Minutes for Grady High School Local School Council MeetingOctober 1, 2013
Members in attendance: Ms. Sharon Bray, parent representative and chairwoman; Dr. Vincent Murray, principal and vice chairman; Mr. James Campbell, secretary and teacher representative;Ms. Gayla Blair, teacher representative; Mr. Rueben Brown, parent representative; Mr. Brain Kish, parent representative; Ms. Angela Robinson, business representative; Ms. Renee’ Steckl, parent representative; Mr. John Webster, parent representative
Members absent: none
Guests in attendance: Ms. Byron Barnes, instructional coach; Ms. Chelsea Gordon, parent; Mr. Rodney Howard, assistant principal; Ms. Jacqueline Marable, parent liaison; Dr. David Propst, assistant principal
With all members being present, Ms. Bray called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. on October 1, 2013. With the secretary position being vacant, Ms. Bray asked that Mr. Campbell take the minutes. Ms. Bray welcomed the guests and new members, then facilitated introductions.
Ms. Bray distributed a suggested agenda. Ms. Robinson moved to adopt it. Mr. Campbell seconded the motion, and the council unanimously adopted the agenda. Mr. Campbell moved to adopt the minutes from the previous meeting. Ms. Blair seconded the motion, and the council unanimously adopted the minutes.
Ms. Bray nominated Dr. Murray for vice chairman of the council. Ms. Robinson nominated Mr. Campbell for secretary. Ms. Bray called for a vote. Dr. Murray and Mr. Campbell were unanimously elected vice chairman and secretary, respectively.
In lieu of the usual principal’s report, Dr. Murray asked Mr. Barnes to present the council with information about the new College and Career Ready Performance Index (CCRPI), the new Georgia school rating and accountability system that replaced Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP).
Mr. Barnes stated that CCRPI has 18 criteria on which schools are graded as opposed to 9 under AYP. Any student subgroup with at least 10 students can be used as a subgroup for the purposes of CCRPI, whereas AYP required 40. CCRPI is calculated using End of Course Test (EOCT) scores, which can be traced to individual teachers, as opposed to the Georgia High School Graduation Test (GGT), which measures a students learning over the duration of their student career and, as such, cannot be attributed to one teacher. Vertical teaming of teachers, in which teachers of the same general content area (e.g. social studies, math, etc.) in different grades coordinate curricula, are required under the new CCRPI. AYP had four statuses for schools, three of which indicated adequate or excellentperformance (gold, silver, bronze), and one of which indicated inadequate performance (needs improvement). CCRPI also has four categories of schools, but only one (reward) indicates adequate performance, while three (alert, focus, and priority) indicate inadequate performance. Grady is currently a focus school.
Mr. Barnes explained that Grady was a focus school because of a disparity in the graduation rates of white students and students with disabilities. The students with disabilities (SWD) subgroup consists of approximately 30 students per graduating class, making each student 3.33% of the subgroup. Two changes in the method of calculating graduation rates also negatively impacted Grady’s reported graduation rate. First, students who receive special education diplomas are counted as dropouts, even if their Individual Education Plans (IEPs) set a special education diploma as the students’ goal. Second, students who transferred to out-of-state schools and did not provide proof of enrollment at a new school were counted as dropouts. Since the standard procedure for transferring students prior to 2011 did not require the student to provide proof of enrollment at a new school, many students were coded as dropouts.
Mr. Barnes outlined the CCRPI index, which includes a scale of 100 with the possibility for 3 bonus points. Mr. Barnes reiterated that EOCT scores, including pass rates, exceeds expectations rates, and overall improvement, would determine many of the points on the CCRPI scale. Ms. Bray stated that Grady may be penalized on this scale since many of its strongest math students take Math I in middle school and, as such, do not have their Math I EOCT scores counted toward Grady’s aggregate math EOCT scores. Mr. Campbell noted that Grady faced a similar issue with regard to science classes. Physical Science requires an EOCT, but most students with a strong aptitude in science do not take Physical Science. Those students usually take Physics and Chemistry, neither of which have an EOCT.
Mr. Barnes said that growth rates are a key component to the new evaluation system, especially for teachers. He stated that teachers with high performing students may be at a disadvantage as, although they will earn high test scores, they may manifest less growth. He also stated that the formulas and baselines for growth had not yet been established.
