Skip Maine state header navigation
 |
Talking About Education: Planning for Quality Learning in New RSUs
By Mary Jane McCalmon, former superintendent and DOE facilitator
What happens educationally when two or three school units come together as a single entity? Each unit has its own academic strengths and shortfalls. Values, vision and beliefs may be similar, but not the same. The curriculum and educational opportunities for students in each unit are not the same.
At the request of Commissioner Gendron, a group of independent facilitators hired by the Department of Education, all of us former superintendents, is taking on these questions. We are working to come up with ways to help prospective regional school units (RSUs) merge multiple academic approaches and philosophies into one. Our goal is to come up with a set of strategies, some specific tools (such as templates, guidelines or training), and identify the resources that will be needed by proposed RSUs to tackle this work.
Consolidation of school districts will be judged in the end not only by the extent to which it enhances efficiencies, but even more importantly by how well it works for our students.
Quality school systems are constantly evaluating themselves and re-examining their approach to academic programming. As former superintendents, Jake Clockedile, Bob Kautz, Norm Higgins and I are well-versed in these self-examinations. They are challenging, sometimes tense, and always eye-opening and rewarding.
Our first step will be to ask practitioners in the field what they see as their most important education planning needs. We have scheduled a series of focus groups to ask educators what work will need to be done to bring separate schools and systems together, what tools and processes might be helpful in doing this work, and what resources they think will be needed to do this planning. The groups include teachers, principals, vocational school directors, curriculum coordinators, superintendents and students, and staff from the Department of Education, Maine School Management Association, Maine Principals Association and the Maine Education Association. These sessions are scheduled throughout the month of April and into early May.
Once the information from the focus groups is gathered the core team will collate and organize the data. The objective is to look for themes in the data about what work seems important to people, what processes or tools would be helpful/meaningful to them, and what resources they would like to see made available to support their education planning work.
The summary of expressed needs from the field will be shared with a group of organizations and individuals who provide organizational development and professional development services to schools in Maine. Those providers will be consulted on what services they think should be provided, and how the necessary support could be made available to the new systems.
By the end of this school year we will make a series of recommendations will be made to the Department of Education about what needs to be done to support high quality education planning for new RSUs.
In future updates we will share with you the data from the focus groups, and eventually the recommendations to the Commissioner.
Merging Technology in prospective RSUs
By Allen J. Curtis, Reorganization Facilitator, Technology Director in MSAD 49
Technology is a key factor in the development of regional school units (RSUs). Seeing a real need in this area, facilitators working with the Department of Education asked me to convene a group of technology people to develop some guidance for prospective RSUs in the area of technology.
I recruited current technology directors from throughout the state to work together on a process to develop a Technology Guideline to support the planning process. The team used its technical skills and the tools available over the internet and ATM to meet and develop the guidelines. This allowed us to minimize travel over a long distance and accomplish the goals in a timely fashion.
The members of this team are myself, Allen Curtis, from MSAD 49; Tyler Dunphy from the Westbrook School Department; Sharon Betts from MSAD 52; Joe Spinazola from Bucksport; Trey Bachner of the Falmouth School Department; Angel Allen, MSADs 58 and 9; and Vincent Vanier, of the Madawaska School Department. All of us are technology directors; Vincent is also president of ACTEM, the Association of Computer Technology Educators of Maine.
 |
The group is comprised of diverse individuals with educational and technology leadership experience. It includes representation from current school boards, various sized school administrative departments and districts, individuals who provide technical leadership for merged schools and municipalities, individuals who provide technical leadership to more than one SAD and members that have prior centralization experience.
The result is a document that contains numerous places for RSUs to review technology options to consolidate existing systems or to bring on new technology to improve their operations and save money. View the document.
We wanted to make clear that our document does not mandate procedural or operational directives offers a guide for the areas we believe need to be addressed. The areas are intentionally generic and may not fit in every situation. The Maine Department of Education will provide additional support for RSUs to review their current technology status and help develop operational and financial impact assessments. Special attention should be given to areas of overlap to ensure they are properly addressed. It has become apparent that when areas such as telephone or security systems are maintained by different departments within the same RSU, they can easily be neglected in planning. Thorough communication between departments will be necessary to create a successful migration. It is the committee’s recommendation that this document be processed with the following priorities:
On the Ground: Implementation Status Report
Nearly all school units complied with the March 28 deadline to inform the Department of Education of their progress. The Department has received 21 updated alternative plans, eight updated reorganization plans, and 49 letters updating us on progress (these were allowed in place of updated plans in areas where no formal action had been taken since the December 1 deadline). 13 units still have not submitted, but all have been contacted and we anticipate receiving those updates in the coming days.
In addition, five units have already had their alternative plans approved; one unit has received conditional approval for a reorganization plan (Falmouth/SAD 51); and one region – Bath and most of the towns in former Union 47 – has already reorganized under separate legislation into a new RSU.
Most of the eight reorganization plans submitted are nearly complete and the Department has asked for additional information from some of the RPCs that submitted them. While no decisions are anticipated for another couple of weeks, it is likely that several will be approved in this cycle.
The Commissioner expects to respond around the middle of the month. In several cases, final approval will depend on action by the Legislature. All but one reorganization plan includes a local cost-sharing agreement which is not currently allowed in the law. Governor Baldacci has submitted legislation, LD 2314, to allow the cost-sharing, as well as two other non-controversial financial fixes. That legislation is under consideration in the House and Senate.
