CABE Journal - October 2013

Vol. 17, No.10 October 2013

w w w . c a b e . o r g

INSIDE THIS EDITION

President Commentary .......................................... 2Executive Director Commentary .......................... 3The changing face of PR in public schools ........... 4Nutmeg deals with adopting a uniform calendar .. 5Medical marijuana: needed policy direction......... 6Lessons from the Penguins ................................... 7Bridging the gap to the common core ................... 8CABE: working for YOU ................................... 10Technology and the role of parents ..................... 11Boards of education should partner with CAG ... 12U.S. Supreme Court ............................................ 13School boards beware ......................................... 1410 reasons why you shouldn’t miss the2013 Annual CABE/CAPSS Conference ........... 15

See BREAKFAST page 4

Jim Crawford, School Breakfast Navigator,End Hunger Connecticut

See EVALUATION page 7

www.facebook.com/ConnecticutAssociationBoardsEducation

Breakfast - Every Kid, Every Day!

Professional Educator Evaluation andSupport system rolls out statewide

Chris SeymourReporter, CABE

Connecticut Associationof Boards of Education Inc.81 Wolcott Hill RoadWethersfield, CT 06109-1242

Connecticut ranks last in the nation for the past eightconsecutive years in the number of schools offering thefederal School Breakfast Program that otherwiseparticipate in the National School Lunch Program1. Yet,educators everywhere know that preparation, planning,and active participation are three recognized ingredientsfor achieving success in almost all ventures. Studentsneed to come to school prepared to learn each and everymorning; hungry minds cannot learn on empty stomachs.Why, then, do we continue to equivocate on ensuring thateach learner comes to the task nourished to participate

WATERBURY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

With new teacher educator evaluationsbeing rolled out statewide in 2013-14, the freshacademic year has ushered in an entirely newyear in Nutmeg State education.

The passage of Public Act 12-116, An ActConcerning Education Reform, in June 2012“was pivotal in defining an annual performanceevaluation system for administrators and teach-ers, based upon a new standard of effectivepractice,” according to Connecticutseed.org.

The law requires each district to adopt eitherConnecticut’s System for Educator Evaluationand Development (SEED) — which is thestate’s “model evaluation system that is alignedto the guidelines”—develop their own, orformulate a hybrid.

“The option was to adopt the SEED model,to develop a district proposed alternative or todevelop a hybrid,” explained Dr. SarahBarzee, Chief Talent Officer at the StateDepartment of Education (SDE). “In many

cases, districts liked components of SEED but not all ofthem would fit in their local context so they developedwhat became known as a hybrid, which is some compo-nents of SEED and some proposed alternatives.”

Whichever model districts chose, they still must havetheir evaluation system breakdown as follows: teacherperformance and practice, 40%; parent or peer feedback,10%; student growth and development, 45%; and whole-school student learning indicators/student feedback, 5%.

Though the new evaluation systems have meant a lotof work for local school systems, Barzee said she feelsdistricts are becoming increasingly comfortable as theybuild a better understanding of the system. “I think, likeany change initiative, last year was a really heavy liftbecause it was very new,” explained Barzee. “Veryanecdotally, I spoke to a few superintendents at an event[in September] who gave me the impression, ‘we’ve gotthis now, we are moving on, we have new fish to fry andnew challenges.’”

Added Barzee, “This is a significant change processbut they’ve had a full year now to understand [the newsystem]. As they developed their plans it required themto really fully understand the system. So now, as with anychange process, the implementation will bring its chal-lenges, but I think districts are addressing them and arelooking forward to the positive opportunities that exist.”

Superintendents “across the board” have expressedthe fact that they like the “opportunity that our newsystem brings to elevate educator effectiveness and wedid see many instances of that in the pilot,” continuedBarzee.

The pilot Barzee referred to, “The 10 District andConsortia of districts,” was conducted in 2012-13. “Ithink it did what it intended to do, which is give us anopportunity to test the system and to study all aspects ofimplementation,” she observed.

“We learned many, many lessons that have assisted usin further refinements and developments for the Systemfor Educator Evaluation and Development; it was veryinstructive and very informative in helping us to pilot thesystem and to make continuous improvements before wewent statewide this fall.”

In West Hartford, Superintendent of Schools Dr.

fully and turn our backs on the federal resources avail-able to every school choosing to participate in thefederal School Breakfast Program?

Similar to the National School Lunch Program, theSchool Breakfast Program is funded through the UnitedStates Department of Agriculture (USDA) and adminis-tered by the Connecticut State Department of Education.However, unlike the National School Lunch Program,Connecticut schools are not taking advantage of thestudent, teacher, and school benefits that come withfederal funds available to them for simply offeringschool breakfast like they do lunch.

Every school is eligible and every student is eligible toparticipate in the School Breakfast Program. Like the

National School LunchProgram, students pay on asliding scale depending ontheir designation to receivefree, reduced, or full pricemeals. Schools are reim-bursed for every mealclaimed – including mealsfor ‘paid’ students.

Although many ofConnecticut’s schoolscurrently offer “a la carte”food items that can bepurchased only at full costto the students, thoseprivately funded items maybe less nutritious, and areoften out of reach for thosestudents who may need itPeriodical

PostagePAID

Hartford, CT

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEELydia Tedone ..................................................... President, SimsburyRichard Murray ................................. First Vice President, KillinglyAnn Gruenberg ................. VP for Government Relations, HamptonStephen Wright ........... VP for Professional Development, TrumbullRobert Mitchell ................................. Secretary/Treasurer, MontvilleDon Blevins .............................................. Immediate Past PresidentJohn Prins ............................................................. Member at Large

AREA DIRECTORSSusan Hoffnagle ............................. Area 1 Co-Director, WinchesterMari-Ellen (Mimi) Valyo ............... Area 1 Co-Director, WinchesterDaniel Santorso ................................ Area 1 Co-Director, PlymouthBecky Tyrrell .................................... Area 2 Co-Director, PlainvilleSusan Karp .................................. Area 2 Co-Director, GlasbonburyDon Harris ...................................... Area 2 Co-Director, BloomfieldLaura Bush ................................................. Area 3 Director, VernonDouglas Smith .................................. Area 4 Co-Director, PlainfieldSteve Rosendahl ............................. Area 4 Co-Director, WoodstockGavin Forrester ................................ Area 6 Co-Director, StratfordElaine Whitney .................................. Area 6 Co-Director, WestportJohn Prins ............................................... Area 7 Director, BranfordPamela Meier ........................................... Area 8 Director, MadisonGail MacDonald ................................... Area 9 Director, Stonington

ASSOCIATESEileen Baker .............................................. Associate, Old SaybrookSharon Beloin-Saavedra .............................. Associate, New BritainGary Brochu .......................................................... Associate, BerlinRobert Guthrie .............................................. Associate, West HavenCal Heminway ..................................................... Associate, Granby

COMMITTEE CHAIRSElizabeth Brown ........................... Chair, State Relations, MontvilleBeverly Washington ..................... Chair, Federal Relations, GrotonBecky Tyrrell ...................................... Chair, Resolutions, Plainville

CITY REPRESENTATIVESJacqueline Kelleher ....................... City Representative, BridgeportMatthew Poland ................................ City Representative, HartfordCarlos Torre .................................. City Representative, New HavenPolly Rauh ........................................ City Representative, StamfordCharles Stango ............................... City Representative, Waterbury

STAFFRobert Rader ....................................................................... Executive DirectorPatrice McCarthy .................................. Deputy Director and General CounselBonnie Carney ............................................ Sr. Staff Associate for PublicationsNicholas Caruso ............................................ Sr. Staff Assoc. for Field Service and Coord. of TechnologySheila McKay ............................. Sr. Staff Associate for Government RelationsKelly Moyher ......................................................................... Sr. Staff AttorneyVincent Mustaro ..................................... Sr. Staff Associate for Policy ServiceLisa Steimer .............................. Sr. Staff Assoc. for Professional DevelopmentTeresa Costa .................................. Coordinator of Finance and AdministrationPamela Brooks ......................... Sr. Admin. Assoc. for Policy Ser. /Search Ser.Terry DeMars ............................................... Admin. Assoc. for Policy ServiceMelissa Dickinson ............................. Admin. Assist. for Membership ServicesGail Heath ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Government RelationsWilmarie Newton ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Labor RelationsCorliss Ucci .................................. Receptionist/Asst. to the Executive Director

Lydia Tedone

2 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013

PRESIDENT COMMENTARY

CABE Board of Directors

Growth and Gains

Vision: CABE is passionate about strengtheningpublic education through high-performing,

transformative local school board/superintendentleadership teams that inspire success for each child.

Mission: To assist local and regional boards of educationin providing high quality education for all

Connecticut children through effective leadership.

The CABE Journal (ISSN 1092-1818) is published monthly excepta combined issue for July/August as a member service of theConnecticut Association of Boards of Education, 81 Wolcott HillRoad, Wethersfield, CT 06109, (860) 571-7446. CABE member-ship dues include $30 per person for each individual who receivesThe CABE Journal. The subscription rate for nonmembers is $75.Association membership dues include a subscription for eachboard member, superintendent, assistant superintendent and busi-ness manager. The companies and advertisements found in TheCABE Journal are not necessarily endorsed by CABE. “Periodi-cals Postage Paid at Hartford, CT.” POSTMASTER: Send addresschanges to The CABE Journal, CABE, 81 Wolcott Hill Road,Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242. Email: [email protected] can find the CABE Journal online at: www.cabe.org/userlogin.cfm?pp=84&userrequest=true&keyrequest=false&userpage=84

September’s State Boardof Education action

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)were briefly discussed at the September State Board ofEducation meeting. They have been developed by acollaboration of 26 states in coordination with Achieve,Inc. The new standards, as the State Department ofEducation (SDE) reports, “will augment expectations forscience learning from simply knowing facts to beingable to put knowledge to use in critical, analytical andcreative ways”.

