of this phase, the SBA will refund an estimated 30 – 45%.

The Milford Daily News covered the issue when it came before the Finance Committee (http://tinyurl.com/yz28vqq) and Town Council (http://tinyurl.com/ykboc39). The newspaper stories said the funding would go to “a study.”

That description is off the mark. The bonding authorized this week will result in actual schematic diagrams of the likely renovations, showing the components of the project and its scale. These diagrams will be prepared by a professional architect in close collaboration with an experienced project manager and with members of the Building Committee.

This phase of the project is NOT the same as the study completed in October 2006 by the firm Kaestle Boos, which looked at FHS at the request of the School Committee. It provided a general look of the building’s condition and a “blue sky” assessment of what might be done, ranging from minimal fixes to the construction of a completely new building. You can view the 2006 report by clicking here, and additional information, including the video of the presentation to the School Committee, by clicking here.

The funding authorized this past week allows Franklin to move forward to hire the professional project manager and architect  who will produce the formal schematic designs for renovation work. Every step occurs under the formal supervision of the SBA and the local Building Committee. The design options will be based on the specific renovation ideas that were part of the Town’s application for SBA funding. Those renovation ideas arose from a tour of the FHS building in December 2008 by professional SBA inspection team and subsequent discussions between members of the Building Committee and SBA officials.

The hiring of an Owner’s Project Manager is required by the SBA and by state law. The OPM should be in place by December or January and the Architect should be on board by March or April. Once schematic design is complete, and there is an agreement with all parties involved, including the SBA, a debt exclusion will be required to move toward construction.

Approximately 12 to 18 months from now, Franklin voters will have a very clear picture of the renovation project – the precise work involved, the cost and the timing – and will be asked to vote on whether the town should borrow the amount needed to pay for it over time. If voters approve the debt exclusion, a substantial portion of the total cost (a minimum of 31 percent) will be reimbursed by the state.

Keep in mind that the exact timing of every step in this process is controlled largely by the SBA, which holds tight supervision over all projects they are likely are to subsidize. Information on the general SBA process is available by clicking here.

You can learn more about the FHS project on this Tuesday night (Oct. 13) when Tom Mercer, chairman of the School Building Committee, discusses this phase of work the School Committee at a meeting that begins at 7 pm the Municipal Building. Middle school parents may wish to tune in or attend.

Panther Pride night at FHS coming up

In a few days, parents of 8th grade students will receive a formal invitation in the mail to attend this year’s Panther Pride Night at Franklin High School on Wednesday, October 21, 2009. This is going to be an informative and exciting opportunity for parents and students to explore the scope and quality of the engaging educational and extracurricular programs and facilities that FHS offers to students. All 8th grade parents and students are invited to attend this informative event that will include multimedia presentations, walking tours, information about our graduates. The evening will also highlight the opportunities for learning, sports, clubs, and activities.

Join the FHS team on Oct. 21st in the Field House where Principal Peter Light will kick-off the evening’s activities, followed by an informational video about the opportunities and experiences that are available to incoming freshmen. After the video, parents and students will be escorted in small groups through the high school where they will have the opportunity to obtain more information about our academic programs and facilities, explore the newly organized Technology Center, sample the new Fitness Center, and view classroom resources at various stops throughout the school. A visit to the Art Gallery and DECA Store are also on the planned tour route. In addition, faculty, administrators, and students will be available in the Field House to provide more information and to answer any questions that you may have about the FHS community.

To allow sufficient time for all parents and students to participate in the Panther Pride experience, there will be two sessions offered based on a student’s last name. The first session will start at 5:30pm (for students with last names beginning with the letters A-K), and the second session will begin at 6:30pm (for students with last names L-Z). If you are an 8th grade parent or student, this year’s Panther Pride night is an event that is not to be missed. So mark your calendar now for Wednesday, October 21st.

Testing the limits of pledging allegiance

Pledging allegiance to the flag may seem like a simple act, but it is not immune from controversy or constitutional inquiry. The limits on school systems have been tested over the years, and there have been some recent court decisions on the issue.

Before looking at the decisions, it is important to note that the Pledge of Allegiance, as a ceremonial activity, promotes both civic awareness and patriotism. The Pledge represents an opportunity to reflect on the fact that, although we are a diverse people, we share a national identity as citizens who are committed to the promise of liberty and justice for all. With that being said, we need to be cognizant of the rights of those who may not wish to participate in this ceremony.

A federal district court in New Hampshire has ruled that the state’s statute requiring the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in schools does not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment or Free Exercise of Religion Clauses. You can view the full decision by clicking here. It also rejected claims that the state’s pledge law violated the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. In addition, it summarily dismissed the claim that the pledge law was void as against public policy on the ground of failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Lastly, the district court dismissed all state law claims without prejudice, allowing them to be refiled in state court.

In that case, the parents of three public school students objected to their children being subjected to recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in school. Specifically, the parents, who identify themselves and their children as atheist or agnostic, contended the pledge offended their and their children’s rights under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment and Free Exercise of Religion Clauses because of the inclusion of the phrase “under God” in the pledge. They also raised Fourteenth Amendment due process and equal protection claims, along with the claim that the pledge law was void as against public policy. In the aftermath of September 11 attacks, the state legislature passed the New Hampshire Patriot Act, which provided for the daily recitation of the pledge in the state’s schools. The statute made student participation voluntary by providing an opt-out clause. While conceding that the children were not compelled to recite the pledge, the parents sought assurances from the principals at their children’s schools that the pledge would not be recited in their children’s classes. However, no such assurances were given.

After briefly discussing the various approaches federal courts have taken to addressing the constitutionality of recitation of the pledge in school, the district court applied the three-prong Establishment Clause test set forth in Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971). Regarding the secular purpose prong, it concluded that both the express purpose of the New Hampshire statute (continuing “the policy of teaching [the] country’s history to the elementary and secondary pupils of [the] state”) and the legislative history of the statute demonstrated a secular purpose. It pointed out that the record of the legislative discussions made clear that the law was enacted for patriotic, not religious, reasons. It also noted that the fact that when the pledge recitation law was revised by the legislature it was separated from the provision allowing recitation of the “Lord’s prayer” in schools, further supported the view the law had a secular purpose. Turning to the primary effect prong, the district court stressed that the government may not coerce an individual to support or participate in religion or its exercise. However, it found no coercive effect was present under New Hampshire’s law.

