Welcome!

Welcome to Laurie Goodman's blog. I use this space to share news and opinions about education and schools in Ridgewood, the state of New Jersey and the nation, in addition to other issues I'm personally interested in. I invite you to share your thoughts, feelings, questions or opinions, too, by posting comments on any blog entry. Please observe basic courtesy -- keep your comments focused on issues, no personal attacks or bullying, please. Contact me directly at: lauriegood@mac.com

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Studying the brain to improve teaching and learning.

Interesting story in today's New York Times about how the human brain learns math.

An excerpt:

For much of the last century, educators and many scientists believed that children could not learn math at all before the age of five, that their brains simply were not ready.

But recent research has turned that assumption on its head — that, and a host of other conventional wisdom about geometry, reading, language and self-control in class. The findings, mostly from a branch of research called cognitive neuroscience, are helping to clarify when young brains are best able to grasp fundamental concepts.

In one recent study, for instance, researchers found that most entering preschoolers could perform rudimentary division, by distributing candies among two or three play animals. In another, scientists found that the brain’s ability to link letter combinations with sounds may not be fully developed until age 11 — much later than many have assumed.

The teaching of basic academic skills, until now largely the realm of tradition and guesswork, is giving way to approaches based on cognitive science. In several cities, including Boston, Washington and Nashville, schools have been experimenting with new curriculums to improve math skills in preschoolers. In others, teachers have used techniques developed by brain scientists to help children overcome dyslexia.

And schools in about a dozen states have begun to use a program intended to accelerate the development of young students’ frontal lobes, improving self-control in class.

“Teaching is an ancient craft, and yet we really have had no idea how it affected the developing brain,” said Kurt Fischer, director of the Mind, Brain and Education program at Harvard. “Well, that is beginning to change, and for the first time we are seeing the fields of brain science and education work together.”

The story goes on to describe several examples of innovative programs based on the science of the brain. Click here for the full article.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Superintendent Fishbein meets with Governor-elect Christie's transition team.

Last week, Superintendent Dr. Dan Fishbein was among a group of educators who met with the Governor-elect’s transition team to give input and advice on education issues that will face the new administration ASAP. The group covered many topics including special education costs, new regulations, proposed legislation (prevailing wage, instant tenure), new testing mandates, qualities to look for in a new Education Commissioner and others. The Governor-elect certainly has his work cut out for him. We’ll all be watching closely to see how he makes the most of this opportunity to make some needed changes in state education policy. I’ll keep you posted on developments...

Standardized Tests and Referendum Recovery

So, I've been a little quiet over the past week...after the months of pre-Referendum activities (including 20+ meetings with the community), I guess I was a little burned out. I’ve been focusing on holiday stuff. And my “real” job, too, (for a change, haha).

Anyway, you can expect my posts to be a little less frequent through the end of this month. I wish everyone a happy, healthy, restful and peaceful holiday season and happy new year!

I’ve been meaning to write about the District-Wide State Testing Report, which Assistant Superintendent Regina Botsford presented at the December 7 meeting. But I’ve been dragging my feet a little because I don’t like the excessive and narrow focus on standardized tests, which I sometimes see. And then the other day I heard an interview with a man who wrote an insider’s “tell-all” book on the standardized test business. Definitely got me feeling even more ambivalent on the topic.

I understand why people can get excited about test results. It’s human nature. We need to order things in the world, and we need to “place” ourselves somewhere in that order. (Bear with me on my amateur psycho-evaluation...this is just my opinion.) And of course we want to place ourselves as high as possible in the food chain. Standardized test scores come out and we immediately want to see how our students compare.

The good news is, overall our scores look good. At the elementary level, the percentage of our students who are “advanced proficient” was better than our DFG* average in every category -- Language Arts, Math and Science. At the high school, same thing. We beat our DFG average in all subjects. At the middle school, our students are basically equal to our DFG in most categories – and just below our DFG in some. It’s important to note that the gap between our scores and the DFG average is narrowing over the past few years, so that’s a good trend. When we discussed the results at the Board meeting on December 8, the general feeling was that middle school presents special challenges and even though our scores dip in grades 6-8, they “catch up” again in high school. That is one way to look at it, but I wonder why our scores dip more than the average scores in our DFG. At a future meeting, the District will present goals for every grade/school, including the middle schools, so I’ll have a chance to ask about that. Again, it does look like our middle school scores are improving relative to the average scores in our DFG, and that’s a good thing.

I've written about standardized test issues in the past. I think there's a place for them, but they need to be part of a complete assessment program. You can read a little more about summative vs. formative assessment here.