The SDE will, over the next few months, complete itsadoption implication study. About 2/3 of the concepts inthe NGSS have a match in Connecticut’s current statestandards. It is likely that recommendations will come tothe State Board of Education in early 2014.The new

Common Core State Standards do not include science.Also discussed was the new requirement for a Master’s

degree in an appropriate subject area to qualify forProfessional Educator Certificate. Issues of pedagogy andcross endorsement were questioned.

Siegel, O’Connor, O’Donnell and Beck are investigat-ing the potential testing irregularities in the HartfordSchool District.

Of note: Dr. Steven Adamowski will continue in hisrole as Special Master for Windham and New Londonschool districts. Dr. Sarah Barzee was appointed as ChiefTalent Officer, a role she had been assuming unofficiallyfor a few months.

Sheila McKaySr. Staff Associate for Government Relations, CABE

The technology for calendar reminders can be useful,if only used. Recently, I found an advertisement from2012 with a post-it-note reminding me to participate inThe New York Times “Schools for Tomorrow” Confer-ence. I googled for more information only to find thatthe Conference was by invite only and was taking placethat very day. I was grateful, however, that I could watcha live stream, since topics and speakers had peaked myinterest.

In its third year, the Times created this educationalconference to promote dialogue and action for greaterschools of the future. They examined what classroomsof tomorrow should look like, and the changes that canbe made in our educational system to improve teachingand learning for every student. Assembled every yearare leaders in education, k-12 and higher education;technology; business; politics and philanthropy whoparticipate as audience members, speakers and panelists.Moderators are a mix of columnists and educationcorrespondents.

Last year’s theme, Building a Better Teacher, explor-ed the changing roles of teachers, using technology moreeffectively, teacher training, and professional develop-ment while attracting the best teachers possible. Aninspiring lesson came from a middle school math teacherwho, along with his students, created math video gamesas instructional strategies. His utilization of math gamesand other technology in his classroom is part of Com-mon Core State Standards (CCSS). Should students winat his own games, the loss is his, as the students havesurpassed a skill – a way of creating mechanisms tolearn.

This years’ focus was titled “Virtual U: The comingof Age of On-Line Education”. Keynote speaker wasSal Kahn of Kahn Academy who spoke of innovationsin instruction and education, how to assess technology in

our classrooms andidentifying the bestenvironment for studentlearning in this digitalage.

One panelist definedCCSS as a wakeup call,since 52% of registeredvoters have never heardof it, and it should beconsidered as wecampaign door to doorthis election year.Future schools are notjust about the achieve-ment gap but gapsbetween acceptance anduse of technology, what Seniors are expected to haveaccomplished as they graduate, what they need to knowand narrowing the gaps between information and technol-ogy. Our roles are to provide structure and resources tohelp them navigate their personal pathways of learning.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan spoke of reformas continuous – in investing in sets of values and prin-ciples, while not losing sight of the value of the educatorsof our children. Even as districts face tough, uncertaineconomic times, we are making progress in publiceducation. He mentioned the strength of our systemresides at the local level.

As board members, it is crucial we continue conversa-tions about how our districts should be allocating ourbudgets to enhance the learning experience of each andevery student – whether latest technological tools avail-able or discussions on education initiatives. Tomorrow’sclassroom starts today – because our students should havea chance to learn anytime, anywhere.

“Education is not the filling of a pail,but the lighting of a fire.”

– William Butler Yeats

Robert Rader

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTARY

The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/October 2013 3

The key role of chairsin promoting board success

CABE AffiliateMembers

BUSINESS AFFILIATESDIAMOND MEMBER

Finalsite

GOLD MEMBERSAdvanced Corporate Networking

dba. Digital BackOfficeBerchem, Moses & Devlin

Centris GroupPullman & Comley

Shipman & GoodwinSiegel, O'Connor,

O’Donnell & Beck, P.C

SILVER MEMBERSAnthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield

Corporate Cost ControlMilone & MacBroom, Inc.

Quisenberry Arcari ArchitectsThe Segal Company

BRONZE PLUS MEMBERSBrown & Brown Insurance

Friar AssociatesGoldstein & Peck, P.C.

Lindburg & RippleO & G Industries

The S/L/A/M CollaborativeTrane

Whitsons School Nutrition

BRONZE MEMBERS

Chinni & Meuser LLCDattco Inc.

Fuller & D’AngeloArchitects and Planners

Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C.The Lexington Group

Muschell & SimoncelliOvations Benefits Group

EDUCATIONALAFFILIATES

American School for the DeafArea Cooperative Educational Services

Capitol Region Education CouncilThe College Board

Connecticut Association of SchoolBusiness Officials

Connecticut Center for School ChangeConnecticut School Buildings

and Grounds AssociationCooperative Educational Services

EASTCONNEDUCATION CONNECTION

LEARNUnified School District #1

The more I see boards function, themore certain I am of the important roleplayed by board chairs. In cases in whichthe board functions well, it is often thechair, backed by supportive othermembers and the superintendent ofschools, that make the difference.

In order to see how this occurs, it’simportant to look at how boards affect thesuccess of their students.

Back in the early 2000s, the IowaSchool Boards Foundation did a study ofthe effect of boards on student achieve-ment. They picked six boards, none ofwhich were actually located in Iowa, butwhich had similar demographics andother factors, to study the boards’ role.

What they found indicated that schoolboards in high-achieving districts are“significantly different in their knowledgeand beliefs than school boards in lowachieving districts. And, this differenceappears to carry through among adminis-trators and teachers.”

While the study is quite lengthy, theseare the key differences found between theadvancing districts and those that are not:

• In the high-achieving districts, theboard/superintendent team andschool personnel consistently ex-pressed an “elevating” view of stu-dents. Students were viewed asemerging and flexible and theschool’s job was seen as releasingeach student’s potential. The board/superintendent team and schoolpersonnel viewed the school systemcritically and were constantly seek-ing opportunities to improve it.

In the low-achieving districts, theboard/superintendent team andschool personnel accepted limita-tions in students and the schoolsystem. They tended to view stud-ents as limited by characteristicssuch as their income or home situa-tion, and accepted schools as theywere. Their focus was on managingthe school environment, rather thanchanging or improving it.

• In the high-achieving districts,school board members showedgreater understanding and influ-ence. They were knowledgeableabout topics such as improvementgoals, curriculum, instruction,assessment and staff development.They were able to clearly describethe purposes and processes ofschool improvement initiatives andidentify the board’s role in support-ing those initiatives.

In the low-achieving districts,board members were, as a whole,only vaguely aware of schoolimprovement initiatives. They weresometimes aware of goals, but wereseldom able to describe actions

being taken by staff members toimprove learning.

So, if school boards need to increasetheir focus on student achievement (or“growth” as some prefer), it is often thechair who has the responsibility ofensuring this occurs . I would infer that ifthe district efforts place in the group ofhigh-achieving districts, it is often theboard chair who sets the tone.

How does the chair do this?One of the most key roles of the chair

is to develop strong relationships betweenhim/herself and the other members of theboard and the superintendent. Accordingto Leading Leaders, by Salacuse, the bestway to do this is to privately spend timewith each individual board member. Theboard chair should work towards under-standing the member’s interests, whetheror not they are school-related.

Taking the time to learn about themember’s family, why he or she ran forthe board and what motivates them willhelp ensure that the board membercontributes to the overall work of theboard in the most effective way. Salacusesays that “interests drive actions” and asthe chair understands where the otherboard members are “coming from”, thebetter the chance of developing agendas,budgets and taking other action, with theconsent of more board members.

So, the board chair has a role beyondjust doing his or her best in runningefficient, orderly and thoughtful meetings.The job is also coach, cheerleader, mentorand coordinator.

That is why it is critical that the chair ischosen in a fair process, ensuring that theperson with best leadership abilities getsthe position.

One of the most important roles for thechair is to ensure that the new membersare provided with an in-depth orientationwhich will help them “hit the groundrunning”. As many elections will takeplace in November, I urge chairs to makesure this occurs and to come or haveanother experienced board member and/orthe superintendent to attend our NewBoard Member and Leadership Confer-ence, December 10th. Here, the newmember can learn much more about beinga board member—and their Association.

CABE also provides a booklet, Who’sin Charge, which contains lots of materialon best practice for board chairs. It alsoincludes much wisdom from former andcurrent chairs.

Board chairs: you make a hugedifference in your districts. Your leader-ship can determine whether the studentsthrive in your schools.

Make sure that you carefully, thought-fully and clearly consider your roles andresponsibilities. You are in the bestposition to leverage the work of your

board and leave a legacy of success forthe board, your community. And, mostimportantly, for your students.

[Editor’s Note: CABE, with grantsupport of SDE, makes Lighthousetraining, based on work done in Iowa,available for Alliance Districts. Youmight consider seeing if your boardqualifies for Lighthouse Training underthe grant. Contact CABE staff to find out.We are currently developing our 2013-14calendar of Lighthouse Districts.]

What Do The IowaStudies’ Results Meanto Connecticut Boards?Boards can help increase studentachievement by:• Consistently expressing the belief

that all students can learn and thatthe district schools could teach allstudents. This “no excuses” beliefsystem results in high standards forstudents and an on-going dedica-tion to improvement.

• Becoming more knowledgeableabout teaching and learning issues,including school improvementgoals, curriculum, instruction,assessment and staff development.

• Using data and other informationon student needs and results tomake decisions.

• Creating goals both for the boardof education and for the district asa whole. Progress towardsachieving them should, of course,be monitored on a regular andplanned basis. CABE has helpedmany districts with this – if we canhelp you, please let us know.

• Monitoring high-achieving boards’progress on improvement effortsand modified direction as a result.

• Creating a supportive workplacefor staff. Boards in high-achievingdistricts support regular staffdevelopment to help teachers bemore effective, support sharedleadership and decision makingamong staff, and regularly expressappreciation for staff members.

• Involving their communities.Board members in forward-movingdistricts identified how theyconnect with and listen to theircommunities and focus on involv-ing parents in education.


CABE-MeetingCABE-Meeting is a user-friendly, web-based servicespecifically designed to assist the board, superintendentand central office staff in preparing for and running boardof education meetings.

