Connecticut Associationof Boards of Education Inc.81 Wolcott Hill RoadWethersfield, CT 06109-1242

PeriodicalPostage

PAIDHartford, CT

Vol. 16, No. 8 September 2012

w w w . c a b e . o r g

INSIDE THIS EDITION

James Marpe, Acting Chair, Westportand Secretary Treasurer, CABEElaine Whitney, Secretary, WestportArea 6 Co-Director, CABE

1,000new school

readiness slotscreated

See STATE page 2

See EDUCATION page 15

CABE welcomes new membersCABE welcomes new membersCABE welcomes new membersCABE welcomes new membersCABE welcomes new members

★

★

★

Milford

Tolland

Southington

CABE welcomes theAvon, Milford, Orange,Southington and Tolland

Boards of Educationand their superintendents

to our 2012-2013membership. CABE

is your Association and

State Boardapprovesnetworkschools

Patrice A. McCarthy, Deputy Directorand General Counsel, CABE

Education Reform update

See 1,000 page 8

★Avon

we are here to serve you!

Chris SeymourReporter, CABE

In an effort to provide increased ac-cess to early childhood education — andhelp turn around struggling school dis-tricts in the process — state officialsrecently announced that 1,000 new schoolreadiness slots have been identified andawarded to providers throughout Con-necticut as a part of the education reformsGovernor Dannel P. Malloy supportedearlier this year, according to a press re-lease from the Governor’s office.

The slots — most of which will be al-located to what Malloy called “high-needs areas”— will go to nearly 40 com-munities, with Bridgeport (130) andHartford (64) receiving the most. Othercommunities receiving large readinessallocations include Meriden (58), NewHaven (53) and Norwalk (50).

Last spring’s education reform law,targets $6.775 million in new funding forincreased access to high-quality earlychildhood education.

The new school readiness slots will beadministered through the ConnecticutSchool Readiness Program, a Departmentof Education initiative designed to pro-vide for, and increase access to, high-quality preschool for children ages three

Welcome back to school!Welcome back to school!Welcome back to school!Welcome back to school!Welcome back to school!

★Orange

The State Board of Education recentlyapproved the applications of four schoolsfor inclusion in the CommissionersNetwork for 2012-13. The schools thatwere invited to apply face the mostsignificant challenges in the state. Theapproved schools are Curiale School inBridgeport, Milner School in Hartford,High School in the Community in NewHaven and Stanton School in Norwich.

Each of these schools will receive be-tween 1-1.5 million dollars in the first year.Prior to approval, the school districtsworked closely with the State Departmentof Education staff to develop a turn-around plan for the schools. Those plansaddress family/community, schoolThe New Educator Performance

Evaluation and Support System: What DoBoard Members Need to Do Now toPrepare for Statewide Implementation in2013-2014?

CABE has been fortunate to be a majorvoice in educational reform in Connecticutand will continue to be an active part ofthe dialogue going forward. One piece ofthat role has been CABE’s participation inthe Performance Evaluation AdvisoryCommittee (PEAC) and its WorkingGroups, which were charged with devel-oping a new system for educator perfor-

mance evaluation and support in Con-necticut.

Three members of CABE’s executiveleadership team and four of CABE’s boardmembers served on PEAC and/or one ofthe four Working Groups: Teacher;Administrator; Pupil Personnel Services;and Implementation.

It was rewarding to work collaborative-ly with highly dedicated and experiencedpractitioners and representatives of othereducation-related organizations, includingCAPSS, CAS, CEA, and AFT. From thestart, there was clear consensus on thekey goals of inspiring educators towardcontinuous improvement, elevation oftheir profession, and supporting them inthose efforts. We also actively

CTCEF’s annual conference ................ 4See you in court ................................... 5Student records ................................... 6Legal briefs .......................................... 7Court rules on threatening speech ....... 7CABE Board of Directors and Staff ............................................ 9Report to the Membership ..................10Media Message ..................................13Schools can’t reject blueberries ..........14CABE: working for YOU .....................17

Lydia Tedone

2 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012

School bells ringwith a new sound

PRESIDENT COMMENTARY

CABE Board of Directors

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEELydia Tedone .................................................. President, SimsburyRichard Murray ............................. First Vice President, KillinglyAnn Gruenberg ........... VP for Government Relations, HamptonStephen Wright .... VP for Professional Development, TrumbullJames Marpe ................................ Secretary/Treasurer, WestportDon Blevins ........................................... Immediate Past PresidentJohn Prins ........................................................... Member at Large

AREA DIRECTORSSusan Hoffnagle ....................... Area 1 Co-Director, WinchesterMari-Ellen (Mimi) Valyo ........ Area 1 Co-Director, WinchesterDaniel Santorso ........................... Area 1 Co-Director, PlymouthBecky Tyrrell ....................................... Area 2 Director, PlainvilleLaura Bush ............................................. Area 3 Director, VernonGavin Forrester .............................. Area 6 Co-Director, StratfordElaine Whitney ............................. Area 6 Co-Director, WestportMichael D’Agostino ....................... Area 7 Co-Director, HamdenSheila McCreven ..................... Area 7 Co-Director, WoodbridgeJohn Prins ...................................... Area 7 Co-Director, BranfordRobert Ruggiero ............................ Area 8 Co-Director, MadisonPamela Meier ................................ Area 8 Co-Director, MadisonGail MacDonald ............................. Area 9 Director, Stonington

ASSOCIATESEileen Baker ........................................... Associate, Old SaybrookSharon Beloin-Saavedra .......................... Associate, New BritainGary Brochu ........................................................ Associate, BerlinRobert Guthrie .......................................... Associate, West HavenCal Heminway ................................................... Associate, Granby

COMMITTEE CHAIRSRobert Mitchell ........................ Chair, State Relations, MontvilleBeverly Washington ................. Chair, Federal Relations, GrotonBecky Tyrrell ................................... Chair, Resolutions, Plainville

CITY REPRESENTATIVESBob Trefry .................................. City Representative, BridgeportMatthew Poland ........................... City Representative, HartfordMichael R. Nast ....................... City Representative, New HavenPolly Rauh ....................................City Representative, StamfordCharles Stango ........................... City Representative, Waterbury

STAFFRobert Rader ...................................................................... Executive DirectorPatrice McCarthy ................................ Deputy Director and General CounselBonnie Carney ........................................... Sr. Staff Associate for PublicationsNicholas Caruso ............................................ Sr. Staff Assoc. for Field Service and Coord. of TechnologySheila McKay ............................ Sr. Staff Associate for Government RelationsKelly Moyher ......................................................................... Sr. Staff AttorneyVincent Mustaro ..................................... Sr. Staff Associate for Policy ServiceLisa Steimer .............................. Sr. Staff Assoc. for Professional DevelopmentTeresa Costa ............................... Coordinator of Finance and AdministrationPamela Brooks ......................... Sr. Admin. Assoc. for Policy Ser. /Search Ser.Terry DeMars .............................................. Admin. Assoc. for Policy ServiceMelissa Dickinson ........................... Admin. Assist. for Membership ServicesGail Heath ...................................... Admin. Assoc. for Government RelationsWilmarie Newton ...................................... Admin. Assoc. for Labor RelationsCorliss Ucci .............................. Receptionist/Asst. to the Executive Director

