Put This One Here, That One There, Oh, This One Could....Maybe?

Let the fun begin! We have heard from a number of former teachers that yet another massive turnover of staff at MVRCS is in the works. Once again teachers under the "leadership" (if that is what you want to call it) of Jen Mullen are jumping ship (and we hear some are leaving without having secured employment elsewhere). Of course the 7th & 8th grade teachers and HS teachers are also leaving in droves. Of course this comes as no surprise as rumors had been running rampant for some time. We came across the following postings for job positions and imagine that since the majority of 4th, 5th, & 6th grade teachers are leaving, they have moved a Kindergarten and 3rd grade teacher into one of these slots as a lead teacher. What we found discouraging is that although the school (as are all public schools) is required to hire certified teachers, the job requirements only make reference of it being preferred (or attainable within one year but most colleges require graduates to pass the MTEL before graduation and many who graduate without it are typically having problems passing the test). Further, the posting for the 'Substitutes' make reference for the potential of moving into a teaching position yet does not require certification. Both positions state 'Bachelors  Preferred' - yet another questionable statement and practice. Boy does this school have high expectations for their new hires....NOT! Most districts require copy of certification, college transcripts, and 3 recommendations to even get an interview. Apparently they do not feel these things are important or are so desperate for bodies, they'll take ANYONE. And we all wonder why so many teachers leave mid-year each year!                                                                                                                                                                                       Another ironic and totally fabricated piece of bs on the part of the school is their 'Equal Opportunity Employer' statement....no discrimination or retaliation? Really? Must be confusing themselves with a different school! We pity those poor, uninformed individuals who seek a position within this school as long as Kinnon is in charge.                                                                                                                  Equal Opportunity Employer Mystic Valley Regional Charter School is committed to maintaining a work and learning environment free from discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, pregnancy, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital/civil union status, ancestry, place of birth, age, citizenship status, veteran status, political affiliation, genetic information or disability, as defined and required by state and federal laws. Additionally, we prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose such discrimination and harassment or who participate in an equal opportunity investigation. This last line is our favorite because we all know how Kinnon would react to ANYONE standing up against him and his bully-team! Why don't we ask the individuals who have filed claims against the school in the past how they were treated once the school heard of the allegations. Funny, it doesn't say that preferential treatment (and higher pay, lower expectations) is given to those individuals who have connections to Neil Kinnon. Oh yeah, they can't, that would be an ethical issue (you know, conflict of interests).                                                     We are looking for candidates to be Permanent Substitutes for our Lower School campus. Candidates will also be promotable into classroom settings for all K - 8 positions, i.e. K - 6 classroom teachers and/or subject teachers at the middle school levels.   Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 3 Job Requirements Massachusetts certification preferred or certification attainable within one year of hire. At least 1 year of relevant experience preferred Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required Application Questions There are no application questions required for this job posting.Of course not, that might limit the application pool and show ones theory of teaching. Why would we want to know that of any incoming teachers??? We have current openings in Kindergarten and 3rd grade.Wonder which poor K and 3rd grade teachers have been forced into changing grades? Levine? Flynn? Kozlowski? Penhaligone?   Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 3
Job Requirements
Massachusetts certification preferred or certification attainable within one year of hire. Experience with Direct Instruction and COre Knowledge a definite plus. At least 1 year of relevant experience preferred Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required
	Special Education Teacher - Opening for 2011 - 12 school year, starting in early-mid August. Resouce room setting with pull out services along with some in class services. Qualified candidates will pull out students for tests to read for the students, plus MCAS and other standardized testing assistance, based on IEP plans. Position Type: Full-time Positions Available: 1 Job Requirements IEP writing experience required. 1 - 3 years of Special Education experience along with MA Special Education certification preferred. Bachelors degree preferred Citizenship, residency or work VISA in United States required

MVRCS Evaluations - Every Wonder....? Wonder No More!

As a parent have you ever wondered what and how the teachers of MVRCS are evaluated? We've been able to obtain a copy of the evaluation form the school uses to assess the teacher and staff performance. We found a number of their objectives to be interesting and thought provoking. Our biggest concern is that while the issue of handling behavioral students is mentioned (c. Individual student behavior management plans are implemented correctly), nowhere is it mentioned about teachers correctly implementing IEP goals and objectives or working/communicating with the Special Education staff concerning students with learning disabilities. To us, this shows how little thought and importance students with learning disabilities are given by the Board and/or Administration. Also note how  nothing is mentioned concerning the well being of students, positive communications with parents, and/or effectiveness with individual students.
We also felt that the lack of focus on any sort of professional responsibilities' (that you would typically see in a school evaluation form) such as understanding their legal and moral responsibilities, ability to convey knowledge of their subject matter, takes initiative both in and out of the classroom, use of professional judgement to ensure success of all students, works actively to involve parents in child's school life, use of resources to ensure student success both in and out of classroom, overall well being of students. No mention of knowledge (even general) about Special Ed issue knowledge or No Child Left Behind knowledge. The list could go on but so much is missing and too much focus is given to the success of the school rather than to ensure the success of the students.
Our comments are in red.

