School board tweaks
SBHS organization
Board to discuss
further measures
in February
By jennifer kohlhepp
Staff Writer

The South Brunswick Board of Education voted unanimously Tuesday to enhance the present high school structure for the 2003-2004 school year.

Members of the board agreed that a change to the current school structure was necessary to negotiate future population increases in the high school. The committee projected that the high school will have to house 2,673 students by the 2006-2007 school year.

"There are positives in the existing structure because our students are successful, and there are positives in the proposals," board member Anna Tupe said. "We are bridging the two [proposed] plans together rather than throwing something out. We still need to address class size, additional counselors and the specifics on personalization."

The plan the board approved preserved much of what the high school already has in place. Students will be divided into two schools: the foundation school for grades 9-10, and the upper school for grades 11-12. Three house leaders will help guide freshmen and sophomores through orientation in the school, as well as the freshman project. The upper classes will have three deans, subject to budget approval, who will teach and take on a proactive, disciplinarian role. Also, the new plan will incorporate two more guidance counselors, bringing their number to 12.

"We will see how well the plan is working in 2004-2005, and then re-evaluate the plan in 2005-2006," board member Barry Nathanson said. "This allows us the opportunity to maintain the present structure, but we are not fixed into a rigid two-school system for the next four years."

The new plan allows the board to readdress each year how many assistant principals, deans and activities coordinators are necessary.

Some residents in attendance addressed the fact that the board initially suggested using the newly constructed addition to the high school specifically to house freshmen. The board said it has not come to a final decision on the matter.

Assistant Schools Superintendent Willa Spicer, who is also a member of the steering committee for the plan, said the committee worked for over a year with the board, the planning committee, faculty, parents, teachers and students to plan how to best structure students inside of the buildings with two specific goals in mind.

"We want to support student achievement, making sure students have accessible options open to them," Spicer said. "And, we want to build a sense of community so each student will belong and have a connection to the community."

The steering committee had proposed two new school plans designed to create more personalization among students and faculty members in an ever-growing population.

Spicer told the board that elements of each plan had been modified due to feedback the committee received from hundreds of concerned parents and students at a public meeting it held Jan. 14.

"The financial information has been adjusted so that there will be no cost differences whether the two-school or three-school structure is approved," Spicer said.

The steering committee said it eliminated cost differences by putting the same number of deans and classes they would teach in each plan.

"Fourteen deans working two periods will not influence or impact the results we are looking for," Spicer said. "These plans will not increase costs next year."

Spicer said the committee also removed the discussion of interest clusters from all of the plans. The idea of interest clusters would allow students with similar interests to intermix despite what school division they are in.

"We will talk about interest clusters later in February," Spicer said. "Once we have a structure, we can detail what we are going to do."

Despite which plan the board chooses, a principal and an assistant principal would still govern the high school.

The board decided not to vote on either of the plans proposed by the steering committee. The board approved a compromised plan based on recommendations from the steering committee and recommendations from parents, faculty and students.

It said it did not choose the proposed three-school plan, which would divide students in grades 9-12 into three separate schools, because of all of the negative feedback it received and the stress that abrupt change would cause to students and faculty.

Although they finally approved a structure similar to the two-school proposal, members said they did not agree with the semantics of the two-school plan presented by the steering committee.

Board members voiced strong opposition to wording in the steering committee’s two-school plan which said it would "eliminate the current school structure." They also disagreed with the idea that the plan would "lock us into a radical change over the next four years."

School board members said that a new superintendent would have less difficulty dealing with a two-school structure.

"We’re going to continue researching what is best for all of the students of the school," Tupe said. "We’re going to look into decreasing class sizes, and adding more teachers and guidance counselors. Our teachers and staff, and how they reach out to each student, will ultimately determine the success of our school."

Although the school board was supposed to vote on adding a homeroom or an additional class period to further personalize the relationship between students and staff, it said it would address personalization structures later in February. Board members said they wanted to gain more perspective from students and staff on their proposal to offer a 20-minute homeroom period twice a week.