The CABE Journal (ISSN 1092-1818) is published monthly excepta combined issue for July/August as a member service of theConnecticut Association of Boards of Education, 81 Wolcott HillRoad, Wethersfield, CT 06109, (860) 571-7446. CABE member-ship dues include $30 per person for each individual who receivesThe CABE Journal. The subscription rate for nonmembers is $75.Association membership dues include a subscription for each boardmember, superintendent, assistant superintendent and businessmanager. The companies and advertisements found in The CABEJournal are not necessarily endorsed by CABE. “PeriodicalsPostage Paid at Hartford, CT.” POSTMASTER: Send addresschanges to The CABE Journal, CABE, 81 Wolcott Hill Road,Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242. Email: bcarney@cabe.org.Members can find the CABE Journal online at: www.cabe.org/userlogin.cfm?pp=84&userrequest=true&keyrequest=false&userpage=84

People in the NewsPatrice A. McCarthy has been named a member of the

Connecticut Bar Association Education Law SectionExecutive Committee.

The American Society of Association Executives(ASAE) recently announced that Lisa Steimer, Sr. StaffAssociate for Professional Development, was renewed asa Certified Association Executive (CAE). The CAE is thehighest professional credential in the association indus-try. Less than five percent of all association professionalshave earned the CAE.

Elizabeth A. Napolitano, Administrative Assistant tothe Wallingford Superintendent of Schools and Clerk ofthe Board of Education, has been elected Vice Presidentof the National Association of Educational OfficeProfessionals (NAEOP).

(continued from page 1)environment, leadership, teachers/support staff, use oftime, curriculum/instruction, and use of evidence/data.

Several of the plans include provisions for up to threehundred hours of additional instructional time, through acombination of extended day and year. In order to makethe instructional time sustainable, in some cases staff willcome in 44 minutes before the regular opening time andother staff will come in 44 minutes after the regularopening time, thus adding 88 minutes to each school daywithout extending teacher schedules.

The Milner School will partner with Jumoke Academy,a Hartford charter school, and will add 34 additionalinstructional days, as well as Saturday academies. Theywill also explore ways to increase the school year by 35days. The New Haven plan adds 240 additional hours tothe school year, with 140 of these hours used for teacherprofessional development. Their goal is to move from“mass production to mass personalization” for theirstudents.

Students will not be advanced a grade based on seattime, but rather will progress by demonstrating masteryon subject specific tests. The Stanton School in Norwichwill also add an additional hour per day of instructionaltime beginning on November 1. In September andOctober, the additional time will be used for professionaldevelopment, enabling them to “front load” the teachertraining and professional development.

Most of the plans also include provisions to developa faculty that strongly supports the turnaround plan. AtCuriale School, for example, in years 2 and 3 onlyteachers rated proficient or above will remain at theschool. State Department of Education staff will workclosely with the schools as they implement the improve-ment plans.

State Boardapproves network schools

While walking in my neighborhood, I asked threeneighbor children playing in their yard, about returningto a new school year. “I’m so excited”, bubbled the firstgrader, because “I love reading and meeting new fri-ends.” Her fourth grade sister echoed, “recess is myfavorite, so is math and I like when my teachers payattention to me.” Not to be outdone, the pre-schoolerstated “I just like school!” Their father watching in thebackround, without hesitation said “they’re ready.”

Education Lesson 101: Turnaround Schools: TheState Board of Education’s approval of the Commis-sioner’s Network, which includes four urban schools in

parents, as theirefforts andcollaboration havebeen embraced bytheir communities.Every majorstakeholderrepresented, answeredthe call from theirlowest performingschools. The

“This unparalleled achievementwill be about the historic

‘turnarounds’ of four schools infour neighborhoods will . . . .

promote the culture of success thatprotects and promotes educational

opportunity — and that excitesevery child, every September.”

Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven and Norwich, shouldbe recognized as a groundbreaking, as it will provide aholistic approach to improving the lowest performingschools in the lowest performing districts.These schools can become where:

• every child can have the same opportunity to echosentiments not unlike the children on my street.

• parents can become engaged in their children’seducation.

• teachers can make meaningful strides in improve-ment of instruction.

• principals and administrators can achieve meaning-ful progress under their leadership.

• Boards of Education can embrace the needed re-form legislation to ensure struggling schools canbecome successful schools.

The Commissioner should be applauded for setting inmotion the initiative to support, guide and develop thestrategies of intervention. Praise should be given to theBoards of Education, Superintendents, labor unions and

Commissioner’sNetwork provides a tremendous amount of promise, as aninnovative and strategic approach to an urgent overhaulof failing schools.

Reforms similar to the ones that will be established inCommissioner’s Network schools have been provensuccessful in other states since they are based on get-ting commitment to reform, a sense of urgency and utili-zation of best practices. Their success in large urbandistricts illustrates the possibilities of what can happenin these schools.

The Commissioner’s Network is not about power, butabout school improvement and community engagement.This unparalleled achievement will be about the historic“turnarounds” of four schools in four neighborhoodsthat will, in the end, promote the culture of success thatprotects and promotes educational opportunity — andthat excites every child, every September.

Robert Rader

BUSINESS AFFILIATESDIAMOND MEMBER

ACT, Inc. - Northeast RegionFinalsite

GOLD MEMBERSBerchem, Moses & Devlin

Connecticut Business SystemsShipman & Goodwin

Siegel, O'Connor,O’Donnell & Beck, P.C

Sullivan, Schoen,Campane & Connon

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTARY

CABE Affiliate Members

The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012 3

Retirement speech for Anne L. Bryant

SILVER MEMBERSAnthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield

Corporate Cost ControlLindburg & Ripple

Milone & MacBroom, Inc.Ovations Benefits Group

Quisenberry Arcari ArchitectsThe Segal Company

Trane

BRONZE PLUS MEMBERSBlue Ribbon LLCBrown and Brown

Fletcher Thompson ArchitectsFriar Associates

Goldstein & Peck, P.C.Kaestle Boos Associates, Inc.

O & G Industries

BRONZE PLUS MEMBERSThe S/L/A/M Collaborative

Suisman, Shapiro, Wool, Brennan,Gray & Greenberg

Whitsons School Nutrition

BRONZE MEMBERS

Nathaniel G. Brown, LLCChinni & Meuser LLC

Dattco Inc.Fuller & D’Angelo

Architects and PlannersJCJ Architecture

Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C.The Lexington Group

Muschell & Simoncelli

EDUCATIONALAFFILIATES

American School for the DeafArea Cooperative Educational Services

Capitol Region Education CouncilThe College Board

Connecticut Association of SchoolBusiness Officials

Cooperative Educational ServicesConnecticut Center for School Change

Connecticut EducatorsComputer Association

Connecticut School Buildingsand Grounds Association

EASTCONNEDUCATION CONNECTION

LEARN

Anne Bryant, Executive Director of theNational School Boards Association,will be retiring at the end of September.Anne has been a wonderful advocate forpublic education and the work of schoolboards and superintendents.

