Committees
& Contact Information
District-wide Technology
Committee: Joe Kavanaugh
H.S. Science Committee: Randy
Jenkins
H.S. Auditorium & Music Committee: Susan
Fitting
H.S. Renovations Committee: Lynda
Castronovo
H.S. Athletic Committee: Thomas
Bried
Jr.Hi. Steering Committee:
Anne Sterman; Linda
Risley
Jr.Hi. Construction Committee:
Bob Loggins
Jr.Hi. Renovations Committee:
Allen Calhoun
Jr.Hi. Instructional Program Committee (IPC): Joe
Kavanaugh; Randy Jenkins
Jr.Hi. IPC Educational Program Sub-committee:
Jeannine Dowdle; Jan Tunison
Jr.Hi. IPC Organizational Structure Sub-committee:
Carol Hodgins
Jr.Hi. Music & Auditorium Committee: Susan
Fitting
Jr.Hi. Social Aspects Committee:
Betty Fortna;
John Tobiassen
Glendaal Building Committee: Ann M. Peluso
Glen Worden Building Committee: James
Dunham
Lincoln Building Committee: Helen A. Laroche
Sacandaga Building Committee: John O. Tobiassen
GO TO TOP
CHARGE
TO ALL COMMITTEES RELATED TO OUR CURRENT BUILDING PROJECT
(Undated document distributed on Sept. 30, 1999 in the H.S. Renovation
Committee)
Dear Committee Members:
As you know, our school district is about to embark on the detailed
planning phase of the largest building project in our fifty-year history.
The Board of Education and I are very thankful for your commitment to
serve on one or more of the school/community committees. To help you
fulfill the task before you, the following guidelines have been created.
Activities of all building project committees should include, but are not
limited to, the following:
1 ) All committees will operate in an advisory capacity with final
recommendations to be made to the Board of Education.
2) The Board of Education will make the final determination on all
committee recommendations.
3) Board of Education members will not serve on any committee in any
capacity.
4) Active committee members will determine committee composition and
operation.
5) All committee recommendations will be shared with the Superintendent of
Schools and appropriate building principals before such recommendations
are presented to the Board of Education.
6) Committee recommendations must reflect the approximate square footage
and conceptual costs approved by the community at the March 9, 1999,
referendum.
7) The services of the Board of Education appointed architect and
construction manager may be utilized, if deemed necessary.
I hope that these guidelines are helpful. Please feel free to contact me
should you have any questions.
Thanks again for your time and assistance.
Sincerely,
s/ Michael J. Marcelle
Superintendent of Schools
GO TO TOP
|
Science
Wing Update From July 1999 Meeting
Dear science wing committee members,
I hope you have had a great summer! As fall approaches, our
work on the science wing committee will intensify, and I hope that everyone will return to our September 16 meeting in the senior high Library (7:00
PM).
Based on our last meeting, and also based on some research I have
done over the summer, a memo has been drafted to the architect
outlining some of our recommendations. I have included the text
of that memo below. I have also included the list of concerns
that we generated as a committee at our last meeting.
At our next meeting, we need to address two major issues. First,
what type of cabinets and tabletop surfaces will we specify?
There are several decisions here that have major impact on cost.
The cabinetry issue revolves around the choice of wood veneer versus
plastic veneer. The lab top surfaces range all the way from
inexpensive particleboard to solid epoxy resin to the
"Cadillac", which is slate. The second issue concerns the
wiring necessary to support technology in these rooms, and what type of
computer facilities we will specify. Of course, these issues are inextricably
linked. These are both exciting and technical issues that I am
sure we will enjoy working out.
Here are some web sites which have lab equipment and furniture:
www.modernss.com, www.fisheredu.com,
www.carolina.com, and
www.telcargroup.com
Enjoy the rest of your summer, and I look forward to seeing you on
the 16th.
Randy Jenkins
Our Summer committee meeting
Safety
- Extinguishers
- Storage rooms
- Hood in storage
- Acid cabinets (not metal)
Location
- Flammable cabinets
- Separation of sinks & computers
- Location of outlets near sinks (gfi)
- Ventilation in storage rooms
- Goggle sterilization cabinets
- Evacuation
- Windows that open
Carpeting NO!
Technology
- Air-conditioned computer rooms
- Put the computers in the labs
- LAP TOPS - to be moved to locations as needed with
locking/docking
station
- Wireless network
- Printer location
- LCD projectors/presentation boards
- Internet capability
- No chalk
- Laser disc/VCR-DVD
Furniture
- Attached desk/chairs (handicapped inaccessible)
- Horizontal surfaces
- Separate desk/chair
- Sized for adults
- No "feet" on legs
- At least one "handicapped accessible station"
- Storage space for student books/bags, etc. in lab rooms
"hook under table for book
bags"
Utilities
- Autoclave
- Microwave oven in prep room
- Dishwasher in prep room
- No hot water!!!?
