Site Council Minutes
Ithaca High School
Rhoda Janis, Nan Bell, Carl Palmer, Jeffrey Wayno, Ted Van Loan, Fred Schwartz, David Lee, Jim Scarpulla,
Margaret Shepard, Troy Tinney, Madeline Powell, Mary Perry
Chair: Jeffrey Wayno
Facilitator: Carl Palmer
Snacks: Rhoda Janis
Recorder: Mary Perry
Jeffrey convened the meeting at 7:36 deciding that introductions were not necessary due to the small number
of people present.
Last meetings minutes were read and approved.
36 Grant Proposal requests were received, each member present was given a packet with a copy of each
Troy asked how much money was in the grant--$18,000.
Board of Education- Margaret
Student Council- Ted reported that Ismael Villafane attended and discussed various subjects including
parking and off-campus activities.
District Council- Jeffrey
Administration-Troy reports that the headphone issue was discussed, also that student parking spaces may
be increased, and that the old ISS room now has 2 full staff supervising.
Discussion about headphones.
Jeffrey reported that we have a major project ahead of us and asked that we read through all of the grant
proposals and rank them by next meeting.
He asked for any new issues, then asked how we would like to proceed with so few people present.
Jim handed out a draft of Site Team Goals.
He wanted the members to check to make sure that all of our suggestions from last meeting had been
Bill asked if Goals# 1 and # 2 are both about the 9th grade initiative, and what will be done after students
who are having trouble are identified.
It was agreed that Goal #1 is not restriced to 9th grade, and Nan Bell said that in the summer it was decided
that various departments would address the needs identified, such as time management and note-taking.
Jim wanted to clarify what was the purpose of collecting this data, what will be the specifics of data
Rhoda reminded us that Goal #1 was based on our meeting with Bill Heffner and Kristie Hotchkiss. She
expressed the need to have a clearing house to coordinate all of the info and follow-up on establishing
measures of success.
Jim said that setting standards for success sounds like a goal he could live with. As a result of looking
through the 5 week reports Jim told us that many are failing.
Margaret said that perhaps our function could be as a clearing house for the information.
Rhoda would like to know where this info is going, and expressed hope that something is going to be done
Fred asked if the State gathers this information, and Rhoda said no, just standardized test results are gathered
by the State.
Carl remembers data that came out in a newspaper report last year, and how teachers took issue saying it was
Fred said that for him, personally, some of the information on the 5 -week reports was not understandable.
Does BOCES process the information?
Carl said, yes, but that raw data is hard to get from Boces.
Discussion of Data Collection in Other School Districts:
Troy said that other Site Based Councils have put out data so that the data can be processed, which is very
helpful. For instance, A.P.s tend to just know what is happening in their own realm and rarely get to see the
broad picture of the school as a whole. He expressed the desire to see studies of the data broken down as to
how kids are doing by groups, such as grade, race or attendance. Then if any one group was behind, the
school would be encouraged to raise this group’s data before the school considered itself to have succeeded.
Perhaps the Site Based Council can help the school look at the data, or at least begin the process by looking at
the data ahead of time. Many expressed dissatisfaction with the BOCES system.
Troy showed us an example of data collected in Texas. The goal in Texas was equity in learning as well as
Fred asked how data is collected and submitted to OCM BOCES
Troy talked about the practicality of teachers using a disc and sending their information direct. There are
much better ways of disseminating information
Carl mentioned there is whole realm of systems available commercially which are very sophisticated.
Fred will type in the goals on the Web site so they can be checked by everyone, edited, and fed back via
Fred suggested a system for reviewing the Grant Proposals ahead of time by ranking the 36 Grant requests by
Jeffrey will send out a message to all Site Council members reminding them to come and pick up their
Discussion of Criteria:
Jim said that we need to determine what the criteria should be for ranking Grant Proposals.
Rhoda told us that last year’s Site Council looked at how the requests fit with the goals of the Council and
ranked them accordingly.
It was decided that we individually rank our top 15 at home.
Madeline agreed there is a need to choose criteria, as did Bill.
Two suggestions for criteria from Madeline were: How many students does this effect? and How long will
the grant money be used?
Carl feels that some people who have received a grant year after year not be considered, but Rhoda felt we
should look at each individually.
Bill said he would like to use flexible criteria, i.e. rolling guidelines.
Fred suggested ranking the proposals 1-10 with 10 being best and Rhoda agreed.
Council unanimously voted to try Fred's system
Bill suggested that we may need to leave time for argument next meeting
Jeffrey will send out a personal note to all who aren't here. It is imperative that everyone attend the next
meeting November 1.
Bill mentioned that several parents are interested in joining Site Council.
Bill requested white boards for next week's meeting
Nan will provide white boards
Fred, reiterated that we write down on a sheet of paper our ranking of all 36 proposals.
Next meeting will be extended until 9 pm.
Send our Grant Proposal rankings (1-10) to Troy via e-mail by Monday October 30. He will compile the
results and when we come to the meeting we will choose the top 15.
Tasks for November 1 Meeting
R: N. Bell
Jeffrey moved to adjourn the meeting with Bill seconding.
Goals of the Site-Based Council
DEFINE THE ROLE OF THE SITE-BASED COUNCIL:
This was a question that came up continuously, as we attempted to clarify and develop out
brainstorm list of goals. It is our suggestion that we need to define and focus Site-based council’s
role first, so we can then determine how we want to approach the action steps below. We also need
to consider the means and evidence of achievement and if they are within our timeframe, energy,
philosophy and power to pursue.
1. Accumulate data on students with regard to attendance and academic failure. (What is
already in place, is this an issue that is not being addressed, what does it mean?)
2. Follow up on the effectiveness of steps taken in the 9th Grade Initiative, Fall 2000. (Survey
of students and teachers, review data in #1)
3. Examine scheduling issues to address space and size issues at the High School. (9 period
day, early/late sessions? Review other school models?)
4. Identify challenges and impact of State Standards from student, teacher, and community
perspective (gather info and communicate annually to HIS and BOE, consider relationship to
allocation of resources)
5. Clarify/document hiring practices (what progress or decisions have already been made, are
there other “elusive” procedures that need to be clarified?)
6. Improve communication with Middle School Site-based (meet and exchange ideas once a
year, attend each other’s regular meetings, exchange minutes?)