At the annual meeting of the stateassociation executive directors in NewYork City, on July 31, I had the honor ofgiving a retirement speech for Anne onbehalf of all of the executive directors. Ithought you would enjoy reading thespeech.

Those of us who have served asexecutive directors know and have knownAnne Bryant for years. I don’t want to gothrough her whole biography or talkabout the individual services, programsand activities she worked on at NSBA.Instead, I want to talk about how effectiveAnne has been as a representative of allof us.

But, before I do, I want to mention thatAnne Bryant came to NSBA the same yearI came to Connecticut, 1996. She hadbeen executive director of the AmericanAssociation of University Women, anational organization advancing equity

for women and girls in education, theworkplace, and the family.

Anne was the first and, at least as oftoday, the only female executive directorof NSBA. And, we all noted, her voicewas nowhere as… sonorous as herpredecessor, Tom Shannon. She made upfor that with her ability to address criticaleducational issues, in writing, televisionand especially in her speeches at NSBAGeneral Sessions.

As Anne entered her first year, she putus through a series of strategic planningsessions, much as we have done this year,in order to determine what state associa-tions and school districts needed fromNSBA. She did much listening and shedistilled what she learned, then taught itto us.

The essence of the lesson: boards ofeducation must be two things: theadvocates for increasing student achieve-ment in the education system and theconveners of the community.

When we look back on our careers, allof us would like to be able to point tospecific services or programs that wecreated or strengthened. Sometimes thesenew ideas become the touchstone ofone’s career.

In Anne’s case, however, it was herconsistent fostering of this idea about theroles and the responsibilities of boards ofeducation. She understood that the wayto promote public education is byensuring the schools give the public whatit so desperately wants: high qualityeducation, carried out at the level closestto parents, taxpayers and others in eachcommunity. Boards must convene thecommunity to get the support of theschools that is necessary to provide highquality education.

And, the public wants to see the publicschools succeed.

The power of the idea that public

education is the unifying factor in holdingour diverse society together is not Anne’salone, nor has she claimed that it was.But, the power to express this conceptand make it count has been one of hergreatest strengths.

Anne’s forte was and still is, her abilityto enter a room and be recognized as a keysupporter of public education—with theunderstanding that that includes thegood, the bad and the ugly (and I’m notspecifically talking about anyone in thisroom). She talks about all the good inpublic education… and the bad. Sheextols the thousands of local districtswhich do really well in connecting the willof the community to the education of theirchildren, thanks in part, to all of thepeople in this room.

When she talks about those districtswhich are in trouble, which fail to increasethe achievement of their students andwhich lack the resources to providestudents with the well-rounded educationevery child needs, she does it in athoughtful way, explaining why things areas they are—and talking about how wecan do things better.

Anne has brought her own style andgraciousness to the position—whethershe was wearing a beautiful scarf or not.Her presence indicated class and depth.Her thoughtfulness and caring easilycomes through. And, we have all beentouched by that.

Her advice is warmly received by boardmembers and superintendents, theLearning First Alliance and certainly bytop government officials, going back tothe Clinton Administration. An ability todevelop warm relationships is somethingall execs need to develop and we have hada master teacher before us for years.

Anne, your effectiveness all of theseyears is part of the glue that has heldNSBA together and, has made boards of

education that much stronger over theyears. Holding the diverse people in frontof you together, no matter how imperfectthat is at times, is a continuous, difficultresponsibility and we thank you for howhard you have tried—and the many timesin which you succeeded.

I will always think back to Annecoming on board when I think of the yearsI have put in as an exec. I know many ofyou can remember the first time you heardher voice on the phone, at an orientationor maybe at a Summer Institute. And, howwe might think about our own legacies aswe think back to the little and the bigthings she has done.

And we will remember the many timeswhen you stepped forward to help ourassociations, our members and oftenourselves personally over those years.

While writing this, I kept thinkingabout the Henry the Fifth speech in whichhe talks about his army. He talks abouthow closely bonded people who gothrough a trial or a battle become.

As the executive directors wish youwell in the next part of your fabulouscareer, Anne, I think I can say that “wefew, we [usually] happy few, we band ofbrothers and sisters” who have strivenmightily to promote public education andour local associations, thank you for themany years of committed service, dedi-cated mentoring and warm friendship youhave given us. And wish you only thebest!

4 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Educatio • September 2012

Liz StokesPresident, CTCEF

David Coleman, co-author, Common Core State Standards,to speak at CTCEF’s 13th annual conference on October 2

David Coleman, who played a leadingrole in developing the Common Core StateStandards in math and literacy and hasbeen named president of the CollegeBoard, will speak at the ConnecticutConsortium of Education Foundation’s(CTCEF) 13th annual conference onTuesday, October 2, from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00p.m., at the Crowne Plaza Cromwell Hotel.

David’s topic will be, “Driving StudentAchievement Through the CommonCore.” He will also present a workshop,“The Common Core State Standards: AnImmersion Experience,” with SandraAlberti, Director of Partnership Initiativesand Professional Development at StudentAchievement Partners.

The conference will cover a variety oftopics. Barbara Diggs-Brown, communi-cations strategy consultant for FHI 360,and Candace Debnam, FHI 360’s programand development officer, will present aworkshop, Strategic Communications, forsmall to mid-sized education foundations

that will include using social media as amechanism to connect to stakeholders.

Unraveling the Mystery of Why PeopleGive…and What You Can Do About It willhelp you understand what motivatespeople to give to particular causes.Presenter Melissa Morriss-Olson,professor of non-profit management andphilanthropy at Bay Path College, willdiscuss specific strategies that you canuse to better connect donors to yourorganization and cause.

Financial Management for YourEducation Foundation will cover bestpractices for financial management, datarecording, and reporting. BookkeeperSara Pflueger and CPA Eric Zielinskiwill discuss how your data can providehelpful financial information for youreducation foundation.

Other workshops include Major andPlanned Giving Strategies for EducationFoundations with Little or No StaffSupport (Chris Templeman, MorganStanley Smith Barney) and Beyond theGrant Application: Is Your OrganizationStructured for Sustainable Grant

Funding? with Marti Fischer.Southington superintendent and

CTCEF board member Joe Erardi willmoderate a two-hour special trainingworkshop, Education FoundationFundamentals, for foundations that needto revitalize as well as for emergingfoundations. During lunch, Joe willpresent a Foundation Celebration Awardto an education foundation to recognizethe grassroots efforts of so many hard-working volunteers.

Luncheon Discussion Groups willcover cloud computing, LEF accountingquestions, public relations, CiviCRM forLEFs, endowment management, time tohire staff, strategic communications, whypeople give, alumni, questions regardingreviving an LEF, and workplace giving.

CTCEF is a statewide non-profitorganization whose mission is to facilitatethe creation, growth, and effectiveness oflocal education foundations in Connecti-cut. It was founded on the principle thatcommunity involvement is a key factor inimproving schools. Local educationfoundations contribute resources to

support public education.Register now for this important

conference and take advantage of ourEarly Bird Special (four or more peoplefrom the same organization register at thesame time with check, purchase order, orPayPal payment that must be received bySeptember 10). Visit the CTCEF Web siteat www.ctcef.org and click on “Confer-ence Page” to download the brochure.

