We have made it no secret that we have been less than impressed with the Special, Education services that Mystic Valley offers. While we believe that the Special Education teachers per se are not the problem (although they could take on a more collaborative approach to teaching by working WITH the classroom teachers rather than independently), we do feel that the department is incredibly lacking due to the lack of leadership on the part of Kathy Kinnon. We have seen their IEP's and find them lacking in substance and in addressing each childs individual needs (too many of their IEP's state the same goals and objectives regardless of the child). Since we know that parents are left to the information that is provided to them by Kathy Kinnon (and Chris Finn when they question or challenge their childs progression and need to be reminded that 'they have other options and MVRCS isn't for everyone'), we thought we'd provide some insight from a well-educated, experienced individual with real Special Education knowledge. We hope this helps parents who are in the process of updating their childs IEP and/or those who do not feel that their childs IEP is adequate. Remember, you may request an additional meeting to address IEP's at any time should you have concerns or do not feel as though your child is progressing under their current IEP.

From WrightsLaw: http://www.wrightslaw.com/info/goals.lesson.heitin.htm

Writing IEP Goals

by Ruth Heitin, Ph.D., Educational Consultant

Creating an IEP with a team of people who are all there to design a good educational program for one unique child can be a pleasure. It can also be very productive. When the whole team has the same level of understanding about IEPs, it is even better. Sounds like crazy talk? Just ask those who have seen it happen. The big winner here is the child.

A Lesson in Writing IEP Goals
An IEP is good educational programming. Good IEPs set the standard for good education. Each part of the IEP addresses an important part of educational planning. The IEP team focuses on the unique educational needs of an individual student. The goals reflect the child’s needs. Designing well-formed goals is an important part of writing an IEP.

“How do I find examples of good IEP goals?”

Marie, the mother who asked this question, had attended several IEP meetings for her child. She did not think the goals the IEP team proposed were good. Yet, she didn’t know what good IEP goals look like.

If you are a teacher, you may have the same questions. Good IEPs set the standard for good teaching. Each part of the IEP addresses an important part of educational planning.

IEP goals must be individualized. Rather than relying on sample goals, you need to learn how to write IEP goals that meet the unique needs of a particular child.

Goals
We all set goals for ourselves, whether we are aware of it or not. Our goals can be as simple as getting to work on time. They can be as complex as budgeting our expenses. We know what we need to do, and we set out to do it.

An IEP goal is not unlike a personal goal. With an IEP goal, we create an educational program for a child with special needs. An IEP goal describes what we hope the child will achieve, or the intended outcome of instruction.

The outcome is stated as an action we expect to see. Goals must be measured in an objective way. We have to be able to see the action or count it or score it. When we state goals clearly as actions, measuring progress comes naturally from the goal. A goal must establish a criterion for acceptable mastery.

In short, when we write instructional goals we have to know what the child needs to learn and what action we want to see. We have to measure progress toward the goal. Finally, we set a level of mastery that we expect.

We use standardized tests and informal assessments to measure a child’s progress toward the goals. We can do tallies or checklists or give tests specific to the action we seek. Anyone who looks at the measurement should be able to understand it. And, all those who review the measurement should be able to come to the same conclusion.

Learning how to write individualized IEP goals is an important first step in developing your child’s IEP. IEP goals should also be SMART and based on good educational practice.

SMART IEP goals are:
Specific
Measurable
Use Action words
Realistic
Time-limited

Educational research will help you identify essential skills in the core academic subjects of reading, writing, and math. When you know the sequence of skills for a subject, you will know how skills build on each other. You can identify gaps in skills – skills that your child hasn’t mastered and needs to learn.

Think about how children learn math. A child learns how to add and subtract. Then he is ready to learn how to multiply and divide.

Before you can develop measurable IEP goals, the child’s skills must be measured objectively. Objective data about a child’s skills are the baselines for goals. This data also should show progress, or lack of it, when measured over time.

We tend to use the terms “goal” and “objective” to mean the same thing. In IEPs, there is a distinction between them. We write annual goals. Objectives are the short-term steps to reach goals.

Reading
In 2000, the report of experts on the National Reading Panel explained the research in reading. This included more than 10,000 research studies. All this information helped form a better understanding of reading and what works in teaching (see www.nationalreadingpanel.org/publications/researchread.htm). The findings from the research changed reading instruction forever. In 2001, Congress passed No Child Left Behind (see www.wrightslaw.com/nclb). The results of the research were included there, too.

Reading instruction requires explicit, intensive, and systematic instruction in the five necessary components of reading instruction:

Phonemic Awareness - the ability to hear and sequence sounds in spoken words.
Phonics - the relationship between the letters of written language and the sounds of spoken language.
Fluency - the ability to read text accurately and quickly.
Vocabulary - the words students must know to communicate effectively.
Comprehension - the ability to understand and gain meaning from what has been read.

Learning to read requires a child to learn specific skills in sequence. Children who have difficulty learning to read have deficiencies in phonemic awareness skills. A child with weak phonemic awareness skills will have difficulty learning phonics skills. This child will not be a fluent reader. If the child does not master phonics and fluency, he will not be able to master vocabulary and reading comprehension.

One young teacher made a banner to illustrate the sequence of reading skills. This came from the specialized program she was using. As students learned a skill, she would advance them down the banner. This made it easy for her to write specific reading goals.

Math
After children master math operations skills (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing), they learn how to use reasoning to solve word problems.

One of my clients, Jane, had this math goal in her IEP:

Jane will use problem solving strategies to solve 2 step word problems with + and – (0 – 999) and x and division (0 – 12) on 3/4 trials.

This is NOT a good IEP goal. Why not?
The intended outcome might have been for Jane to solve two-part word problems. But this goal says she needs to learn to use problem-solving strategies. The goal does not state whether she will be able to solve problems. Worse, this goal includes all math operations (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing), making the goal overly broad.