Mr. Barnes explained that many aspects of the extra credit section, in which schools can earn 3 additional points on the 100 pint scale, had not yet been implemented. He also noted that the aggregate student data he was sharing was from 2012, as data for the class of 2013 was not yet available from the state. Ms. Robinson stated that preliminary PEC data for 2013 was available.
Mr. Campbell noted that schools that go on the focus schools list remain on that list for a minimum of three years regardless of the school’s performance during their first and second years on the list.
Mr. Barnes noted that in terms of SAT scores and other factors (which are not included in CCRPI), Grady was performing above the state, the district, and all of the APS schools except for the small, elite early colleges which take only the very top students from each high school. Mr. Webster asked how many students took the SAT. Dr. Murray states that approximately 80% of Grady’s graduating class took the test. Mr. Barnes stated that a total of 293 seniors took the SAT, double the number of Grady seniors who took the test in 2006. Dr. Murray noted that the senior class had 315 students. Mr. Barnes also informed the council that Grady had a composite ACT score of 19.9 for 2013. The number of students taking the ACT had more than doubled from 80 in 2006 to 216 in 2013.
Dr. Murray asked Assistant Principal Dr. Propst to provide an update on campus lighting, an issue brought to the attention of the council by an email from parent Lynette Slovensky. Dr. Propst explained that many outside lights on campus had been replaced, but others still need replacing. He stated that he was working on getting a faster turnaround time from reporting of a dim bulb to its replacement. He also updated the council on other pending security improvements, including a card reader for access to the music hall and gym, locks for the back gate of the stadium, and issuance of keys to all relevant staff. Dr. Propst stated he was also pursuing brighter lights, more lighting, and visibility improvements for the stairs between the gym and student parking lot. Ms. Steckl noted that on open house night, someone fell on the steps Dr. Propst was discussing. Dr. Propst stated that, as a result of that fall, he was prevailing upon Mr. Smith, an APS capital improvement officer, to provide Grady with the additional lighting.
Dr. Murray suggested the council address the matter to Mr. Parsons, the head of APS facilities. Ms. Bray suggested the council have a point person to meet with Dr. Propst and help draft a letter to Mr. Parsons. Ms. Robinson asked if the PTSA already drafted such a letter, thereby allowing us to simply support the PTSA letter. Ms. Bray, Ms. Robinson, and Mr. Brown agreed that a single letter from Grady was ideal. Mr. Kish volunteered to coordinate with the PTSA and Dr. Propst in drafting the letter.
Dr. Murray reported that school enrollment was 1328, not the projected 1379. He stated that Grady avoided losing two teachers despite falling short of projected enrollment. Grady now has 16 new teachers this school year, but could not find special education teachers. The new special education requirement call for special education teachers to have three certifications; one in special education and two in content areas. Currently, the school is staffing these positions with substitutes. Ms. Bray asked if these positions had been added since last year. Dr. Murray answered that the positions had been added due to an increase in Grady’s special education student population. Dr. Murray also noted that the larger teaching staff allowed Grady to add electives.
Mr. Webster asked what enrollment was for the 2012-13 school year. Mr. Barnes answered that Grady had 1,352 student in May, 2013. Ms. Bray asked what the enrollment by grade level was. Mr. Barnes gave the most recent breakdown as 451 freshmen, 310 sophomores, 329 juniors, and 235 seniors.
Ms. Bray suggested fixing the council meeting time at 4p.m., as opposed to alternating between 4 and 5 as the council did the prior two years. Dr. Murray stated that Tuesday meetings could potentially conflict with faculty meetings. Ms. Bray proposed setting the meeting schedule immediately to avoid potential conflicts. She advised maintain the current schedule of the first Tuesday of the month, while skipping January, as school will have just returned to session. Ms. Bray called to schedule meetings on November 12, December 3, February 4, March 4, April 1, and May 6.
Ms. Bray distributed suggested amendments to the council’s bylaws. The amendments removed election procedures from section 8, thereby allowing the council to set procedures when it calls elections. They also removed a redundant list of positions from section 8, changed article 3 to reflect the business representative position, and removed the requirement of contacting the county organ for non-called meetings from article 3. Ms. Bray moved to adopt the amendments to the bylaws. Mr. Campbell seconded the motion. The council unanimously voted to adopt the amendments.