An exciting feature designed for use by committees, inaddtion to boards of education, was recently added toCABE-Meeting. Now all your board work andcommittee information is conveniently located in oneplace!

“CABE-Meeting has been a great program forour district. We have saved time and money andincreased our ability to disseminate informationquickly. I encourage Board members to con-sider the advantages of CABE-Meeting.”

Becky Tyrrell, Member,Plainville Board of Education

CABE and Baldwin Media:Partners in Managing Communications

The Media Messagefrom Ann Baldwin, Baldwin Media Marketing, LLC

The changing face of public relations in public schools

Breakfast- Every Kid, Every Day!

(continued from page 1)most. However, these schools do have thesystems already in place to streamline theprocess of participating in SchoolBreakfast and begin to bring federaldollars directly into the district. Enrollingin the School Breakfast Program with theCT State Department of Education is asimple, straight-forward process forschools already participating in theNational School Lunch Program. Addi-tionally, the Connecticut BreakfastExpansion Team offers a wide variety offree, individualized support to schoolsworking to start, expand, and improvetheir School Breakfast Programs.

The Connecticut Breakfast ExpansionTeam (CBET) is a collaboration of theCT State Department of Education, EndHunger Connecticut! and the CT No KidHungry campaign, New England Dairy &Food Council, CT Action for HealthyKids, and the School Nutrition Associa-tion of CT. CBET engages in outreachefforts designed to spread best practiceideas, disseminates information aboutavailable funds to support school break-fast, provides technical support, andworks with schools to adapt the breakfastdelivery model that works best for themand to overcome logistical hurdles thatare unique to each situation. CBETprovides these supports and more at nocost to schools or districts and do notreceive any financial or other compensa-tion for schools participating in theSchool Breakfast Program.

Often, districts with lower numbers ofstudents that qualify for free or reducedprice school meals fail to recognize thateven one hungry student can alter theentire classroom dynamic. Trips to thenurse, behavioral issues, tardiness, andabsenteeism are all affected by hunger.Statistics indicate clearly that providing anutritious food offering early in the schoolday reduces all four of these hindrances tolearning.

Additionally, studies clearly indicatethat students who do not regularly eat anutritious breakfast are more likely to

have lower math scores, poor cognitivefunction, slower memory recall, and morelikely to repeat a grade.2 For students whoconsistently start the day with breakfast,research shows that they attend 1.5 moredays of school, score 17.5% higher onmath tests, and are less likely to experi-ence disciplinary problems.3

Many schools send home messagesencouraging students to have a healthybreakfast during standardized testingweeks. Some even provide breakfast and/or snacks just prior to or between testingsessions. If being well-nourished helpsperformance on tests, why isn’t it apriority for learning on a daily basis?

Starting a SBP does not have to becomplicated. It can begin at any pointduring the school year and pilot programshave been employed to “work out thekinks” on many occasions. There aremany resources to assist your schoolswith the process. For more information,please contact Jackie Schipke, SDEEducation Consultant and CBET coordi-nator, by telephone at (860) 707-2123 ore-mail at [email protected] to dis-cuss the straight forward steps involvedwith implementation or expansion of theSBP in your district.

(Endnotes)1Food Research Action Center (FRAC);School Breakfast Scorecard: http://frac.org/reports-and-resources/publica-tions-archives/#breakfast2 Food Research Action Center (FRAC);Breakfast for Learning: Scientificresearch on the link between children’s nutrition and aca-demic performance:http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09breakfastforlearning.pdf3Deloitte and No Kid Hungry Center forBest Practices;Ending childhood hunger: A socialimpact analysis:http://www.nokidhungry.org/pdfs/school-breakfast-white-paper.pdf

Public Relations for school districtsused to be about getting a positivemessage out to your school community.It was previously a one-waycommunication designed to showcase thebest of a school or district to gaincommunity support.

Currently, too many school districtsare dealing with their constituents in areactionary mode as opposed to beingpro-active. As we all know, the waypeople receive their information haschanged. Today, public relations is lessabout conveying information than it is

about establishing and promotingpartnerships’ within the community.

An effective school public relationsplan needs to provide value! People aremore open to receiving news they can use,not just information that the school‘throws’ at them. Your communicationsshould be focused on a ‘call-to-action’ orbased on trying to motivate behavior orsupport. There should also be a way forpeople to respond to the information theyreceive so that they feel they have a voiceon a particular issue. Communicationcan’t be a one-way street, even if there is

a fear that the response might not be allpositive.

The number one question you shouldbe asking yourself is ‘What does ourschool or district want to achieve with itspublic relations program? To increaseenrollment? To generate support ofschool reform? To counteract negativemedia? To help parents learn how to helptheir child succeed? All of the above?’

Only when a school has determined itscommunity’s concerns, formed a strategiccommunications plan, and developed apublic relations strategy, will the publicrelations delivery find its best mark.The goal of a district’s public relationsshould be a community of citizens thatbelieves the motto, ‘public schools…thereis no better place to learn.’

For more information, or to schedule a demonstrationfor your board, call Lisa Steimer at800-317-0033 or 860-571-7446

or email [email protected]

See You in Court – The Nutmeg Board of Education

The Nutmeg Boards deals with adopting a uniform school calendarThomas B. Mooney, Esq.Shipman & Goodwin


A Practical Guideto Connecticut

School Lawby Thomas B. Mooney, Esq.

Shipman & Goodwin

The Guide comes with a CD which provideshyperlinks to many cases and statutes

and will permit word searchesas a supplement to the Index.

New to the Seventh Edition:Bullying, Background Checks,

Child Abuse Reporting, Discrimination Issues,Educational Reform, FERPA,

Freedom of Information,State Aid for Educationand much, much more

The 7th edition is now available from CABE.Call and order your copy TODAY at 860.571.7446 or 800.317.0033

Seventh EditionNow shipping

The Nutmeg Board of Educationmakes many mistakes. The latest imbro-glio created by the board will be reportedhere each issue, followed by an explana-tion of what the board should have done.Though not intended as legal advice,these situations may help board membersavoid common problems.

Setting the school calendar has been aproblem for the Nutmeg Board of Educa-tion. Two years ago, it proposed to elim-inate February vacation from the schoolcalendar in 2012-2013. But the NutmegUnion of Teachers (NUTS) went crazy,arguing that such action would violatetheir rights.

Mal Content, long-serving President ofNUTS, claimed that the February vaca-tion is a time-honored therapeutic tradi-tion in Nutmeg, and he threatened thatany change to the February vacationwould be an illegal unilateral change inworking conditions. So the Board relent-ed, and it left the vacation in the schoolcalendar.

As fate would have it, in October thatyear, Superstorm Sandy hammered the

Nutmeg Public Schools hard. For eightdays, district schools were closed, andwith several more snow days before andafter February vacation, there was realdrama over whether the Nutmeg PublicSchools would be able to hold school forthe required 180 days before June 30.

Fortunately, with the coming of spring,Mother Nature finally cooperated, and thedistrict squeaked by, holding the last dayof school on June 27.

This year, Bob Bombast, veteran mem-ber of the Nutmeg Board of Education,has made it his personal crusade to makesure that the school calendar would neverbe a problem again.

After getting his ducks in a row with aseries of one-on-one meetings with hisfellow Board members, Bob proposed inopen session that the school calendar forthis year be amended to eliminate Febru-ary vacation. Given Bob’s politicking,there was little need for discussion, andthe Board promptly passed Bob’s motionunanimously. Then the fun began.

Mal Content was in high dudgeonabout this change in the school calendar.During public participation at the nextBoard meeting, Mal threatened to file an

unfair labor practice charge against theBoard for its unilateral changes in theschool calendar. Next came a gaggle ofparents who, one after one, explained inagonizing detail how important familyvacations are.

Some of them even threatened to suethe Board members for the non-refundabledeposits they had made on vacationpackages scheduled during the days onwhich February was originally scheduled.

Bob ignored Mal and the parents asthey were talking, preferring instead totext friends on his cell phone. But theother Board members were intimidated bythe vehement protests, and after thetwelfth parent complaint, Penny Pincherasked to be recognized.

“Mr. Chairman, I think that we weretoo hasty. I move that we rescind ourprior action and restore February vaca-tion.” Red Cent quickly seconded themotion, which Mr. Chairperson promptlyput to a vote without discussion. Bobcouldn’t believe his ears when Mr.Chairman announced that the motionpassed 4 to 1.

What should the Nutmeg Board ofEducation learn about the school calen-dar?

Before we get to that, there are anumber of other issues to consider here.

First, Bob’s politicking may have beena violation of the Freedom of InformationAct. The question is whether Bob sharedBoard members’ perspectives with otherBoard members in his various meetings soas to be a discussion among a quorum ofthe Board.

Penny’s motion raises another FOIAissue. At regular meetings, a publicagency can add an item to the agenda by atwo-thirds vote. Here, however, Pennymade a new motion without any vote toplace it on the agenda.

In addition, Penny’s motion raised anissue under Robert’s Rules of Order. TheBoard had already taken action in amend-ing the calendar, and Penny’s motionshould thus properly be considered amotion to rescind or amend.

In contrast to a motion to reconsider(which can only be made at the samemeeting by a member who had voted withthe majority), a motion to rescind oramend can be made by any member, butthere are still special rules. When a bodywants to revisit action previously taken,the proposed action must be set forthspecifically on the agenda.

If it is not, the action must be passed byeither a two-thirds vote or by an absolutemajority of the body to guard againsttiming such action to thwart the will of themajority.

Mal Content claimed on behalf ofNUTS that the Board could not eliminateFebruary vacation, but he was wrong. TheTeacher Negotiation Act provides that thelength and scheduling of the studentschool day or student school year are not

mandatory subjects of bargaining.However, the union may have had a

claim concerning the impact of the latecancellation of February vacation for thecurrent year. When an employer exercisesthe right to act unilaterally, it may still beobligated to negotiate over the impact ofits action.

For example, if a board of educationadds a day to the school year, it mustnegotiate over pay for the additional day.Similarly, if a district has not reserved theright to change the calendar because ofweather and other unanticipated events(as many districts do and should), it mayhave to negotiate over the impact of latechanges to the school calendar.

