Administrative Plan Draws Parent Support, Teacher Opposition

by Judy Silberstein

EDITOR'S NOTE: PTA leaders speaking at the meeting, were either speaking for their executive boards or for themselves and not on behalf of their memberships. The article has been edited to reflect that. We apologize for earlier inaccuracies.

(February 28, 2007) Mamaroneck School Superintendent Dr. Paul Fried formally outlined and filled in details of the administrative restructuring plan he began discussing last month. (See: Schools Supt. Proposes Major Administrative Restructuring.) The presentation, held at the Tuesday, February 27 School Board meeting, was limited to explanation and commentary on the plan that has generated considerable support from parent leaders and objections from the teachers.

The Plan

Superintendent Fried outlined his administrative restructuring proposal and promised there was still time for for input.

The restructuring plan calls for adding four new administrative positions and modifying three others to provide additional support as a growing numbers of teachers and students grapple with the ever more complex curriculum. According to Dr. Fried, between 1998 and 2006, enrollment at the middle and high school grew 30%, adding a total of 595 students. At the same time, the faculty grew by 28%, or 51 positions, without the addition of any new administrators. The plan is aimed at both enhancing professional development and responding to parent concerns for greater consistency across classrooms and grades.

Calling the current department chairs and coordinators “excellent,” Dr. Fried said they just don’t have the time to handle the increasingly complicated job or to coordinate and align curriculum across two separate buildings.

Content Directors: His plan would eliminate most department chairs and add four content specific directors with supervisory responsibilities for English, science, social studies and math at the middle and high schools. The special education chairs would remain in their current status; the world languages chairs would also remain and would retain their stipends but teach a full load.

A district-wide director for cultural arts would replace the current music coordinators at the elementary and secondary levels. Because Dr. Fried expects this new director to have a music/drama background, he proposes retaining the high school art department chair, who would receive a stipend but no release time.

A New Assistant Superintendent: The plan also adds a new assistant superintendent for student support services, which would replace the current director of special education and also oversee “504” plans and health services (now covered by the director responsible for health education, physical education and athletics). The new assistant superintendent would also supervise a new director of counseling for grades 6 to 12, who would replace the current high school guidance department chair.

Costs: The new plan comes with new costs, which are balanced to some extent by savings from eliminating current administrative and department chair positions. First year costs for the new assistant superintendent and six directors were estimated at $940K. This is balanced against an approximate $689K of savings for a net cost around $350K. (Having the content directors teach 1 period per day would yield an additional $110K in savings but would require teachers agreeing to a change in their contract – something they are not currently supporting.)

Why Now and Why “Top Down”?

Dr. Fried, acknowledged a criticism of the plan as being “top down.”

“I stand guilty as charged,” he apologized, vowing to revert to his more typical collaborative approach going forward. However, he said, he would not be fulfilling his role as the district’s leader if he failed to act now.

Dr. Fried suggested that the timing of the initiative was motivated in part by retirements in key positions. The current director of special education, Peter Berendt is retiring this year as is the chair of the MHS counseling department, Paul Martin, leaving an opportunity to make changes without displacing tenured employees. Existing staff are welcome to apply for the new positions, but applicants must be certified as both supervisors and teachers.

Response From Parents & Teachers

Judging from responses of the 25 speakers who had lined up to comment on the plan, there appears to be universal consensus in support of adding the new assistant superintendent position. There was also support for the entire package from heads of PT Council, MHS PTSA, Hommocks PTA and SEPTA, the special education PTA.

Liz Licio, speaking for the MHS PTSA Executive Board, listed several advantages of the plan, including opportunities to improve students’ transition from the Hommocks to the high school; greater consistency; and enhanced teacher development. Susan Lewen, speaking for PT Council said, “We believe the additional support benefits teachers and students.” Nancy Pierson, from SEPTA commended the superintendent for his support. “Paul shares our belief that all children can learn; this plan will benefit all our children,” she said, referring specifically to the addition of the assistant superintendent.