For more information, call CTCEFPresident Liz Stokes at 203-227-9323.

ReminderWe need your help in keeping our da-tabase up-to-date. Please call us (860-571-7446) or go directly to the data-base website (https://em.eboardsolutions.com/cabe/eMembership/Admin/Login.asp) with any changeson your school board or district ad-ministrators. With the most current in-formation it will allow us to keep ev-eryone informed.

See You in Court – The Nutmeg Board of Education

The Nutmeg Board deals with residency issues of a studentThomas B. Mooney, Esq.Shipman & Goodwin

The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012 5

A Practical Guideto Connecticut

School Lawby Thomas B. Mooney, Esq.

Shipman & Goodwin

The Guide comes with a CD which provideshyperlinks to many cases and statutes

and will permit word searchesas a supplement to the Index.

New to the Seventh Edition:Bullying, Background Checks,

Child Abuse Reporting, Discrimination Issues,Educational Reform, FERPA,

Freedom of Information,State Aid for Educationand much, much more

The 7th edition is now available from CABE.Call and order your copy TODAY at 860.571.7446 or 800.317.0033

Seventh EditionNow Available

The Nutmeg Board of Educationmakes many mistakes. The latest imbro-glio created by the board will be report-ed here each issue, followed by an ex-planation of what the board should havedone. Though not intended as legal ad-vice, these situations may help boardmembers avoid common problems.

The new school year started smoothlyin Nutmeg, with one exception – theburgeoning enrollment. The NutmegBoard of Education had played it close inits staffing decisions for the comingschool year, because funds were so tight.However, as the beginning of the yearapproached, enrollments at every levelexceeded the predictions. What to do?

Ms. Superintendent came to the firstSeptember Board meeting with her plan.She explained to the Board that, givenclass size guidelines, it would benecessary to hire another six teachers tocover the increased enrollment. “Butdon’t worry,” she explained. “We will beable to find the money by tightening ourbelts.”

“Are you kidding?” veteran Boardmember Bob Bombast asked. “We didn’thide that kind of money in our budget . . .I mean if we hid any money, which ofcourse we didn’t, it wouldn’t be thatmuch. Besides, the class size limits arejust guidelines. Don’t worry aboutthem.”

Penny Pincher, the Board’s austerityqueen, put in her two cents. “I have abetter idea. My neighbors are constantlytelling me about the hoards of kids whoare attending our schools illegally. Godknows why they want to go to school inNutmeg, but they do. If our custodiansdo surveillance duty, I am sure that wecan exclude those lawbreakers and cutour enrollment down.”

Ms. Superintendent quickly saw thatshe wasn’t getting anywhere with herrequest for more teaching positions.“OK, then,” she responded. “I think thecustodians will enjoy the fresh air. I willget them right on this.”

Ms. Superintendent was surprised athow easy it was. After school one day, acustodian followed one student, who goton a city bus and apparently went home

to a neighboring community. He waited atthe bus stop the next morning, and sureenough the student got off the bus andwalked to the school bus stop. As soonas he shared this information with her, Ms.Superintendent promptly told the Boardall about it.

Ms. Superintendent notified thestudent and his family that he was noteligible for free school privileges inNutmeg, and, as provided by statute, shenotified the family of its right to appeal.She was shocked when the family actuallyappealed her decision to the Board, butshe was confident that the Board wouldsupport her.

That support was evident from thebeginning of the hearing. Bill Alot, locallegal scourge, represented the family.When he heard about the custodian’sobservations, he scoffed and told theBoard that they meant nothing. He wassurprised, however, when Bob Bombastgot into it with him. “Don’t give me that!”Bob thundered. “Once I heard about yourclient sneaking into town, I did a little‘research’ myself. I saw your client takethe bus out of town four days in a row.”

The Board was surprised at Bob’sinitiative, but figured that it was reliableevidence. Despite the testimony of thestudent and his mother that the studentwas simply helping his grandmother outof town, the Board voted unanimously toreject the appeal. Bill Alot vowed toappeal to the state.

Does Nutmeg have a problem?

As usual, Bob Bombast oversteppedhis limited authority as a board member.In residency matters, board members sit asjudges to hear the evidence from bothsides and decide the matter impartially.Ms. Superintendent’s communicationswith the Board and Bob’s interventionwere inconsistent with that responsibilityand raised due process concerns. Tostart, however, a more general review iswarranted.

School accommodation hearingsaddress two very different situations.Since school accommodations includereasonable transportation, parents havethe right to challenge transportationdecisions, such as bus stop location orwhether bus transportation will beprovided at all. The board’s decision insuch cases is very important, because ifthe parents appeal to the StateDepartment of Education, the board’sdecision will be affirmed unless it isarbitrary, capricious or unreasonable.School accommodation hearings moreoften deal with the basic question ofresidence and whether a student isentitled to attend school in that town.The school accommodations statuteprovides that the burden of provingresidency for school purposes is on the

party making the claim. However, there isa strong public policy in favor of educa-tion, and, if a student claiming to be elig-ible is denied school accommodations, asa practical matter the administrationshould generally be able to show that thestudent is in fact living elsewhere.

Sadly, the statute provides nodefinition of “residence.” When studentsspend time in another town with divorcedparents or other family members, therecan be serious question as to where thestudent actually lives. Given thecomplexity of modern living arrange-ments, school districts cannot use rigidformulas to determine school eligibility,such as requiring that the student spenda majority of nights in town. Rather,board members must consider all the factsand circumstances (e.g., living arrange-ments, location of possessions, history,relative frequency of nights in and out oftown, what happens on school vacations)to decide whether the student has a bonafide residence for school purposes. In-deed, a student may have two suchresidences.

Given the statutory procedures, theaforementioned due process concerns areless important than they might otherwisebe. In contrast to student expulsiondecisions, which are final, board-levelschool accommodation decisions are not.Once the board of education has ruled,the family may appeal to a hearing officerappointed by the State Department ofEducation. Moreover, in residencyhearings, there is no deference to thedecision of the local or regional board,and the state hearing officer decides thematter de novo. Thus, the state-levelhearing will obviate the due processconcerns.

Finally, there are two labor relationsissues here. First, class size is a negoti-able subject. Given that enrollment canbe unpredictable, flexibility in such mat-ters is crucially important. Here, Nutmegis fortunate simply to have guidelines.

Also, in her eagerness to find inelig-ible students, Ms. Superintendent mayhave invited a labor relations complaint.For union employees, working conditionsare negotiable, and school officials maynot make significant changes in existingworking conditions without prior negotia-tion. To be sure, school custodians per-form a variety of important tasks.

However, being a private investigatoris not typically one of them, and theirassignment to such duty likely triggered aduty to bargain.

Attorney Thomas B. Mooney is a part-ner in the Hartford law firm of Shipman& Goodwin who works frequently withboards of education. Mooney is a regularcontributor to the CABE Journal.