1.       Student Achievement & Instructional Implementation (35%)

a.       Students attain targets for lesson progress and mastery test scores (generally, student scores are within the allowable range unless there are relevant extenuating circumstances).
      The reason most 'student scores are within the allowable range) is because the students are grouped according to ability level. The unfortunate aspect is that if a 5th grader is working at a 3rd grade level, they will be placed within a group of similar students. The students will, for the most part, achieve passing or acceptable grades. The issue is that not only are they NOT working at grade level but parents are given the false impression that their child is doing well in school. MVRCS has been known to retain these students for failing to achieve a passing score on MCAS even when the child has earned A's and B's throughout the year. Of course part of this is systematic elimination.

b.      Students’ scores improve on independent standardized tests and other independent assessments.

c.       Students achieve targeted performance in other subjects on available measures.

d.      Individual faculty member implements all curricula (e.g. attaining 90% correct student responses, demonstrating strong lesson presentation skills, using appropriate correction procedures, monitoring of students’ independent work in class, ,and using of appropriate signals).

e.      Individual faculty member effectively implements other curricula, assessments, parent progress reports, and report cards developed, or selected, by the Mystic Valley Regional Charter School, and appropriately assigns homework and corrects papers.
      Within this category it seems as though too much focus is given to testing and assessment rather than ensuring that students learn (not always the same thing). This reminds us of the situation with the Robert Hughes Charter School where the teachers were instructed to coach or guide students during MCAS testing to ensure high scores for the school. 

2.       Promotion of Positive School Image (10%)

a.       Individual faculty member contributes to a measure impact on enrollment (e.g. increased enrollment is linked to parent satisfaction with individual faculty member, or conversely, word-of-mouth, and/or independent marketing student attrition is caused by dissatisfaction with the individual faculty member)
      This doesn't even seem as though it should fall within a teachers evaluation. The focus should be on the students, NOT the school. If they are so concerned about student attrition then why are they not concerned with the dissatisfaction of many special education (or diverse learners) students who leave as a result of a less than impressive Special Education Department and the leadership of that department. We wonder how Kathy Kinnon scores within this category.

3.       Classroom/Behavior Management (20%)

a.       Faculty member demonstrates the effective use of time, smooth transitions between activities, effective room arrangements, appropriate movement, clear expectations for student conduct, a greater frequency of praising students to correcting them, use of the School’s character curriculum vocabulary, effective and appropriate use of reward systems, proper referrals to the School Director’s office, and fairness and consistency in recognizing negative behavior and imposing consequences/restitution.
      Our course fairness and consistency in recognziing negative behavior and imposing consequences/restitution for those un-Kinnected students.

b.      Students demonstrate instructional/task focus and appropriate character virtues in the classroom, as well as appropriate conduct in the halls, restrooms, play areas, and other non-classroom environments.

c.       Individual student behavior management plans are implemented correctly. 
      Again, no mention of IEP's for learning disabilities. This is very alarming to us. 

4.       Performance of Duties (15%)

a.       Individual faculty member faithfully, diligently, and effectively implements the policies and procedures of the Mystic Valley Regional Charter School, demonstrating a strong work ethic and a positive attitude. The individual is punctual and meets other basic organizational expectations, including organizing student extracurricular activities and fulfilling such assigned duties as morning monitoring, dismissal monitoring, bus monitoring, and recess monitoring.

5.       Interpersonal Skills (10%)

a.       Individual faculty member works well with other School staff, contributes to the development of a collegial work culture, participates in informal professional development discussions, shares expertise with colleagues, and participates in team planning meetings.
      As long as it doesn't touch upon any of the topics covered in the next category, 'Professionalism'. 

6.       Professionalism (10%)

a.       Individual faculty member shows an understanding of professional behavior in the areas listed below:

                                                               i.      Communication with the Leadership Team. The individual faculty member directs communication about a conflict, issue, concern, or problem to the members of the Leadership Team of the Lead Teacher. The individual faculty member does not discuss any of the above with colleagues that are not directly involved with the issue in question. The individual faculty member does not discuss any of the above issues with parents. 
                                    It continues to amaze us that staff members are not permitted to discuss any 'conflicts, issues, concerns, or problems' with student's to their parents. Why is so much focus paid to these types of issues? How does this impact the learning of the students?

