SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS
Dr. Peter B. Holland
ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FOR CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION
Dr. Patricia A. Aubin
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
Dr. Gerald E. Missal
Office of The Superintendent of Schools
Open Monday through Friday
From 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
To the Citizens of Belmont:
The Belmont Public Schools, the School Committee and the Belmont community are all committed to the goal of effectively educating all of Belmont’s children. We have a long-standing tradition of setting high expectations for the success of all our students, and we take enormous pride in the fact that our school system continues to rank among the top-performing districts in the Commonwealth.
The performance of our schools is especially noteworthy given our per-pupil spending, which is now below the state average and well below the spending of other districts with comparable results. Our system’s success comes as a result of the consistent efforts of our students, reinforced by the administrators, teachers, parents, and many other involved Belmont citizens who create a learning environment that nurtures and encourages our students’ efforts.
The mission statement of the Belmont Public Schools commits us to preparing citizens who “learn from the past, imagine the future, and meet the challenges of the present with intelligence and commitment”. The School Committee is responsible for developing policies that support this mission, and for advocacy on behalf of adequate funding for the schools. The active support of the Board of Selectmen, the Warrant Committee, and the citizens of Belmont has reinforced our advocacy. The School Committee has the further responsibility of expending the funds made available to the school system in the most appropriate and cost-effective way possible.
In the 2005 fiscal year that began in July of 2004, the School Department was able to restore most – but not all – of the classroom-based staffing cuts that were necessitated by the financial pressures of the previous fiscal year. After eliminating 12.9 classroom-based full-time equivalent (FTE) positions and 1.0 FTE in guidance positions in the Fiscal Year 2004 budget, we regained approximately 11.5 classroom-based FTEs for FY 2005, plus 2.4 FTE needed positions in guidance, psychological services, technology support, and library aides. Even with these staff restorations, class sizes – particularly at the Chenery Middle School and Belmont High School – continue to be a concern.
In non-personnel parts of the school budget, we likewise were able to make restorations in such areas as textbooks, equipment, supplies, and maintenance, but all these categories are still funded at levels substantially lower than the needs identified by our administrators. The funds available for computer technology, meanwhile, were not sufficient to maintain our current level of equipment and infrastructure, much less increase our technology capacity – at a time when our society, to a great extent than ever before, relies on a citizenry with a high level of technological literacy.
As the School Department copes with limited funding, ever-escalating mandates at the state (Massachusetts Education Reform Act) and federal (“No Child Left Behind”) levels are placing increasing demands on the time and energy of our school personnel. One particular example of increasing mandates is the new federal “Adequate Yearly Progress” measure, which requires all school systems – even high-performing ones like Belmont’s – to show improvements in test scores for all students, including those in a number of sub-groups involving race or income levels, every year. These mandates, unfortunately, are not accompanied by enough additional funding to make them achievable without sacrifices in other services that the Belmont schools have traditionally provided.
The Belmont Public Schools continue to provide outstanding value for Belmont and its citizens. According to the most recent information from the state Department of Education, our per-pupil costs are now more than $620 below the state average, and thousands of dollars per students less than some other comparable districts. Yet our school system’s performance, by any objective measure, continues to be among the best in the Commonwealth. The Belmont High School Classes of 2003 and 2004, which were accountable under the state’s “high-stakes” graduation requirement of passing the English and Mathematics MCAS tests, both achieved a 100% success rate in satisfying this new mandate.
The School Department has made great efforts to reduce costs wherever possible, including membership in purchasing collaboratives and competitive bidding for many services. In addition, the School Committee - working with Superintendent Peter Holland and his administrators - has worked to generate significant revenues to help fund Belmont’s school system. In Fiscal Year 2005, we will raise more than $980,000 - over 3.2% of our total budget needs - through student fees, building rentals, tuition payments from other communities who use our LABBB Collaborative special education programs, and other means.