Jane’s math goal is not SMART. It is not specific or measurable. It does not use action words, and is not realistic or time-limited.

How can we revise this goal to make it SMART?

According to Jane’s IEP, using objects helps her to solve problems. A better goal for Jane might be:

Using real money, Jane will be able to show how much money she has after she receives two weeks of allowance, and how much money she will have left after she buys one object, with 75 percent accuracy measured twice weekly each quarter.

Now, the goal meets the five criteria for a SMART IEP goal.

Writing
Achievement in written language requires many skills. Mechanics help make thoughts clear. Word usage and sentence structure help make the writing interesting. Good thought expression sends the desired message.

In Jane’s IEP, her writing goal read:

Jane needs to write a paragraph, with a topic sentence and at least 4 detail sentences, on one given topic using her editing checklist measured twice monthly.

So, if Jane writes that paragraph, has she achieved that goal?

By the way it was written, the intended outcome is that Jane only “needs” to write a paragraph to meet the goal.

A better writing goal for Jane is:

Jane will write and edit a five-sentence paragraph that addresses a given subject twice a month. Each paragraph will include a topic sentence, at least four details and a conclusion. She will earn a score of 75 percent or higher on a writing rubric for each writing assignment. There will be at least four writing assignments per quarter.

Tip: Rubrics are useful scoring tools that measure a child’s progress. A writing rubric includes the criteria and standards used to assess a child’s performance on writing assignments.

The revised goal is specific and measurable. It uses action words, is realistic, and time-limited. The revised goal is SMART!

DESE 'Common Criteria' - For All Schools EXCEPT MVRCS!

We came across the following information at (http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/guides/commoncriteria.pdf) and thought that it was interesting and worth sharing. The document that it was contained in was described as the ‘common school performance criteria’ from the DESE. Given our most recent blog regarding what we felt to be a less than adequate concern level on behalf of Jeff Wulfson at the DESE, it is interesting to see what MVRCS SHOULD be being evaluated on.  

Comments we found most interesting have been bolded while our comments are in red.

The Common School Performance Criteria (Criteria) have been developed using the three guiding areas of charter school accountability defined in the current regulations, 603 CMR 1.00 – faithfulness to charter, academic success, and organizational viability.

The purposes of the Criteria are:

to bring alignment to the criteria used across all aspects of charter school accountability, from the application process to the renewal process;

to provide charter schools with clear guidance about how the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (Department) defines charter school success and on what basis charter schools will be evaluated; and

to clarify the connections between charter school accountability and state and federal accountability standards.

There is a wide range of sources of evidence that will provide the data to help charter schools, the Charter School Office, and the Commissioner and Board of Elementary and Secondary Education know if a charter school has met performance expectations. A partial list of evidence sources is attached after the Criteria.

            Unfortunately, the wide range of sources that are listed at the end of this document DO NOT include concerned parents other than those chosen by the school to participate in an interview.

Mission, Vision, and Educational Philosophy
The school is faithful to the mission, vision and educational philosophy defined in the charter application and any subsequent approved amendment(s).

           We once again find ourselves drawn to the Mission Statement from the 2003-2004 Annual Report and wonder how true the Board is staying to their original mission statement. If, as is stated below, ‘that a first rate education is the birthright of every child’ then why is has the lottery and waitlist come under such scrutiny these past few years and why are only certain families permitted entry? We’re also not seeing anything in this mission statement (or even the most recent one) pertaining to creating a school that places athletic facilities above academic needs.

MISSION STATEMENT
To establish a school which provides the opportunity of a world-class education. The prime characteristics being a well mannered disciplined and structured academic environment. One which promotes and incorporates certain core virtues, as well as, our common American culture, both which are embodied in our Declaration of Independence and our United States Constitution.
The Mystic Valley Regional Charter School was founded on the following principal:

·          That a first-rate education is the birthright of every child,

·          That all children can learn,

·         That every child should be challenged to reach his or her full potential.

The overachieving goals of the school are to:
•
Demonstrate the heights of academic achievement that public schools can routinely attain when the advantages of charter school governance are coupled with new academic standard,
•
Offer area families new choices in public education,
•
Create new professional opportunities for teachers that permit them to succeed,
•
Graduate well educated, civic minded, principal adults capable of thoughtful, logical reasoning.

AYP
The school makes Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) in the aggregate and for all statistically significant sub-groups.3
The school does not have a status for accountability purposes of Improvement, Corrective Action, or Restructuring.

          But the school does, and has had a status of Corrective Action and/or Restructuring yet nothing is done about it.

Diverse learners
The school provides services for all students, including English language learners and those with disabilities and/or special education needs, as required by law.
The school implements and follows a Department approved recruitment and retention plan.

            Yes, another big one in our book. The DESE has ruled in a hearing that MVRCS was not providing an adequate education for a student, parents and teachers have filed numerous complaints with the DESE, and we have been in contact on several occasions YET NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

As for the ‘approved recruitment and retention plan’, the DESE has ‘directed’ MVRCS to place recruitment ads in languages other than English yet to our knowledge, they have not.

Professional climate
Teachers are provided with feedback and guidance that leads to improved instructional practice and student achievement.

Teachers can’t approach any Administrator at the school for assistance without it being used against them. Teachers receive less than adequate training and guidance in issues pertaining to Special Education matters.
The school implements a professional development plan that effectively addresses the needs of teachers.

Little attention is given to ‘professional development’ other than the hearing more of the same from the Administration. At no time do they have outside speakers come in to speak on matters that would matter or make a difference to the teachers professionally.

Teachers are provided with structures for collaboration.
The school establishes a professional climate resulting in a purposeful learning environment and reasonable rates of retention for school administrators, teachers and staff.

The retention issue at MVRCS is as joke. With Neil Kinnon believing a monkey could do what teachers do, it is no wonder that they feel underappreciated and disrespected. Again, the only retention plan in place is to hire and retain as many friends and family members as possible – regardless of their abilities or qualifications.