                                                             ii.      Discussion of Salary, Performance Based Raises or any other Compensation. The individual faculty member directs any and all communication concerning any of the topics listed above with the members of the Leadership Team. The individual faculty member does not, under any circumstances, discuss any issues related to compensation with other members of the faculty, staff, or parents.  
                                    Again, they will be terminated if it is discovered that a discussion was had. We do know that they talk about such things but no one ever dares admit to it out of fear of being terminated. We heard of one 'Kinnected' individual who scored originally well below 60 in their initial evaluation yet over the years slowly improved 2 points per year but is still under the acceptable mark. YET IS STILL EMPLOYED THERE!

                                                            iii.    Discussion of Confidential Information regarding students. The individual faculty member directs communication of confidential information regarding students to members of the Leadership or Education Teams. The individual faculty member does not discuss confidential information regarding students with other members of the faculty, staff or parents.  
                                    One staff member has told us that although this should be common practice, it is not. Also, the reason this is included is not for the protection of the students but rather to limit teachers coming to similar conclusions and joining forces when issues arise regarding students.

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

A Letter to the DESE

SIDE NOTE: We have since obtained a number of copies of other letters sent to not only Mr. Wulfson but also to a Mary Street, another DESE employee who is (or was) responsible for the oversight of MVRCS. It is disturbing to us that the DESE has had parents write to them in the past yet no actions have been taken. We must question at what point does the DESE begin to care about the questionable actions of our school enough to actually do something. It is beginning to look like the fox has been put in charge of the hen house.

This letter was sent to Mr. Wulfson a the DESE along with numerous other individuals we felt may have the answers we seek. In true UnOfficialMVRCS, this was also sent to a number of media and news outlets.

Dear Mr. Wulfson;

We would like to thank you for offering to be the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s contact person for our group. To clarify, we are a group of parents with children in Mystic Valley Regional Charter School who have become concerned with the operation and management of our school. As a result we have created a blog that can be found at UnOfficialMVRCS.blogspot.com with the hope of drawing attention to the issues. We have insisted upon anonymity out of fear of repercussions to our children on the part of the Board of Trustees and Administration of our school. We find it unfortunate that we feel the need to protect our identity but have heard from many parents who felt attacked and victimized by the school as a result of vocalizing their criticisms or questions. We do not imagine that the DESE approves of this practice or behavior nor would allow it to occur. Further, the need to conceal our identity has resulted in drawing attention away from our issues and concerns as our identities and motives are constantly being questioned.

Our purpose for writing to you at this juncture is to question the DESE as to what their exact role is in the oversight of our school. We have read numerous site visit reports (some of which are written by you) that draw attention to such issues as the schools refusal to incorporate term limits for Trustee members into their by-laws, the Boards failure to comply with the Open Meeting laws, specifically in relation to the Executive Sessions, and the concern that the Board may be too involved in the day to day operations of the school. We have also heard from numerous parents and teachers who have relayed their experiences when contacting your agency for issues such as discrepancies in reports, special education issues, failure to comply the IDEA, NCLB, retaliation of ADA laws, and issues related to the schools failure to report neglect or threats of harm regarding students. Our blog also brings to light such issues as violations of Charter school laws (specifically the re-admittance of relatives of the Administration), clear violations of the conflict of issue laws (including nepotism, preferential treatment to children of Trustees and Administration regarding the lottery and waitlist), the schools practice of including questionable language and restrictions within teachers contracts, and examples of the lack of respect Neil Kinnon demonstrates towards parents and in the hiring of highly qualified teachers, which has a direct impact on their high turnover rate.

IEP Laws That Govern Meetings and IEP Development ~~~Know Before You Go!

(All of the links plus others found within this posting can be located http://www.doe.mass.edu/sped/parents.html)

We have heard some disturbing stories regarding the handling of IEP meetings at MVRCS from both parents and teachers. One reader recently posted a comment about Kathy Kinnon not permitting a parent to have a friend, relative or associate attend the meeting with them. This is very much in violation of the laws and should not have occurred (see IDEA regulations @ **). We have also heard from parents who went through the effort and expense of having their child independently evaluated only to be told that the school would not implement any of the evaluators recommendations or necessary services ('That is how we do it here, you knew that when you enrolled your child here" - another violation). The school has been cited by the DESE of not meeting the required time lines regarding referrals, evaluations and meetings. One of the instances we are most concerned with is the lack of communication, collaboration, and support between classroom teachers and special education staff. It would appear that the school is not prompt in providing the required support and documents (specifically IEP's) to new teachers or teachers who are re-assigned. Unfortunately, because not all specialist and teachers have experience or formal education in teaching, they may not appreciate what an IEP is or it's importance. To assist parents in ensuring their children receive the services and accommodations needed to succeed, we have (and will continue to add to it as we come across other issues) copied the laws that govern the violations we have heard of.  Please be sure to contact us with other issues or concerns that you may have knowledge of. 