Among our revenue-generating methods is the School Choice program, which brings approximately $5,000 to Belmont for each student we accept. The decision to enter the School Choice program, which the School Committee made by accepting 30 high school students in 2002 and an additional 30 high school students in 2003, was not an easy one. Entering the Choice program has caused an increase in class sizes at Belmont High School, while causing us to rely on student tuitions from other districts to help pay for our schools. No other school system in Greater Boston has entered the Choice program. Because of increasing enrollments at Belmont High School, and large class sizes at the Chenery Middle School, the Committee has not expanded the program beyond the high school Choice students whom we are presently obligated to retain until
they graduate from our system.
In 2004, continuing with the level of staff changes in the previous several years, the School Department hired more than 60 new staff members, including a significant number who are replacing veteran teachers, administrators, and principals who are retiring from the system. This annual influx of new hires, together with the professional development needs of staff hired in the past few years and our veteran staff members, requires greatly increased responsibility for supervisory staff to provide appropriate levels of support and training for all our teachers.
Although a complete list of retiring staff members is included later in this report, I would like to recognize Foster Wright, retiring after 24 years as Belmont High School Principal, as well as Rose Feinberg, retiring Principal of the Mary Lee Burbank School, and Herb Baker, retiring Director of Social Studies, for their unceasing efforts to improve education in Belmont during their many years of service. We have been extremely fortunate to have such talented and dedicated educators serving in these important supervisory roles.
Bargaining Teams Contract
Expires
Unit A Teachers Miller /Stratford/Griswold 8/31/05
Unit B Administrators Bowe/Gibson 6/30/05
Unit D Education Support Miller/Bowe 8/31/05
AFSCME Custodians/ Cafeteria Gibson/Stafford 6/30/05
Workers
Belmont Secretaries Secretaries Stratford/Griswold 6/30/07
Association
Superintendent’s Contract Stratford/Miller
Principals (advisory) Gibson/Griswold varies
In April, citizens re-elected Kathy Miller and elected Diane Stafford to membership on the School Committee. The School Committee re-elected Scott Stratford as Chair and Donna Griswold as Secretary. The following are sub-committee assignments for 2004-2005:
Subcommittees of the School Committee
Communications & Community Relations Griswold, Gibson, Stafford Crofts Policy Revision Miller/Stratford
Federal/State Education Advocacy Miller/Stafford
Technology Assessment and Funding Stafford/ Bowe
Best Practices and Benchmarking Bowe/Stratford
Representatives
Advisory Council for the Future Needs of Belmont High School Gibson
Boosters Stafford
Capital Budget Committee Griswold (alternate: Bowe)
Community Education Stratford
EDCO Board Holland/Miller
ESCO Energy Study Stafford
Foundation for Belmont Education Stratford (ex-officio)
Health Advisory Committee Bowe
ITAC (Info. Tech. Advisory Com.) Bowe
Recreation Commission Gibson
Vision 21 Stafford
Warrant Committee Stratford (ex-officio)
(alternate: Griswold)
Youth Commission Griswold
Foundation for Belmont Education
Awarding over $225,000 to the School Department in 2004, the Foundation for Belmont Education is dedicated to raising funds to enrich the Belmont Public Schools. Founded by citizens who wanted to ensure the continued excellence of the school system, the Foundation awarded Learning Excellence Grants to 23 recipients for a total of $35,169 in the past year. Major projects for the past year include the Chenery Readathon ($40,655), the Friends of Science initiative ($65,024), the Belmont High School Writing Lab ($60,000), and Professional Development support ($27,000).
The Foundation has awarded over $200,000 for professional development courses for Belmont teachers and administrators in the past seven years. Since its formation in 1992, the Foundation has awarded nearly one million dollars for programs in the Belmont Public Schools.
The Foundation raises funds in several ways. Many Belmont families made gifts to the STAR (Staff and Teacher Appreciation and Recognition) program to honor more than 600 Belmont educators for their outstanding contributions to the education of Belmont children. The adult and student spelling bees have been very successful, as have special initiatives such as the Friends of Science and the Chenery Readathon. The seventh annual Dinner Dance will be held on Saturday, March 19. The commitment and generosity of the Foundation and the many families who contribute each year enable the Belmont Public Schools to offer many programs that would be otherwise impossible to undertake.