“We do a lot of things really well,” said Melany Gray, the Hommocks PTA president who stressed she was speaking only for herself, “but there are things we can do better.” In particular, parents are concerned about consistency, for example, when some classes get more grammar instruction or are graded more harshly or have a new teacher who is behind on preparing students for a common mid-term exam. The new directors would address these issues at the middle and high school, leaving Annie Zimmer to continue addressing consistency across the four elementary schools. The proposal is the “very logical next step to” improving the system, she said.

While the PTA leaders praised the superintendent for his “courage” and plan, one “unaffiliated resident” speaking only for himself was more skeptical. Burt Corwin, whose three children graduated recently from MHS, suggested there was a greater need for mentoring, not administration, of new teachers. He said the proposal would be costly and would require “some hard choices” elsewhere since the community was “not a bottomless money pit” and recent 10% tax hikes “are not sustainable.”

His views were more in line with the teachers, who had organized themselves to present various objections to the proposal and the way it had been developed.

As presaged by Dr. Fried’s apology, teachers objected to the “top down” plan. Nick Cuccchiarella, the coordinator of the MHS APPLE program, commended the superintendent for “honestly recognizing” institutional shortcomings, but added that without teacher input, the plan fell short. He said teachers had been “blindsided” with the “unilaterally developed vision for change” and were longing for opportunities to be involved in making excellence happen.

A number of teachers objected to adding more administrators. Jon Murray, an MHS art teacher for 29 years, said “a new tier of administrators would move precious resources in the wrong direction – away from students and away from the classroom.” He suggested keeping the department chairs but enhancing their effectiveness by giving them more release time.

Bob Morrissey, the Hommocks English department chair, worried that the supervisors would necessarily have a high school, “AP oriented” perspective that would push the middle school away from its nurturing of young adolescents and towards becoming “just a prep school for MHS.

Other teachers suggested alternate means of accomplishing the stated goals. Linda Sherwood, an MHS English teacher, offered multiple ideas: using consultants to quickly align the curriculum without adding new tenure track positions; paying master staff to align curriculum and mentor new teachers “in a more cohesive way at a fraction of the cost;” or starting with just two new administrators and assessing the results before going further.

Nick Kourabas, an MHS counselor, questioned requiring the new counseling director to have supervisory credentials, which would lead to a “tiny pool of candidates” and exclude all of the current Mamaroneck counselors. Instead of adding a new layer of administrators he would like the funds go towards hiring a new counselor. Val Etra, the head of the MHS science department, said 25% of the science classes had more than 24 students, the "safe limit" for a lab. She worried about the district affording to hire needed new teachers.

There was also fear that supervisors would be intimidating and stifle the ways teachers share and support each other. Susan Allen, an MHS math teacher and former administrator, said teachers would lose an “unfettered ability to have forthright and genuine discussions” if forced to meet with supervisors who are “expected to provide formal feedback to higher levels of administration.”

Dr. Fried concurred with the goal of adding counseling staff. A new counselor was added in 2006-2007 and he expects another one to be added in 2008-2009 budget. He was distressed, however, to hear that teachers did not believe they could continue working collaboratively with each other at the same time as they worked with administrators. “This plan is about support,” he said.

Going Forward

By the time all the speakers had come to the podium, it was almost midnight. The board took no action and none is required until they begin the process of approving the 2007-2008 budget.

The new positions will definitely be imbedded in the superintendent’s budget, to be unveiled on March 6. However, both School Board President Cecilia Absher and Superintendent Fried promised there would be ample opportunity for further “conversation and adjustment” before the board adopts its final budget on April 17.

“What’s clear to me is we have terrific schools and a terrific school system,” said Dr. Fried, contacted on Wednesday for comment. “But after a lot of listening and a lot of studying, I feel we need to move ahead. To do this we need to nudge -- changing the school culture is vital and this plan is one way to do that.”

Was he open to alternatives? “I’m sure there are other ways – we’re very interested in hearing from our teachers and listening to other proposals. Merging of my ideas with other ideas is a possibility,” he said. “What isn’t acceptable is doing nothing.”

Front Page

Print This Page
Email this page