(*DFG = District Factor Group. It's the group of districts the state puts us in, based primarily on population density and community affluence. We are a "J" district and other districts in this group are Glen Rock, HoHoKus, Northern Highlands, Saddle River, Upper Saddle River, Woodcliff Lake, Millburn, West Windsor-Plainsboro, Rumson, Chatham, Mountain Lakes.)

Now about that book I mentioned. It’s called Making the Grades: My Misadventures in the Standardized Testing Industry, by Todd Farley. The author was really interesting on WNYC the other day. I’ve ordered the book and I’ll let you know what I find out. I can tell I’m not going to like it.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Ridgewood High School named Silver Medal school in U.S. News & World Report's annual rankings

In its annual ranking of the Best High Schools in the United States, U.S. News & World Report named Ridgewood High School to Silver Medal status. We were one of only two Bergen County schools ranked (Bergen Academies was ranked #39 in the nation). New Jersey was ranked #4 state overall. The rankings were based on a three-step methodology, focusing on test performance (overall and for each school's least-advantaged students) and college readiness.

I'm not generally a big fan of magazine rankings...take them with a grain of salt and remember that one of these magazines' primary goals is to sell magazines, so they will develop rankings that seem unique, and with criteria that can change from year to year. In fact, the U.S. News college rankings have generated controversy in recent years as more and more colleges ask to be excluded because they don't agree with the methodology used. I haven't heard any of any similar controversy regarding high schools.

You can read the entire High School rankings story by clicking here.

Anyway, I think our high school's achievement as a Silver Medal ranking is something to celebrate! Congratulations to Jack Lorenz and our high school staff!

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Voters approve more than $215.4 million in school construction projects

As reported by the New Jersey School Boards Association:

Voters in 11 of 15 New Jersey school districts approved more than $215.4 million in school construction projects on Tuesday, Dec. 8.

School boards may hold special elections on five specific dates a year, and Tuesday was the final day for a school board to schedule a referendum in 2009. This year, voters approved school-construction proposals in 48 of 66 communities, for a success rate of 72.7 percent, one of the highest approval rates recorded during the past 11 years. The average success rate during the previous four years has hovered around 62 percent.

The 15 districts holding bond referendums on Tuesday proposed a total of $237 million in school construction. Energy-saving initiatives continued to be popular, as seven of the 15 referendums asked voters to approve solar panels; six of the projects with solar energy components were approved.

Of the $215.4 million that was approved in the 11 districts, nearly $68 million will be covered by state funds, either through up-front grants, annual “debt service aid” payments, or rebates through the state’s Clean Energy program.

The next date on which a school board may schedule a bond referendum question is Jan. 26.

Statewide results from Tuesday’s school construction proposals:

ATLANTIC COUNTY
Estell Manor – REJECTED
Renovations, including HVAC, electrical, and installing a geothermal system
Total amount – $3,105,636
Amount eligible for state funding – $1,367,192

BERGEN COUNTY
Edgewater – PASSED (both questions)
Proposal 1: Demolish the George Washington School and construct new elementary school
Total amount – $28,250,000
Amount eligible for state funding – $ 1,179,750

Proposal 2 (contingent upon the passage of Proposal 1)
Install solar panels at Eleanor Van Gelder School
Total amount – $478,400
Amount eligible for state funding – $191,360

Hasbrouck Heights – REJECTED
Relocation of main office and several classrooms for security reasons at two elementary schools; replacement of heating systems at two elementary schools, the middle school and high school
Total amount – $4,728,712
Amount eligible for state funding – $1,891,484

RidgewoodPASSED
Renovate high school, including field improvements; additions and/or renovations to eight other schools, with projecting ranging from new roofs to installation of a new track
Total amount – $48,265,314
Amount eligible for state funding – $9,844,712

BURLINGTON COUNTY
Bordentown Regional – PASSED
Renovations to the high school complex, including solar panels, reconstruction of athletic fields, lighting and other work
Total amount – $8,499,975
Amount eligible for state funding – $2,620,936

Mansfield Township – PASSED (both questions)
Proposal 1: Roof replacement at elementary school
Total amount – $639,300
Amount eligible for state funding – $255,720

Proposal 2 (Contingent upon passage of Proposal 1: Install solar panels at elementary school
Total amount – $1,229,424
Amount eligible for state funding – $ 491,770

Springfield Township – REJECTED
Renovations including installing solar panels at elementary school
Total amount – $11,083,227
Amount eligible for state funding – $3,776,565