In 2008, The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (AL, FL, GA) in Frazier v. Winn struck down a Florida state law that it found requires all students to stand at attention during the Pledge of Allegiance, even those excused from reciting the Pledge. However, the court upheld the law’s requirement that a student obtain parental permission to be excused from participating. You can view the Frazier decision by clicking here.

For a look at more cases under the religion clause of the first amendment, click here.

Justice offers some keen reading and an innovative online course

At a bookstore today, I stumbled upon a book called Justice: What’s the Right Thing to do? by Michael J. Sandel. I was first drawn in by the word “justice” on the cover, and on closer examination by the faces contained in the letters. Given my line of work in my day job, this book demanded closer examination. Which brought me to the inside jacket:

What are our obligations to others as people in a free society? Should government tax the rich to help the poor? Is the free market fair? Is it sometimes wrong to tell the truth? Is killing sometimes morally required? Is it possible, or desirable, to legislate morality? Do individual rights and the common good conflict?

Great questions, indeed. Upon further examination, we learn that the author is a Harvard professor who teaches a course called “Justice” at Harvard University. In the course, up to a thousand students pack the campus theater to hear Sandel relate the big questions of political philosophy to the most vexing issues of the day. Affirmative action, same-sex marriage, physician-assisted suicide, abortion, national service, patriotism and dissent, the moral limits of markets—Sandel dramatizes the challenge of thinking through these conflicts, and shows how a surer grasp of philosophy can help us make sense of politics, morality, and our own convictions as well.

The book led me to a website (http://www.justiceharvard.org) which contains a rather innovative online course covering these great questions. In the online course, Harvard opens its classroom to the world that helps viewers become more critically minded thinkers about the moral decisions we all face in our everyday lives. And it further introduces us to some of the fascinating aspects of technology in education. It demonstrates how classrooms can go beyond the four corners of a building, and how web 2.0 tools can lead to engaging and thoughtful discussions for an unlimited audience. And it points to yet another wave in teaching and learning, things we continue to explore in the Franklin school system.

For a glimpse of what the Justice course offers, check out the video posted below. And take advantage of this course offering and see what technology can do for your mind.

First Annual Jenna Pasquino Memorial Foundation Golf Tournament

The Jenna Pasquino Memorial Foundation was started in 2009. The Foundation’s goal is to sponsor activities and programs such as scholarships to graduating seniors and charitable community organizations.

Jenna passed away this past April 30th in a motor vehicle accident in Bellingham MA and was taken from us at the young age of 20. Jenna was very involved in the community in Franklin where she lived, was a student in the Franklin Public Schools, and had many friends and family in town and also in the neighboring area.

Its first fundraiser is an annual golf tournament, with the proceeds going to a scholarship fund. This year it will be held on Saturday, October 17th at the Blissful Meadows Golf Club on Chockalog Rd in Uxbridge with tee off promptly at 8:00am. It will be 18 holes, followed by dinner, awards and a raffle. The cost is $125 per golfer. Any non-golfers are welcome to join the foundation for dinner at 1:00 pm, after the tournament at a cost of $30.

The Foundation is looking for tee and green sponsors, goodie bag items and/or gift certificates for services, meals, etc. or items that it can use for our raffle for the tournament.

The sponsor fee is $100 and your business name will appear on an individual sign at one of the holes for the entire tournament. It will also be publicized in the program given to each golfer, along with the list of all contributors. This is a great opportunity for you to get exposure for your business as well as supporting a very worthwhile cause.

We are included a sponsorship form/golfer’s registration form below for your convenience. If you would like to be a sponsor, and/or are interested in playing in the tournament, please fill out the enclosed forms and mail them back with your check to the Jenna Pasquino Memorial Foundation, c/o Erin Donahue, 30 Mill River St, Blackstone, MA 01504 . You can either create your own team or we will be putting together teams for individual registrants. Please respond ASAP so that you will be guaranteed a spot.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact one of the following organizers:

Erin Donahue at (508)641-5074

Andrew Spas at (401)330-6439

Dave Boyan at (508)579-2750

Kelley Byrnes-Benkart at (508)245-2336

View this document on Scribd

Jenifer Fox: Obama is Right, Developing Talent is Key in Education

I thought this was an interesting post and comment on the President’s speech to students and thus have posted a link using ShareThis.

Jenifer Fox: Obama is Right, Developing Talent is Key in Education

Here’s an excerpt, but click on the link to read the entire post:

President Obama implored school children to take responsibility for their own educations. He said, “I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself. Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.”

Mr. President is right. Once children know their own strengths and talents and understand how to put them to use, they can create their futures. Schools are very good at teaching children about their weaknesses and helping them see what they cannot do and what they do not know. We are far less skilled at teaching students to understand what they love to do. This should be the nation’s educational charge.

President’s address to students

At noon on Tuesday, September 8th, President Barack Obama will be welcoming America’s students back to school. The President has spoken often about the responsibility parents have for their children and their education, but in this message he’ll urge students to take personal responsibility for their own education, to set goals, and to not only stay in school but make the most of it.

To help make sure as many school districts, classrooms, and students are able to get this message the President has launched a resources page where you can find out almost anything you’d want to know. You can view the resources page by clicking here. There’s information on how you can watch it on TV or on the internet, classroom activities that teachers can engage their students in around the speech, even the satellite coordinates for school districts that want to access the feed.

The President’s address has certainly generated a lot of buzz in the nation and in Franklin. A number of calls and e-mails have been received relative to the President’s address over the last several days. Indeed, you may have read about the controversy in today’s Milford Daily News (click here). Here is how the matter is being handled in the Franklin Public Schools:

• Grades K-5 — Principals have told teachers they have discretion to view on computers. If teachers plan to use the speech in class, they need to inform parents and offer an opt out.
• Grades 6-8 — At this time they are all planning to use the speech as an opportunity to work with students to establish expectations and set goals. The Principals will inform parents thru Connect Ed and offer an opt out.
• Grades 9-12 — Teacher discretion and offer an opt out.