The School Committee and system teachers and administrators are very grateful for the ongoing support of the Foundation for Belmont Education.
School Advisory Councils
As a result of the 1993 Education Reform Act, School Advisory Councils have been established at each of Belmont's schools. The Advisory Councils have taken an active role in addressing policy issues at the site level. Members of the 2004-2005 School Advisory Councils include the following:
STAFF PARENT COMMUNITY
SCHOOL MEMBERS MEMBERS MEMBERS
BURBANK Christine Francis, Chair Robbie Catchings Sharon Gouveia
Karen Fierros Elizabeth Miller Katie Lowrie
Jamie Huguet Barbara Owens Joyce Messer
Brenda Maurao
BUTLER Bruce MacDonald, Chair Farah Abbas Lot Bates
Andrea Bouts Kevin Cunningham
Ellen Goldshine Patricia Kriebel
Jennifer Pressey Jim Shore
WELLINGTON Amy Wagner, Chair Ellen Canepa Carol Darbyshire
Caitlin Adams Ron LaRussa
Cheryl Lyons Lynn Polcari
Carolyn Murphy
WINN BROOK Janet Carey, Chair Jeff Berger Jane Murphy
Marshall Levy Celine Brabo Rosemary Pisano
Robin Morrison Kevin Chinn
Deborah Napolitano Ann Rittenburg
CHENERY Deborah Alexander, Paula Caruso Jean Hall
MIDDLE Co-Chair Michelle Dooley Phyl Solomon
SCHOOL Patricia Connolly Jane Levitt
Michael McAllister Deborah Lockett
Lisa Nelson
Nancy Shane
BELMONT Jonathan Landman, Chair Sue Croy Florence Cooperstein
HIGH Carolyn Bunyon Joanne Domeniconi Alexandra Brostoff*
SCHOOL Catherine Larkin Mary Harvey Marina Galkina*
Tara Niemeier Arn Howitt Bobby McLaughlin*
Patricia Partridge Mary Johnston Allie Ruane*
Martha Reagan Peter Mili Caroline Smart*
Ann Levis Smart Ciaran Ussher*
Andrea Yelle Annie Warner*
* Student
Programs and Instruction
In 2004 the Belmont Public Schools remained committed to universal access to the highest quality curriculum possible for students. Staff Development programs focused on improving student literacy at all grade levels and advancing faculty expertise in differentiating instruction to meet the learning needs of a diverse student body.
Accountability issues remain a high priority for teachers and administrators as federal mandates from the No Child Left Behind legislation continue to direct testing programs for the state.
Assessment
This annual report on the results of standardized testing in the Belmont Public Schools includes information on standardized tests which students took as a result of state mandate and student choice during the 2003-2004 school year.
2003-2004 School Year
Student Choice SAT I Multiple
SAT II Admin.
Advanced Placement (AP) Dates
Grades 3, 4, 5, 6 Massachusetts Comprehensive Spring
7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Assessment System (MCAS)
The testing schedule for Belmont students continues to be challenging. Students participated in the Scholastic Achievement Tests, Parts I and II. Student involvement in Advanced Placement testing continues to increase. In addition, Belmont participated in the seventh administration of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS). State testing involved students in grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. All seniors passed the English and math MCAS, a requirement for graduation.
Of special interest in this year’s report is the result of the SAT I for the class or 2004. SAT I results for 2003-2004 report the highest combined math and verbal means for the system since 1980. The combined mean for verbal and math was 1179, 32 points higher than the combined mean for last year. In addition, over 600 students took at least one Advanced Placement exam during the 2003-2004 school year.
Scholastic Achievement Test I (2003-2004)
BPS State National
Mean V M C V M C V M C
(V = Verbal) 581 598 1179 518 523 1041 508 518 1026
(M = Math)
(C = Combined)
The SAT I report summarized information for seniors who took the SAT I: Reasoning Test at any time during high school through March, 2004. If a student took the test more than once, the most recent score was used.