Local unit for heating water
- at least one station.
- Specify hot and cold water.
- Anti-scald valve requirement?
Compromise with at least one hot/cold water outlet.
Accessibility
- At least one station per lab room.
- At least one seat per classroom.
- Locate them near safety features and that safety features
are usable by
a disabled student.
- Is there separate funding to create accessible stations?
General
- Do the windows open?
Yes - at least some windows should
open.
- Blackout shades in physics.
Shades should be specified in all rooms.
Intercom system and phones:
- Cell phones for teachers
- An outside line in every teacher planning area
- Academic Head office has intercom phone and speaker
- Internet connection in classroom and planning
- Electrical outlets in all planning spaces
The memo to Mr. Michael Bellows at Glynn, Spillane and Griffing:
Mike, we recently discussed a list of concerns and ideas regarding
the
science wing we will be building at Scotia-Glenville High School.
At that
time you asked me to put them on paper, and I have made an attempt
to do that here. Please let me know if any of these requests or
recommendations
are "out of line" with our square footage requirements or
conceptual cost
guidelines. If for any reason you feel that I have omitted any
part of
our discussion, please do not hesitate to let me know.
1. Our next major task is to specify the type of cabinets and
tabletop
surfaces we would like to have in our labs and classrooms. To
expedite this, you agreed to supply blank "side views" of
each wall in each room.
I will then instruct staff to develop layouts of their preferred
cabinetry
and any other items that would appear on these drawings. At
our next committee meeting (September 16), we will discuss the
particulars of each tabletop surface, and also types of casework
(plastic vs. oak, etc.). We will do our best to specify the use
for each cabinet, including such things as microscope storage, etc.
Right now, it appears that we will ask for solid epoxy resin surfaces
in the chem. and biology labs, but will ask
for lesser surfaces in the Earth Science and physics areas.
2. We would like to specify gas fixtures in every lab room,
each room with a master cut-off switch.
3. As a safety precaution, we would like to specify fire
blankets and fire extinguishers in each lab room. In all
chemistry and Biology lab
rooms, there should be a shower or body drench system. All lab
rooms should have an eye wash station.
4. Hot and cold water should be specified at all sinks.
5. We would like UV sterilization goggle cabinets in every lab
room.
6. Regarding ventilation: The recommendations I
have from Flinn
Scientific call for a minimum of 8 complete air changes per hour for
all lab spaces and all chemical storage areas. Flinn recommends
that every lab space have a ventilation purge system which is capable
of moving 3200 ft3 per minute, directly vented outdoors, not
interconnected between rooms, and should have an on/off switch
allowing the purge system to be
easily accessed. This system would not be used on a continuous
basis, but
as needed. According to Flinn, this corresponds approximately to a
complete room air change in 5 minutes. This system is separate
from any fume hood system. Ventilation ducts leading from lab rooms
and chemical storage areas should be specially lined such that they
are corrosion resistant.
7. We will need to specify acid storage cabinets and flammable
materials cabinets in the chemical storage area.
8. Chemical Fume hoods should be installed as indicated on the plan
view drawings, but should also be installed in the chemical storage
area and biology planning/prep area.
9. Please reduce the width of the Biology planning area such
that it changes in size from 26 ft. wide to 20 ft wide. Add the
saved space to each biology lab adjacent to the planning area such
that the length of each lab room is increased by 3 ft.
10. In the center of the north wall of the biology offices, add a peninsula
that extends 10 ft into the office area. Make the peninsula 4 ft
wide. In this peninsula, place a sink, electrical outlets, and a gas outlet.
Under the peninsula, specify a dishwasher and refrigerator with all
associated "hookups". Over the peninsula, install a
ventilation fume hood. On the wall at the end of the peninsula,
specify a small microwave oven with associated mounting hardware and
electrical outlets.
10a. Reduce the width of the Health Planning room by 3 feet,
adding those 3 feet to the Health classroom.
11. In the Chemical storage area, specify a similar peninsula, but
do not specify a refrigerator, and shorten the length to fit as you
feel appropriate.
12. Specify emergency lighting in the chemical storage and
biology planning areas.
13. Specify a shower or body drench, eyewash, and fire blanket in
the Biology planning area and chemical storage area.
14. Just inside the biology planning area hall door, specify a
4' deep x 6' wide network rack against the wall. This cabinet
will act as a hub for the computer network.
15. In no location should carpeting be specified.
16. All sinks should be a minimum size of 16" x 20".
Sinks in the Biology and Chemistry lab rooms and classrooms should be
solid epoxy resin.
17. I am aware that it is a contentious issue, but there is
consensus in the committee that we should install windows that can be
opened.
18. Since computers are projected to be an integral part of
our lab and classroom program, it is recommended that all spaces be
air conditioned to protect the investment in electronic equipment.