From a pure policy perspective guest speakers are governed by School Committee policy IJOB, which reads as follows: “Resource persons are those individuals or groups who are invited into the schools to present supplementary information and ideas to the classroom course of study. These experiences afford students the opportunity to benefit from community viewpoints. Care should be taken in selecting these speakers so that they are individuals who respect diversity in thinking and varying views and who are not attempting to inappropriately influence points of view.” Some of the other policies of interest to this discussion include the following (click on the link to view the full text of the policy):

• Academic freedom
• Teaching activities/presentations
• Teaching about controversial issues/controversial speakers

The process being followed in the Franklin Public Schools relative to the President’s speech on Tuesday is clearly in line with these policies.

This is not the first time that a President has directly addressed school students. You can view Ronald Reagan’s address to students from 1988 by clicking here. You can view the text of George H.W. Bush’s speech to students in 1991 by clicking here.

From a purely personal standpoint, I am delighted to see that the President is reaching out to students in such a meaningful way. While I am not generally in favor of too much federal involvement in local school districts (see my post on that topic by clicking here), I believe that giving students a meaningful opportunity to hear from a President who is great speaker and leader, is laudable. I can recall being inspired as a youth by a speech of President John F. Kennedy and his call for public service. It’s something I remember to this day, and it is my hope that President Obama will touch students in a similar fashion. It may even spark greater interest in government and public service, and re-stoke the flame of liberty. To that end, let’s encourage our youth to listen in on Tuesday, or during the replays which will no doubt be available on-line.

You can view an advance copy of the text of the speech by clicking here.

The feds are coming, the feds are coming

In an interesting twist, earlier this week, my son and I travelled the Battle Road on bikes from Lexington to Concord, the scene of Paul Revere’s famous ride. It was interesting to follow the steps that led to the first skirmish of the American Revolution which took place on April 19, 1775. And it’s interesting to reflect in the place where the flames of liberty were ignited, and concepts of federalism and the limited role of a central government were nurtured.

That ride brought to mind the President’s current push to rewrite education legislation and invoked a federal takeover of schools in this country (see Boston Globe report by clicking here and Newsweek piece by clicking here).

Education has historically been left in the hands of local communities. It’s part of the idea that the governance of education is best done at the local level, where the parents, teachers, administrators, and students are intimately more aware of the needs of their schools. Indeed since colonial times, Massachusetts required the towns to maintain a system of public schools. The statute of 1647 — which is the precursor to G. L. c. 71, Section 1 — required every town with fifty or more householders to appoint a schoolmaster in the town “to teach all such Children as shall resort to him to Write and Read,” and every town of one hundred or more householders or families to “set up a Grammar School, the Master thereof being able to Instruct Youth so far as they may be fitted for the University.”

The federal constitution purposefully says nothing about education. In Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U. S. 483 (1954), a unanimous Supreme Court recognized that “education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments.” And in 1973, the Supreme Court recognized that education is not among the rights afforded explicit protection under our Federal Constitution. San Antonio Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973). In Wright v. Council of City of Emporia, 407 U.S. 451 (1972), the Court noted that “[d]irect control over decisions vitally affecting the education of one’s children is a need that is strongly felt in our society.” As one of the justices in that case observed:

Local control is not only vital to continued public support of the schools, but it is of overriding importance from an educational standpoint, as well. The success of any school system depends on a vast range of factors that lie beyond the competence and power of the courts. Curricular decisions, the structuring of grade levels, the planning of extracurricular activities, to mention a few, are matters lying solely within the province of school officials, who maintain a day-to-day supervision that a judge cannot.

Despite all of this, the President is making a push to impose national standards in education. Indeed, the federal government is offering funding — through a program called Race to the Top — which will reward school districts that adhere to national standards. But national standards, no matter how brilliantly designed, create uniformity and are harmful to creativity. Aside from that, they ignore the good work that is already being done in states such as Massachusetts. To those who still think American schools are bad and need standards, I suggest you review my last post by clicking here.

For a glimpse of some of the more detailed reasons to oppose national standards, consider the following:

• The best defense against national standards
• Feds In The Classroom: How Big Government Corrupts, Cripples, and Compromises American Education
• The case against national standards
• Against National Standards

If the federal government wants to help states and local governments, it can begin by funding the mandates already in place. For a list of those mandates already in place and which are not fully funded, click here. For now, the national standards push should be abandoned and we should revert of the federalist system composed at the end of the Revolutionary War.

American schools do a better job than some may think

To those who think that American schools are so bad, look at the book Catching Up or Leading the Way: American Education in the Age of Globalization by Yong Zhao. As the jacket materials note, this remarkable book will forever change the debate about what’s wrong and what’s right with American education and where it should be going.

Based on his own experience as a student in China and as a parent of children attending school in the United States, Zhao skewers conventional wisdom while setting straight the recent history and current state of US schools. To make his case, Zhao explains:

• Why the perceived weaknesses of American education are actually its strengths.
• How reform proponents, business executives, and politicians have misjudged American education.
• Why China and other nations in Asia are actually reforming their systems to be more like their American counterparts.
• What really matters for an education system and what really counts as educational excellence.

With an extraordinary command of facts and thought leadership, Zhao describes how schools have to keep pace with a world that is being dramatically transformed by globalization, the “death of distance,” and digital technology. Instead of falling in line with mandates for standardization, his prescription is for educators to

• Expand the definition of success beyond math and reading test scores.
• Personalize schooling so that every student has opportunity to learn.
• View schools as enterprises that embrace globalization and digital technology.

You can view the slideshow from Zhao’s presentation at the 2009 School Administrators of Iowa (SAI) by clicking here or one viewer’s notes by clicking here.

Former Justice urges more civic education

David H. Souter, retired as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, challenged American Bar Association (ABA) members at the Opening Assembly for the 2009 Annual Meeting to “take on the job of making American civic education real again.”  For video of Souter’s speech, click here. 