All scores reflect the recentered SAT scaled score. All student scores from the administrations prior to April, 1995, when the recentered scale was introduced, have been converted to order to summarize data across the cohort.
In Belmont, the verbal mean is 73 points higher than the national mean and 63 points higher than the state mean. The mathematics mean for Belmont is 75 points higher than the state mean and 80 points higher than the national mean. The combined mean for Belmont students was 138 points higher than the state mean and 153 points higher than the national mean.
In Belmont, 141 students took both the SAT I and SAT II. The verbal mean for these students was 630 and the math mean was 650. Rigorous academic programs continue to correlate with higher SAT scores.
Advanced Placement
The Advanced Placement Program offers 35 discipline-based examinations. These exams consist of multiple choice and open response questions. The examinations are graded on a 5-point scale. Most of the nation’s colleges and universities award credit for grades of 3 or higher. The values of an Advanced Placement Program are many. First, AP courses offer a standard curriculum that is used across the country and acknowledged throughout the world for its quality and rigor. Second, the AP curriculum tends to raise the quality of curriculum throughout the entire high school. Finally, the AP courses at Belmont High School are aligned with university standards and expectations.
In 2002, 255 students took 488 Advanced Placement Exams in 21 separate subject areas. Of the 488 student scores, 88% were 3, 4, or 5.
In 2003, 290 students took 545 Advanced Placement Exams in 21 separate subject areas. Of the 545 student scores, 89% were 3, 4, or 5.
In 2004, 298 students took 601 Advanced Placement Exams in 23 separate subject areas. Of the 601 student scores, 89% were 3, 4, or 5
Students take Advanced Placement Exams in twenty-three areas:
Biology Calculus AB Calculus BC
Chemistry Comp.Sci. A Comp. Sci. AB
Econ-MAC Econ-MICRO English Lit/Comp
Environ. Sci. European His. French Language
U.S. Government Latin/Vergil Music Theory
Physics B Physics C-E&M Physics C-MECH
Psychology Spanish Language Studio Art-Drawing
Studio Art-Design US History
Longitudinal data indicates a steady increase in the number of Advanced Placement tests taken and the number of student participants. During the 1999-2000 school year, AP Studio Art was added to the curriculum. During the 2000-2001 school year, AP Economics, AP Environmental Science, and AP Computer Science were added. During the 2001-2002 school year, AP Music Theory was included. During the 2002-2003 school year, students had the opportunity to elect AP Latin.
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS)
During the 2003-2004 school year, Belmont students in grades 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 participated in various disciplined based tests as part of MCAS. An initial review of the results of the seventh administration of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) indicates an overall positive performance for Belmont students. Belmont students are meeting the learning standards of the State Curriculum Frameworks.
Individual school reports, system wide data, and state scores allow for a comparison of the percentage of Belmont students in each of four performance levels with the statewide percentages in each performance level. At all grade levels and in all subject areas, the percentage of Belmont students who scored at advanced and proficient levels was significantly higher than the statewide percentages in the same performance categories.
Student results were reported in scaled scores and performance levels that were determined by a band of scaled scores. Proficiency levels are: advanced, proficient, needs improvement and warning. Students must meet the minimum needs improvement score of 220 to graduate from high school. The federal mandates of No Child Left Behind require that all students reach the proficient level in math and English. The proficient standard for Massachusetts is a score of 240 on MCAS.
MCAS Test Administration for 2003-2004
Grade Tested In 2003-2004 |
YOG |
Current Grade In 2003-2004 |
# Tested |
Subject Tested
|
10 |
2006 |
11 |
279 |
English Math |
8 |
2008 |
9 |
292 |
Math Science |
7 |
2009 |
8 |
290 |
English
|
6 |
2010 |
7 |
289 |
Math
|
5 |
2011 |
6 |
292 |
Science
|
4 |
2012 |
5 |
264 |
English Math |
3 |
2013 |
4 |
270 |
Reading
|
In addition, grade 9 and 10 students participated in test trials for subject area tests in science.