Legislative Update: Status of Reorganization LegislationThings are moving quickly in the Legislature this week as three separate bills related to school administrative reorganization are in play, making any update old news by the time it is published. Nonetheless, here’s an update on activity in the House and Senate over the past few days. This is as of Thursday afternoon.
LD 1932 was enacted in the House last Friday and Senate this Monday. Governor Baldacci quickly vetoed the measure because of the super unions amendment. His veto message is below. In short, his concerns are the same as ours – that unions are inefficient, can’t achieve the necessary savings, and do not lead to educational equity.
The Governor submitted language on Friday for legislation to reintroduce the three non-controversial financial fixes and one other technical fix. The bill, LD 2314, was printed Wednesday morning. Here is a brief summary of the provisions, none of which has changed substantively since first introduced in December.
All four items in the proposed legislation were part of the original LD 1932 as approved by 10 members of the Education Committee and the minority report endorsed by the remaining three members of the Committee.
The House took up LD 2314 briefly on Wednesday night. Initially they moved to send the bill to committee. However, there was a motion to reconsider and then a motion to Indefinitely Postpone (kill) the bill. The bill was then tabled.
There is some expectation that the Legislature may seek to add back in to LD 2314 some of the elements of the original Education Committee version of LD 1932 such as the waiver to allow some rural, isolated units with 1,000 to 1,200 students (below the current 1,200 minimum in the law).
The House took up the other two related pieces of legislation on Wednesday evening – LD 2280 and LD 2281.
Legislative leaders are aiming to conclude business by next Wednesday, April 16, and may schedule sessions for this Saturday in the House and Senate.
Text of the Governor’s veto message
To The Honorable Members of the Maine Legislature:
I am enclosing S.P. 741, L.D. 1932, “An Act to Amend the Laws Regarding School Funding,” which is being returned without my signature or approval.
This bill began as a means to eliminate technical barriers to the school administrative reorganization law enacted last year. The elements of the original bill are non-controversial and were supported by all 13 members of the Joint Standing Committee on Education and Cultural Affairs.
During the legislative process, the bill was significantly amended and its original purpose was lost. The non-controversial technical changes became encumbered with language that I cannot support.
In its current form, L.D. 1932 would undermine the effectiveness of the education reforms that passed the Legislature last year with broad bipartisan support. Specifically, the bill would allow for the formation of “super unions,” which would encourage more bureaucracy and allow for the expansion of an inefficient means of school governance. Maine would likely end up with more school districts, not fewer. Further, the bill would decrease the transparency of the budget validation process and increase confusion, making it more difficult for voters to get a complete picture of how their tax dollars are being spent on education.
Nonetheless, agreement still exists on the need for the technical amendments that prompted L.D. 1932. Most schools districts have been working diligently since January to reduce school administration, improve student outcomes and save tax dollars. Unfortunately, in some places this good work has stopped as Reorganization Planning Committees, School Board members, town officials and citizens have been forced to wait for the tools they need to move forward.
To help them move forward, I have submitted legislation that includes the non-controversial elements of L.D. 1932. The new legislation will allow school units to negotiate local cost-sharing agreements, will allow districts that receive the minimum special education subsidy to continue to do so when they join a new school district and will remove the 2 mill requirement. The bill will also correct a technical error by creating a single budget format for all districts.
Maine must continue to push for the highest quality education for our children, but we must also continue to seek greater efficiencies in the way the State delivers services. For these reasons and the others outlined above, I firmly oppose L.D. 1932 and respectfully urge you to sustain my veto.
Sincerely,
John E. Baldacci
Governor
In the News
Falmouth/SAD 51 has a completed reorganization plan that cannot get final approval until legislation is passed to allow for a local cost-sharing agreement. Officials there recently wrote to the Legislature asking for the solution, and other districts are asking for the same. Here are some recent articles about the need for the cost-sharing solution.
Lawmakers stuck on school bill, Walter Griffin, Bangor Daily News
Freeport school consolidation hinges on legislation Amy Anderson, The Forecaster
School Officials Getting Frustrated With Maine Legislature, Rhonda Erskine, WCSH
Senate to vote today on bill Cost-sharing has no opposition, Matthew Stone, Kennebec Journal
For an excellent daily source of reorganization stories in the news, visit: http://mdischools.net/#mostrecent
Question: When will the Department respond to the March 28 submissions?
Answer: For most school units that submitted a reorganization or alternative plan responses are going out in the mail on Friday, April 11. Responses have already been mailed to units that submitted letters only. The responses will include approval of 5 more alternative plans. This increases the number of approved alternative plans to 10.
Question: When will school units or groups of units that requested a change in their configuration receive a response?
Answer: Units or groups of units that requested a change in their configuration will not receive a response until after the end of the legislative session because pending actions in the Legislature may affect the response. Legislative leaders have said they plan to adjourn on April 16.
Reorganization Team Contacts
Melissa Padgett, Administrative Assistant
Jennifer Pooler, Coordinator
Ray Poulin, Project Manager
Norm Higgins, Project Manager
All four can be reached at 207-624-6802
Jim Rier, Director of School Finance,
207-624-6794
David Connerty-Marin, Director of Communications ,
207-624-6880