Curriculum
The school’s curriculum is documented, articulates the skills and concepts that all students must know and be able to do to meet state standards, is aligned horizontally and vertically, and supports opportunities for all students to master these skills and concepts.

The part we find interesting here is ‘ALL STUDENTS’….yes, Kathy Kinnon that means those students that have IEP’s and require additional services. Unfortunately we’ve been noting how few of the Special Education students actually pass the MCAS tests.

Decision making and communication
The school has clear and well-understood systems for decision-making and communication. These systems result in a common sense of purpose for all school constituencies.
               

                A ‘clear and well-understood systems for decision-making’ ----yes, all decisions are made by Neil Kinnon and based on his many years of formal education and training within an educational setting. Oh yes, that’s right, he doesn’t have ANY formal education or training in School Administration OR teaching (in fact, he doesn’t have any respect for the profession of teaching!).

Roles and responsibilities
The school defines and delineates clear roles and responsibilities among board and staff.

In one of the annual reviews the reviewer made mention of his concern for the lack of delineation between the Board and the day to day operations of the school.

Board oversight
The board of trustees makes use of best practices to hire (an) effective school leader(s).

Yes, friends and family members who agree to follow the orders of Neil Kinnon
The board of trustees regularly and systematically assesses the performance of (the) school leader(s) against clearly defined goals and makes effective and timely use of the evaluations.

Yes, the Board assesses the performance of school leaders in a very unbiased, honest, and ethical manner……EXCEPT of course those members of the friends and family club. How  Neil Kinnon can assess his sister in law , brother, childhood friend, friends of friends, etc. in an unbiased, truthful, ethical manner is beyond us…..because it doesn’t happen!

The board of trustees operates with a clear set of goals for the school and has developed a set of tools for understanding progress toward meeting those goals.

The board of trustees manages the school in a manner that ensures academic success, organizational viability, and faithfulness to the terms of its charter.

Is a response even necessary for this one? As long as you leave out corruption, unethical behavior, conflicts of interest, putting sports before academics, and back room deals, no comments are required.

School leadership
School leaders administer the school in a manner that ensures academic success, organizational viability, and faithfulness to the terms of its charter.

Are we referring to Dr. McCleary who is given little say beyond the art that is placed on the walls or Chris Finn who has the job only as a result of his childhood friendship with Neil Kinnon (yes, a Business Manager would naturally progress into an Assistant Director position - - - right?). Oh, what about Kathy Kinnon who does little besides make sure she is at the Chinese Buffet on Chinese New Years? Note to Kathy Kinnon….faithfulness to the terms of the charter would mean that all the students receive an education, even those who are on your poorly written IEP’s.

Organizational planning
The school has realistic plans for program improvement, possible future expansion, and adequate facilities based on evaluation and analysis of data.

We like ‘adequate facilities’ on this one….yes, they’ll have adequate athletic facilities and really, who cares about adequate facilities at the lower campus. So they’re a little cramped in there, just think how great it will be to have a state of the art athletic facility for yet another friend or family member to manage!

Family engagement
The school involves parents/guardians as partners in the education of their children.
Families and students are satisfied with the school’s program.

Yes, parents are partners as long as they remember that Neil Kinnon has the final say and that he ‘doesn’t have to have open meetings’ for them.

Coordinated Program Review

The school receives minimal findings in the Coordinated Program Review (CPR) process and immediately addresses any areas of non-compliance.

Funny, some issues have been addressed and re-addressed in multiple year visits yet no corrective action has been taken. Board of Trustees issue for one.

Safety
The school establishes and maintains a physically safe environment for students and staff.
The school establishes an environment free from harassment and discrimination for students and staff, and effectively addresses the social, emotional, and health needs of its students.

No discrimination in this school but if a student does do well they use systematic elimination. That isn’t discrimination is it….? Really?

Employee qualifications
Employees of the school meet all applicable state and federal qualifications and standards.

Ok so only 55% of the teachers are truly qualified (i.e. certified to teach in Massachusetts), oh well.

The Much Awaited (Practically Demanded) 10th Grade Analysis

A reader has been posting repeatedly their insistence that our failure to include the 2010 MCAS scores for the 10^th grade is unfair and because it isn’t in alignment with our needs or ‘thesis’.  We didn’t initially provide the data as we felt that since the results were included in the Annual Report and we gave them credit for the student’s performance in English Language Arts and Math that it wasn’t alarming nor did they constitute as a parent concern.  Alternatively, the Science/Technology MCAS scores were less than impressive both independently and in comparison to the other sending districts. In response to their posting, we did do the analysis which we initially provided within the blog posting and in direct response to their posted comment.  Unfortunately the reader continues to feel as though we have slighted the accomplishments of the students and school. As a result of their ranting we have decided to do as they suggest and are providing an analysis not only of the 10^th grade 2010 MCAS results in comparison to the sending districts but to also provide the data for this same classes MCAS scores since 2003.

As you will see, the majority of the students did do well in the English Language Arts (84 of the 88 students) and Math (79 out of 88 students) 2010 MCAS’s. Unfortunately, 4 students did not do so well in English Language Arts (i.e. their scores indicate that their ELA levels ‘Need Improvement’ or that these students are performing below grade level) and 9 students did not do so well in Math (i.e. 8 of the students are performing below grade level and 1 student failed). Yes, lower numbers and percentages than the sending districts but we must make mention that by this time these students have attended school for nearly an entire year more than their counter-parts of sending districts.

The truly unfortunate part of this classes MCAS scores would be the Science and Technology portion. While the ELA and Math scores for MVRCS have fluctuated over the years, MVRCS has pretty consistently scored poorly within this subject matter.  Only 69 % (or 61 out of 88 students) achieved a score of Advanced or Proficient with Melrose (70%), Stoneham (78%), and Wakefield (86%) out-performing MVRCS. These other districts were able to do this with less school time and with more students. The question must then be asked if MVRCS students are excelling within some subject matters at the expense of others.

