Superintendent of Schools Douglas White announced at the December 14 meeting of the Mattapoisett School Committee that in the future, all state schools will move towards implementing a test that is a hybrid of the more traditional MCAS test and the “next generation” PARCC test.

The merits of the PARCC test, compared to the older MCAS test, were the main topics of conversation during the Mattapoisett School Committee meaning.

The committee was able to compare results because, while all students from grades three through six take PARCC exams in math and ELA, the fifth grade students at Old Hammondtown and Center School also took the MCAS Science exam.

The Committee opted to begin PARCC testing last year, and 2015 was the first year the test was taken. This was also the first year that standardized testing was done by computer in Mattapoisett.

“The Massachusetts Board of Education has mandated that all standardized testing must be done on a computer by 2019,” said White, “and we’re already there. The fact that it is computerized is part of why we chose to use PARCC in the first place.”

The committee first reviewed the grade five students’ MCAS Science scores, in which 73 percent of students scored in the ‘Advanced’ or ‘Proficient’ range, which is 20 percent above the state average. Twenty-five percent of students scored ‘Needs Improvement’ and 2 percent dropped into the ‘Failing’ category. The percentage of students who scored at ‘Advanced’ or ‘Proficient’ levels has remained roughly the same between 2012 and 2015.

“It’s a good achievement,” observed Mattapoisett School Committee Vice Chairman Patrick LeClair, “but I’ve noticed there’s a small subgroup of students stuck in the ‘Needs Improvement’ and ‘Failing’ categories. Our goal is to focus on moving students from ‘Needs Improvement’ to ‘Proficient,’ and from ‘Proficient’ to ‘Advanced’ and so on.”

“There’s a significant drop-off at ‘Advanced,’” agreed Chairman James Higgins. “Are we really doing enough to push advanced students or to give other students the opportunities to reach an advanced level?”

Center School Assistant Principal Kevin Tavares noted that there was already an action plan to address this concern.

“We’ve been focusing more on math and reading,” Tavares said. “We need to shift more focus to science. Recently, we haven’t been able to clarify exactly what needs to be taught at each grade level, but that should change next year.”

The committee then switched to reviewing PARCC scores. The students did well on PARCC testing, with all four grade levels scoring an average score well above the state average.            PARCC is scored somewhat similarly to an SAT test: a score of 650-700 indicates ‘Not Yet Meeting Expectations,’ while 701-725 indicates ‘Partially Meeting Expectations.’ A score of 725-750 indicates ‘Approaching Expectations,’ while scoring 750-803 indicates ‘Meets Expectations.’ The highest-ranking students will score between 804-850, which correlates to ‘Exceeds Expectations.’

Each of the four grade levels earned an average score of 751+ in ELA to land them all in the ‘Meets Expectations’ category. The schools received an identical result on the math section of the exam, where each of the four grades again scored an average score of at least 750. Higgins was pleased with the result.

“Our students adapted to a new test and a new testing style [testing online, rather than with a pencil and paper] well,” Higgins said.

PARCC does not come without its downfalls, however. ORR District Assistant Superintendent Elise Frangos observed that the students generally do not score as well on the PARCC testing system as they do on the MCAS test.

“PARCC values whether students meet expectations of that grade level,” she said. “The past study skills we used don’t apply here.”

“Did we move because the PARCC test is computerized? Was there any proof that one test was better than the other?” asked LeClair.

“When we used MCAS, it was created by educators. Items from the year’s test were released, and teachers could look at their students’ scores to see where they were lacking,” said Frangos. “PARCC is a better, more rigorous test, but it is written by Pearson. Pearson is an educational company, but they own the test, and they aren’t releasing any items. What we really need is a test like PARCC, but owned by us.”

That idea has apparently crossed the minds of the Massachusetts Board of Education as well.

“I know that the Board of Education has been weighing whether to keep going with PARCC or to move back to the MCAS test,” said White. “They’ve voted instead to go forward with a computerized test which will be a blend of MCAS and PARCC. It will be controlled by the state and written with the input of educators. They’re calling it ‘MCAS 2.0.’”

The new test won’t be implemented immediately. White indicated that the Board of Education hoped that it would be written and ready to go for grades three through eight in 2017. The 2016 test will be the same PARCC test taken this year, but will be taken during one testing window, likely from late April into May. Students at the high school, meanwhile, will do two more years of MCAS testing, while a PARCC-style assessment is being built, for anticipated release in 2018.

In the meantime, Mattapoisett schools will begin to focus more on continual improvements to its science program.

“We’re doing inventory on science materials,” said Higgins, “and developing partnerships with places like the Mattapoisett Land Trust and the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission. This will open up more science opportunities for students.”

Although the majority of the meeting focused on the issue of standardized testing, several other issues were touched upon.

White indicated that the ORR school district was having a difficult time finding substitute teachers to replace teachers taken ill.

“Our concern is finding qualified, excellent substitutes,” he said. “Our current rate of pay for substitutes was set in 2001 or 2002. I’ve looked at other districts, and we are on the low end of the scale.” He proposed moving the rate from hourly pay to daily pay.

“I’d like to propose an increase in pay for the remainder of the year, with a further increase to begin in September 2016,” he said. The current rate of pay for certified substitute teacher is $70 per day. The first pay increase, applicable for the rest of the current school year, will push the rate of pay from $70 to $75. The salary rate will increase again in September 2016, ending at $85 per day for a certified substitute teacher.