CAMDEN COUNTY
Berlin Township – PASSED
Roof replacement, renovations to HVAC at two schools; roof replacement at administration building
Total amount – $6,580,995
Amount eligible for state funding – $3,246,206

CAPE MAY COUNTY
Woodbine – PASSED
Install solar panels at elementary school
Total amount – $3,682,665
Amount eligible for state funding – $2,145,745

CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Fairfield Township – PASSED
Addition and renovations to elementary school
Total amount – $3,984,772
Amount eligible for state funding – $1,984,772

ESSEX COUNTY
Livingston Township – PASSED (both questions)
Proposal 1: Renovations to six elementary schools and two middle schools
Total amount – $55,996,572
Amount eligible for state funding – $22,398,628

Proposal 2 (contingent upon passage of Proposal 1): Install solar panels and any necessary roof and electrical system renovations at six elementary schools, two middle schools and a high school
Total amount – $8,687,905
Amount eligible for state funding – $3,475,162

GLOUCESTER COUNTY
Delsea Regional – REJECTED
Replace roof at middle school
Total amount – $3,000,000
Amount eligible for state funding – $1,631,719

SALEM COUNTY
Quinton Township – PASSED
Improvements to elementary school, including installing solar panels
Total amount – $4,839,850
Amount eligible for state funding – $2,717,885

SOMERSET COUNTY
Montgomery Township – PASSED
Renovations to three schools, addition and renovations to one school
Total amount – $24,350,352
Amount eligible for state funding – $9,485,489

UNION COUNTY
Cranford – PASSED
Replace roofs at all schools; replace HVAC systems in three schools and boilers at three other schools.
Total amount – $19,981,269
Amount eligible for state funding – $7,992,506

Schools referendum passes 51% to 49%

It was very close, but Referendum 09 was approved by voters. Now the real work will begin as we mobilize for the many renovation and expansion projects throughout the school. Thank you to everyone who participated in the process.

The unofficial totals we got were:
2129 Yes
2047 No

This represents about 25% of the registered voters participating.

We'll get the official results certified by the county.

Details to come...and then some!

For now, though, a little sleep.

Monday, December 7, 2009

On tonight's Board of Ed agenda...

Yes, there's all kinds of activity happening within the district, besides the upcoming referendum (Vote tomorrow!). Here are some highlight's from tonight's meeting agenda:

* Choir Performance by RHS Madrigals
* Report on districtwide test scores
* Referendum update (of course!)
* Approval of new high school courses (discussed at last meeting and listed here)
* Approval of our "articulation agreement" with Bergen Community College, which allows some of our high school students to receive college credit for courses they take at RHS (cool way to make college a little easier and/or less expensive!)
* Various staff appointments, resignations, changes of assignment
* Grateful acceptance of generous donations
* Discussion of revised policies on use of school facilities
* Opportunities for Public Comment

The meeting starts at 7:30 p.m. (CORRECTION) on the 3rd floor of the Ed Center. You can watch the live webcast by clicking here, or watch the archived webcast beginning tomorrow (and fast forward through the less-than-exciting parts!).

Race to the Top or race to more problems?

In the world outside the Ridgewood referendum...
As reported in the Bergen Record, various state lawmakers are upset with Education Commissioner Lucille Davy for not getting New Jersey's application in for Federal Race to the Top education funds. It seems her office decided to leave it for the new governor's staff to handle. I'm not going to comment on the politics of all that (and you can bet it's about politics), but I'm thinking it may not be such a bad thing to drag our feet in the race to the Race. Sure, it would be great to get $200 million to $400 million from the the Federal government for NJ schools, but at what cost? The Obama administration's education policy is something our students will live with for years, and parts of it concern me:
• There's a big focus on charter schools, even though research shows that student achievement in charter schools is as mixed as it is in traditional public schools;
• I have yet to see practical, real-world description of how student test scores can be linked with teacher evaluations;
• Why would NJ want to adopt national common core standards, if many of those standards are lower than New Jersey's existing academic standards?

All I'm saying is, these things are giving me pause and hoping we can get more info/explanations/assurances. The rush to this Race to the Top reminds me of the early days of No Child Left Behind, and we know how well that turned out.

Friday, December 4, 2009

Editorial in today's Ridgewood News says "Vote YES"

Reprinted from Ridgewood News 12/4/09:

This Tuesday, village residents will be asked to approve a $48 million bond referendum to upgrade school buildings and fields. If residents approve the bond referendum, taxpayers will contribute an average of $300 per year for the next 25 years to pay it off.