When more than two-thirds of Americans cannot even name the three branches of government, they cannot speak up for an independent judiciary, Souter said.  “This is something to worry about” and there is “a risk to constitutional government,” he warned.  Souter said he learned the statistic in a conference convened in 2006 by retired Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and Associate Justice Stephen Breyer.

He contrasted the lack of public understanding of the workings of government today with his own civic development as a child growing up in Weare, N.H.  He attended yearly town meetings with his parents, watching community leaders decide issues of local governance, differentiating between legislative and executive functions and between township responsibilities and those of the state.  A respected citizen who had been elected by township residents lead the meeting with fairness and recognition of all viewpoints, in a judicial capacity, he said.  When he reached the ninth grade, the formal civics class taught in school was easy to understand, and not one of his classmates would have failed to identify the branches of government, he added.

The reality that a “majority of the public is unaware of the structure of government,” and fails to understand the notion of separation of powers, is the “root problem we have to face about judicial independence,” Souter said. 

Civic education must be raised to a new power,” he concluded.  It is “the birthright of every American.”

Along these lines, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, in cooperation with Georgetown University Law Center and has developed a Web site and interactive civics curriculum for 7th, 8th and 9th grade students called Our Courts. You can view that site by clicking here. At the ABA conference, Meryl J. Chertoff, Professor at Georgetown University Law School and Director of the Sandra Day O’Connor Project on the State of the Judiciary reported on new online learning tool. You can view that video by clicking here.

As part of my personal commitment to this effort, for the past two years, I have participated in the Constitution in the Classroom project at Franklin High School. Constitution in the Classroom is an effort by the American Constitution Society to bring its members into primary and secondary classrooms to raise awareness of fundamental constitutional principles. In 2009, the classroom discussion focused on the Redding student strip search case which was decided by the Supreme Court in June 2009. The conversations with students have been lively and bring into perspective the role of the courts in their lives.

As Thomas jefferson once observed: “An enlightened citizenry is indispensable for the proper functioning of a republic. Self-government is not possible unless the citizens are educated sufficiently to enable them to exercise oversight. It is therefore imperative that the nation see to it that a suitable education be provided for all its citizens.”   Those words are critical underpinnings to the need for greater civics instruction in schools.

FY10 budget numbers finally settled

For the FY10 fiscal year, Franklin’s net loss of positions will be approximately 12. That should come as welcome news to the community, considering that in February, we faced a budget gap of nearly $3.5 million. At an average of $50,000, that gap represented approximately 70 positions. The gap we faced forced the school department to issue 60 layoff notices in April 2009, and many of the recipients of those letters have received recalls.

We reduced that budget deficit through reductions in expenditures (as shown in the column on the left in the table below). In addition, we received revenues from one-time federal and state resources, including stimulus funds, and school choice revenues (shown in the column on the right).

	FY10 Level Service Original Budget	53,807,773							FY09 Level Funded Budget		50,297,820
LESS									PLUS
Reduction in Expenditures		Amount							Sources of Revenue		Amount
Health Insurance Pemium		(192,000)							State Fiscal Stabilization Funding		219,523
Administrative, etc. Wage Freeze		(124,000)							Federal Stimulus Package		343,091
Additional Health Insurance changes		(200,000)							Circuit Breaker Extraordinary Relief Revenue		426,339
FEA Wage Deferral		(800,000)							School Choice		145,000
Degree Advancement		(150,000)
Attrition		(210,000)
Prepaid Tuition to out of district placements		(200,000)
Positions eliminated		(500,000)
Total Reduction in Expenditures		(2,376,000)							Total Increase in Revenue		1,133,953
Revised Level Service Budget		51,431,773							Increased Level Funded Budget		51,431,773

 

Some have suggested that we “found money” or were “crying wolf” during the budget discussions over the last several months. A careful examination of the data demonstrates otherwise.

Some of the confusion lies with the fact that because of contractual obligations, we had to notify 60 staff members of impending layoffs, even though we knew the number would be smaller.  Our budget gap was approximately $1,500,000 when the layoffs were announced in April.  That is the equivalent of about 30 positions that we expected to lose. We had the pay freeze from the teachers voted in June which saved us $800,000, we prepaid some special-education tuitions which saved us approximately $200,000, we had attrition funds available due to retirements, we had some available revolving account money, and some funds in the degree advancement category which allowed us to cover the gap. We were fortunate in this regard, because that helped us absorb some of the stimulus cuts announced in late June which interfered with our ability to bring everyone back.  

In general, we were able to get to this point through a series of cost savings and budget reductions.   It is great news that we are able to be in this position after perhaps one of the most difficult budget seasons in a long time. I appreciate the patience and perseverance from everyone on the School Committee, administration, and staff. This was truly a team effort and we should all be very proud of the hard work that got us to this point.

But all of this does not bring us back to level service on teaching positions. In fact, the actual layoffs for this year involved 12 positions, and 10 of those were teaching positions.  We started the year with 399 teachers.  Next year, we will have 389.  The positions that we will end up losing will be five physical education/health positions at Franklin High School, the five librarians spread throughout the district, one assistant principal at Franklin high, and the data analyst position (for a total of 12 positions).

In addition, you should consider the following:   we had 443 teachers as of October 1, 2007. The historical numbers going back five years show that we are on a dangerous trend for staffing of our schools.  The table below shows that we are down from a high of 466 teachers in 2006-07.    These staffing cuts have taken place at the same time we have seen increasing enrollments, resulting in larger class iszes.  That’s frankly not good for education, and again, dismisses the “crying wolf” theory.

 
 

School year	# of classroom teachers
2003-04	408
2004-05	459
2005-06	449
2006-07	466
2007-08	443
2008-09	399

 

You can get some additional history on teaching positions in Franklin by looking at this blog post from last year which can be found at: http://franklinschoolcommittee.wordpress.com/2008/05/17/information-on-teachers-in-franklin/.

A good name is a priceless possession

The increase in the use of anonymous rants and postings on newspaper and other blogs is concerning.  Often times, they express a view from folks who suggest that they have all the answers, but are unwilling to “step up to the plate” and do anything about it.