The broad discretion vested in boardsof education to set the school calendarmay soon be lost. In Public Act 13-247,Sections 321-324, the General Assemblyhas adopted a procedure whereby schooldistricts will be required to use a uniformschool calendar by region, starting in2015-2016.

Specifically, this Public Act estab-lished a “Uniform Regional SchoolCalendar Task Force,” which is respon-sible for adopting “guidelines for auniform regional school calendar [that]shall include, but not be limited to, (1) atleast one hundred eighty days of actualschool sessions during each school year,(2) a uniform start date, (3) uniform daysfor professional development and in-service training for certified employees,pursuant to sections 10-148a and 10-220aof the general statutes, and (4) not morethan three uniform school vacationperiods during each school year, not morethan two of which shall be a one weekschool vacation period and one of whichshall be during the summer.”

The Task Force, which includes aCABE representative appointed by itsExecutive Director, is required to adoptand submit such guidelines to the GeneralAssembly and to the various regionaleducational service centers by January 1,2014.

Each regional educational servicecenter is then required to develop aregional school calendar and submit it tothe State Board of Education for approvalby April 1, 2014. Such school calendarsmust be consistent with the guidelinesdeveloped by the Task Force, as describedabove.

This new law provides that boards ofeducation “may adopt” the uniform schoolcalendar for 2014-2015, and boards ofeducation “shall use” the uniform calen-dar in 2015-2016. Is there a differencebetween “adopt” and “use”? Stay tuned.

Attorney Thomas B. Mooney is a part-ner in the Hartford law firm of Shipman &Goodwin who works frequently withboards of education. Mooney is a regularcontributor to the CABE Journal.

[Editor’s Note: Deputy Director andGeneral Counsel Patrice A. McCarthy isCABE’s representative at the CalendarTask Force.]


Vincent A. Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service, CABE

The Policy Corner

Medical marijuana in the schools setting:needed policy direction

Under the Act, “palliative use” meansthe acquisition, distribution, transfer, pos-session, use, or transportation of marijuanaor related paraphernalia to alleviate aqualifying patient’s symptoms of a debilitat-ing condition or their effects. It includes thetransfer of marijuana and related parapher-nalia to the patient from his or her primarycaregiver but does not include use by some-one other than a qualifying patient.

A “qualifying patient” is a stateresident who is at least age 18 and hasbeen diag-nosed by a physician as havinga debilitating medical condition. Apatient’s “primary caregiver” is someoneat least age 18, other than the patient orthe patient’s doctor, who agrees to takeresponsibility for managing the patient’swell-being with respect to his or herpalliative use of marijuana.

Qualifying patients and their primarycaregivers must register with DCP, whowill issue the patient and the primarycaregiver a registration certificate that,once issued, is valid for the same periodas the written certification from thephysician, up to one year.

The legislation prohibits qualifyingpatients, their caregivers or doctors, orlicensed dispensaries or producers frombeing arrested, prosecuted, or otherwisepenalized, including being subject to civilpenalties, or denied any right or privilege,including being disciplined by a profes-sional licensing board, for taking speci-fied actions related to the palliative use ofmarijuana. The legislation establishesparticular requirements for each group.

The legislation also prohibits anyonefrom being arrested or prosecuted solelyfor being present during, or in the vicinityof, the permitted palliative use of mari-juana. The protection does not apply ifthe patient ingests marijuana on a motorbus, school bus, or other moving vehicle;at work; on school grounds or any publicor private school, dormitory, college, oruniversity property; in any public place(i.e., any area that is used or held out foruse by the public whether owned oroperated for public or private interests);of anyone under age 18; or in a way thatexposes someone under age 18 to second-hand marijuana smoke.

School districts cannot refuse to enrolla student nor should they discriminateagainst a student who may be a permitteduser of medical marijuana. Moreover,school districts cannot refuse to hiresomeone or fire, penalize, or threaten anemployee based upon medical use ofmarijuana. The district is still permitted toprohibit the use of intoxicating substancesduring work hours or to discipline anemployee for being under the influence ofsuch substances during work hours.

The Act specifies that these provisionsmust not be construed to permit the

palliative use of marijuana in a way thatviolates other provisions prohibitingpalliative marijuana use in certain settings(e.g., ingesting marijuana at work, school,or other specified settings, or using it in away that endangers the health of others).

Implication inthe School Setting

Regretfully, marijuana use has in-creased among teenagers. A December2011 government report cited that one outof every fifteen high school studentssmokes marijuana on a near daily basis.The popularity of marijuana reflects whatresearchers and drug officials say is agrowing perception that habitual mari-juana use carries little risk of harm. Thatperception, experts say, is fueled in partby wider familiarity with medical mari-juana and greater ease in obtaining it.

As a general principle, medicalmarijuana is no different than standardmarijuana. Under the federal ControlledSubstances Act, marijuana is classified asa “Schedule I drug,” meaning it (1) hasthe potential for abuse, (2) has nocurrently accepted medical use in treat-ment in the U.S., and (3) has a lack ofaccepted safety for use of the drug undermedical supervision. Therefore, there is agrowing debate concerning the personalmedical use of marijuana and its legality.

Medical marijuana laws are constantlychanging and vary among geographicallocation. Federal and state laws make it acrime to use, grow, sell, or possessmarijuana. The U.S. Supreme Court hasstated that it is illegal to use, sell orpossess marijuana, even for medical usein the 2005 case of Gonzales v. Raich.However, 20 states, including Connecticutand the District of Columbia, havelegalized medical marijuana; therebyremoving any criminal penalties fromdoctors who prescribe the drug or frompatients who use it within the bounds setby state law.

There has been a “tug of war” betweenthe federal and state laws concerningmedical marijuana. As noted, on the onehand federal law makes it a crime tocultivate, possess, or use marijuana forany purpose. On the other hand, severalstates allow the medical use of marijuana.Generally, in cases where federal andstate laws collide, federal law prevails,meaning that users of state-authorizedmedical marijuana may be subject toarrest and/or prosecution. The U.S.Government, since 2009 indicated that theDepartment of Justice (DOJ) would notprioritize the enforcement of federalmarijuana laws on authorized users of

medical marijuana or their caregivers.In a directive issued to federal

prosecutors on August 29, 2013, DOJindicated that it will not attempt tochallenge state laws that allow for themedical use of marijuana providing thedrug sales do not conflict with eightnew federal enforcement priorities.Those priorities include the distributionof marijuana to minors and sales thatassist or act as cover for traffickingoperations.

Medical marijuana poses anotherchallenge to schools as they urgestudents and staff to stay away fromdrugs. Prescription drug abuse is mostcommon among young people. Schooldistricts face the uncertainty of howmedical marijuana use should behandled in the school setting, asstudents are taught to stay away fromdrugs including prescription drugmisuse.

Despite marijuana having a medicalbenefit, it still poses the dangers that allmind-altering substances pose. As asubstance that is now legal whenproperly prescribed by a physician, itmust be treated in the same manner asany other prescribed drug that is onlyused in extreme circumstances. It isintended to be prescribed for extremeand unique medicinal needs and not asa first option.

Background ofthe Legislation

Marijuana, used by humans forthousands of years, is classified as anillegal drug. However, there has beena growing movement to legalize itsuse, primarily for medical purposes.Prior to Connecticut’s new legislation,medical marijuana use had surged in18 states and the District of Columbia.States are still wrestling with thequestion of what medical marijuana isor should be.

Connecticut approved the medicaluse of marijuana through Public Act12-55, “An Act Concerning thePalliative Use of Marijuana,” effectiveOctober 1, 2012. The law sets theboundaries under which medical mari-juana may be recommended, culti-vated, possessed and used. The De-partment of Consumer Protection(DCP) was required by the legislationto adopt implementing regulations byJuly 1, 2013. The applicability of thislegislation is limited in the schoolsetting.

This Act allows a licensed physi-cian to certify an adult patient’s use ofmarijuana after determining that thepatient has a debilitating medicalcondition and could potentially benefitfrom the palliative use of marijuana,among other requirements. Thelegislation lists certain conditions thatqualify as debilitating. Patients seekingto use marijuana for palliative pur-poses must have a written certificationby a physician and register with DCP.

Qualifying patients and their pri-mary caregivers may possess a com-bined one-month marijuana supply.Conditions are established regardingwho can be primary caregivers whichrequires them to register with DCP.Licensing requirements for pharma-cists (termed “dispensaries”) to supplythe marijuana and for producers togrow it have been established.

Patients, their caregivers or doctors,dispensaries, or producers are pro-tected from being subject to criminalor civil penalties, or being denied anyright or privilege, for specified actionsrelating to palliative marijuana use.

Schools, landlords, or employersare prohibited from taking certainactions against a patient or caregiver ifthe actions are solely based on theperson’s status as a palliative mari-juana patient or caregiver, unless theactions are required by federal law orto obtain federal funding.

The new law prohibits patients fromingesting marijuana in certain settings,including at work or school, in publicplaces, in moving vehicles, or in frontof children.

Policy ImplicationsPolicy language should be

considered, pertaining to medicalmarijuana, for both staff membersand students. The legislation doesnot require a policy; therefore thisnew material is considered optionalfor inclusion in a district’s policymanual.

Policy #5131.6, “Alcohol Use,Drugs, and Tobacco” can be revisedto contain a separate, but optional,section pertaining to the medical useof marijuana by students eighteenyears of age or older.

In addition, two new policies forconsideration have been developedpertaining to this topic. They are: (1)#4118.235/4218.235, “MedicalMarijuana Standards” (Personnel),and (2) #5131.601/4118.236/4218.236, “Medical (Palliative) Useof Marijuana,” which is applicableto students and staff over eighteenyears of age.

Samples of these are availablefrom the CABE Policy Service uponrequest.