We then began an analysis of the MCAS scores for the 2010 grade 10 class since 3^rd grade (as our reader had suggested). We are including the data that we accumulated and used for our analysis as we found a number of interesting aspects. We must begin by saying that we obtained all of our information from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s website at (DESE MCAS Results). We must state that although the reader who prompted us to begin this analysis insists that the 2010 10^th grade class has a combined Advance Proficient and Proficient score of 97% (versus the 96% that we found), we were unable to locate the “new link to the State for the 10^th grade they just put up”. What we did find was that for the 2010 year, the 10^th grade class did increase the number of students who scored Advance Proficient and Proficient from 69% to 96% between the time this class took their 3^rd grade MCAS scores (in 2003 when they were in 3^rd grade) and their 10^th grade MCAS scores. What we also found interesting for this group was the total number of students who participated each year. Specifically the fact that in 2003, when the class that was in 10^th grade during the 2009-2010 school year was in 3^rd grade, they had 120 students. Of those students, 83 students (or 69%) scored Proficient in Reading (the DESE did not indicate an Advanced Proficient rating for MVRCS during that year). Interestingly enough the total number of students in that class group declined gradually over the years with only 88 of the original 120 students remaining. It would be our guess that the remaining 32 students of the original 120 were the students that were systematically eliminated or nudged towards the door as they were not performing. The question then remains if MVRCS truly improved their score or simply continued educating those 83 students and allowing the others to fall through the cracks.

Another interesting aspect of this analysis that we feel is worth sharing is that if one looks at the Science scores for this same group of students (the students that made up the 10^th grade class during the 2009-2010 school year), they are consistently deplorable. Yes, a rise in scores and students can be seen but we should expect more students to have better scores after having almost an entire extra year of schooling than their counterparts of sending districts. We're not sure we would consider all of these results as 'staying the course' as one has suggested.

The figures in Red represent the English Language Arts and are the % of students who scored Advanced/Advanced Proficient, the High % for the sending district, and the actual number of students. The format remains the same with math displayed in blue and science in green. The last column is the total number of students within that class during that school year.

 

Our Theory - Exactly!

From Wrightslaw  http://www.wrightslaw.com/blog/?p=4470

One Person is a Fruitcake, 50 People are a Powerful Organization!

12/27/10
by Wrightslaw

Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, “What are you doing for others?” - Martin Luther King

Millions of children attend under performing schools. Millions of parents struggle to get appropriate educational services for their children.

What can you do to help these parents and children? What can you do to improve the lives and educational outcomes for children in your community?
To boost your creative thought processes, we’ll tell you what others are doing…



Loni Allen, an educational advocate from California, began a From Emotions to Advocacy group and has trained hundreds of parents.

Jackie Igafo-Te’o and Deborah Canja from Michigan built a dynamic website that is improving the lives of parents and children in the U.S. and Canada. Check out bridges4kids.org.

Not convinced that a few determined people can make a difference? Still wondering what can one person do?

Mom gathers petitions for school takeover.  CA parents force an overhaul of failing school - using a new state law to force the failing school to be taken over by a charter school operator, the first such move in the country.

If you think that you alone cannot do much to improve your school, you are probably right. You’re more likely to get what you want for your child if you work with other parents.
If you are in a school that is not parent-friendly, this is how you might be perceived.

1 person = A fruitcake
2 people = A fruitcake and a friend
3 people = Troublemakers
5 people = “Let’s have a meeting”
10 people = “We’d better listen”
25 people = “Our dear friends”
50 people = A powerful organization”

If you collaborate with other parents and organizations, you can make a difference. There is strength and power in numbers.

Source: 12 Things Parents (and Teachers) Need to Know About and Expect From Your Schools - and Yourself.  (Originally from Parent Leadership Associates)

Back to the BIG Issues at Hand

Our past few posts have taken us a bit off track and we feel that it is once again time to reiterate not only our dedication to MVRCS but to also restate the major issues and concerns that led to the creation of this blog. Many have accused us of being 'haters' of the school but nothing could be further from the truth. In September the Robert Hughes Academy Charter School in Springfield, MA was scheduled to close as a result of "mismanagement and misgovernance issues" (Hughes Charter School Must Close) after the Board of Education voted 11-0 to revoke their charter. That is exactly what we are trying to prevent through the use of this blog as a communication  vehicle> Our intent is to keep parents informed about issues and concerns that could potentially result in MVRCS facing the same type of voting situation. Yes, we could remain silent as the Board and Administration hopes that ALL parents will (and their attempts to encourage the same by limiting the information and involvement of parents) but we believe that their bad acts will eventually catch up to them and the children will ultimately suffer.Please let us know if you believe we overlooked additional issues or concerns.

A quick overview of the potentially damaging examples include:

Violation of Waitlist and Lottery Regulations

1. Relatives being re-admitted/receiving preferential treatment:
1. Finn's relatives being re-admitted;
2. Gennetti's relatives being re-admitted;
3. Questions regarding residency requirements;
4. Questions regarding children of staff circumventing the lottery and waitlist process.
2. The DESE requesting a copy of the lottery results and waitlist from last year.
3. The demographics of the school that include a high percentage of non-minorities and lack of non-english speaking students.

        Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct Violations

1. Hiring of relatives, friends and associates:
1. Difference in treatment, expectations, and pay;
2. Question of qualifications of some;
2. Duty of Care and Loyalty
1. Neill Kinnon serving on the Board and as City Councilor with the two 'agencies' doing business together;
2. prohibits them from doing anything that would allow them to profit personally or indirectly because of their position.
1. A trustee who seeks special privileges in school admission or other educational benefits for a member of his or her family violates the duty of loyalty to the charter school board;
2. conflict of interest law generally prohibits Board members from taking advantage of their position to gain improper benefits for themselves, their relatives, their associates, or their friends;
3. This restriction also applies to current Board members who have a contract with an agency separate from the school and who wish to enter into a contract with the school through that agency. (? Would the City of Malden be considered an ‘Agency’ and ‘City Councilor’ have a contract with them?);
4. Must avoid conduct that creates a reasonable impression that they are likely to act, or fail to act, because of undue influence by any person.

          Special Education Issues:

1. Kathy Kinnon’s qualifications, relationship to Neil Kinnon, and questions of work hours and responsibilities;
1. Concern regarding parents who wish to appeal IEP's and/or decisions made by Kathy Kinnon being decided by a relative.
2. Question of lacking IEP’s that fail to identify students current abilities and goal (as per 2007 DESE report);
3. Concern regarding support and communication between classroom teachers/IA's and Special Ed teachers;
1. Do all staff who work with children on IEP's receive a copy of their IEP before begin to work with student.

          Questions regarding school finances:

1. Question of whether the school is following laws governing contractors and bidding requirements;
2. Question of differences in financial records of Annual Reports v. financial records found on DESE website.

          Violations of Charter School Laws and Regulations:

1. Open Meeting/ Executive Session Violations;
2. Obtaining Meeting Minutes for Executive Sessions.

How Equal is Equal at MVRCS?

In past posts we've done a pretty thorough job discussing and documenting the differences in expectations and compensation between those 'Kinnected' or 'Konnected' staff members versus other staff members. We've also touched upon the manner in which the admissions lottery has historically been handled (although the Administration must have realized that by announcing the names, they gave away too much information so instead chose to assign numbers. Pretty sneaky we must say). One area we haven't touched upon is how differently students can be treated. Honestly, we don't like to bring the students into our concerns and issues with the school as we feel that it is unfair. That being said we will be trying to NOT mention or identify any students as we discuss the manner in which some students are treated.
It has recently come to our attention that Neil Kinnon's neighbor has been hired to handle the construction of the new Athletic facility.Our first thought as we read that the contract was negotiated, but the amount NOT published, was what the interview, application, or screening process for this position entailed. We have been able to confirm that the individual was involved with Big Dig (although we're not sure if that is a good thing or bad thing) and graduated from Northeastern University with an Engineering degree. We just found it awfully convenient that Neil Kinnon was able to hire yet another friend, family member and/or associate at the expense of MVRCS (and ultimately the taxpayers of the sending districts). But we digress as this the intent of this post is to discuss how different students may or may not be treated. The school policy states that 3 dismissals and/or tardies equal an absence and that 20 absences is an automatic retention. It has come to our attention that some students have had a tendency in the past to experience a tardy issue. If we understand the policy correctly, if a student had 100% attendance and was not dismissed, they could be tardy no more than 60 times. Hmmm, we wonder if this policy has been uniformly enforced to all students or if some students may be held to different standards and expectations just as some staff members are. Isn't it so sad that Neil Kinnon doesn't even make the ATTEMPT at seeking the best individuals for various positions but rather just hires his friends, family, and associates.

We recently heard from a former staff member who recalled a troubling situation regarding differences in academic ability and retention. While we have been unable to confirm this information, the former staff member did provide us with some credible information and materials. It seems that one student (student A) demonstrated superior academic abilities than another student (student B) who was several grade levels higher than student A. Sadly, student A had been retained and was being considered for retention once again while student B had never been retained (although should have been). While the staff member initially believed the difference in treatment was as a result of race (student A was African-American and student B Caucasian) but later realized that student B had a 'Konnection' to Neil Kinnon. We must say that we were provided with work examples from both students and had to agree that Student A's work was superior (even though their was a number of grade levels between them and just to clarify, Student A was in the lower grade). Yes, other factors are typically taken into consideration but the problem with this situation is that while both students were on IEP's, student A's included a behavior component and we believe (although have not had the opportunity to verify) that students can not be retained as a result of a behavior issue, especially if diagnosed.

Our final example (and we truly do have many) includes the child of an Administrative team member who has been known to act up during class. Apparently (and according to our sources) this child has grown up with Chris Finn and has a very friendly relationship with him. As such, the child does as they please and when they end up in the office, are handled with the most gentlest of kid gloves. While children who are guilty of their same infractions are often given detention, suspended, and/or sent home, this child is not. To make matters worse, the Administrative team member (i.e.parent) who at first griped about this situation (that Chris Finn refused to handle the situation appropriately) became incensed when Chris Finn held the child to the same standards as other students. Interesting how that works. As a side note, another employee had written in regarding this same Administrative team member/parent who was confronted with having to discipline a child one day when Chris Finn was out of the building. Apparently, the PDC was less than professional with the child and spoke to the child in manner that was not becoming of a school administrator. Further, it appears that the student in question was being disciplined regarding an ongoing issue of threatening others with firearms. Yeah, the DESE might just have regulations regarding how the situation SHOULD HAVE been handled. We do wonder if that student was possibly a child of someone who is 'Kinnected' or 'Konnected' individual. But don't worry, we hear this individual is only still there at the insistence of Neil Kinnon, she too must know too much and could probably do some real damage to the school if not treated in the manner she feels is appropriate. Now if only she could learn to do a better job of either interviewing and hiring individuals or at the very least provide guidance, mentoring, or coaching. Actually, communication lessons might go far with this PDC.

Why So Much Secrecy at MVRCS?

"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society: and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings." John F. Kennedy

"Where secrecy or mystery begins, vice or roguery is not far off." Samual Johnson

           

           Per Webster's Dictionary, Roguery is defined as:

ro·guery (rō′gər ē)

noun pl. rogueries -·guer·ies

the behavior or an act of a rogue; specifically, trickery; cheating; fraud.