When reading the remarks of these critics who are weak and unwilling to sign their name, I am reminded of this quote from Teddy Roosevelt:

It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

In today’s Milford Daily News, former state representative Marie Parente offered her view, which includes an analysis of efforts to identify anonymous posters.  You can view that piece by clicking on this link:

MARIE PARENTE: A good name is a priceless possession – Milford, MA – The Milford Daily News (Posted using ShareThis)

As she notes in the opening of her piece, “The past few months, several published comments on local newspaper articles by anonymous posters appear to have ‘crossed the line.’  One wonders whether they believe they are contributing to a forum, offering constructive criticism or simply intend to inflict pain, damage community standing and humiliate targeted victims.”

The Boston Globe ran a similar piece critical of these anonymous posts.  In it, the author notes that “these forums are insidiously contributing to the devaluation of journalism, blurring the truth, confusing the issues, and diminishing serious discourse beyond even talk radio’s worst examples.”  The author goes on urging newspapers to restore journalism’s integrity by removing these reader forums.  You can read the full Globe piece by clicking here.

Participating in government is no doubt important.  But the destructive use of anonymous rants can hardly qualify as participation.  It is easy to sit back behind a computer screen and hide behind electronic guts.  But in order to be a force worth reckoning, one must be in the arena. 

Jobs of tomorrow report released

President Obama issued a new report this morning on the “jobs of tomorrow” — even as the jobs of today keep disappearing. In the report, titled “Preparing the Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow,” the President’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) present a projection of potential developments in the U.S. labor market over the next five to ten years and discusses the preparations necessary to develop the 21st century workforce. The report (read it here) discusses the skills and training that will likely be needed for the growing occupation categories, and the education and training system needed to prepare people for those jobs.

With regard to education in particular, the report notes the following:

Occupations requiring higher educational attainment are projected to grow much faster than those with lower education requirements, with the fastest growth among occupations that require an associate’s degree or a post-secondary vocational award. Key attributes of a well-trained workforce as well as elements of an effective education and training system are detailed below.

The elements of a more effective system identified in the report include:

• a solid early childhood, elementary, and secondary system that ensures students have strong basic skills;
• institutions and programs that have goals that are aligned and curricula that are cumulative;
• close collaboration between training providers and employers to ensure that curricula are aligned with workforce needs;
• flexible scheduling, appropriate curricula, and financial aid designed to meet the needs of students;
• incentives for institutions and programs to continually improve and innovate; and
• accountability for results.

The report concludes that the U.S. economy appears to be shifting towards jobs that require workers with greater analytical and interactive skills – skills that are typically acquired with some post-secondary education. Mindful of this, we must do what we can to maintain a solid foundation in our public school system.

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics offered its analysis of tomorrow’s jobs and highlighted the importance of on-the-job training as follows:

For 12 of the 20 fastest growing occupations, an associate degree or higher is the most significant level of postsecondary education or training. On-the-job training is the most significant level of postsecondary education or training for another 6 of the 20 fastest growing occupations. In contrast, on-the-job training is the most significant level of postsecondary education or training for 12 of the 20 occupations with the largest numerical increases, while 6 of these 20 occupations have an associate degree or higher as the most significant level of postsecondary education or training.

This report underscores the importance of learning how to learn, an important element for a successful education.

You can read the full CEA report by clicking here.  You can view the Bureau of Labor Stsitistics report by clicking here.

Supreme Court will only clarify school rules

Don’t look to the Supreme Court to set school rules, only to clarify them when officials have abdicated that responsibility, Chief Justice John Roberts said Saturday according to an AP report (you can view the full report by clicking here).

At a judicial conference, Roberts was asked how school administrators should interpret seemingly conflicting messages from the Court in two recent decisions, including one last week that said Arizona officials conducted an unconstitutional strip-search of a teenage girl. You can view our blog post on that decision by clicking here. In 2007, the justices sided with an Alaska high school principal, ruling that administrators could restrict student speech if it appears to advocate illegal drug use. You can view our blog post on that decision by clicking here. The court’s full decision in the free speech case can be viewed by clicking here.

According to the AP report, Roberts told the audience there was no conflict in the court’s rulings, just clarity intended to deal with narrow issues that surface from government actions. “You can’t expect to get a whole list of regulations from the Supreme Court. That would be bad,” Roberts said. “We wouldn’t do a good job at it.”

You can be the judge of the clarity that emerges from these decisions. From my perspective, the 8-1 decision in the strip search case provided reasonable clarity and was a sound decision based on constitutional principles. The 2007 free speech case, on the other hand, was far less clear and was somewhat disturbing in terms of the curbs on free speech that were articulated. The First Amendment says quite clearly that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press….” (emphasis supplied). But the Court’s 2007 decision says that you can have some laws abridging speech when that speech is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use.

The community benefits from education

Having strong and vital schools is important for every community. Because we appreciate that fact, we are constantly urging the community to support public education and keep us on the path of moving from good to great. The downturn in the economy has been troubling to these efforts, but we remain committed to the cause.

It is in this spirit that we introduce you to the Common Good Forecaster, a joint product of United Way and the American Human Development Project. They have developed a tool to forecast how things might change in our community if educational outcomes were better.

They have also prepared a companion report which you can view by clicking here. As they note in the introduction:

Those who advocate for greater investment in education often make the economic argument: more education leads to higher wages and is critical for financial stability and independence. They’re right. Robust evidence supports the view that higher levels of educational attainment are linked to higher incomes, less unemployment, less poverty, and less reliance on public assistance.

But education is about more than just better jobs and bigger paychecks, important though they are in making families and individuals more financially stable. More education is also linked to better physical and mental health, longer lives, fewer crimes, less incarceration, more voting, greater tolerance, and brighter prospects for the next generation. More education is good for individuals who stay in school to earn their high school degree or who enter and graduate college, but it is also good for all of us, paying big dividends in the form of increased civic engagement, greater neighborhood safety, and a healthy, vibrant democracy.