6 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012

Student records (FERPA) regulations revised: Policy implicationsVincent A. MustaroSenior Staff Associate for Policy Service, CABE

The U.S. Department of Education(DOE) revised regulations governing theFamily Educational Rights and PrivacyAct (FERPA). FERPA is the federal priv-acy law pertaining to the education re-cords of students. The new regulationscontinue to safeguard student privacywhile giving states the flexibility to shareschool data that can be helpful in judgingthe effectiveness of government invest-ments in education.

Previously, uncertainty existed be-tween state sunshine laws and FERPA,which created confusion for institutionsabout when and with whom student infor-mation could and should be shared.

Schools needed flexibility to pursueroutine uses of information without get-ting prior consent while allowing them toprevent those who may misuse or abusestudent information from accessing it.

Major ChangesThe major changes to the existing

federal regulations pertain to directoryinformation and to statewide longitudinal

data systems. School districts may dis-close a student’s directory informationwithout consent if the district first notifiesparents or eligible students of the typesof information that may be disclosed andallows them the opportunity to opt out ofthe disclosure. Directory information in-cludes things that are generally not con-sidered harmful or an invasion of privacyif disclosed.

Designation of certain information asdirectory information is beneficial toschool districts, since districts are pro-hibited from doing things like publishingyearbooks or creating graduation publica-tions unless the information contained inthe publication is designated as directoryinformation or consent is obtained foreach individual student. Some districtsdo not designate some information asdirectory information.

New RegulationsThe new regulations now allow dis-

tricts to adopt limited directory informa-tion policies that allow the disclosure ofdirectory information to be limited tospecific parties; for specific purposes, or

both. This new regulation lessens theburden of obtaining consent for the moremundane uses of student information,such as yearbooks, while still allowingschools to choose the purposes for whichdirectory information may be disclosed.

For example, the new regulations permita district to adopt a limited directoryinformation policy allowing parents andeligible students to permit the release ofthe student’s name, dates of attendanceand honors or awards for commencementpurposes while prohibiting the release ofsuch information to non-district request-ors.

In addition, the new regulations clarifythat parents may not, by opting out ofdirectory information, prevent a schoolfrom requiring a student to wear orpresent a student ID or badge.

The DOE felt the need for schools toimplement measures to ensure the safetyand security of students which shouldnot be impeded by a parent or studentusing FERPA’s directory information opt-out provisions.

Amended FERPA RegulationsThe amended FERPA regulations also

provide states with greater flexibility insharing data in statewide longitudinaldata systems.

Previously, the regulations allowedschool districts to disclose personallyidentifiable information without consentto “authorized representatives” of stateand local educational authorities, theSecretary of the U.S. Department ofEducation, the U.S. Attorney General andthe U.S. Comptroller General as may benecessary in connection with the audit,evaluation or enforcement of federal legalrequirements related to federal or state-supported education programs.

The interpretation of the previousregulations was that such sharing did notinclude other state or federal agenciesbecause those agencies were not underthe direct control of the state educationalauthority. This prevented the ConnecticutDepartment of Education from makingdisclosures of personally identifiableinformation to other state agencies.

The regulations now define “autho-rized representative” in a manner whichnow permits state and local educationauthorities to designate other individualsand entities, including other governmentalagencies as their “authorized representa-tives,” provided those individual oragencies are involved in a federal or state-supported “education program.”

The amended regulations define“education program” to include a “pro-gram that is principally engaged in theprovision of education, including, but notlimited to, early childhood education,elementary and secondary education,post-secondary education, job training,

career and technical education, adulteducation and any program that isadministered by an educational agency orinstitution.

DOE is planning to issue a series ofcase studies to explain in detail howeducation authorities may comply withthese new regulations.

The revised regulations permit schooldistricts to evaluate the preparedness ofits high school graduates for postsecon-dary education by designating the post-secondary institution as its authorizedrepresentative through a written agree-ment. The district could then obtaininformation such as remedial courses theirgraduates had to take in college or howlong their graduates persisted in college.

The regulations require the state andlocal education authorities to use “rea-sonable methods” to ensure that theirauthorized representatives are FERPA-compliant.

DOE, to help understand this require-ment, has published, “The FamilyEducational Rights and Privacy Act:Guidance for Reasonable Methods andWritten Agreements.” This documentdetails the specific requirements forwritten agreements and provides bestpractices for other provisions that couldbe included in agreements.

Policy ImplicationsMandated policy #5125, “Student

Educational Records/Annual Notification ofParental/Student Rights,” pertains to thistopic. It also contains language on the topicof “Directory Information.” Some districtsalso have a separate policy, #5145.15,“Directory Information.”

Policy #5125 has been updated toinclude the new definitions and othermaterial related to the revised regulations.The administrative regulation whichaccompanies the policy has also beenupdated. The policy and administrativeregulation can be attained by contactingthe CABE Policy Department.

The parental notification form has alsobeen revised. The guidance, “The FamilyEducational Rights and Privacy Act:Guidance for Reasonable Methods andWritten Agreements” is now an optionalappendix to policy #5125. Policy #5145.15,“Directory Information” and its formshave also been revised.

The Family Policy Compliance Officehas updated its website to include theFERPA final regulations; an overview ofthe new regulations; the guidancedocument for reasonable methods andwritten agreements; and new modelnotifications of FERPA rights. Thewebsite address is: www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/index.html.

The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012 7

2nd Circuit Court of Appealsrules on threateningspeech by students

The 2nd Circuit (CT, NY and VT) Courtof Appeals has upheld a district court’sfinding that school administrators aremost often in the best position to distin-guish between student speech that isthreatening and speech that is merelyoffensive and is protected by the FirstAmendment.

A 10-year old student in a fifth gradeclass in New York fulfilled a class assign-ment which required students to fill in apicture of an astronaut and write things invarious sections of the astronaut. Thestudents were instructed by their teacherto write a “wish” in the left leg of theastronaut.

The student in this case wrote in theleft leg portion of his crayon drawing thathe wished to “Blow up the school withthe teachers in it”. This was not the firstdrawing by the student that had raisedconcerns with school staff and the stu-dent shared his drawing with classmates.

The school principal met with thestudent, who explained that he was onlykidding about his wish. However, thestudent was suspended from school forsix days. The student’s parents filed alawsuit on their son’s behalf claiming hisfree speech rights were violated after anunsuccessful appeal of the suspension.

The federal District Court in New Yorkheard the case and granted the schooldistrict’s motion for summary judgment,essentially finding in favor of the district’sdisciplinary actions. The parents thenappealed to the 2nd Circuit Court ofAppeals.

It is clear through the Supreme Courtof the United States’ ruling in Tinker v.Des Moines Independent CommunitySchool District (1969) that while stu-dents don’t shed their free speech rightsat the schoolhouse gates, administratorsmay limit, and discipline students, for

certain speech that “materially and sub-stantially interferes with the operation ofthe school.”

The 2nd Circuit Court went on to statethat school administrators may regulatestudent speech and expression when theyhave more than a mere fear or apprehen-sion of disturbance. One judge in thecase noted that while it was unlikely a 10-year old would have been able to actupon his “wish”, the Court ultimatelydecided it was irrelevant whether thestudent lacked the capacity to carry outthe threat or whether he meant the speechto be a joke.

