Dawn,

At least you now know at least one of the 'non-Ormsby' school committee members occasionally reads this dicsussion even if he/she does not deign to reply in this forum.

I guess I am confused. The discussion is not about how newspapers report. Newspapers always report to appeal to their readers. It's their job. Look at how the NY times favors Obama over McCain. That is the nature of the news outlets.

The real issue is the HS and the release date of information.

Oh and Bill is right. The information needs to be shared. Silence is not the answer. Lack of information leads to specualtion.

Dear Readers,

Here’s my take on the accreditation news: the School Department had an obligation to disclose the warning status immediately. I would like to hear from Dr. Marini why he did not disclose the news in May.

I would also like to know why not one single School Committee member asked him that during Tuesday night’s meeting.

As I’ve said before, NAU starts from the assumption that our municipal leaders are doing the best they can, but we nudge when we think they’re wavering from the course.

I’m nudging now.

I know personally how important that news was and is, especially to parents of this year’s entering eighth graders. If their parents are concerned about accreditation and want to consider moving their children to private high school next year, they should have been doing their due diligence over the summer, possibly completing some of the school interviews, and gathering applications and setting up standardized testing registrations. Now, if they want to take that route, they’re already behind.

Public schools DO compete with private schools, and every student they lose results in the loss of state funding. Doesn’t it make more sense to disclose the info up front and reassure parents that the problem is being addressed in a proactive manner, instead of risking losing credibility [again] and effectively steering more students out the public school door?

I do think that every step the school administration has taken since they received the warning notice has been right on track and I have high hopes that Dr. Scuzzarella will resolve the issue(s) she thinks she can resolve.

In the meantime, I have posted a second but related topic thread under the website’s town government child board. It’s titled, “When do citizens have a right to know?” Hope you’ll check it out and respond with your thoughts. I remain hopeful that our elected and employed leaders will read the thread and take the info to heart [perhaps post a response themselves?].

Sincerely,
Sandy Gleed

beautifully stated. As usual you were far more eloquent and PC than I! The facts are that the information was not disclosed and the SC didn't question anything. I know I was left to wonder and speculate. Seems fair to ask for honest answers. If I can be taken to task for posting my assumptions based on lack of info from school leaders, so should they be taken to task for failure to provide the info that leads to speculation.

In general, I think Marini does try to do the right thing. Perhaps he thought this was a misunderstanding that he could easily clear up with a visit to NEASC. If so, that should be public along with an apology for making assumptions. I took my spoonful of medicine and publicly posted my erroneous conjecture and I expect no less from leaders in this town. If the expectation from the SC was that I publicly correct my error, my expectation of the SA/SC is that they do the same.

I have a lot more respect for an honest mistake than the silent treatment. Frankly, a big part of my assumption that the SC had participated in wrong doing has been their silent disregard for questions or inquiries they don't care to answer accompanied by their policy that makes public participation at SC meetings virtually impossible. As Dan Murphy once stated, we do our business in public, ugly or not. If you don't want to partake in public information sharing don't serve on a public board and don't lash out at informed citizens trying to obtain information or advocate for their cause.

I hope that the right decision will be made and if not, I will take solace in the fact that I remedied my own actions and can sleep well tonight. I will also assume that I will not incur backlash for my child's NCLB placement because I have exercised my right to freedom of speech.

In regard to NCLB and AYP, that information should be available Monday or Tuesday. I have read the NCLB guidelines cover to cover and I am better educated than most on NCLB regulations. If you have NCLB questions, I am happy to share information. Feel free to contact me.

Best regards to all and many thanks to Don Romano for maintaining this site and Sandy Gleed for her many efforts on behalf of the citizens of North Andover.

I called the DOE today and they told me AYP results will be available mid-day on Monday via the website portal.

From today's ET editorial pages: http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_238014953.html

Tommy Duggan also spread the gossip he heard about all this: http://www.valleypatriot.com/WCAP/082308a.mp3

In addition to getting into how and why the information go out when it did (TD was told that the ET was tipped off on the warning status from someone in the school dept, then the ET approached the Superintendent for confirmation ...), he says the School Committee all say they found out at last week's school committee meeting. He's skeptical that this is the case.

Best wishes,
ahbgone

I haven't seen any results for 2008 yet. Will this info be open to the general public or will you need a password given to school administration?

Thomson has failed. See official notice on NAPS website.

<www.northandoverpublicschools.com>

QUOTE:
Dear Parent or Guardian:

The Department of Education notified the district today that the Thomson School has been identified for “improvement” in English language arts for the aggregate under the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). --V Marini 8/25/08 - NAPS website

Translation from the CYA Bureaucratese: Thomson children in the "White" category failed to acheive AYP for the second year in a row.

How bad were the scores? That's not even mentioned. Even if the 'official' scores won't be released until October, it'd be nice to know the extent of the 'improvement' needed.

QUOTE:
They're waiting for specific data on how close the school came to meeting it annual yearly progress goals. - Eagle Tribune 8/26/08

I guess the state didn't tell the administration the actual scores. We have to wait...

In today's E-T, Supt. Marini makes a public acknowledgement that his NAHS accreditation issue should have been made public much sooner. I give him credit for taking accountabilty and being honest.
http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_240011234.html

Since most documents are in electronic form these days, why not make the report public so we all can read it?

Best wishes,
ahbgone

Good point...but it also depends on which report you're talking about...

NEASC seems to be a private member organization, so that's probably why their reports (and warning letters) are not public: http://www.neasc.org/about_us/mission/

Several articles have mentioned this, and I think it is worth understanding: at present, NAHS is accredited and remains so (as stated on the NEASC website). Warning status, as I understand it, means there are current problem areas, which could possibly place accreditation status in jeopardy if not corrected (but the timetable is not made clear to us).

The AYP and MCAS reports are handled by the Mass DOE, so those reports are public, and available online. However -- the reports for 2008 MCAS aren't available until October (so the reports online right now are for 2007 MCAS scores).