In a post dated October 2, 2010 titled ‘Kinnons Efforts to Control  - Us, Firefighters, Teachers, and ??’ we discussed the 2004 case concerning the Malden Firefighters and their legal battle with Neil Kinnon and Mayor Howard. To reiterate our original post:

“The case revolved around the Malden Firefighters (and their Union reps) attempting to advocate against Mr. Kinnon's decision to reduce the fire staff. The Firemen (as we understand it) were posting signs, handing out leaflets, and generally attempting to education the public as to the actions of Mr. Kinnon & Mr. Howard and the impact to the residents. The case went to court (and expenses incurred) as both parties defended their position. While we can understand an appointed Commissioners and Mayors desire to not have the fact that they were paying for a Commissioner rather than Firefighters, the extent of the battle amazed us. Mr. Kinnon was attempting to deny the Firefighters of Malden their First Amendment right to voice their opposition to the actions. The Firefighters prevailed but it was sad that the City of Malden felt entitled to such limitations upon their staff, spent city funds to defend, and had written a Memorandum that was in violation of the laws that govern our government and those that govern employer’s actions.

 At the time we chose not to delve too deeply into the schools efforts and insistence upon secrecy but feel that the time has come to question exactly why the need for such secrecy. Most of us can appreciate that at times secrets may be necessary and have positive implications or outcomes. Examples of this would be the planning of a surprise party, a special gift, or simply the completion of a task. Alternatively, when we think of our politicians, leaders of organizations and companies insisting upon secrecy, or individuals insisting upon secrecy, it causes others to question their motives and intentions. What first comes to mind are the actions of terrorists, criminals, and even more deplorable the actions of child molesters. When we think back to years gone by when too many adults were able to take advantage of young and vulnerable by making them swear to secrecy. Fortunately for many, our society has realized the need for openness, honesty, and communication to prevent such wrongdoings and dangerous situations. No where is this more apparent than our societies recent insistence on a more open government. Within our families parents are reminded time and again of the importance of maintaining open communications with their children in the hopes of curtailing drug, alcohol, and inappropriate sexual conduct. It is no wonder then that we are concerned with Neil Kinnon, the Board of Trustees, and the Administration’s insistence and attempts at not only preventing open communication but also their insistence upon silence.

It concerns us that teachers are so limited in what they can and can not say to parents to the point that their contracts state limitations. For example, teachers (whether still employed by the school or not) are prevented by their contracts of advising parents to remove their children from MVRCS. Given that the school has such an extensive waiting list and that the school is clearly not equipped to handle all students, one must ask why they prohibit teachers from making such a statement. More importantly, why they must include this information within their contracts and threaten legal action should a teacher speak out about such a situation. This would be more understandable in district schools as should a school district not be able to provide an adequate education to a child they are responsible for not only outsourcing that child to a private school, but for the transportation expense to and from that school. Alternatively, should MVRCS admit to not being able to provide a child with an adequate education, the child is then referred back to their sending district. Why then must they refuse to allow teachers to communicate such information to a parent? Granted one would hope that the Administration would handle such discussions but it is clearly NOT going to happen at MVRCS.

Going one step further, why does Neil Kinnon insist upon keeping parents in the dark about so much? Why do they continually break the Open Meeting law by excusing themselves to Executive Sessions when the topics do not fall into the legally allowable topics? Why do they make obtaining copies of the minutes so incredibly difficult? One of the legal reasons the Board is permitted to meet under the Executive Sessions is to discuss the termination of an employee. Many employees have come and gone over the years and while many are at their own doing, we know of many employees who have left not on their own accord. Under the laws, these employees are entitled to attend Executive Sessions if their employment in question yet we have heard of no employee ever being granted such right. Does that mean that Dr. McCleary is making termination decisions? Or Chris Finn and George Benzie? It seems obvious that the school has some employment issues and that many laws are being violated regarding both their current and past employees.

So we ask you Mr. Kinnon, why all the secrecy? Do you think if you forbid everyone from talking you can keep hidden all the conflicts of interest and code of conduct laws you are breaking? Who are protecting from prohibiting teachers from telling parents the truth? Is THAT how you meet the needs of ALL of your students? What don't we know about that you are doing? AND, WHY THE SECRECY (and new format) AT THE RECENT LOTTERY? YET ANOTHER WAY OF SKIRTING THE LAWS THAT GOVERN YOU? Mr. Wulfson, are you paying attention? Is your phone ringing yet, cause it will be.

How Much Do You REALLY Know?

You Don't Know What You Don't Know.....

Many of our opponents have accused us and others of not being involved with the education of our children. We have been challenged regarding how many board meetings we attend, are we room parents, part of the PTO, and the list goes on. More recently we've received comments regarding how uninformed so many parents are as to what actually goes on at MVRCS. This started us thinking about how little access to information we as parents have regarding the school day of our children. As a result, it has made us realize how little access we have to not only information regarding our children but also access to 'our' school. It has caused us to come to the conclusion that the Board and Administration of MVRCS do not want informed parents but rather prefer them to be kept clueless and uninvolved. You Don't Know What You Don't Know.

Our first case in point relates to how much we, as parents, know about our child's day while they are at school. While many schools not only encourage classroom teachers to publish weekly newsletters, they require it. Newsletters are a way for teachers to maintain open communications with parents, keep parents abreast as to what is going on in the classroom, and provide parents with a starting point or prompts as to helping children talk about what they are doing in school. Wouldn't it be so nice to be able to have a specific question to ask about a lesson or activity rather than just the standard 'how was school today'?  How often do parents get the opportunity to visit the classroom, stop in and catch up with teachers (other than the 5 minutes during pickup), or see other students work? The school has eliminated any opportunity for parents to access the buildings as they are not permitted in the classrooms before or after school. It is even more upsetting that the children are not even permitted back in the building after school regardless of the reasoning (i.e. forgot something, bathroom visit, want to show their parent something). With all of the cameras in place (with a lip reading program attached no less!) and the staff that are required to be there until 4pm, it is incomprehensible that the school has adopted such policies. As parents we should have full access to the facilities that house our children for 37.5 hours a week, 200 days a year. This is just another way for the Administration to limit access of information to parents because they rely and depend upon parents being ignorant and uninformed. As for the arguments about being room parents or 'involved' - only 2-4 parents are room parents and therefore permitted to attend the occasional party or event and how do you stay involved when you have such limited access to the building and teachers? Again, You Don't Know What You Don't Know.