The Court found that a failure to disci-pline the students could have caused achain of events with classmates possiblycopying the student’s speech and con-duct and raising Equal Protection argu-ments to avoid discipline. The Court alsofound that administrators could havereasonably foreseen parents, after hearingof the incident, would lose confidence inthe district’s ability to protect its studentpopulation.

Issues with parental confidence con-cerning children’s safety could causenegative effects such as a decline inenrollment and/or a need to hire securityservices for the school.

The Court decided that school districtsdo not have to decide the ability of astudent or students to carry out a threatnor their actual intention as long asschool officials can reasonably forecastthat the speech will substantially disruptschool activities. A student’s threat to aschool or its population is not constitu-tionally protected speech.

Districts are advised to have policiesand procedures that comply with federaland state laws in place to properly andlegally deal with an issue concerningstu-dent speech or expression. Shouldques-tions arise, always contact legalcounsel at CABE or your board’sattorney.

Constitutional RightsIn a 2nd Circuit (CT, NY, VT) Court of

Appeals case, a high school footballcoach, who had previously sued theschool district, asserted that the schoolboard’s refusal thereafter to appoint himas athletic director was retaliation for thatlawsuit, in violation of the First Amend-ment. He moved to set aside the jury’sverdict in favor of the district.

The Circuit Court of Appeals upheldthe district court’s determination that,even assuming he had shown the board’sdecision was motivated in part by hisprior speech, the board had producedsufficient evidence for the jury to havedetermined, as it did, that the boardwould have taken the same action even inthe absence of the protected speech.

Of the three candidates for theposition, the successful one bestdemonstrated strong adult-to-adultinterpersonal skills and the ability tointeract and communicate effectively withdistrict administrators and coaches, andwith other athletic directors.

In any event, as the superintendentdid not recommend the plaintiff to theboard for the position, the board had nooccasion to vote on appointment of theplaintiff and there was no evidence it hadever voted to appoint a candidatewithout a recommendation from thesuperintendent.

Evidence concerning his claims in theprior trial was properly excluded in thisone, and pretext is not a relevant factor inconsidering a First Amendment retaliationclaim. The jury properly determined thatthe plaintiff had not proven his caseagainst the district, and the trial court didnot abuse its discretion in upholding thatverdict.

Deep v. Coin 453 F.App. 49 (2d Cir.,2011) School Law Reporter, July 2012

Discrimination under ADAA former teacher appealed from the

dismissal of her claims of discriminationunder the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) in a 2nd Circuit Court of Appealscase. The Circuit Court of Appeals heldthat she had not identified evidence tosupport the claim that her back injuriesconstituted a substantial limitation on amajor life activity during the periodrelevant for her claims, nor did she showthat her insomnia and fatigue substantiallylimited her ability to sleep or that hersleeping problem was worse than that of alarge portion of the adult population.

Even assuming she had shown adisability sufficient to establish an ADAcase, she failed to show that the legiti-mate, nondiscriminatory reasons fortermination shown by the school district,her chronic tardiness and ineffectiveteaching, were pretextual.

The district did offer her the accommo-dation her doctor suggested – that she beallowed to arrive five to ten minutes late atthe beginning of the school day-eventhough the doctor expressed doubt that itwould make a difference; her suggestion,that there be someone on call for themornings she would arrive late waspatently unreasonable and would causethe district undue hardship. As she failedto show that she had a back disability, thedistrict was not required to accommodatesuch a disability under the ADA.

Finally, the Second Circuit has not yetdecided that the ADA provides a basis forhostile environment claims but, assumingthat it does, the plaintiff failed to show shewas disabled and also failed to show shewas harassed or ridiculed because of anyalleged, disability, and she failed to showadverse action against her based on aperceived disability of mental illness.

Farina v. Branford Bd. of Educ., 458 F.App. 13 (2d Cir., 2011) School LawReporter, July 2012

Legal BriefsKelly B. Moyher, Senior Staff Attorney, CABE

Kelly B. MoyherSenior Staff Attorney, CABE

8 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012

CABE is pleased to announce that oneboard of education member reached theMaster level of the Board Member Aca-demy Program. This board member is re-cognized for his achievement in partici-pating in numerous hours of board-relatedprofessional development activities.

To achieve the Master Board of Edu-cation level, a board member must firstaccumulate at least 20 credits, becoming aCertificated Board of Education Member(CBEM). The Master Board of Educationmember must earn an additional 20 creditsabove and beyond the CBEM level. Theareas of study are:

• Leadership• Effective Meetings• School/Community Relations

• Strategic Planning• Group Dynamics• Board Member Ethics• School Finance• Labor Relations• School LawThe board member reaching the Master

Board Member level is:David Kemp, Vernon

We applaud the commitment to publiceducation and children David hasdemonstrated and congratulate him onaccomplishing this difficult and time-consuming feat!

Lisa SteimerSenior Staff Associate for

Professional Development, CABE

Board member reaches Master Level

(continued from page 1)and four, according to the press release. Asubstantial majority (750 of the 1,000 newschool readiness slots) will be allocatedwithin 19 existing priority school readi-ness districts, adds the release.

Five hundred of these 750 slots will goto Connecticut’s 10 “reform school dis-tricts,” which are asubset of the lowest-performing schooldistricts in the state;the remaining 250new slots wereallotted among“competitive schoolreadiness communi-ties,” which aredefined as districtswith two or morepriority schools.

According toFairfield Superinten-dent Dr. David Title,who is also Chair ofthe State’s EarlyChildhood EducationCabinet, “Theadditional schoolreadiness slots are important and needed. In the short term, they will allow childrenwho would otherwise have not received aquality early childhood experience to getone.”

In the long term, they are one piece ofthe overall early childhood puzzle thatneeds to include improving the qualityand access of early childhood programsacross the state. It is clear from the fund-ing of these additional slots that theGovernor and General Assembly areserious about improving early childhood

care and education across the state.”Dr. Ann Gruenberg, a professor of

education at Eastern Connecticut StateUniversity and CABE’s Vice Presidentfor Government Relations, also believesthe new readiness slots will be beneficialfor poorly performing districts.

“An investment in early childhood,includingadding oppor-tunities foryoung childrenin districts thatare challenged,can certainlyhelp turnaround trendsin whichchildren areunder per-forming,” shestated. “Engag-ing families andsupportingchildren at anearly age areboth importantaspects ofcomprehensive

plans for improvement.”All in all, adding early educational

opportunities for 1,000 children “is aclear step in a very positive direction,”continued Gruenberg, “It demonstratesan acknowledgment of the urgency ofquality early childhood experiences. It isan important component in comprehen-sive support initiatives; it is hoped thatthis focus and commitment will con-tinue.”

There is ample evidence that earlyaccess to quality early childhood exper-

iences is a great investment, both educa-tionally and economically, said Gruenberg.“Pre-kindergarten experiences have thepotential to have a profound positiveimpact on children. Their brains are stilldeveloping, and positive experiences canhelp with this process,” said Gruenberg.