· 126 members of the class of 2006 (current grade 11) took the biology exam.
· 144 members of the class of 2006 (current grade 11) took the chemistry exam.
· 57 members of the class of 2007 (current grade 10) took the physics exam.
Other testing programs included proficiency tests for all English Language Learners. These students are required to participate in the MCAS testing as well as the Massachusetts English Language Assessment Oral (MELA-O) and the Massachusetts English Proficiency Assessment (MEPA).
Four Year Comparison of Combined Percentages of Student Performance at Advanced and Proficient for MCAS
Grade |
2000-2001 |
2001-2002 |
2002-2003 |
2003-2004 |
3 Reading |
85% |
84% |
83% |
84% |
4 English |
84% |
80% |
74% |
78% |
4 Math |
70% |
73% |
60% |
67% |
5 Science |
NA |
NA |
82% |
81% |
6 Math |
69% |
73% |
72% |
76% |
7 English |
72% |
88% |
91% |
89% |
8 Math |
61% |
58% |
74% |
72% |
8 Science |
NA |
NA |
68% |
73% |
10 English |
80% |
88% |
84% |
90% |
10 Math |
78% |
73% |
73% |
85% |
MCAS Testing 2003-2004
Number of Students in Warning Category
Grade 3 |
Reading |
1 |
Grade 4 |
English |
5 |
Grade 4 |
Math |
7 |
Grade 5 |
Science |
14 |
Grade 6 |
Math |
20 |
Grade 7 |
English |
4 |
Grade 8 |
Math |
24 |
Grade 8 |
Science |
16 |
Grade 10 |
English |
4 |
Grade 10 |
Math |
8 |
Almost all special needs students were included in the testing. Accommodations were made to ensure a high percentage of participation. Accommodations took the form of additional time, a separate or less distracting test climate, or teacher intervention to clarify directions. These and other accommodations are included in a student’s education plan. Some special needs students participated in an alternative assessment. In addition, all students with limited English proficiency were also tested. Both the federal and the state regulations insist on the testing of all English Language Learners.
The ultimate goal of the Education Reform Act initiatives regarding curriculum frameworks and a comprehensive testing system is to improve the academic performance for all students. School systems will make every effort to have as many students as possible perform at the advanced and proficient levels
Adequate Yearly Progress
While the state determines graduation status through the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), the federal No Child Left Behind law outlines the criteria for assigning adequate yearly progress (AYP) to a school or school system.
Under federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation, every state must work toward the goal of having all students gain proficiency in both English language arts and mathematics by the year 2014. In Massachusetts, “proficiency “ is defined by a score of 240 or more on the MCAS tests. Students score in one of four categories: Warning, Needs Improvement, Proficient, or Advanced. A score of 240 places a student in the proficient category. Thus, every child in Massachusetts must score 240 on the English and math MCAS to meet the federal standard.
Students, schools, and school systems are expected to make progress toward this goal of 100% proficiency by the year 2014. Each year scores are analyzed to determine if students, schools, school systems, and states are making “Adequate Yearly Progress” (AYP).
In 2003-2004, as in previous years, Belmont students scored well on standardized tests. These norm referenced tests represent one means of measuring a student’s achievement. The Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) provides another means of measuring achievement through its criterion referenced tests. This standards based assessment developed by the state is now in its seventh iteration and will continue to provide data for the district on student achievement as it relates to the newly instituted curriculum in the state curriculum frameworks.
Belmont Boston METCO Program
The Belmont Boston METCO Program welcomes 126 students in grades K-12 from communities within the city of Boston. Parents choose to send their children to Belmont because of the many educational opportunities offered including a strong academic program and a wide array of extra curricular activities. Student test scores are monitored to ensure positive achievement and to identify needs for support. Summer programs are designed for elementary, middle and high school students to assist in transition to new grades or schools and to provide academic enrichment.