19. Every lab and classroom should have at least one
handicapped accessible station.
20. All safety equipment must be handicapped accessible.
This includes but is not limited to shower/body drench, eyewash, and
fire blankets.
21. All safety equipment should be labeled with high
visibility placards.
22. No chalkboards should be used. All boards should be
either white boards or projection boards.
23. The physics classroom and lab require "blackout
shades". We need to be able to make these rooms very dark.
Please specify shades in all rooms.
24. A comprehensive plan for technology needs is being
discussed. Right now, we are looking at built-in cabinets for
computers on the sides of the lab rooms, with flat LCD panels in
fixed locations on lab benches. In the classrooms, we are
devising a demonstration table that includes accommodation for laser
disc (DVD), VCR, Video-flex, and computer/Internet connections. In
the Health, Biology and Earth Science classrooms, we would like to
specify an LCD projector mounted from the ceiling, wired to the electronics
at the demonstration table. In the physics and chemistry classrooms,
a large screen TV should be specified. We are moving toward a hard
wired system rather than a wireless network, but these decisions are far
from complete.
24a. Teacher planning rooms should have intercom
phones/speaker and at least one outside line. Also computer
network wiring should be installed in all planning areas. The
academic head office needs an outside line, an intercom phone/speaker
and computer network wiring.
25. Attached chair/desk units are not desired by most
teachers. All desks should have horizontal, not sloped
surfaces. Desks and chairs should not have "feet"
which are well known to fall off and break after a short period of
usage. Chairs and desks should be sized for adults.
26. In lab rooms, if space exists under lab tables, it was
suggested that hooks be installed so that students could hang book
bags from them.
Please remember that all of the above is still preliminary.
After the September 16 committee meeting, I will follow up by
providing you with as much detail as is possible. As soon as
your office can provide me with the "side views" of the
rooms, I will pass them on to the staff for development.
Thanks, and please don't hesitate to call, Randy.
GO TO TOP
Renovations
Committee Ideas for Renovated Spaces in HS
Area 1: Science Wing (old)
Among the possible options
1. move art rooms to second floor (3 spaces).
2. move foreign language or alternative education to old science
wing: for. language (3 rooms) aft. ed (2 rooms)
3. create space for GIVE offices and instructional/meeting space
4. create space for speech, ESL services
5. create office space for social worker, psychologist; and some academic
heads (English, SS)
6. convert the two offices adjacent to Bell for conference area
7. convert current faculty lunch area (second floor) into classroom
or office space.
Area 2: Creating Meeting/Faculty
spaces Among the possible
options:
If Art Rooms move:
1. convert art rooms into large meeting area/ create small
"kitchenette" area in back of A-3; and use space for faculty
dining space; large meeting areas; Board of Education meeting space.
Or
If Foreign Language Rooms move:
1. convert B-5 and 7; Pat Tammar's area to meeting area (as indicated
above)
Lobby area/gallery space and
renovations in old wing
committee liked the plan for front of building. [but it is not tied to any
academic function, so it has a very low priority--Jerry's note]
Group is looking for assistance in creating the most use of the space so
that we can accommodate the many needs we have for:
1. art space
2. alternative education
3. GIVE program
4. Special education classes and service areas
5. faculty dining space and meeting and conference room space
6. office space for social worker, psychologist, and Academic Heads(2)
October 14, 1999, by L.
Castronovo, Principal.
Next meeting (10/28) the architect will present a couple of conceptual
plans for renovating the H.S. space under consideration.
GO TO TOP
Renovations
Committee Decides To Move Art Rooms
The Scotia-Glenville High
School Renovations Committee, Chaired by Lynda Castronova, Principal, has
wrapped up its most important decision before the building plans go to the
State for approval. It has decided to move the Art program from the
first floor to the second floor, where the science wing is currently
located.
The decision was an important one for controlling building costs, or
rather increasing them.
When asked, the architect gave a preliminary estimate that keeping the Art
program where it is, and using the current science wing for other program
needs, would be cheaper than moving the Art program to the second floor
and renovating the space currently used for the Art program to alternative
program uses, notably a large meeting room (a.k.a. teachers' lounge, with
added but unnecessary school board meeting capabilities).
So why did the committee decide to move the art rooms when it was cheaper
to upgrade them in place? The architect said there was no compelling
need or advantage to moving art. An art teacher said it was six of
one and half-a-dozen of the other. Carrying tons of art supplies and
projects to the second floor over the next 30 years is no added bonus either, especially for some of the physically impaired.
The decision was left to the art teachers, who, being unable to think of
better reasons, decided a change of view would be nice. Admittedly,
they felt some guilt, but as one art teacher put it, the
"cookie" of a new two-story exhibition hall added to the front
of the high school and connecting directly into the art rooms on the
second floor was too much to resist.