You can look at the statistics for Norfolk County by going to the forecaster, which you can view by clicking here. Once there you can view the data sets and see for yourself how education impacts our community. We have long been strong and passionate advocates for education in Franklin and believe that the site offers empirical evidence of the benefits of living in a community with a high performing school district. You are also urged to review the companion report for suggestions on ways that you can help and support the educational offerings in Franklin.

Media reactions to strip search case

The American Association for Justice put together a nice summary of media reactions to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Safford Unified School Dist. #1 v. Redding which I have included below with links to the stories.

In the case, the court ruled 8-1 that “an Arizona middle school violated the rights of a 13-year-old girl when she was strip-searched for drugs,” as ABC World News (6/25, story 5, 2:20, Gibson) reported. On the CBS Evening News (6/25, story 5, 1:45, Couric), correspondent Wyatt Andrews called the ruling “a major victory for student privacy. The Supreme Court said the strip search of Savana Redding, then a 13-year-old eighth grader, was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” Redding: “I’m glad that it’s almost finally over and I can just continue on with my life. I’m really happy, though, with the decision today.” NBC Nightly News (6/25, story 7, 2:25, B. Williams) said the case involved “just how far public schools can go to enforce those so-called zero tolerance policies that have become so popular. And the question: have they gone too far with our own children?”
 
The USA Today (6/26, Biskupic) reports Justice David Souter, writing for the court, “said an official must have a ‘reasonable suspicion of danger’ regarding the drugs sought and a belief they could be hidden in a student’s underwear before making ‘the quantum leap from outer clothes and backpacks to exposure of intimate parts.’”

The USA Today (6/26) editorializes, “It should be obvious to everyone, and certainly to every parent, that only the most extreme circumstances could justify strip-searching a 13-year-old girl. More extreme, surely, than suspicion that the girl possessed some prescription-strength ibuprofen tablets in violation of school rules. That logic is at least obvious to the U.S. Supreme Court. … The Redding decision could mark a welcome change in direction for the courts and schools, which retain wide latitude to inspect lockers and other student possessions with only ‘reasonable suspicion.” In a responding USA Today (6/26) op-ed, National School Boards Association general counsel Francisco Negron writes that “the court missed an opportunity to provide clearer guidance to school officials. While the court did not nullify zero-tolerance policies, it did require schools to determine the dangerousness of a drug before deciding how intrusive to make a search. It did not specify what it meant by dangerousness. How are school officials to gauge that?”Los Angeles Times (6/26, Savage) reports Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, saying the ruling “‘grants judges sweeping authority to second-guess the measures that these officials take to maintain discipline in their schools and ensure the health and safety of the students in their charge.’ It is the second time this week that Thomas alone has dissented in a major case. On Monday, the court rejected a challenge to the Voting Rights Act, but Thomas said he would have struck down the law provision in question as unconstitutional.”

AP (6/25, Holland) reports the court ruled Safford Middle School officials violated Redding’s rights “by strip-searching her for prescription-strength ibuprofen, declaring that U.S. educators cannot force children to remove their clothing unless student safety is at risk.” While the court said officials violated Redding’s Fourth Amendment rights, the court also said officials “could not be held financially liable but left it to lower courts to decide if the school district could.” 

The Washington Post (6/26, A1, Barnes), the Wall Street Journal (6/26, A2, Bravin), New York Times (6/26, A16, Liptak), New York Daily News (6/26, Meek), National Law Journal (6/26, Mauro) and Christian Science Monitor (6/26, Richey) also report on the ruling. 

The Washington Post (6/26, A24) editorializes, “A six-justice majority correctly balanced the privacy interests of the student with the need to preserve school officials’ flexibility to maintain order and safety. … The court — with Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissenting on this point — also rightly refused to allow lawsuits against the Arizona school officials, ruling that they should be immune from being sued unless they blatantly violated ‘clearly established law.’” 

The New York Times (6/26, A24) editorializes, “In an important victory for students’ rights, the Supreme Court ruled, 8-to-1, Thursday that school officials acted unconstitutionally when they strip searched a 13-year-old girl. The majority was too willing to find that in this particular case the officials involved were immune from liability. But the decision still sends an important message to schools about the need to respect their students’ privacy when they conduct investigations.”

Student strip search ruled unconstitutional

In a surprising victory for student’s rights, the United States Supreme Court today issued an opinion ruling that the strip search of a 13-year-old middle school student Savana Redding was unconstitutional. You can view our previous posts on this case by clicking here and here. This is a very good ruling for student’s rights and upholds the principle that their rights do not end at the schoolhouse door. It further provides clarity to school district in just how far they can reasonably go in an effort to make their free of drugs.

The opinion was authored by retiring Justice David Souter, perhaps one of his last opinions as a Justice. You can find a complete copy of the opinion by clicking here.

The Court ruled 8-1 in favor of the student, finding that the mere suspicion of finding a small quantity of ibuprofen was unreasonable and did not justify the search in her underwear. In so finding, the court determined that the content of the suspicion failed to match the degree of intrusion to the student. As the Court ruled: “What was missing from the suspected facts that pointed to Savana was any indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity, and any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying pills in her underwear. We think that the combination of these deficiencies was fatal to finding the search reasonable.”

The Court went on to describe the embarrassment and humiliation suffered by the student because of the search.

Savana’s subjective expectation of privacy against such a search is inherent in her account of it as embarrassing, frightening, and humiliating. The reasonableness of her expectation (required by the Fourth Amendment standard) is indicated by the consistent experiences of other young people similarly searched, whose adolescent vulnerability intensifies the patent intrusiveness of the exposure.

The Court made it clear that searches of this nature require “the support of reasonable suspicion of danger or of resort to underwear for hiding evidence of wrongdoing before a search can reasonably make the quantum leap from outer clothes and backpacks to exposure of intimate parts. The meaning of such a search, and the degradation its subject may reasonably feel, place a search that intrusive in a category of its own demanding its own specific suspicions.”

Only Justice Clarence Thomas voted with the school in the case. Justice Thomas continued his consistent opposition to such individual rights, particularly when invoked by students. In one line, he wrote “[p]reservation of order, discipline and safety in public schools is simply not the domain of the Constitution. And, common sense is not a judicial monopoly or a constitutional imperative.”

