High school responds to criticism over (and in) report

FALLS VILLAGE — The Region One Board of Education had plenty of questions at a special meeting held last Thursday, Sept. 27, to address the recent reaccreditation report of the New England Association of Schools & Colleges on Housatonic Valley Regional High School.

At least one board member was not happy with the fallout over the board’s silence after receiving the report at a regular meeting on Sept. 10.

Falls Village representative Maggie Ruotolo read a prepared statement complaining the board had "been the object of undue criticism recently" for its failure to comment on the NEASC report or ask questions after a brief presentation by Principal Gretchen Foster.

A Lakeville Journal editorial last month lamented that the board’s failure to comment was "both surprising and disappointing" and concluded that "it was an opportunity missed." Talk show host Mike Flint of WHDD-AM also criticized the board and critical comments were posted on this writer’s blog on The Journal’s Web site at tcextra.com.

A special meeting of the board was more appropriate to address the 10-year report produced by the regional accrediting agency, Ruotolo said, rather than trying to engage Foster after her "clear, concise presentation." However, at the Sept. 10 meeting the board did not indicate it would consider addressing the issue in the future.

"I did not have any questions on the information she discussed," Ruotolo said. "Had there been an item on the agenda for a discussion of NEASC, my questions and concerns would have been broader and directed to Dr. Foster and to my colleagues on the board."

Foster said she received the report produced by the visiting NEASC committee on July 10. Later that month she shared it with the board and in August she met with Region One administrators to discuss it, released it to the news media and posted it on the school’s Web site.

At Thursday’s meeting, Foster produced an eight-page memorandum to the board on what she and other administrators have done to respond to the report, which praised the school but noted there are many areas that need improvement. A few areas of recommendation, such as improving the teacher evaluation process and establishing written curriculum guides, are already being addressed. Foster said some of the report’s other conclusions were either misleading or inaccurate.

Seven separate school committees have been formed to respond to the NEASC report, addressing such items as mission statement, curriculum, instruction, assessment and leadership organization. More than 15 administrators, most of whom helped prepare Housatonic’s detailed self-study in advance of the NEASC committee’s March visit, are involved in the response effort.

The visiting NEASC committee praised some aspects of life at Housatonic, including school resources, supportive technology, health-care access, the library-media center, the student assistance team and the accessibility of its faculty.

But the report not only criticized the school for the paucity of written curricula; it also questioned whether Foster had sufficient autonomy, faulted the school for an unclear chain of command, cited an alleged lack of school spirit and noted an over-reliance on teacher-centered learning — especially in the lower to mid-level class sections. In addition, questions were raised about whether the school’s mission statement was being supported and about the absence of a formalized mentoring program.

Superintendent Patricia Chamberlain asked Foster what happens if administrators disagree with some of NEASC’s findings, as they did, for example, with the report’s conclusion that the campus was out of compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

"We have to give them a reason why [we disagree]," Foster replied. "They decide whether the evidence is sufficient."

Ruotolo wanted to know how Foster intended to ensure that courses and instruction followed the curricula after they were put into written form. Foster said department heads and other evaluators will perform that function.

"We’re in and out of classrooms all the time," Foster said.

But striking a nerve was the observation by the NEASC committee that "for many teachers... the dominant approach to instruction is teacher-centered and textbook-based."

"They were hit hard by that," Foster said of her faculty. "Many of them said no [NEASC committee members] ever visited their classrooms."

Foster disagreed with the committee’s implicit findings that a student-centered approach is best for every lesson. Chamberlain agreed.

"If the students are engaged, then the teacher is less important," said the superintendent. "It’s the engagement piece that’s critical."

One board member asked what would happen if the school lost its accreditation, as nearly happened to Hartford Public High School in 1997. Foster said that would not happen. Nor would NEASC put the school on probation. Only a warning was possible, she surmised.

Foster presented a NEASC-suggested timeline for responding to the committee’s report and action to be taken to implement recommendations during the course of the 2007-08 academic year. A two-year progress report is to be submitted by October 2009. She will present another update to the board in November after meeting with administrators later this month.