Of course, the exhibition hall was not part of the program needs
identified at the beginning of the project. It has been added to
give the high school a "more modern look" and to provide a place
to display student work (which, in itself, is a good idea).
Presumably, the exhibition hall will be built only if there are sufficient
funds left over after bidding on the essential spaces is completed.
School Board member Karen Bradley has repeatedly expressed concern about
project modifications and additions that go beyond the scope of the
program needs identified at the beginning of the project. She has
been reassured that modifications, resulting from more thinking about the
project, reflect improvements over the original plans, and they should not
be rejected just because they differ from initial expectations.
Quite right--when decisions are based on reason. But to move art
rooms without compelling need or advantage, for the sake of obtaining a
new view and being 150 feet closer to an exhibition hall that may never be
built, is falderal. I may never be permitted to attend another
school committee meeting in this district, but the public and the Board
ought to know the basis on which decisions to spend hundreds of thousands
of dollars are being made. Too much of the building project has
already been designed around feelings, outdated beliefs, and false needs.
Moving the Art program to the second floor was one of those original ideas
submitted to the voters that should have been weeded out as an inefficient
use of funds in the final analysis. If the Board is satisfied that
it has enough resources to meet all its more important priorities, then by
all means it should enhance the building project as requested. If,
as is the more likely case, funds expire before higher priority needs are
met, then the Board should not hesitate in rejecting the Renovation
Committee's final plans for moving the Art program and adding an
exhibition hall.
GO TO TOP |
Instructional
Sub-Committee of the Middle School Planning Committee
The first meeting of the
sub-committee was on Wednesday, September 29, 1999 in the Jr. High
cafeteria. There are 54 people on the committee. Of those 54 people, about
½ are parents and the other ½ are teachers (mostly sixth grade
teachers), academic and technology support staff, and administrators
(English Chair, Math Chair, Science Chair, two principals). The plan is to
meet at 7:00 on the 2nd Wednesday of every month, but as noted below the
sub-committees will also be meeting.
Randy Jenkins and Joe Kavanagh
are chairing the group. They presented to the group the idea of breaking
up this sub-committee into four smaller groups to address the issues
listed below. At the end of the meeting, each committee member handed in a
sheet listing our preference for which sub-sub committee we wanted to
serve on.
Facilities (particular to
instruction) who uses new wing and why special facilities (i.e., new
science labs??) technology security and logistics
Staff Preparation Staff
Development Conferences In-service Summer curriculum Site visits
Consultants. Further suggestions by committee members (mostly teachers)
added: team building timing for identification of teams specialization of
6th grade teachers
Organizational Structure team
teaching specialization scheduling (block vs. straight 8) mixing of
classes certification concerns sharing of staff with elementary (music,
speech, art)
Educational Program Technology
Coordination/articulation summer school gifted and talented acceleration
new curriculum choices new learning standards academic intervention
services. Further suggestions from committee members included: outdoor
education program interdisciplinary opportunities service learning
After some discussion, most
committee members agreed that #’s 2 and 3 (Staff Preparation and
Organizational Structure) should be combined because most of the decisions
about staff preparation would depend on decisions made about the
organizational structure.
Every one at the meeting selected
their preferences for which sub-sub committee they want to serve on and
gave their e-mail addresses
Some other issues discussed in
general include:
Committee members brought up the
subject of a mission statement for the school. Randy and Joe indicated
that the Middle School Steering Committee had discussed this, but so far
they knew of no mission statement that had already been adopted. Most
instructional committee members felt that we should have a mission
statement in place before making recommendations for this committee.
I mentioned to Joe K. and Randy
that it was my opinion that most people who volunteered for this committee
(because it is the curriculum committee) thought we would and should have
some input into the mission statement for the school. Joe K. said he would
bring this to Anne Sterman’s attention and that this committee would
probably be able to bring its recommendation or have representation on the
steering committee for a mission statement.
Some other comments from
committee members included:
Why are we reinventing the wheel?
Aren’t there some models we can copy from?
Who will decide the formation of
teams? The teachers appear to be very concerned about how the change will
personally effect them. Randy Jenkins and Joe Kavanagh did an excellent
job of reminding people that the personnel decisions will be decided by
the Administration and that was not the charge of the committee.
One person suggested that a union
representative be in attendance at the Staff Development and
Organizational Structure meetings.
Shouldn’t the members of the
facilities sub-committee of the instructional committee be in contact with
the middle school building sub-committee before making recommendations?
Wouldn’t/Shouldn’t the
decisions of the Educational Program sub-committee effect decisions at the
decisions about facilities and hopefully not the other way around.
I would like to say
that I have to commend Randy Jenkins and Joe Kavanagh for taking on
another large committee.
Maureen Caccavale
GO TO TOP
|
|