We have heard from many teachers that the powers that be at MVRCS have strict limitations and restrictions on what teachers can and can not speak to parents about. In all honesty, they are permitted to speak to parents about very little and any teacher-parent correspondences (notes home) must be pre-approved. MVRCS is the only school that insists upon such control placed upon their teachers. The Administration has been quoted as saying that they do not want to provide too much information to parents as then they would be required to continue in that manner. Try asking teachers some tough questions like 'what level group is my child in (i.e. should I be concerned that my child is in the lowest reading or math group and still struggling)'? Or, 'how was my child's placement determined?', and heavens forbid you request a level change for your child - DENIED but unfortunately, the teachers have such limited say all of this. In hindsight we wished we had provided parents with a list of questions to ask during their 15 minute conferences last week. On that note, did you meet with the teacher who actually teaches your child reading and/or math daily or their homeroom teacher (if they are not the same). Do most parents even know that the homeroom teacher is not necessarily the teacher that their child spends the majority of their day with? Again, You Don't Know What You Don't Know.

We would agree that parents are permitted to attend the Open Meeting portion of the Board of Trustees monthly meeting but must also acknowledge how uninspiring the experience is for the majority of most parents. As we've discussed in the past, Neil Kinnon treats the parents with blatant disregard that borders on contempt. At the same time, the Board too often (and many times illegally) resort to Executive Sessions which exclude parents. The Board has shown just how little importance they place upon these meetings as not only are they not welcoming to parents but they make obtaining the minutes for these meetings near impossible to obtain. At the very least, the Board COULD post the minutes for both sessions on their web site as a means of ensuring all parents are informed and kept abreast as to issues. While many parents have determined that attending the Board Meetings serves no purpose considering the dismissive and demeaning tone of Neil Kinnon, many would appreciate having access to an agenda and/or meeting minutes to allow them to be better informed. We bring up TitleI funding as an example, why would a school who makes it clear that they do not have access to the funding that our public schools have, refuse funds and assistance in reading? In an Annual Report the board said it was so that they could control the curriculum and methodology but Title I is meant assist and ensure the reading success of all students. We think it is again, because it would allow too much information to be revealed AND because they could not control (to the degree it is now) what told to parents.Again, we see this approach and attitude as just another example of the Administration wanting to keep parents uninformed and ignorant. Let's not forget, it is difficult to challenge or question what you don't know about, or you don't know what you don't know.

We could really go on and on with this as it has become overly apparent that the Board of Trustees and Administration do not want involved, informed, questioning parents but would much prefer to just maintain unilateral control similar to a dictatorship. Oh yes, and is that Dictator Neil Kinnon with the control?

FINALLY ~ A Reply from Jeff Wulfson, Associate Commissioner, DESE

We FINALLY received a reply from our numerous emails to Jeff Wulfson, the Association Commissioner at the Department of Elementary & Secondary Education. Mr. Wulfson, while failing to actually provide the clarification of the schools transportation as we requested, did state that if he were provided with an actual complaint, the DESE would be willing to intervene to ensure the law is being followed. Although we appreciate his offer to intervene with an actual complaint, it is disturbing that he to is unable or unwilling to state the schools actual policy. Reading between the lines, if any parent dares to file a complaint, then and only then, will we address the issue. It is equally disturbing that he does not take issue with the fact that the school has repeatedly ignored our request for written clarification and question why that is. It is usually those who are attempting to hide something that are unwilling to provide the information requested.
On the upside, we are pleased that we have actually heard from Mr. Wulfson and have included a copy of his letter. We have inserted comments at various points and to assist in distinguishing between the two, have done so in red text.


From Mr. Wulfson:

I am writing in response to your recent emails, requesting clarification regarding the state’s role in overseeing the operation of Commonwealth charter schools in general and the Mystic Valley Charter Public School (MVCPS) in particular.

There are two types of oversight that the Commonwealth has with respect to charter schools. The first type of oversight is to respond to specific individual complaints in which the school is alleged to have violated a law, regulation, or other governing policy. The second type is the more general oversight that the Department (DESE) and Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) have as the charter school authorizer in Massachusetts.  These two types of oversight are discussed below in more detail.

Specific Complaints

As we have noted before, the first type of oversight provided by the Commonwealth is shared among a number of state agencies, depending upon the particular subject matter. For example, concerns regarding the open meeting law or the construction bidding statutes are the responsibility of the Office of the Attorney General, the public records law is overseen by the Secretary of the Commonwealth, and the State Ethics Commission oversees the conflict of interest laws.

This Department has a number of separate offices that share in this oversight responsibility. Issues involving special education services, accessibility, or other matters relating to student welfare are reviewed by our Program Quality Assurance unit and complaints regarding student transportation are handled by our School Business Services office. Complaints alleging that a charter school has failed to comply with a specific provision of the charter school statute or regulations are handled by the Charter School Office. To the extent that a complaint alleges a violation of the charter school statute or regulations, the complainant must present that complaint to the school’s board of trustees prior to filing a complaint with the Charter School Office.  See 603 CMR 1.10.