CABESearch Services

is recruiting for

SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS NEWTOWN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

For an update or more information onvacancies go to our website: www.cabe.org

For more information contact, CABE Search Services,860-539-7594

Jacqueline V. Jacoby, Senior Search ConsultantPaul Gagliarducci • Associate ConsultantMary Broderick - Associate Consultant

Bob King • Associate Consultant

P.O. Box 290252, Wethersfield, CT 06129-0252www.cabe.org/support • Equal Opportunity Employers

did introduce a number of additionalflexibilities that were offered to districts;however the one that the PEAC did notapprove was partial model.”

According to Barzee, each waiverrequest that was received was consideredon its individual merits. “With respect toWest Hartford, they were the only districtto request a waiver from whole modelimplementation and we felt strongly thatthe PEAC and the Board agreed to otherflexibilities but whole model was anexpectation that all districts would do in‘13-14,” she said.

Back in West Hartford, List saidanother reason she requested partialimplementation was the extensive workher district is doing in preparation for theCommon Core State Standards.

“One of the other reasons, and a bigreason that I asked for a delay, is becausewe are in our third year of implementingthe Common Core and our teachers havebeen working for well over a year ondesigning units that reflect the CommonCore,” said List.

“It’s teachers having a hand in thework and making it our own but basing iton Common Core State Standards,” addedList. “I don’t want the fact that they’regoing to be rated to interfere with whatI’m hoping, what I’m actually seeing, isinnovation and greater rigor through theunits they’re developing for the CommonCore.

They’re being risk takers in the workthey’re doing now and I don’t want tostifle that because they’re going to have toworry about a rating at the end of theschool year.”

Using student learning outcomes torate teachers “is something different and Ireally would’ve liked more time to devoteto getting that right,” observed List. “Idon’t want to just check off a box and saywe did it—I want to say, ‘this is some-thing we all believe in and it’s going toreally, over the long term, improveteaching and learning.’”

Professional Educator Evaluationsystem rolls out statewide

Patrice A. McCarthyDeputy Director and General Counsel, CABE

Lessons from the Penguins

Having had the extraordinary opportu-nity to travel to Antarctica and read “OurIceberg is Melting” by John Kotter duringthe past year, I offer some observationsthat may be useful to boards of educationfacing challenges implementing educa-tional reforms in a time of constrainedresources.

While there were no school boards toobserve in Antarctica, I did have the op-portunity to observe behaviors of pen-guins that I had only read about.

For example:• Penguins are careful planners, giv-

ing great attention to detail. Theycarefully build their nests, stone bystone, to insure a dry nesting placefor their young.

• Penguins live as a group, but protect

their turf. In fact, they feel free tosteal stones from the nests of theirneighbors.

• Penguins are vulnerable – they facesignificant dangers from predatorsincluding leopard seals and killerwhales.

• Penguins teach by modeling be-havior for their young – swimming,fishing and preparing for the chang-ing seasons.

• Penguins are good communicators.Chicks recognize the sounds of theirparents from an early age, even in acrowded colony.

• Penguins are curious about theirsurroundings – human and withinthe colony.

“Our Iceberg is Melting” offers advicefor changing and succeeding under anyconditions – and uses a penguin colony asan illustration. The key elements that

John Kotter identifies in the process ofsuccessful change are:

• Setting the stage by creating a senseof urgency and pulling together theteam.

• Developing the change vision andstrategy.

• Making it happen by communicat-ing, empowering others to act, pro-ducing short-term wins and beingrelentless in making the vision areality.

• Creating a new culture so thechanges are sustained.

Resilience and persistence are two ofthe qualities illustrated in Kotter’s fic-tional penguin colony that I observedamong the penguins of Antarctica.

Like Antarctica, education is undergo-ing its own “climate change”, with theimplementation of the Common Corecurriculum, new testing, and the educatorevaluation and support system. A greatdeal of planning to implement thesechanges has already taken place at thestate and local level, but adjustments will

be neededalong theway.

Commu-nicatingwhat thesechangesmean foreducationin yourdistrict isan import-ant role forboardmembersand super-intendents.

School board members and superinten-dents who are persistent, resilient andcommunicate well will enable theirstudents, staff, parents and the communityto embrace these new challenges and usethe opportunity to improve studentachievement.

There really is something to learn fromthe penguins!

(continued from page 1)Karen List said her district has beenworking on developing its teacherevaluation system “for about a year and ahalf.” She elaborated, “The beginningprocess of rolling out the teacher perfor-mance section of the plan is going verywell.

We have spent time—our administra-tors have spent over 30 hours—calibrat-ing to make sure that we all are inagreement about what we are seeing whenwe watch good teaching or poor teach-ing.”

The district has also spent a lot of timemaking sure teachers fully understand thenew system. “We have devoted a tremen-dous amount of time to ensuring that ourteachers really understand it and ouradministrators are calibrated to use therubric as faithfully as possible and asconsistently as possible,” continued List.

Though West Hartford has devotedmuch time to the teacher performance partof the system, List pointed out that herdistrict hasn’t “devoted time to develop-ing student learning outcomes and whatthose might look like.”

“We are moving a little slower than weanticipated because I had submitted awaiver request [with the SDE] and I hadrequested that we implement the teachingperformance part of the plan in year one,and then in year two [2014-15], we wouldimplement the student performance partof the plan,” said List. “I was told that mywaiver was denied and I had to implementthe whole thing in one year.”

Barzee noted that, earlier this year, thePerformance Evaluation AdvisoryCouncil (PEAC) considered “additionalimplementation flexibilities” as a result of“feedback we were hearing from thefield,” but partial model implementation,as West Hartford had requested, was notone of those options.

“We were hearing that this really was asignificant amount of work for districts ina single year,” said Barzee. “So, PEAC


You are invited to join the CABE/CAPSS Community at the Annual Conference!Is your district on this list?

Bridging the gap to the common core with blended learningMichelle RutherfordApex Learning, Seattle, WA

Blended learning models, in whichteacher-directed instruction is combinedwith digital curriculum, create student-centered experiences that enable improv-ed learning outcomes aligned with theCommon Core State Standards (CCSS).

Transitioning to the CCSS using tra-ditional methods alone may be challeng-ing to implement because the CCSS lowerthe grade level at which certain content isintroduced and are more rigorous thanmany current state standards. Althoughthe breadth of Standards coverage is re-duced, students must demonstrate andapply conceptual understanding in greaterdepth.

Curricular resources and assessmentsmust be adjusted to match the increasedrigor and bridge the gap between stategrade-level concepts and CCSS grade-level concepts. In addition, learner-centered instructional strategies must beemployed to assist students during thetransition.

With the higher expectations of theCCSS, teachers are challenged to addressdisparate student needs. Blended learningis a method that makes this possible.

Districts with at least one CABE/CAPSS Conference registrant as of September 12, 2013.

Area 1NaugatuckPlymouthRegion #1Region #6Region #14Region #15WaterburyWinchester

Wolcott

Area 2 (continued)South Windsor

SouthingtonWethersfield

Windsor LocksWindsor

Area 3Bolton

ColchesterColumbia

EASTCONNEllingtonHamptonMansfieldStaffordTolland

Willington

Area 4Canterbury

EastfordGriswoldKillinglyPlainfieldPutnamSprague

Area 5Bethel

BrookfieldNew Milford

ReddingRegion #9Region #12Ridgefield

Area 8Cromwell

East HamptonGuilfordMadison

Old SaybrookRegion #4Region #17Region #18Westbrook

Area 2AvonBerlin

BloomfieldCREC

East HartfordEast Windsor

EnfieldGlastonbury

GranbyHartford

ManchesterNew BritainNewingtonPlainvilleSimsbury

Area 7ACES

BranfordCheshire

DerbyEast Haven

MilfordNorth Haven

OrangeRegion #5Seymour

WallingfordWest HavenWoodbridge

1 23

4

5

6

7 8 9

Area 6C.E.S.

FairfieldGreenwich

MonroeNew Canaan

SheltonStratfordTrumbullWeston

Westport

Area 9East LymeLedyard

MontvilleNorth Stonington

NorwichSalem

StoningtonVoluntown

One challenge of any classroom isaddressing each student’s unique learningneeds. In a blended learning environment,Apex Learning comprehensive coursesprovide direct instruction and assessment,allowing each student to work at his orher own pace and focus on specific con-tent yet to be mastered. Teachers can en-gage one-to-one with each student, usingreal-time data to monitor progress andperformance, and determine the best wayto help each student achieve.

Blended learning enables teachers towork in more effective ways to ensuresuccessful learning outcomes. Teacherscan adopt digital content specificallydesigned to address the Standards as thecore curriculum or to enhance instruction,pulling lessons and interactive activitiesinto instruction with the aid of an interac-tive whiteboard. Digital lessons, compat-ible with individual student devices al-ows for further individualization. Studentstake assessments and receive individual-ized study plans based on assessmentresults.Teachers use assessment results toimprove learning outcomes by groupingstudents by skill mastery and developingtargeted instructional strategies for small-

group and individual instruction.Teachers review individualstudent progress and aggregateclass data.

This real-time access to dataallows teachers to identify eachstudent’s learning needs andprovide strategic targetedintervention, re-teaching, andremediation prior to summativeassessment. In each case, thedigital curriculum delivers acomprehensive, Standards-basedscope and sequence that enables studentsto access rigorous content and developproblem-solving skills.

Apex Learning digital curriculumprovides quality instruction and assess-ment specifically designed for the CCSS.Active learning keeps students engaged asthey explore new concepts, apply learn-ing, and deepen mastery of difficultconcepts. In addition, data is provided forteachers to individualize instruction andfill gaps in student knowledge. Thispersonalized approach leads to greaterlearning outcomes.

According to the U.S. Department ofEducation, students participating inblended learning have opportunities to

achieve at higher levels thanstudents receiving traditionalinstruction and assessment alone.

Blended learningenables student-centeredlearning while also meeting the

new Standards. Additionally,Apex Learning digital curriculum

address the Standards by focusing ondeveloping students’ skills to demonstrateconceptual understanding, show andexplain their reasoning, and apply thisknowledge to everyday life.

Teachers have Standards-based lessonsand assessments to support instructionwhenever that support is needed. Usingthe blended model, teachers are able tomeet a wide range of learning needs, aremore effective, and increase studentlearning outcomes.