Ms. Bray articulated the council’s concerns regarding overcrowding. She stated that even though Grady’s enrollment is now within its planning capacity range, the facility still doesn’t seem adequate for even a “right-sized” population. She also stated that the insufficient number of lockers, inadequate number of science labs, the presence of portables, and the growing number of floating teachers all negatively affect student achievement. Dr. Murray added that the building would lose three classrooms in order to make technology labs for the Biomedical Science and Engineering program, which is currently housed in the dance theater. He stated that a facilities report was forthcoming. Mr. Barnes stated that he had attended a walkthrough with Mr. Carnes, a former superintendent for instruction from Indianapolis, and another walkthrough with engineers. Mr. Barnes said that they agreed that portables were not a permanent solution to Grady’s capacity issues.
Ms. Steckl added that outside facilities use is also an issue for Grady parents. Since the stadium on Grady’s grounds is used by the entire district, parents often experience difficulties attending after-school events or even picking students up from those events. Ms. Bray noted areas, such as behind the stadium, that could potentially provide additional parking space. Ms. Steckl suggested an overall examination of the school’s facilities, and pressing for additional facilities if the current facilities are insufficient. Ms. Robinson called for such an examination to also consider the affect facilities have on instruction. Dr. Murray said he would investigate the protocol for such an examination.
Mr. Webster referred to the earlier figures on enrollment per grade, which indicated that the school had 451 freshman and only 235 seniors. Mr. Campbell noted that the figure for seniors would be decrease and the figures for freshman increased due to students who failed core classes being classified at a lower grade level. Mr. Webster added that the large difference, 116 students, still suggest rising overall enrollment. Ms. Bray added that overcrowding would continue as elementary enrollment in the cluster continues to rise. Ms. Steckl stated that Grady’s capacity needs to be addressed before those elementary students are enrolled in high school.
Ms. Bray asked what the council could do to improve Grady’s CCRPI rating. Mr. Barnes responded that parents could help improve attendance. Ms. Steckl raised the issue of late busses, which negatively impact attendance. She stated she'd spoken to bussing personnel in the district office and that they’d taken her phone number so they could respond. Mr. Barnes stated that late arrivals due to late busses do not count against the student. Ms. Steckl responded that students are still missing instructional time. Ms. Blair stated that, ironically, the school day had been pushed back 15 minutes in order to give busses more time to get students to school, but late busses are still a persistent problem. Ms. Blair stated that busses service elementary, middle, and high schools. She asked if could find out at which level the breakdown in transportation was occurring. Dr. Propst added that the late busses negatively impact school culture, as even students who do not ride the bus arrive at school or class late because they know that instruction will be delayed due to late busses. However, he did notice gradual increases in bus punctuality. Ms. Robinson asked who in the district office handled bus issues. Dr. Propst responded that Ms. Melissa Davis, the Assistant Director for Transportation, was his contact. Dr. Murray suggested inviting her to meet with LSC.
Mr. Barnes suggested that an additional problem for busses is that 8th Street does not have an acceptable bus lane. Dr. Propst responded that the city planning committee is discussing the bus lane as well as the issue of the 10th Street bike lane and having a zone officer to slow traffic during bus pick up and drop off times. Ms. Bray suggested the LSC draft letters related to these issues as well. Dr. Propst said that such letters would be helpful as the current situation is potentially dangerous. Ms. Steckl volunteered to work with Dr. Propst on drafting a letter regarding these issues. She inquired as to whether related issues with visiting busses in the 10th Street parking lot were resolved. Dr. Propst said that those issues were not resolved. He stated he was working with district personnel to resolve it.
Ms. Bray recapitulated the issues the LSC had discussed; facilities, the instructional audit, CCRPI, attendance, and busses. She then opened the meeting to public comments.
Ms. Chelsea Gordon, a parent in attendance, thanked the council for its work. She asked how many trailers Grady had and how long they had been at the school. Dr. Murray answered that ten trailers had been at the school for three years. Ms. Gordon also suggested putting field trips and other activities, as well as contact information for the sponsors of such activities, on the school calendar. Ms. Steckl agreed with this suggestion and added that the school could also consider a Facebook page.
With the public comments concluded, Mr. Campbell moved to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Blair seconded the motion. The Council unanimously approved the motion. Ms. Bray adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m.
1