In all of the above areas, the oversight agencies require some degree of specificity as to the allegation in question in order to properly investigate and obtain a response from the school. While some parents may be reluctant to be identified as the source of a complaint for fear of reprisal, as a practical matter, anonymous emails or postings on blogs and websites that contain only vague assertions are difficult at best for us to investigate. To cite one example, you have alleged that MVCPS is not meeting its responsibilities to provide bus transportation for students living more than two miles from school. If we had a specific complaint from a parent, with information as to where the student lives and where he or she attends school, we could verify the grade level of the student and the distances and then intervene with the school to ensure that it is meeting its responsibilities. 

Unfortunately, a number of us have contacted various departments within the DESE (specifically Jeff K.) to no avail. Also, how many times must the DESE be told that the Board of Trustees at MVRCS refuse to address complaints in a professional, fair, and without repercussions (as we're sure Annie O. can attest to, as one example). 

Also, between the information listed here AND the payroll information provided by the Boston Globe, how much more specific information is required before the DESE is willing to look into various conflicts of issues, code of conduct violations, open meeting laws, and the like. We did notice that Mr. Wulfson failed to address the issue as to whether his agency has filed and followed up on the Open Meeting and Executive Session Meeting violations that has been documented.

Oversight as Authorizer

Our second level of oversight relates to our role as the charter authorizer for Massachusetts. The overall performance of every charter school is reviewed every five years; and the BESE makes a decision on whether or not to renew the charter based on the school’s academic performance, organizational viability, and faithfulness to the terms of its charter. A school’s track record in complying with state and federal requirements and in responding appropriately to parent inquiries are two of many factors considered in making a renewal decision. The charter for MVCPS expires in June 2013 and the renewal inspection and decision probably will take place in the 2012-13 school year. During the course of that review, parents and other interested parties will have the opportunity to provide comments to us on the school’s performance.

It is unfortunate that the DESE has taken the position that it will not look into the reported allegations that have been made against the school until the 2012-2013 school year. So much for the students who are not selected for entry into the school as a result of a rigged lottery, or the students who are not receiving the services they require because Neil Kinnon refuses to address his sister-in-laws failure to comply with NCLB laws and the oversight and management of the Special Education Department.

In regards to the comment regarding "parents and other interested parties will have the opportunity to provide comments to us on the school's performance." Oh, he must mean the parents that the school hand selects to attend those meetings, the parents who don't have complaints or who won't speak up against the school. Yes, the same parents who have been invited in the past, and obviously NOT the likes of our friend Annie O. (who we must apologize to for constantly dragging her name back into this) or the other parents who were encouraged to leave the school (you know, those children who weren't expelled but were in danger of being retained). May we suggest now that any and all parents who would like to be heard during the next review write to Mr. Wulfson NOW and ask to be either included in the group meeting or to meet with him individually.

General Queries

You have asked how to request a financial audit of MVCPS. As you may already know, every charter school is required to have an annual independent audit conducted by a certified public accountant. These audit reports are published as part of each school’s annual report and are available to the public. In extraordinary circumstances where fraud or misappropriation of funds is suspected, the State Auditor does have authority to conduct additional financial investigations. Suggestions that expenditures in certain areas are “excessive,” however, generally do not rise to that level of concern. Both school committees and boards of trustees are given broad discretion in determining the appropriate expenditures for the operation of their respective schools.

 Extraordinary circumstances wouldn't be the overpayment of 'Kinnected' individuals and/or those individuals who are paid more than most of our teachers yet show up for about an hour a day (if that)? We would be willing to bet that the school is aware of what would get the attention of the State Auditor and makes sure that those 'expenditures' do not show up on their annual reports. We'd be interested in knowing how much attention and detail (i.e. receipts, overview) is required in the filing of these reports. Mr. Wulfson makes mention of having an CPA conduct an independent audit and we question who the actual CPA is who conducts these audits. One would hope that they must be required to be unassociated and unbiased int their review of financial records.

You have also raised a question regarding the lack of term limits for the trustees on the MVCPS board. DESE recommends that charter school by-laws include such limits, and we require newly chartered schools to include such a provision. We have discussions ongoing with the MVCPS board regarding adding such a provision to their by-laws. Those discussions continue and we continue to urge the school to adopt term limits for its trustees.

But again, other charter schools have had their charter renewal contingent upon, among other things, incorporating term limits into their by-laws. And again we question why MVRCS has not had the same contingency placed upon them. Also, why do the trustees at MVRCS feel that they do not have to answer to the DESE? If new charter schools are required to do so, then so should MVRCS. Oh, that's right, we are dealing with Mr. Neil Kinnon who stated (as seen in our 'Did They Really Say That' column) "The quickest way to be not true to the charter is to not have continuity. Since superintendents come and go, where do you get continuity? You’re able to get that through a long-serving board that has full understanding of the charter. This is what I have told the DOE every year they’ve come in and questioned it.’’ As we stated there, again, Really? Is overpaying and creating jobs for friends, family members and associates staying true to the charter? Is rigging the lottery and ignoring NCLB laws staying true to the charter? Is putting an athletic facility before the logistic and academic needs of students who have outgrown the lower school facility? What about not retaining teachers but only retaining those who are overpaid and underworked as a result of their association with you? Yeah, none of THAT matters!

Finally, I must tell you how personally disturbing it was to read your group’s recent correspondence to Governor Patrick in which you suggest that there might be “pure corruption” here in the Department. My colleagues and I take our responsibilities as public employees very seriously. Such allegations were made not only without any shred of evidence but were inappropriate and unnecessary. 

We apologize that you find the actions of parents attempting to ensure laws are being followed as disturbing. We too are disturbed at many things that have and continue to be allowed to happen. We do not feel as though they were made without adequate evidence (specifically other charter schools being held to very different standards and expectations), nor inappropriate and unnecessary. We have written to you on a number of different occasions going back to October 7 and this is the first response we have received. Not to mention that the transportation issue has still NOT been clarified by either you or MVRCS. 

I trust that this provides you with the more detailed information that you were seeking.  Again, should you require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Jeff Wulfson

Associate Commissioner