To learn more about Apex LearningSolutions, visit http://apexlearning.comor email [email protected].

[Editor’s Note: Apex Learning Solu-tions was one of many who submitted awork-shop proposals to the 2013 CABE/CAPSS Conference Committee. Those notselected to present at the Conferencewere offered the opportunity to write anarticle.]


CT Education Funding By Source: Updated for FY 2012 through 20151

According to this model, state funding is estimated to tick up slightly from 40% to about 41% in FY 2013-14 with a small decrease in local funding from56% to 55%.

* The estimated yearsof 2012 through2015 include knownvariables such as theadditionalexpenditures foreducation reform andTeachers RetirementBoard. Othereducation relatedcosts at both the stateand local levels areprojected based onhistorical increases.Any variations fromthese historicalincreases couldmaterially impact theestimates for fiscalyears 2012 through2015.

(Endnotes)1 CT State Department of Education, Division of Finance and Internal Operations, May 2013 (for figures through 2011). Budgeted amounts for education reform and TRB from P.A. 13-247, retrieved from: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/ACT/PA/2013PA-00247-R00HB-06706-PA.htm

20122013 2014 20152000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2006 20082009 2010 2011 • • • •

5% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 9% 9% 5% 4% 4% 4%

42% 41% 41% 39% 38% 38% 41% 40% 42% 42% 37% 37% 40% 40% 41% 41%

51% 54% 54% 54% 56% 55% 53% 55% 52% 53% 53% 54% 56% 56% 55% 55%

Federal Funding

state %

local %

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Fun

din

g P

erce

nta

ges

CABE: working for YOUIndividualized Workshops • Professional Development Opportunities

Legal Services • Policy Services • Representing You Statewide and Nationally


Below are the highlights of activities thatthe CABE staff has undertaken on yourbehalf over the last month. We did this:

➤ By providing opportunitiesfor members to learn howto better govern theirdistricts:

• Participated in LEAD CT teleconfer-ence.

• Presented Candidates workshop atC.E.S. in Trumbull.

• Trained New Fairfield staff andboard on the use of CABE-Meeting.

• Created and presented webinars forCABE-Meeting Meeting Managerson the Goals Feature, board membersusing CABE-Meeting, and one thatprovides an overview of CABE-Meeting for districts interested inCABE-Meeting.

• Provided policy information to 26districts, two out-of-state schoolboard associations, one RESC andone newspaper through 33 answeredrequests for information or samplepolicies, on 28 topics. Further,districts continue to access CABE’s

online Core Policy Reference Manualand/or online manuals posted byCABE for policy samples. The topicsof greatest interest pertained tostudent health issues and securityissues.

➤ By representing Connecti-cut school boards on thestate or national level:

• Participated in keynote panel onSchool Safety and Security at ArizonaSchool Boards Association annualLaw Conference.

• Participated in Connecticut SchoolAttorneys Council meeting.

• Attended School Nurse AdvisoryCouncil meeting.

• Received grant applications forCommunity Conversations for theGraustein Memorial Fund.

• Provided a radio interview on WTICon school safety and security.

• Participated in After School AdvisoryCouncil meeting.

• Attended meeting of ConnecticutCommission for Educational Technol-ogy.

• Participated in meetings of theGovernor’s Prevention Partnership’sAudit Committee and Board ofDirectors meetings.

• Participated in meeting of the Big 6Partnership.

• Met with representatives of GreenLeaf Schools group.

• Participated in meeting of Govern-ment Relations and ResolutionsCommittees.

• Participated in Connecticut Society ofAssociation Executives (CSAE) IdeaExchange.

• Participated in Mission-BasedMarketing Program provided by theHartford Foundation for PublicGiving.

• Served on committee interviewingExecutive Director candidates forCSAE.

➤ By helping school boardsto increase studentachievement

• Held conference call with presenterfor Pre-K workshop which has sincebeen postponed due to circumstancesbeyond our control.

• Sent two issues of Policy Highlightsvia email listserv covering topics thataffect student achievement. Thisincluded issues pertaining to impactphysical activity and discipline,security issues, the principal’s roles,nondiscrimination, and gender equity.

➤ By promotingpublic education:

• Prepared resolutions for CABEGovernment Relations Committeemeeting.

• Attended Wallingford Back-to-School Convocation.

• Met with Paul Holzer, ExecutiveDirector of Achieve Hartford!

• Facilitated retreat for the Board ofDirectors of the Connecticut Associa-tion of Educational Office Profes-sionals (CAEOP).

• Participated in mini-grant reviewcommittee for the Wheeler Clinic.

• Attended meeting of the CAPSSBoard of Directors.

• Answered questions about the currentlegal issues facing boards of educa-tion. “HOT” topics this month were:Pending referendum, executivesession privileges, records retention,response time to FOI requests, andreligious accommodations.

➤ By providing servicesto meet members needs:

• Met with UCONN graduate studentson Capstone project for this year.

• Met with New Haven Chair CarlosTorre and new superintendent GarthHarries on CABE programs, servicesand other activities.

• Entered into an agreement to do anaudit of the policy manual ofThomaston.

• Completed as part of the CustomUpdate Service Packets of new and/orrevised policies for the districts ofAnsonia, Columbia, East Hampton,East Windsor, Franklin, GilbertSchool, Marlborough, New Fair-field, New Hartford, Newington,North Stonington, Old Saybrook,Oxford, Putnam, Region #6,Stafford, Sterling, West Haven,Westbrook, and Windham.

• Completed the audit of the Wethers-field Policy Manual.

• Currently working on audits forBolton and Madison.

• Made revisions to CABE’s ModelStudent Handbook.

• Placed the manual of Orange onlinethrough the Connecticut OnlinePolicy Service.

➤ By ensuring membersreceive the most up-to-date communications:

• As part of the development of newpolicy manuals utilizing the CustomPolicy Service, materials were pre-pared for Avon, Derby, Ellington,and Griswold.

CondolencesJewel Gutman, CABE President 1980-82, died recently at the age of 84. In addition

to her extensive contributions to CABE, Jewel had served on the Simsbury Board ofEducation, the School Finance Commission, the Capital Region Education Council,and numerous other boards and commissions in Simsbury and the greater Hartfordarea. As a practicing attorney, she specialized in juvenile law.

Her commitment to and advocacy for public education will be missed. Former StateBoard member, CABE President and Friend of Public Education awardee Pat Lukeremembered, “Jewel Gutman was a strong and courageous leader who made thedifficult decisions based on what was right and not necessarily on what was popular.”

CABE extends its condolences to her family.


The August 19th edition of TimeMagazine contained an article called TheDigital Parent Trap. It has muchapplication to how school districtscommunicate with parents on the use oftechnology.

The author, Eliana Dockerman, set upa situation in which two parents fromdifferent families who have very diverseideas on the proper use of technology fortheir children. She asks, “who’s right—the mom trying to protect her kids fromthe perils of new technology or the dadwho’s coaching his kids to embrace it?”

Obviously there’s no correct answer,but we are at a time in which many schooldistricts are about to incorporate Web-enabled tablets into everyday curriculumand testing for the Common Core StateStandards will be done on computer.

School boards and school staff need tobetter help our parents with these difficultdecisions.

As the author points out, the “parentaladage” used to be that the less time spentin front of screens (television or com-puter) was better. And, we have obesity,cyberbullying and negative aspects ofsocial media for reasons to limit technol-ogy.

There are private schools that limittechnology, not only in the classroom, butat home, too. But, according to thearticle, recent research suggests that“social-networking sites also offerunprecedented learning opportunities.“Online, kids can engage with specializedcommunities of interest” says Mimi Ito,an anthropologist at the University ofCalifornia at Irvine who’s studying howtechnology affects young adults. “They’reno longer limited by what’s offered inschool…Parents need to encourage thattype of online learning, not limit it.”

There also are benefits in cognitiveintelligence for youngsters. A “recentstudy by SRI, a nonprofit research firm,kids who played games like Samorost(solving puzzles) did 12% better on logictests than those who did not. And atMIT’s Education Arcade, playing theempire-building game Civilization piquedstudents’ interest in history and wasdirectly linked to an improvement in thequality of their history-class reports.”

Why were the effects positive?Children were engaged in the games, notmindlessly watching television or someonline activities.

When children were “actually doingsomething themselves—in the virtualworlds on iPads or laptops—that retentionrate” for children goes way above the

amountremem-bered bystudentswho werehearing orseeing anactivityoccur.

Accord-ing toDockerman, this is “a main reasonresearchers like to say the AmericanAcademy of Pediatrics’ recommendationof a two-hour screen-time limit is anoutdated concept: actively browsingpages on a computer or tablet is waymore brain-stimulating than vegging outin front of the TV.”

But, early-age tech fluency is mosthelpful in enabling children to staycompetitive. They need to become fluenton the computer or they will be leftbehind.

While none of this suggests thatchildren have “unfettered access to thegadget of their choice”, as with otherchildhood privileges, parental monitoringis a key.

It would seem to me that the schools,especially those involved with pre-k andelementary education, need to provideparents with information about what is

Technology and the role of parents in their child’s education

Here is what the article called TheGood Stuff Kids Can Do With PopularTech:CULTIVATE INTERESTS

On Facebook and Twitter, there arecommunities to support niche passionslike coding, photography and music. Ifyou’re still worried, download Detec-tive (Mac or PC), an activity-monitor-ing app.

STREAMLINE HOMEWORKApps such as WoiframAlpha (info

searching) and Evernote (note taking)are the ultimate productivity assistants.If you’re still worried ... downloadiStudiez Pro (lOS), an assignment-re-minder app.

GET CREATIVEGames like Minecraft allow kids to

create whole worlds from scratch, hon-ing problem-solving end critical-think-ing skills. If you’re still worried ... down-load the Stay-Focused plug-in (GoogleChrome), which allows a parent to setsite time limits.

Robert RaderExecutive Director, CABE

best for learning and growing. Helpfulanalysis such as that in this article shouldbe a part of what schools provide.