There are dissenting opinions on the issue: Some residents see the project as a necessity, some want it scaled back, while others don't think now is the right time. District officials are hoping that the bond is approved, because if it is, the state will chip in about $12 million to get the projects completed.

Many Ridgewood residents are proud of their homes, making necessary upgrades and repairs to maintain the value of their properties. That same pride must be shown to the village's communal properties, including the schools.

Would a Ridgewood homeowner ignore a roof leak, rodent infestations, or crumbling walls? Highly unlikely.

Would a Ridgewood resident let a child sleep in a hallway? Probably not, but some village students are now taking classes in school hallways.

Some will argue that fiscal restraint should be shown because of the economic recession. But spending money on much-needed repairs is not frivolous - if the damage gets worse, it will cost more. And if the bond is not approved, the district will lose the state aid for the project, and may never get that money back.

Two major complaints from residents opposed to the referendum are the installation of turf fields and air conditioning in the auditorium at Benjamin Franklin Middle School (BF).

BF has the largest auditorium in all Ridgewood schools, used by Jamboree, Dad's Night and some elementary school productions. In May and June, it can be sweltering. It is often rented by outside organizations - producing income for the Board of Education - and would be more attractive to other potential renters if air conditioning were installed.

The installation of turf fields will allow the football field to be used for more than football, which is only fair for all the other Ridgewood High School teams.

Village residents will make the ultimate decision on whether this project proceeds or not. We think there are too many reasons to vote in favor of the proposal than let the opportunity slip away.

Thursday, December 3, 2009

Village is getting more $$ from County to help pay for Schedler property

Just read this good news on the Bergen Record website: Ridgewood will receive an additional $600,000 grant from Bergen County to purchase the 7-acre Schedler property, bringing the total grant aid to $1.6 million. The remaining $1.1 million will be funded through bonding.

The property, assessed at $2,598,000, is located on the east side of Route 17 and runs parallel to West Saddle River Road. Mayor David Pfund said earlier this year that the village anticipates preserving the property as open space, including (in a plan I saw) a park with fields, jogging path, benches and bathrooms.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Explanation (again) of what we currently spend on facilities and why...

For those who missed it when I wrote before (click here), it is true that a school district may budget to put money into a capital reserve account, creating a fund that is accumulated for a “rainy day.” Our District established a capital reserve fund in 2000. We have funded it and, most recently, we used money from this account last year to do repairs on the 1919 roof at RHS. But in recent years, we have not been able to budget additional funds for capital reserve, nor have we been able to end the year with as much surplus as in the past.

Also, yes we are allowed to spend more on capital projects and maintenance within our operating budget. The only thing stopping us is...everything else. After paying our contractual obligations for salaries and benefits, and dealing with cost increases in transportation and other expenses, and staying within the state's budget growth cap of 4.0% of the tax levy (approx. 3.6% budget), the most we've been able to put toward the facilities is $2 million per year. That's a significant amount of money -- except when you consider that we have 11 old buildings to maintain totaling one million square feet. $2 million doesn't go very far. If the community wants to spend more on facilities, we will have to take the money from somewhere else. It's as simple (and as complicated) as that.

(Added 12/4/09 @ 10:50 AM)
What kind of capital and maintenance projects does the District undertake as part of our regular budget? As I wrote previously, here's a partial list of projects from this past summer/fall:

Ridgewood High School
Renovation of Guidance Suite and Grade Advisor area; Rooms 207, 211 & 112. (Note, the Guidance area had water damage, crumbling plaster, dingy paint...now it's a great showcase for visiting college admissions folks and parents.)
Renovation of North Stair Tower (the one I used to say looked like a ghetto movie set)
Repair of Lockers in Boys' Locker Room
Installed flooring in ancillary weight room
Installed 600+ new lockers
Locker room showers, more roof replacement and bathroom renovations going out to bid

Hawes
New fencing
New lighting in gym

Orchard
Fencing
New lighting in gym
Sidewalk (donated by HSA)

Willard
Renovation of art room
Outside lighting improvements

Travell
Gym renovation -- tile & lighting
Outside lighting improvement

GW
Replaced 4 classroom carpets with tile floors
Refinished Gym and Band Room floors
Roof repairs
Fencing
Bathroom renovations -- going to bid

Glen
Gym window wall replacement -- going to bid
Exterior door and electrical upgrades -- going to bid

BF
Roof repairs
Improved electrical in library and computer labs
Fencing
Roofing & door projects to be bid

Ridge
Renovated gym (floor and lighting)
Drainage in front of building
Door project -- going to bid

Somerville
Renovated cafeteria
Removed wall between 2 classrooms; replace with foldable wall
Fencing
Partial roof replacement (over gym)

Any questions, please comment or email me directly lauriegood@mac.com.