The new law also funds an additional $3million for school readiness quality initia-tives, professional development for exist-ing early childhood providers, and devel-opment of a quality rating and improve-ment system, added the release.

The process to award the slots to pro-viders began this spring when schoolreadiness councils distributed a localrequest for proposals to school readinessproviders and other interested programsannouncing the competition for additionalspaces.

1,000 new school readiness slots allocated

Allocations were prioritized accordingto a community’s capacity to add slots forthe coming school year in facilities thathold, or will soon attain, either NationalAssociation for the Education of YoungChildren (NAEYC) accreditation orapproval as a federally-designated HeadStart facility, said the release.

“High-quality preschool programs cancontribute significantly to a child’shealthy development,” said State Depart-ment of Education Commissioner StefanPryor in the release. “In order to preventperformance gaps and increase academicsuccess, it’s important for us to invest inhigh-quality early childhood education.That’s why we will work to implement thisprogram effectively this year and toexpand the availability of early childhoodopportunities in the coming years.”

A new negotiations season is underwayin Connecticut and CABE is hoping boardmembers and superintendents will give ustheir best efforts to help us collectcontract and negotiations data for theNegotiations Service which CABEmembers receive. Surveys to collectinformation can be obtained online atwww.cabe.org and you will also receivesurveys via email throughout the season.

Teacher and administrator unions areable to secure this information quickly asthey are at the bargaining table. CABErelies on its membership to help us obtainthis information so that we may analyzeand turn it around back to you for useduring negotiations.

As soon as your district receives asettlement or arbitration award, pleasesend your information to CABE so thatwe may add it to our database.

Kelly B. MoyherSenior Staff Attorney, CABE

NEGOTIATIONSNEWS

“Pre-kindergartenexperiences have

the potential to havea profound positiveimpact on children.Their brains are still

developing, andpositive experiences

can help withthis process . . . . ”

– Ann GruenbergVP for Government Relations

The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012 9

City Representative

Committee Chairs

Lydia TedonePresidentSimsbury

860-658-1173 (h)860-658-4465 (b)

Area Directors

Robert RuggieroArea 8 Co-Director

Madison203-421-5103 (h)203-245-2778 (b)

Charles StangoCity Representative

Waterbury203-575-0411 (h)

Richard MurrayFirst Vice President

Killingly860-774-4165 (h)

2011-12 CABE Board of DirectorsExecutive Committee

Stephen WrightVP for

ProfessionalDevelopment

Trumbull203-459-0079 (b)

Becky TyrrellArea 2 Director

Plainville860-793-0615 (h)

Michael D’AgostinoArea 7 Co-Director

Hamden203-230-9292 (h)860-240-2731 (b)

Sheila McCrevenArea 7 Co-Director

Woodbridge203-389-4203 (h)

Ann GruenbergVP for

Government RelationsHampton

860-455-1211 (h)860-465-5268 (b)

Don BlevinsImmediate Past

PresidentWaterford

860-444-0733 (h)860-439-2386 (b)

James MarpeSecretary/Treasurer

Westport203-454-5998 (h)

John PrinsMember at Large

Branford203-481-6279 (h)

Beverly WashingtonFederal Relations

Groton860-445-7328 (h)

Becky TyrrellResolutionsPlainville

860-793-0615 (h)

Robert R. MitchellState Relations

Montville860-447-8882 (h)860-443-7441 (b)

John PrinsArea 7 Co-Director

Branford203-481-6279 ( (h)

Gary BrochuAssociate

Berlin860-828-1579 (h)860-251-5705 (b)

Eileen BakerAssociate

Old Saybrook860-388-2761(h)

Associates

Sharon Beloin-SaavedraAssociate

New Britain860-827-0136 (h)

Robert GuthrieAssociate

West Haven203-934-7565 (h)203-996-2382 (c)

J. CallenderHeminwayAssociateGranby

860-653-3851 (h)860-653-0550 (b)

Polly RauhCity Representative

Stamford203-325-9379 (h)203-977-4105 (b)

Laura BushArea 3 Director

Vernon860-872-2420 (h)860-798-1693 (b)

If you have any questions about orsuggestions for the Association,please feel free to contact any

member of the Board of Directors.They are here to represent you, the

membership.

Susan HoffnagleArea 1 Co-Director

Winchester860-379-1249 (h)

Daniel SantorsoArea 1 Co-Director

Plymouth860-940-9188 (h)

Mari-Ellen ValyoArea 1 Co-Director

Winchester860-379-4054 (h)860-480-1515 (c)

Gavin ForresterArea 6 Co-Director

Stratford203-377-0218 (b)

Elaine WhitneyArea 6 Co-Director

Westport203-221-7335 (h)

Pamela MeierArea 8 Co-Director

Madison203-245-2868 (h)203-530-0513 (c)

Gail MacDonaldArea 9 Director

Stonington860-599-8654 (h)860-572-0506 (b)

Bob TrefryCity Representative

Bridgeport203-373-1436 (h)203-521-8371 (c)

Matthew PolandCity Representative

Hartford203-695-6303 (b)

2011-2012CABE Staff

ADMINISTRATION

GOVERNMENT RELATIONS

POLICY SERVICE

LABOR RELATIONS

MEMBERSHIP SERVICES

Robert RaderExecutive Directorrrader@cabe.org

Teresa CostaCoordinator ofFinance and

Administrationtcosta@cabe.org

Cory UcciReceptionist/Assistant

to the ExecutiveDirector

cucci@cabe.org

Patrice A. McCarthyDeputy Director and

General Counselpmccarthy@cabe.org

Sheila McKaySenior Staff Associate

for GovernmentRelations

smckay@cabe.org

Gail HeathAdministrative Associate

for GovernmentRelations

gheath@cabe.org

Vincent A. MustaroSenior Staff Associate

for Policy Servicevmustaro@cabe.org

Pamela BrooksSenior AdministrativeAssociate for PolicyService and Search

Servicespbrooks@cabe.org

Terry DeMarsAdministrativeAssociate forPolicy Service

tdemars@cabe.org

Kelly B. MoyherSenior Staff Attorneykmoyher@cabe.org

Wilmarie NewtonAdministrativeAssociate for

Labor Relationswnewton@cabe.org

Bonnie B. CarneySenior Staff Associate

for Publicationsbcarney@cabe.org

Nicholas CarusoSenior Staff Associatefor Field Services and

Coordinator ofTechnology

ncaruso@cabe.org

Lisa SteimerSenior Staff Asociate

for ProfessionalDevelopment

lsteimer@cabe.org

Melissa DickinsonAdministrative Assistant

for MembershipServices

mdickinson@cabe.org

You may contactstaff at

800-317-0033 or860-571-7446.

10 The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education • September 2012

Report to the Membership 2011-2012CABE: Dedicated to strengthening public education through advocacy,

professional development and service to boards of education.

(please see page 11)

This year has been very positive for CABE,despite a Legislative Session that was one ofthe most challenging we have ever faced.We had very good participation from ourmember boards and even added a few. Thistranslated in part into a successful year andmore opportunities for CABE to help ourmembers increase their effectiveness andaddress their needs.