Boards of education should partnerwith the Connecticut Association for the Gifted

Beverly KatzExecutive Director, Connecticut Association for the Givted

The Connecticut Association for theGifted (CAG) is your partner closing theeducational achievement gap amongstudents.

CAG supports administrators, teachers,and parents to meet the needs ofConnecticut’s gifted, talented, and high-potential children. We offer resources,information, advice, and programs foradministrators, teachers, and parents.

CAG offers Professional Develop-ment Programs which provide valuableinstruction to help districts address theneeds of their gifted and talented popula-tions—whether in formalized giftedprograms or in the general classroomsetting—and allow educators to apply G/T pedagogy to a broader spectrum ofstudents.

CAG instructors deliver qualitytraining in a variety of content areas, andwill customize workshops to meet yourdistrict’s specific needs. Whether yourschool is looking to develop or strengthena gifted program, to better serve giftedstudents within the general classroom, toutilize gifted pedagogy to help students atall levels, or to educate parents regardingthe needs of gifted children, CAG’sProfessional Development presentershave a wealth of experience to share.They are researchers, educators, andadvocates with extensive backgrounds—from K-12 classrooms to top universi-ties—and a wealth of practical experiencewho present at local and internationallevels.

Although each workshop is customizedto the needs of the district, typical topicsmight be Nature and Needs of GiftedStudents, Dealing with Intensity, Under-achievement and Selective Achievement,Perfectionism, Multipotentiality,Asynchrony in Gifted Students’ Develop-ment, and many more.

District and school leaders plan foreducational opportunities and teachereducation that meets the learning needs ofall their students. However, not allschools and districts offer services forhigh-ability students, or have teacherswith backgrounds in gifted and talentededucation. To help districts, CAG offersa free Administrator’s Tool Kit. The toolkit addresses:

• The rationale for gifted educationservices

• The critical elements of giftededucation programming

• Accountability for gifted studentlearning

• The connection between giftededucation and other district andschool initiatives such as 21st

century skills.Your teachers can benefit from CAG’s

Teacher Resource Group (TRG), a freeprofessional social network for theeducation community. TRG is a nationalresource for sharing of everything gifted.One of the most difficult challenges ineducation is consistently and appropri-ately meeting the needs of G/T students.CAG’s TRG can help you meet thischallenge by answering your questions,sharing information, and providingresources and support. The TRG isspecially developed to help schools,districts, and teachers meet the academic,emotional, and intellectual needs of theirstudents. Our gifted education specialistshave years of first-hand experience in theclassroom and at major research institu-tions. They are available to help you findthe solutions you need.

Ask the Expert – Our consultants arestanding by to help. CAG members canemail us for support and resources that

can help in the classroom.Free Professional Webinars – Hosted

by leading gifted educators from acrossthe country, and our partner edWeb offersfree CE’s.

CAG Classroom Connections – CAGteacher members receive a bi-monthlyinformational memo with helpful tips andstrategies provided by our experiencedTRG specialists.

Your entire school district can joinCAG through CAG’s Affiliate Program.PTAs/PTOs and administrative groupsmay become CAG affiliates, bringingCAG’s statewide resources directly toyour community. Have a conversationaround excellence in education withCAG’s help. Become a CAG affiliate andyour members get these unique benefits:

• Annual CAG Membership forYour Entire Group: Everymember automatically receives

annual membership in CAG. Noneed for individuals to renewthemselves when your affiliaterenews; everyone renews at thesame time. Affiliate members getfull CAG benefits, including ourmonthly enewsletter, discounts toall CAG events, the latest informa-tion, resources, and research.

• Your Affiliate’s PersonalWebpage: Each CAG affiliate getsa free mini-website hosted withinthe CAG website. Post announce-ments, list district contacts, shareinformation, all within the CAGwebsite, so your members can takeadvantage of the extensive contentand information CAG offers.

• Annual Visits from the CAGBoard: CAG affiliates get freeyearly visits to your community orschool district to help with G/Tprograms: a presentation on giftededucation, help organizing a parentadvocacy committee, hold an annualgifted ed back to school night, forexample.

CAG offers many exceptional re-sources for your educational community.Visit CAG at www.ctgifted.org and at theCABE/CAPPS Conference November 15,and learn how we can partner together.

CABE Board meets withState Board Members

State Board ofEducation membersBob Trefry, StevenWright and JosephVrabely along withCommissioner Pryormet with membersof the CABE Boardof Directors onSeptember 12.Topics of discussionwere: the CommonCore State Stan-dards, the SmarterBalance assess-ment, and teacherand administratorevauation.

CABE Board of Directors met with members of the State Board of Education.


Running adistrict ishardLighten yourload with anupdatedpolicymanual

You need an up-to-date policy manual to run your dis-trict effectively. CABE can help. Our policy specialistswill assist in updating your manual, ensuring yourdistrict’s policies are current and up-to-date with theConnecticut statutes.

Call Vincent Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for PolicyService (860) 571-7446 or (800) 317-0033 to beginupdating your manual today.

Legal Section Kelly B. Moyher, Senior Staff Attorney, CABE

The United States Supreme Court inFisher v. University of Texas recentlyaddressed the issue of affirmative actionand the related policy of the University ofTexas at Austin. The Supreme Courtvoided the lower appellate court’s rulingin favor of the University and remandedthe case, holding that the lower court hadnot applied the standard of “strictscrutiny”, which was articulated in theprevious Supreme Court cases Grutter v.Bollinger and Regents of the Universityof California v. Bakke. The SupremeCourt’s ruling in Fisher took Grutter andBakke as given and did not directly revisitthe constitutionality of using race as afactor in college admissions.

The suit, brought by undergraduateAbigail Fisher in 2008, asked that theCourt declare the University’s race-

conscious admissions inconsistent withGrutter, which had in 2003 establishedthat race had an appropriate but limitedrole in the admissions policies of publicuniversities. While reasserting that anyconsideration of race must be “narrowlytailored,” with Fisher the Court did not goon to overrule Grutter, which some fearedto be an action that would end affirmativeaction.

Plaintiffs Abigail Noel Fisher andRachel Multer Michalewicz applied to theUniversity of Texas at Austin in 2008 andwere denied admission. The two women,both white, filed suit, alleging that theUniversity had discriminated against themon the basis of their race in violation ofthe Equal Protection Clause of theFourteenth Amendment. The Universityof Texas at Austin accepts students in the

top 10% of each Texas high school’sgraduating class, regardless of their race;under Texas House Bill 588, 81% of2008’s freshman class were admittedunder the plan.

Applicants who, like Fisher, fail tograduate in the top 10% of their highschools, have a further opportunity to gainadmission to the University by scoringhighly in a process which evaluates theirtalents, leadership qualities, familycircumstances and race. Fisher had agrade point average of 3.59 (adjusted to4.0 scale) and was in the top 12% of herclass at Stephen F. Austin High School.She scored 1180 on her SAT (measuredon the old 1600 point scale, because UTAustin did not consider the writingsection in its undergraduate admissionsdecision for the 2008 incoming freshmanclass). The 25th and 75th percentiles ofthe incoming class at UT-Austin were1120 and 1370. She was involved in theorchestra and math competitions and

U.S. Supreme Court address the issue of affirmative actionvolunteered at Habitat for Humanity.During the case proceedings, Fisherenrolled at Louisiana State University,where she was in her final year as anundergraduate in 2012. In 2011,Michalewicz withdrew from the case,leaving Fisher as the sole plaintiff.The United States District Court heardFisher v. University of Texas in 2009 andupheld the legality of the University’sadmission policy. The case was appealedto the Fifth Circuit which also ruled in theUniversity’s favor. On June 24, 2013, theFifth Circuit’s decision was vacated bythe Supreme Court , and the case re-manded for further consideration in a 7-1decision.

Periodic review of race consciouspolicies is necessary. Policies should bestrictly scrutinized and narrowly tailoredand clearly show the impact and goals ofthe policy. Consideration of race neutralalternatives should always be consideredprior to turning to race conscious means.

CABE Resolutions/GovernmentRelations Committee meetings

The Government Relations Committee met on September 12, to accept the resolutions from theResolutions Committee, for presentation at the CABE Delegate Assembly to be held onNovember 14. Watch your mail for Delegate Assembly registration information.

On September 12, CABE’s Executive Director Robert Rader, Patrice A. McCarthy, DeputyDirector and General Counsel, and Lisa Steimer, Senior Staff Associate for ProfessionalDevelopment met with three UCONN Public Policy Capstone students to talk about how theycan help us to better meet your needs.


School boards bewareInfluential national network calls for elimination of school boards

Julie Underwood, J.D., Ph.D.University of Wisconsin - Madison

[Editor’s Note: We thought it mightbe helpful for Connecticut school boardmembers to be aware of this organiza-tion. Its policies and positions areconcerning for boards across the coun-try.]

An organization with nationwideinfluence is working hard to negate thedecision-making and leadership authorityof each school board in Wisconsin andacross the country.

According to the Report Card onAmerican Education, the educationagenda of the American LegislativeExchange Council (ALEC) calls for:

• Reducing the influence of oreliminate local school districts andschool boards.

• Privatizing education throughvouchers, charters and tax incen-tives.

• Increasing student testing andreporting.

• Introducing market factors intoschools, particular the teachingprofession.

In short, ALEC seeks to undo much ofthe work and power of school boards.

What is ALEC?ALEC is a national network based in

Washington, D.C. It describes itself as amembership organization for those whoshare a common belief in a “limited

government, free markets, federalism, andindividual liberties.” Its goal is to createand enact model legislation, which theydevelop.

Although identified as nonpartisan,ALEC’s members skew to the conserva-tive end of the political spectrum andinclude corporations, foundations, and“think tanks.” The corporations (profitand nonprofit) pay large annual fees andpay the additional costs of sponsoringmeetings. Corporate members pay toserve on their taskforces, and provide thefunds for the state legislators to attendALEC meetings.