BUSINESS AND FINANCE
Budget
At the annual meeting in April, Town Meeting approved a school budget of $30,923,766, an increase of 4.3% over the prior year’s budget. The budget that was approved by the voters was not a level-service budget. With significantly higher costs for health insurance and special education, a level-services budget would have required an increase of approximately 9%.
Because of the severe financial pressures facing the Town, the School Committee approved this reduced-services budget.
The Belmont Public Schools continue to provide outstanding value for Belmont and its citizens. According to the most recent information from the state Department of Education, our per-pupil costs are more than $600 below the state average. Yet our school system’s performance, by any objective measure, is among the best in the Commonwealth. Belmont High School’s Class of 2004 - the first in Massachusetts history to be accountable under the “high-stakes” graduation requirement of passing the English and Mathematics MCAS tests—has a 100% success rate in satisfying this new mandate.
The School Department has made great efforts to reduce costs wherever possible, including membership in purchasing collaboratives and competitive bidding for many services. Perhaps our most important cost-saving venture, the LABBB Collaborative, achieves substantial cost savings by pooling resources with Lexington, Arlington, Bedford, and Burlington to administer special-needs programs that would be far more expensive in other settings, while providing a high level of service for our students.
In addition, the School Committee and School Administration have worked to generate significant revenues to help fund Belmont’s school system. In FY 2005, we will raise more than $980,000, over 3% of our total budget needs, through fees, building rentals, School Choice, and other means. Among our revenue-generating initiatives is the School Choice program, which brings approximately $5,000 to Belmont for each student we accept. The decision to enter the School Choice program was not an easy one. At one level, it shows that Belmont must rely on students from other districts to help pay for our schools. No other school system in Greater Boston has entered the Choice program. In FY 2005, we will maintain the number of Choice students at 60, all attending Belmont High School.
Building Maintenance
The School Department’s 2004-05 operating budget included $1,435,144 ($591,729 for the maintenance of buildings and grounds plus $843,415 for custodial services) for the care and upkeep of school facilities. In addition, Town Meeting also approved a Capital Budget of $2,477,992, which included several school projects. Within the capital budget was $81,000 for technology purchases, $20,000 for window balance replacements at the Burbank, Butler and Winn Brook, $180,000 for roof repairs for both town and school buildings including finishing the replacement of the Winn Brook roof. $50,000 to convert burners to natural gas at Burbank, $70,000 to replace emergency generators at Belmont High School, and $100,000 for pool filtration system at Belmont High School.
Wellington Elementary School Project
A Superintendent’s Advisory Council on the Future Building Needs of the Wellington School was established during the 1999-2000 school year. The charge of this committee was to do an in depth study of the various options for the Wellington School presented in the Facility Audit Report. Serving on this committee were the building principal, a teacher representative, Wellington parents, a member of the town’s Permanent Building Committee and a resident architect. The Advisory Committee conducted a search for a feasibility study architect consultant. The Newton firm of Drummey Rosanne and Anderson, Inc. was appointed by the School Committee to assist in the Wellington School Study.
Numerous meetings of the Advisory Council and architects were held during the fall of 2000, all of which were posted and open to the public. The Council considered three options: (1) full renovation with the building unoccupied, (2) renovations with an addition with the building either occupied or unoccupied, and (3) new construction on site with the building either occupied or unoccupied. After reviewing costs comparisons of each of these options, the Council voted to recommend to the School Committee the single option of new construction with the existing building occupied during the construction. This recommendation was first presented to the School Committee at their meeting of January 9, 2001. After further discussion at their meeting of January 16, 2001, the School Committee unanimously voted to accept and
support the recommendation of the School Advisory Council and to “recommend to the Selectmen and Town Meeting that a new Wellington School be constructed at the Wellington site while the present building is occupied.”