There are a number of new initiativesCABE took on over the last year. Wepartnered with five other organizations in-cluding CAPSS and the Connecticut Asso-ciation of Schools (representing principals),business and reform groups. This was espe-cially helpful as the Governor pushed areform agenda. Our partnership resulted inmore access to legislators and the Governor’sstaff and greater visibility, both at the Capi-tol and in the media.

We also continued our partnership withthe State Department of Education, particu-larly with our increased emphasis on theneed for student growth, through the Light-house Project, our work with school gover-nance councils and workshops which alsohighlighted each board’s critical role in in-creasing student achievement.

We also worked hard on the PerformanceEvaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) andits subgroups. Thanks go to the members ofour Board of Directors which worked withour staff to ensure that we had helpful inputinto the process.

Finance and SupportLast year was difficult for school boards

and, understanding the financial situationfor school boards, we kept the dues frozenfor the third year in a row, despite inflationand other costs.

CABE has continued to ensure its re-sources are consistent with the needs ofour members. In order to eventually free upgreater resources, last fiscal year we paidoff our mortgage. CABE now owns morethan 2/3 of our headquarters at 81 WolcottHill Road, free and clear. The other third isowned by members of a legal firm.

We want to remind you, if you wouldlike to use the Rovins Conference Room,please let us know. We don’t charge foruse of the room and it’s a great place for ameeting or a retreat. We want our buildingto be seen by board members as your build-ing!

Communications and TechnologyThe Association continues to improve

communications with our membership.CABE has a facebook page. If you have

a Facebook account you can join the CABEgroup by going to www.facebook.com/groups/117140651639856/. We are usingFacebook to supplement our current waysof communicating with our members.

A Communications Committee was es-tablished with board members and CABEstaff to examine ways we can better com-municate with our membership. The Com-mittee continues to meet and will share itsrecommendations when finalized.

Activities we have undertakento serve you better this pastyear

Representing Connecticutschool boards at the state ornational level

Mary Broderick served as Presidentof the National School Boards Association(NSBA) in 2011-2012. As a member of theEast Lyme Board of Education, LEARNBoard of Directors, President of CABE andNSBA, she has dedicated over 22 years ofservice to her town of East Lyme, the stateof Connecticut and the nation.

Patrice A. McCarthy, Deputy Direc-tor and General Counsel, CABE served asChair of the NSBA Council of School Attor-neys (COSA) in 2011-2012. Patrice was thefirst Connecticut attorney ever elected chair-man of this important organization. Patricehas been with the Association for 29 years.

Providing opportunities formembers to learn how to bet-ter govern their district

Board Member AcademyThroughout the past year, CABE has

continued its commitment to be the NUM-BER ONE Connecticut provider of profes-sional development, by providing high qual-ity training for local school board membersacross Connecticut.

By offering workshops, hot topic work-shops, an annual Convention, area meet-ings, individual workshops, the CABE Jour-nal and other publications, CABE presentsboard members and administrators withmany ways to increase their knowledge andskills.

Board MemberAcademy CertificationTo encourage board members’ participa-

tion in professional development, CABE’sBoard Member Academy provides pointsfor service, leading to two awards: Certifi-cated Board of Education Member (CBEM),

which requires 20 credits and Master Boardof Education Member (MBEM), which re-quires 20 additional credits.

The Academy addresses the continuingeducational needs of school board membersby focusing on core areas of board respon-sibilities.

Statewide WorkshopsAttendance at our workshops was ap-

proximately 848.Workshop topics included: candidate

briefings, new board member, negotiations,legal issues, leadership, policy, and an up-date on what happened at the 2012 Con-necticut General Assembly. Several of theseworkshops were sponsored, in part, by theState Department of Education.

Individual Board WorkshopsCABE staff continues to regularly meet

with boards of education as they desire toprovide professional development. Stafffacilitated customized workshops from ba-sic roles and responsibilities, the superin-tendent search process, goal setting andfull-day board retreats. We reached morethan half of our member districts with work-shops (approximately 78).

CABE/CAPSS ConventionThe Convention, Educating Our Chil-

dren for a Global Society was held on No-vember 18 and 19, 2011.

• Attendance at the Convention was622 board members, superintendents,business managers, administrators,education officials and invited guests

• General session speakers includedGovernor Dannel Malloy, Connecti-cut Education Commisisoner StefanPryor, Richard Lemons, JackGallagher, James Ludes, and SoniaManzano.

• Workshops included: Creating andImplementing a Curriculum for WorldLanguage, Strategically Budgeting inDifficult Times to Educate Childrenfor Their Place in a Global Society,CAPSS Transformation Project, Sec-ondary School Reform Implementingthe Capstone Project, and Data, DataEverywhere – But How to Know ThatOur Student Learning Programs Are

Having Any Meaningful Impact?.• Members of the State Board of Edu-

cation participated in a lively discus-sion with the attendees

• Approximately 55 exhibitors of edu-cation-related goods and servicesparticipated in the exhibit hall.

Leadership InstituteCABE’s Leadership Institute graduated

its eighth class, having now served over 80participants. The participants were very en-thusiastic about their experiences and urgedCABE to continue this program. It is jointlysponsored by CABE and the State Depart-ment of Education. Participants met for fivefour-hour sessions, including a webinar.Through facilitated discussion and outsidepresenters, they had the opportunity to dis-cuss in depth a variety of education issues.

PublicationsThe CABE Journal was published eleven

times over the last year. Its primary audi-ence is school board members, superinten-dents and district administrators through-out the state. The Journal is also sent tostate and federal legislators, other educa-tion organizations (local and national) andothers who have an interest in keeping up-to-date with education issues in our state.

The Model Student Parent/GuardianHandbook was revised to reflect currentissues and legislative changes.

The eighth edition of the very success-ful publication A Practical Guide to Con-necticut School Law was revised by authorThomas B. Mooney, Attorney, Shipman &Goodwin.

Policy HighlightsTwenty-six issues of the email newslet-

ter, Policy Highlights, were distributed onan every-other-week basis to board mem-bers and superintendents, highlighting cur-rent educational topics with policy implica-tions. Throughout, the major focus remainedon issues pertaining to student achieve-ment.

Policy Requests and/or SamplesApproximately 800 requests for policy

information and/or sample policies frommember districts were addressed, usuallyon the same day the request was received.The website-based Core Policy Manualalso received a large number of “hits” forsample policies in addition to the districtmanuals that have been placed on linethrough the CABE Connecticut OnlinePolicy Service (C.O.P.S.). In addition, 18 dis-tricts were under contract for CustomizedPolicy Services during the year for the re-view and development of new district policymanuals or updates to selected portions ofthe manual.

Lighthouse ProjectOur partnership with the Connecticut

State Department of Education (SDE) is infull swing and highly successful. Fundedby a grant from SDE, a team comprised ofCABE and SDE personnel help districts im-prove student achievement through moreeffective board leadership. CABE/SDE train-ers have been working with a cohort involv-ing four other states and ten Connecticut

Photo courtesy Windsor Public Schools