NOTE: IF YOU ARE NOT SATISFIED WITH YOUR CHILD'S PROGRESS OR HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, BY LAW YOU ARE ENTITLED TO SCHEDULE A REVIEW OR MEETING (AND POSSIBLY HAVE YOUR CHILD RE-EVALUATED) AT ANY TIME. YOU ARE NOT RESTRICTED TO ONCE A YEAR BUT RATHER THEY MUST OCCUR AT LEAST ONCE PER YEAR. Should you desire a new meeting or to discuss your child's progress, we suggest contacting Kathy Kinnon directly either by phone at 781 388-0222 x3821 or email at Kathy Kinnon's Email.

Should you encounter resistance or have additional questions regarding information you have been given, you should contact 

1. Joel Krakow at (781) 338-3747or email him at compliance@doe.mass.edu

2. Contact us and we will provide you the name of our contact at the DESE.

We can not stress enough, have an advocate or attorney represent you if possible (see the new links page with non-profit advocates and legal agencies), but at the very least, TAPE THE MEETING, PRINT OUT THIS PAGE, and BE PREPARED USING THE QUESTIONS & WORKSHEETS WE ARE GATHERING. (See statistics regarding appeals at the end of this post)

 Mass Laws and Regulations - 603

Reading Related ~ Upcoming IEP Meeting? You MUST Ask These Questions!

For Parents going into an IEP meeting, here are some incredibly useful questions to ask during the meeting, Be sure to record the answers as you may want to refer back to them at future meetings. This too came from Wrights Law at Reading Related Questions You MUST ASK. This is one of the BEST tools parents can arm themselves with other than an advocate or attorney. Any additions or changes to this form will appear in italics as this document is a resource of Wrights Law.

Parents of children with disabilities who are receiving “special education” reading
instruction need information to participate in writing the IEP (Individualized Education Program) and in working with their children at home. When speaking with your child’s teacher(s) or education specialist, use the following questions to help you gather the information you need in the boxes provided. And remember if you do not understand something, ask to have it explained thoroughly.

                    If you have questions about your child’s overall reading progress, ask…

1. What is my child’s grade level in reading? What does that mean she can do?
2. Where does she need to improve?  
(Specifically phonics, decoding, vocabulary, comprehension,  or fluency)
3. Is there a difference between how well my child reads individual words and
how well she understands what she reads? If so, what can we do to improve
the weaker areas? (Specifically decoding v. comprehension)
4. Are you using a specific program to teach my child? If so, what skills does this
program teach? (The school uses Direct Instruction as their methodology but ask what specific book they are using, lesson, and grade level of book. What Reading Recovery or Intervention Reading program are they using?)

About Reading Improvement Questions Parents Can Ask…

Refusing Title I Funds....Because?

We've been looking into Title I funding as we found it curious that MVRCS has declined this funding in the past (even though they qualified for it), causing us toquestion why they did this, if they are still refusing Title I funds. It seems in these times of tight financial concern and equally unstable education funding (charter schools included), that schools would take whatever funding they could obtain (especially as they have been forced to charge for transportation this year). While we have been unable to identify justification for their decision, we did find more information on Title I funding and what is required to receive such funds.After reading through this, we question if the decision was based on the fact that by accepting these funds, the school would be under scrutiny of the Title I folks who would be looking for the following signs of a quality, successful education for all children.

The purpose of this title is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state academic assessments. This purpose can be accomplished by —

Kinnons Efforts to Control - Us, Firefighters, Teachers, and ??

We have been accused of being school haters, union proponents, members of the Concerned Citizens of Malden group, and the list goes on. As we have addressed repeatedly, we are none of the above. As we stated earlier we listed the link to the Malden School Budget as a way to demonstrate that when a school has nothing to hide, they have no issues or concerns in submitting their records under the Freedom of Information Act as required by law. The fact that our school has chosen to break the law rather than follow the law causes us to question why they would the repercussions of breaking that law if they have not broken any other laws. We can also assure our readers that we are in no way affiliated with any unions or union actions. In fact, while we do believe that our teachers should unite for better working conditions, we don't feel the unions are the answer. In fact, we would prefer the teachers align themselves with the Pioneer Institute (www.pioneerinstitute.org) to address the improvement of their working conditions. They have done some wonderful research and made great strides towards education reform. Another group called Turn Exchange (www.turnexchange.net) is another organization that works with teachers and making great accomplishments.

A GREAT Resource for Parents on What Makes an IEP Effective

This article is incredibly useful for parents of special education students at MVRCS. We suggest having your childs IEP nearby for comparision (you should have received one at your last meeting but Kathy Kinnon would be able to provide you with a copy) as you read through this.

FAPE.org is also an excellent resource for Parents. Another useful article on how to tell if your child is making progress can be found at: http://www.pacer.org/parent/php/PHP-c78.pdf . The main index can be found here: http://www.fape.org/pubs/index.html.

“Facts-on-Hand” is an easy to read series on special education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).