Model legislation is developed throughthe ALEC taskforces (e.g. health, safety,education), each co-chaired by a corpo-rate and legislative member. In order topass a model bill out of the ALECtaskforce, both the public and electedsides of the committee must agree. Theelected officials then submit theseproposals to their own state legislatures.

Members of the taskforces have aninterest in the topical area of thetaskforce. For example, educationtaskforce members are representativesfrom the Friedman Foundation, theCharter School Association, the privateschool associations, and corporationsproviding education services.

The proposals cannot move out of thetaskforce without the approval of thecorporate interests. The corporationsinvolved have an interest in the areas andthus typically stand to profit financiallyfrom the proposals.

For example, two large for-profitcorporate providers of virtual education,Connections Academy and K-12 Inc., hadheavy involvement in the development ofthe ALEC model Virtual Public SchoolsAct. At the time it was drafted by ALEC,the chair of the education committee wasa principal employee of ConnectionsAcademy. Connections Academy and K-12 have reaped huge financial benefits inthe states where the Virtual Schools Acthas been passed.

In Tennessee, K-12 Inc. received thestate contract for virtual schools shortlyafter it passed their legislature as a no-bidcontract. For this contract they receivedmore than $5,000 per student from thestate during the 2011- 2012 school year.Currently, the legislature is auditing thiscontract due to low student performancein the program.

ALEC Pushes VouchersOne of the key goals of ALEC is to

privatize education through vouchers.Milton Friedman argued vouchers wouldfoster competition and improve students’learning. Experience has not borne thisout.

The research indicates that voucherschools do not outperform their publicschool counterparts. The children invoucher programs should in fact be doingbetter because they represent the “easier”to educate segment of the public schoolpopulation.

I say “easier” because, first, there are

Area meetings for Candidatesrunning for the Board of Education

far fewer students with disabilities servedin private voucher schools. Second, eventhough they receive public funding,private schools retain the right to select,reject, and expel students throughadmissions and disciplinary rules.

Finally, children in voucher schoolscome from families who are engagedenough in their children’s education tohave actively moved them to the privatesystem. Education research is clear thatchildren with actively engaged parental orhome support will clearly outperformstudents who do not have that support intheir lives. With “easier” student voucherschools should clearly outperform thepublics. Doing almost as good can hardlybe called success.

Voucher advocates argue that even ifthe academics are not up to par, at leastthe cost for the state is lower. Sad, andnot true. First, if you are not attractingpublic school students to switch to privateschools, the state just ends up payingtuition for those students already enrolledin the private school – this just shiftsprivate costs to taxpayers.

Second, the local schools district paysfor more than the cost of the voucher;typically paying for transportation, specialeducation and support services. Vouchershave neither shown success academicallynor financially.

Reducing the Role of SchoolBoards

The ALEC agenda in education isambitious. Model bills seek to influenceteacher certification, teacher evaluation,collective bargaining, curriculum,funding, special education, and studentassessment.

Common throughout the bills areproposals to decrease local control ofschools by local school boards whileincreasing control, influence, and profitsof the companies in the education sector.Privatization is consistent with theinterests of the corporate ALEC members.

The ALEC goal to eliminate schooldistricts and school boards is a bitshocking – but the idea is to make everyschool, public and private, independentthrough vouchers for all students. Allfunding is then provided to a schoolseparately so there is no need for localschool district or school board coordina-tion, control or oversight.

Personally, I believe there is a purposefor public schools and the local publicoversight necessary to support and guidethem. Public education was created toserve the needs of the public – ensuringthat every child had access to an educa-tion that would help him/her become anactive citizen, capable of participating inour democratic process.

What happens to our democracy whenwe return to an educational system whereaccess is defined by corporate interest anddivided by class, language, ability, race,and religion? In a push to a free marketeducation do we lose the purpose ofpublic education?

Julie Underwood, J.D., Ph.D., is aprofessor and the Dean of the School ofEducation at the University of Wiscon-sin–Madison. She was formerly NSBAGeneral Counsel.

ElaineWhitney,Chair,WestportBoard ofEducationand Area 6Co-Director,talked aboutthe time andpersonalcommitmentof being aboardmember.

Candidates running for the board of education met at C.E.S. in Trumbull to receive a briefingon preparing for public office.

C.E.S., Trumbull

CREC, Hartford

Candidates running for the board of education met at CREC in Hartford to receive a briefingon preparing for public office.

Lydia Tedone, Chair, Simsbury Board ofEduca-tion andPresi-dent ofCABE,spokeaboutthe timeandpersonalcommit-ment ofbeing aboardmember.


1. Advocate forConnecticut’s childrenCABE’s mission is “to assist localand regional boards of education inproviding high quality educationfor all Connecticut childrenthrough effective leadership.”Board member education andadvocacy go hand-in-hand if thechildren are to benefit. You can bepart of advocating for all ofConnecticut’s children.

2. Exercise leadershipCABE represents nearly allConnecticut school districts, and isa powerful organization. Every oneof you is a “mover and shaker” inyour home community. You comefrom every possible political agendaand yet you put that aside to pulltogether for children. How manyother gatherings can you think ofwhere over four hundred diversepeople can gather together for apurpose as noble as the education ofchildren? Attend the annualConference because you want tomake things happen forConnecticut’s children.

3. Develop yourboardsmanship skillsIf you believe in education forchildren should you expect any lessfor yourself? Every industry andagency believes in training. Publicofficials need to also realize thattheir skills need to be constantlyhoned in order to remain effective.Attend the annual Conference tolearn new skills that will help youbecome a better school boardmember.

4. Reenergize yourselfEach of us needs to be nudged outof the rut occasionally to help usregain the fervor we possessed as anewly elected board member readyto revolutionize education. Attendthe annual Conference to be inspiredso that you can return home and digin anew to make your district evenbetter.

5. Find commoninterests and concernsIf you thought your district was theonly one dealing with a particularissue – think again! Attend theannual Conference to learn howother districts are dealing withspecific issues, addressing concerns,

and implementing curricula to meetthe needs of children.

6. Connect withother board membersThe opportunity to talk with otherswho share a common interest isinvaluable. The annual Conferenceis the perfect place to meet indivi-duals who share your passion foreducation. Talk one-on-one withpeople who are as energetic, com-mitted and caring as you are. Noone is a stranger for long at theConference. The annual Con-ference provides an unprecedentedforum where sharing and net-working occur constantly.

7. Become familiarwith the uniquenessof other districtsConnecticut is a diverse state and toeffectively educate all of children,school board members must set theexample as adults respecting eachother. The annual Conferenceprovides you with the opportunityto learn more about each other bysharing concerns and successes withother districts.

8. Become a partof the solutionAs an association we will alwayshave potentially divisive issuesbefore us. When board membersspeak from the heart and everyonegives a little to go forward, we are astrong, unified voice for education.We come from all over the state, wehave many different personalbeliefs, but during the Conferencewe work toward common goals toadvocate for Connecticut’s children.Attend the Conference to betterunderstand the issues so we canmove quickly towards developingsolutions together.

9. Renew old friendshipsand develop new onesIt is a great feeling to know youhave friends across the state thatyou will see periodically throughthe year. Board members are neverat a loss for conversation becausethey have the universal bond ofchildren’s education to discuss.

10. Divide and conquerTo gain optimum learning and tomake sure your school district getsfull value for sending more than oneboard member, develop a plan todivide and conquer. Examine theagenda, select topics of interest andsend each board member to adifferent seminar session. Followup and share what each has learnedover dinner at the Conference orduring an informal work sessionback in your district.

10 Reasons why you shouldn’t missthe 2013 Annual CABE/CAPSS Conference

Lisa SteimerSenior Staff Associatefor Professional Development, CABE

We all have read the studies that tell uswhat we already know, because we areliving it – it is increasingly difficult to

webinar takes place – much like a face-to-face workshop.

The current webinar offerings onCABE’s website include topics such asProfessional Governance Boards =Student Success, Legislative Update,Unemployment Compensation Costs withan Emphasis on Reasonable Assurance,Alliance District Requirements, and TenBest Practices to Avoid Liability. ForCABE-Meeting subscribers webinars areavailable on Board Member Use and theGoals Feature.

There is also a webinar available for

Another Professional DevelopmentResource Available to YOU!

make time for professional development.Family and work demands are such thatthere is very little extra time to go around.Whether you are a board member,superintendent or superintendent’ssecretary CABE is making it easier foryou to access important informationthrough webinars.

Throughout the year, a variety ofCABE staff provide webinars live tothose who register. These webinars arearchived on CABE’s website after the‘live’ presentation. If you register toparticipate in a live webinar, you have theopportunity to ask questions of ourpresenters via your computer as the

districts interestedin learning moreabout CABE-Meeting entitledCABE-MeetingOverview.

Previouslyrecorded webinarsmay be accessed24/7 on CABE’swebsite at http://www.cabe.org/page.cfm?p=354.

Mac®-based attendeesRequired: Mac OS® X 10.6 or newer

Mobile attendeesRequired: iPhone®, iPad®, Android™phone or Android tabletWhile the staff at CABE continues to addtopics that will provide our members withtimely information, we recognize thevalue of convening a group of people forface-to-face training as well. Staff willcontinue to provide both forms ofprofessional development.

If you have a suggestion for a webinaror face-to-face training, please contactLisa Steimer at [email protected].

Systemrequirements forparticipating in aCABE webinarare:

PC-basedattendeesRequired:Windows® 7,Vista, XP or 2003Server

Lisa Steimer, Sr. Staff Associate for Profes-sional Development, presented a webinar onCABE-Meeting. Also pictured WilmarieNewton, Webinar Coordinator.

Patrice A. McCarthy, Deputy Director and General Counsel and SheilaMcKay, Sr. Staff Associate for Government Relations presented awebinar on the Governor’s Budget. Also pictured Wilmarie Newton,Webinar Coordinator.

CABE Executive Director Robert Rader and Gary Brochu, President,Berlin Board of Education presented a webinar on ProfessionalGovernance Board = Student Success. Also pictured Wilmarie Newton,Webinar Coordinator.

CABE Journal - October 2013

Documents

Transcript of CABE Journal - October 2013