Report Inappropriate Comments

While I have been a strong proponent for both long term planning and the use of an expert since the beginning of this process, I do feel that there were options that could have incorporated both while still moving forward with the work of the LTFPC. An expert could have been brought in to quickly validate the projections and capacities/complete any other recommended analysis and to assist in the detailed implementation plan which seems to be the major point of disagreement (including the identification of multiple options for consolidation and districting, which, there are many beyond what was considered). In a parallel process, long term planning could have commenced, ensuring short term changes would not prevent longer term solutions. But here we are, so let's take this opportunity to learn from the past and create a process that values stakeholder and community input throughout, not only at the end, and one where our system's values and educational goals drive infrastructure needs. The School Committee has many important questions to answer that will drive the analysis and recommendations, such as optimal school and classroom size, grade level groupings, educational and extra curricular offerings, their values regarding neighborhood schools, cost vs.benefit, equability across schools/districts, etc. and they need to be key participants/decision makers throughout the process.

From: Now what for schools?

Please explain the inappropriate content below.