Franklin teacher on mission at space camp

Horace Mann Middle School science teacher James Schliefke is at space camp this week after earning a scholarship from Honeywell.

Schliefke, a resident of Franklin, was one of 288 teachers from 16 countries and 47 states chosen to take part in the Honeywell Educators @ Space Academy programs at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

He is sharing letters and photos from SpaceCamp on the County Gazette’s website which you can view by clicking here.

The Honeywell Educators @ Space Academy programs provide teachers with new and innovative techniques to educate their students about science and math.

The programs focus on space science and exploration in a variety of classroom, laboratory and real-life astronaut training, including: a high-performance jet simulation, scenario-based space missions, land and water survival training, and state-of-the-art flight dynamics programs.

Schliefke is the only teacher from Massachusetts chosen to attend.

Since the program’s inception in 2004, Honeywell and its employees have sponsored more than 1,100 scholarships for teachers from 36 countries and all 50 U.S. states, to participate in the Honeywell Educators @ Space Academy programs.

Honeywell Educators @ Space Academy is part of Honeywell Hometown Solutions, the company’s corporate citizenship initiative, which focuses on several areas of vital importance: Family Safety & Security; Housing & Shelter; Science & Math Education; Habitat & Conservation; and Humanitarian Relief. Together with leading public and non-profit institutions, Honeywell has developed powerful programs to address these needs in the communities it serves.

For more information on Honeywell Hometown Solutions, click here.

New FPS logo unveiled

A new logo for the Franklin Public Schools (shown at right) was unveiled last night at the School Committee meeting. The new logo was chosen from many participants in a contest that the Strategic Planning Committee organized to involve students in the strategic planning process.

Roseann Gosch, art teacher, created a flyer and encouraged students to help us design a logo for the Franklin Public School District. Students were encouraged to create a bold graphic image that represents all of our separate schools combined. After the drawings were submitted, they were brought to the Franklin High School Graphic Design class which incorporated them into a finished product.

Thirty students who participated in the design process were recognized and received certificates at last night’s School Committee meeting. Kristen Dumas was recognized for coming up with the winning logo.

New documentary on high stakes testing

MCAS and high stakes testing have been part of the education landscape for the past decade, and the reviews remain mixed. In this new documentary entitled Children Left Behind: A Documentary on High Stakes Testing, producer Louis J. Kruger, Psy.D., N.C.S.P. takes us on a journey on the exams that high school students in the United States are required to pass in order to earn a high school diploma. The film is about the well-intended purposes that are driving this movement toward high stakes testing, and its unintended consequences.

From coast to coast, more and more states are using these high stakes tests in an effort to reverse the supposed rising tide of mediocrity in our public schools and close the achievement gap between socioeconomic and racial groups. Children Left Behind, brings to the forefront the stories of students who are struggling with these tests. These compelling stories provide a springboard for the exploration of the educational, political and moral issues associated with these exams.

The social justice issues are palpable. Testing is a ubiquitous part of our global society. The documentary raises the important question of whether we are leaving too many children behind in our quest for higher test scores.

The next screening for the film is scheduled for June 22 at 5 p.m. at Citizens for Public Schools, 18 Tremont St. in Boston. The film’s website also includes information on what everyone should know about the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) and High School Exit Exams (HSEEs) (which can be viewed by clicking here).

FHS advances to feasibility stage with MSBA

The Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) Board of Directors voted on Wednesday, June 3, 2009 to invite Franklin to collaborate with the MSBA in conducting a Feasibility Study on the Franklin High School. This invitation for a Feasibility Study is the culmination of the MSBA’s extensive due diligence and analysis to determine which school facilities across the Commonwealth are in most need of capital investment.

The MSBA visited Franklin in December, and based on the senior study performed then, the MSBA staff recommended that Franklin’s Statement of Interest (SOI) be moved to the Feasibility Study category to further study the appropriate solution to the identified problems.

During the Feasibility Study phase, the school district and the MSBA will collaborate to find the most fiscally responsible and educationally appropriate solution to the facility’s problems. The Feasibility Study, which will be conducted pursuant to the MSBA’s regulations, will involve the MSBA collaborating with the District to begin to explore potential solutions to the problems identified in the Statement of Interest.

This invitation to collaborate on a Feasibility Study is not approval of a project, but is strictly an invitation to the Franklin school district to work with the MSBA to explore potential solutions to the problems that have been identified. Moving forward in the MSBA’s process requires collaboration with the MSBA, and communities that “get ahead” of the MSBA without MSBA approval will not be eligible for grant funding. To qualify for any funding from the MSBA, local communities must follow the MSBA’s statute and regulations, which require MSBA collaboration and approval at each step of the process.

Before the Feasibility Study can begin, there are a number of things that must happen, including:

(1) The District must execute an Initial Compliance Certificate;

(2) The MSBA must approve the composition of the District’s School Building Committee;

(3) The District must execute a Feasibility Study Agreement with the MSBA, detailing the scope, schedule, milestones and cost sharing parameters of the Feasibility Study;

(4) The MSBA must approve an Owner’s Project Manager, which approval will include a review by the MSBA’s Owner’s Project Manager Review Panel; and

(5) The District must select a Feasibility Study Designer through MSBA’s Designer Selection Panel.

For the Milford Daily News report on the feasibility invitation, click here. You can get see additional blog posts on the FHS project by clicking here, and additional background information on the project by clicking here.

Message to FEA membership

Several weeks ago, the School Committee requested an opportunity to speak directly with the Franklin Education Association (FEA) membership at its meeting on April 28. We did not get that opportunity.

Through the two video segments below, the Franklin School Committee reaches out directly to the rank and file membership of the education union in this town. In these messages (which total approximately 14 minutes), the School Committee spells out the reasons underlying its request for wage concessions, and the need to maintain collaborative meeting times for principals and teachers. It is also an invitation to engage in further discussions to save teaching jobs and preserve Franklin as a high performing school district.

It is our sincere hope that the members will view this message and reach out to leadership and request that a resolution be forged immediately. As we state in the message, our door is open. We stand ready to talk with you or with your representatives at any time or place.