To implement this recommendation, the School Committee had intended to request that the April 2001 Town Meeting vote to appoint a Wellington School Building Committee and to authorize $300,000 for design services to develop schematic designs and provide for owner’s costs during this preliminary stage of the project. However, due to the override request to support the operating budgets and a multitude of other town capital projects coming forth for consideration, it was decided to delay the request for design funds at this time. Other town capital projects were the fire stations, the Town Hall Complex, the library, the senior center and in the near future, renovations to Belmont High School. In a series of joint meetings of the Board of Selectmen, the Capital Budget Committee and the Warrant Committee reviewed
the timing and needs of each of these projects in an attempt to develop a long range plan which phases these projects over a number of years. It was the wish of the School Committee that the Wellington be addressed within the next year or two when this final phasing plan is adopted.
Belmont High School Project
At a Special Town Meeting in November, the Town voted to appropriate $90,000 for design services for the development of a Master Plan for future renovations to Belmont High School. The intent of developing the Master Plan is to identify and prioritize necessary renovations while waiting for a comprehensive renovation some time beyond 2010. The Master Plan will develop a phasing plan with estimated pricing to keep the building fully functional over the next seven years. The phasing plan will also take into consideration the potential integration of a performance-based contracting being pursued by a separate initiative though an Energy Services Company (ESCo) project.
PERSONNEL AND STAFF
Fifty-six teachers were hired for the 2004-2005 school year to replace the 13 teachers who retired, 27 who resigned and 7 who were not renewed.. One teacher is on career leave during 2004-2005, and 8 are on maternity leave during parts of the school year. Two principals and one curriculum director retired in 2004-2005. One administrator and one curriculum director resigned in 2004-2005. Jonathan Landman replaced Foster Wright as Principal of the High School. Christine Francis replaced Rose Feinberg as Principal of the Burbank School. Michael Harvey replaced Herbert Baker as Curriculum Director of Social Studies and Craig Gruber replaced Gerald Chapman as Vice Principal of the High School. Maurice Wright was hired as the Belmont High School METCO Counselor/Coordinator.
Retirements
Richard R. Allen, Special Education teacher at Belmont High School
Herbert P. Baker, Director of Social Studies
John M. Coleman, Jr., Social Studies teacher at Belmont High School
Dr. Rose Merzon Feinberg, Principal of the Mary Lee Burbank School
Wega G. Firenze, Spanish teacher at Belmont High School
Judith G. Hanley, seventh grade English teacher at Winthrop L. Chenery Middle School
H. Kenneth Hanson, Jr., Director of Orchestras of the Belmont Public Schools
Kevin McMullen, Social Studies teacher at Belmont High School
Jo-Ann S. Miller, language arts teacher at the Winn Brook School
Judith E. Paradis, fifth grade teacher at Winthrop L. Chenery Middle School
Rachel E. Reck, Guidance Counselor at Belmont High School
Claudia E. Sarmiento, eighth grade social studies teacher at the Chenery Middle School
Foster E. Wright, Principal of Belmont High School
Conclusion
The School Committee and School Department thank the Board of Selectmen, the Warrant Committee, the Capital Budget Committee, countless school volunteers and fund-raising organizations, and all of Belmont’s citizens for their support. The Foundation for Belmont Education has been particularly generous in funding curriculum initiatives, staff development, and other vital projects. We are always interested in hearing about ideas that will enable us to control costs or raise revenues, while maintaining the high quality of our system.
In the coming years, Belmont’s below-average per-pupil expenditures, combined with funding increases that are below the amount the amount needed to maintain level-service budgets, will pose a great challenge to the ongoing excellence of the Belmont Public Schools. A school system needs funding that is adequate, predictable, and sustainable in order to be successful. At present, despite the considerable efforts of the Town and its citizens, those necessary conditions are not being met in Belmont.
In 2004, as in years past, Belmont has good reason to be proud of its schools and its students. Our schools operate very efficiently, with a minimum of administrative overhead, and our teaching staff and administrators are dedicated and enthusiastic. As we look into the future, we must remain focused on ensuring a well-trained teaching corps, well-equipped classrooms (and classes of appropriate size) to allow all our students to reach their potential, and - above all - continued high expectations for the performance of our students and our school system. Please join us in our never-ending efforts to maintain and preserve the strength of our schools.
Respectfully submitted,
Scott D. Stratford, Chairman, Belmont School Committee
| 