Report says "no evidence that Ridgewood synthetic turf field poses a threat to environment, flood plain or children."

For anyone with questions about the benefits/risks of artificial turf in Ridgewood, the following recent press release from REAC (Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee) should be helpful (bold or italic sections are my highlights).

11-30-09 Ridgewood, NJ: In November 2009, the Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee (R.E.A.C.) released its environmental, health and safety assessment of the synthetic field at Maple Park. The assessment may be accessed at R.E.A.C.’s website by clicking here.

Three years ago, Ridgewood replaced a grass field at Maple Park with a synthetic field manufactured by FieldTurf. Media reports of concerns over synthetic turf fields in NJ received national attention in 2008, prompting REAC to form a sub-committee to conduct a 10-month assessment of whether these concerns affect the residents of Ridgewood. R.E.A.C. focused on identifying the most current and objective information on synthetic turf, in order to provide an unbiased reference resource for the residents of the Village of Ridgewood.

R.E.A.C.’s assessment focused only on concerns, which are applicable in Ridgewood and are specific to the synthetic “infill” turf field design at Maple Park. Much of the information presented in the assessment was derived from actual testing at Maple Park, some of which was previously not available.

The assessment also includes test results and commentary from government sources, including the NJ Dept. of Environmental Protection, NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, NYS Dept. of Health, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and California Environmental Protection Agency. Other important sources include the American Journal of Sports Medicine, British Journal of Sports Medicine, the Clean Washington Center (CWC), Penn State University Center for Sports Surface Research, Ridgewood Dept. of Parks & Recreation, RHS Athletic Dept. and RHS Director of Health & Wellness. There are extensive video and website links incorporated into the assessment, which may be of interest to Ridgewood residents.

The assessment is intended to be a living document that can be modified as new credible information becomes available. The overall conclusions from the assessment are that there is no evidence that the synthetic field at Maple Park poses a threat to the environment, the flood plain around the park or children, who use the field. In addition, the assessment highlights a number environmental and functional advantages that have been realized locally and beyond Ridgewood, as a result of the field installation. R.E.A.C. notes that it did not consider financial costs or potential savings associated with the field when conducting its assessment, as these were beyond the environmental, heath and safety scope of the assessment.

The R.E.A.C. is an independent volunteer committee, appointed by the Village Council, with experience and/or interest in environmental issues. REAC advises the Village Council on environmental, health and human safety issues in Ridgewood. It also seeks to assist the residents of Ridgewood in addressing environmental concerns by advocating “best practices”, which protect the environment, respect the ecosystem and promote sustainability.

For additional information, please contact John Halenar with R.E.A.C. at johnhalenar@yahoo.com.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Good questions & answers at last night's community meeting

I'd say there were about 30 people at last night's community meeting on the referendum. Many people brought questions, which Dr. Fishbein and Board of Education members answered. Most of the questions focused on trying to find alternatives to the $48 million bond referendum to address our facilities needs. The trouble is, there really are not many alternatives. To put it bluntly, it sucks that we have to do this, but the system is currently set-up so that the only way to accomplish major capital work is via bonds, which must be approved by voters.

Have we explored all our options? I believe we have.

To reiterate some of the suggestions/alternative solutions I've heard:

* Budget significantly more in capital work within our regular operating budget? Can't do it without removing programs or otherwise impacting daily education activities.

* Budget significantly more in capital work by increasing our regular operating budget? Not allowed, due to the state's budget cap.

* Get corporations to sponsor building projects (to create the RHS Pepsi Stadium or the Hawes Verizon Wing)? Companies aren't doing those types of donations anymore.

* Get the work done with our customary $2 million per year for capital and maintenance? Unfortunately, $2 million does not go very far when we have 11 buildings (One million square feet!) and a single school roof can cost $2 million.

* Split out the fields (or some other project) from this referendum? Too late. The ballot question is locked in.

* Re-open Glen School and redistrict? Re-opening Glen would require construction at Glen to add a cafeteria, library, art room and music room. We would need to hire a principal, secretary, nurse, art teacher and librarian, adding hundreds of thousands of dollars to our operating budget every year. Re-opening Glen would not address the needs at GW and RHS. And re-opening Glen does not address our wellness/athletics needs.

Those are the most comment suggestions. I wish some of them would work. But unfortunately, the way school funding is set up, and with the budget cap, bonds, voted by referendum, are the only way to do major facilities work.