The committee unanimously approved the proposal, but White will need to bring it before the other district school committees for approval before it can be advertised and put into effect.

The next meeting of the Mattapoisett School Committee is scheduled for January 11 at 7:00 pm at Center School.

By Andrea Ray

After a years-long legal battle between the Town of Marion and Tabor Academy over an unpermitted backstop, Tabor Head of School John Quirk told the Marion Zoning Board of Appeals on December 10 that instead of continuing on the same path to try to keep the backstop, he was withdrawing the school’s appeal to start fresh with a new request for a variance.

The meeting agenda listed Tabor Academy as seeking relief from the building commissioner’s prior denial of a building permit for the backstop. Now, said Quirk, instead of seeking relief, he is seeking to withdraw without prejudice.

“We’re hoping to reappear in January … to reapply with this group (ZBA members) … to express our desire to seek a variance and our arguments as to why we think we have a reasonable chance,” said Quirk.

Quirk asked ZBA Chairman Eric Pierce if there would be any objection to the withdrawal. Pierce paused for a moment before giving his reply.

“I don’t know what else that means other than this was remanded to us by the courts,” said Pierce. “We’ll just have to find out. I don’t know what the case is…”

Pierce said this case was interesting, and he told Quirk that, in his opinion, seeking a variance after-the-fact means the backstop would have to come out before it gets approved to put back in again.

Quirk said Tabor would be proposing changes to the backstop plan to enhance safety features on it, and also said he would “make a good reasonable case as to how those changes will benefit everyone involved.”

Quirk said he appreciated the board’s patience just before Pierce said he would entertain a motion to accept the withdrawal without prejudice. ZBA member Michelle Ouellette asked for clarification and a little background information before a vote.

“The court said, you win – the town – but we want you to go back and talk about it some more – try to work it out,” Pierce told her. The appeal, he said, was to overturn Building Commissioner Scott Shippey’s original decision to deny the building permit.

But, said ZBA member Betsy Dunn sternly, “If you don’t come back in January, the structure comes down.”

Relatively new ZBA member Kate Mahoney also had some questions, and Pierce struggled a bit to summarize the situation relative to its history. Quirk chimed in.

“We are no longer seeking relief from the … the … the challenge from Mr. Shippey…. I can assure you that we’re not going to seek any advantage from this bit of confusion,” said Quirk.

Pierce told Mahoney that Quirk could withdraw so that he could reapply. The board voted to accept the withdrawal, just in case a vote was required.

“Consider yourself withdrawn,” Pierce said.

Also during the meeting, the board denied a request to convert a single-family dwelling into a multi-family house, citing a Town bylaw that discourages multi-family houses in town and restricts them to specific residential zones only – zones in which Chris Shachoy’s 444 Front Street home is not located.

“We could suggest a withdrawal,” said Pierce, “but there’s no option. At least that’s the way I read it.”

The board did approve a Special Permit for Bill Marvel to add a 16- by 16-foot addition to his 60 South Street home.

The next meeting of the Marion Zoning Board of Appeals is scheduled for January 14 at 7:30 pm at the Marion Town House.

By Jean Perry

It was a long time coming, between waiting for the engineer to complete the design and for Marion Conservation Commission approval, but the repairs to the spillway at Grassi Bog off Mill Road will finally move forward.

The commission continued the hearing back on November 18 after a disagreement with Marion Open Spaces Acquisition Committee Chairman John Rockwell over the updated plans and the commission’s refusal to look at them in light of some discrepancies between the features of the plan and comments made by the Town’s peer review engineer.

On December 9, MOSAC representative Jeff Oakes presented the updated plan to the commission with the requested answers to the commission’s questions from November and, although the commission still had a few questions, the consensus was that the commission could go ahead and issue the amended Order of Conditions, placing specific stipulations relative to the location of a turtle habitat not mentioned on the updated plan and to the removal of a concrete structure that was never completed.

During discussions, Conservation Commission Chairman Norm Hills determined that the first comment made by CDM Smith, engineer for the Town, was not a correct statement, thus it was now deemed a “non-comment.” The plan that did not specify a slope of the site now was noted as well, although the wording was a bit confused and will be changed, as per the OOC.

Hills was concerned about the elevations of the main spillway, the overflow, and the auxiliary spillway, with the auxiliary spillway being shown as a higher elevation.

Hills still preferred all details from the initial plan be included on the new plan, saying, “Normally when we get a new set of plans, they become the plan of record so you don’t have to go back to the other plan.” He added, “The question about the elevations of the spillways … it just bothers me … I wouldn’t think that the auxiliary spillway would be higher than the overflow.” He suggested it might be reversed.

Commission member Jeffrey Doubrava wondered if the commission could still move the project forward, despite the myriad of unanswered questions.

“We could probably write some of these comments into the order … or include these comments as part of our amendment and have them specify the size of the rock,” said commission member Joel Hartley. “And I think we need tighter inspections.”

Hills also wanted a number of fallen trees in the overflow ditch removed.

Commission member Cynthia Trinidad suggested the commission make more frequent inspection visits independently.

The next meeting of the Marion Conservation Commission is scheduled for January 6 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.

By Jean Perry