You can view the videos by clicking on the images below or by clicking on the following links:  Part I,  Part II.

If you have difficulty viewing the message on YouTube, or would prefer to view a text version, please see below:

View this document on Scribd

Refreshing post from Franklin teacher

I saw this post on milforddailynews.com this morning and thought it was worth repeating here. It is said to be from a Franklin teacher. To me, it exemplifies the typical Franklin teacher: hard-working, dedicated, and caring. It also captures empathy for the residents in Franklin, other teachers, the School Committee, and administration. Of the over 400 teachers we have in the system, I believe this to be the prevailing view. I just wish more like this writer had shown up at the union meeting yesterday:

I too often work 10-12 hour days. My car is in the parking lot at the school I teach at often well into the evening. I then bring additional work home with me, that often has me working until close to midnight, not to mention the work that I take home on the weekends. I am in my 10th year of teaching, and it has been like this since day 1, because I am committed to do the best job I can each and every day and to continually evaluate my own teaching and search for ways to better do my job for the children of Franklin. Meanwhile, I am also a single parent to 2 young children that DESERVE and require my attention each morning and evening, and on the weekends. No one goes into teaching deceived into thinking they will have a 6 hour work day and all this vacation time to run off into the sunset!

In addition, I chaperone ski trips and other afterschool events, have given up my vacation to chaperone students on a trip to Washington DC, and make a point to attend events my students and former students are involved in, whether they be athletic, musical or theatric. I spend my summers taking courses in order to maintain my teaching license and better my teaching. I also spend many days in my classroom to be sure it is ready for students in the fall and to begin to implement new ideas.

My guess is that many of you who continually perpetuate and feed the enormous disrespect towards teachers that the community of Franklin has, have never stepped foot in a classroom beyond your own education and have not once bothered to have a real conversation with a teacher. And shame on all of you, because I am sure many of you can think back and remember a teacher that really made an impact on your life or was there for you during a difficult time in your life. I would also bet that those of you with such a dislike for teachers have children who are or were in the Franklin Public Schools and I find it hard to believe that each of those teachers was as you describe us.

I am certainly not trying to pit the private sector against the public sector. I am fully aware of how hard people in the private sector work and how big of a hit they have taken (lay offs and pension reductions to name a few). My own parents continue to work well past when they should have retired, because the economy does not enable them to do so. The work we do each and every day may be different, but one cannot be viewed as less important than the other.

In terms of the wage freeze and conditions, as a member of the FEA and a resident/parent in Franklin, I can tell you that there are 2 very different versions of the events that have transpired out there, and I doubt the truth will ever see the light of day. The other unions in town agreed to a wage freeze with no conditions in return. I (and many of my colleagues) feel that we should do the same. For many of us, of utmost importance is saving the jobs of our colleagues and therefore protecting the high level of education this community has come to expect. I do not believe conditions should be attached to a person’s career/livelihood. Our contract is up for renegotiation next year and now the school committee is aware of the things the union would like to see addressed. The time to address those issues is not now (and I may be shooting myself in the foot for saying these things publicly).

We should agree to the wage freeze so that the teachers can continue doing the excellent work that they do and the school committee and administration can move forward in planning for the 2009-2010 school year.

I continue to have the utmost respect for those who have answered the calling of the teaching profession. The School Committee will continue to strive to make certain that we maintain Franklin as a high performing district. To move student achievement, you need reasonable class sizes, professional development opportunities, and highly qualified staff. It is committed teachers like the poster above that make this possible in our community.

Columbine lessons still resonate

My vacation week read this year was Dave Cullen’s excellent work entitled Columbine. It’s an indelible portrait of the killers, the victims, and the community that suffered one of the greatest tragedies of the 20th century. This book was released nearly 10 years after the event, and is a riveting page turner which will help the reader understand better what happened at a suburban high school on April 20, 1999.

On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, entered their high school in Littleton, Colo., and shot and killed 12 students and one teacher. That event sparked a number of changes in how students experience school.

Cullen is considered a leading authority on the Columbine killers. In his book, he tries hard to get us inside the heads of Eric and Dylan, writing in an empathetic style that allows us to inhabit their twisted points of view. It’s a compelling study of not only their minds, but the reaction of the community, the country, the victims, and their families. You don’t come away understanding exactly why the event happened, but you do have a better sense of how. Throughout the book, you can feel the pain, and better understand the efforts at making schools safer that have occurred in the past 10 years.

As noted by USA Today, some of the most important post-Columbine reforms include:

• Better partnerships between law enforcement and schools. After Columbine, the federal government funded the placement of 7,000 police officers in schools, many in a more consultative and mentoring role, not just to deal with trouble. Today, schools across the country have “resource officers.” Many are part of teams that include teachers and mental health professionals.
• Encouraging students to report suspicions. A study by the U.S. Education Department and the Secret Service of 41 shooters, including the Columbine killers, found that most planned their rampages in advance, told other kids and were egged on by others. Now, many schools encourage students to report suspicions, including on anonymous tip lines. Tips have foiled several plots.
• Watching for red flags. A 2002 report found that most of the attackers it studied were depressed and had difficulty coping with “significant losses or personal failures.” Almost three-quarters felt “persecuted, bullied, threatened, attacked or injured by others.” These problems often went undetected. Most did fine academically, and only 37% had ever been suspended or expelled. This has led to more vigilance and adult interaction with students at many schools. USA TODAY profiled one — Lucy Addison Middle School in Roanoke, Va. — in which a typical teacher focuses on the “little things” such as body language, insults, a look in the eyes. More mental health professionals are in schools, and 38 states have anti-bullying laws.
• Better reaction plans. Columbine-style attackers generally want to kill as many as possible and themselves. There is a new recognition of a need to move in fast. It’s now the basis of emergency drills and practice — a change from Columbine, where police lacked basic information about school layout, took four hours to get into the school, and where more than 900 officers from 34 agencies were working on different radio frequencies.

As a parent and School Committee member, this book was compelling. It has lessons in it for parents, educators, law enforcement, and even citizens not directly connected with schools.