O.L.L. Education Commission Meeting Minutes
August 10, 2006
Attendance: Pat Armstrong (representative from the Education Department of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati) , Fr. Dave Sunberg, Sue Kampel, Elaine Tepe, Scott Liesch, Lynn Breidenstein, Terry Rabanus, Nancy Jamison, Karen Bergen, Lynda Sexton, Jennifer Ruwe, Karen Rusche, Gino Trotta, Terri Brown
Karen had invited Pat Armstrong to come and speak to us about roles and responsibilities of an Education Commission in accordance with the Archdiocese of Cincinnati. Before we began our meeting, Pat handed out some guidelines that we can reference as we establish our agenda for this coming school year.
Pat began her talk by introducing herself and shared her background which includes 24 years of working as an educator for the Archdiocese of Cincinnati. She then asked each member to share their reason for choosing to be a part of the O.L.L. Education Commission. She thanked us for selecting this ministry and asked God to give us courage and strength to carry out our purpose.
Pat indicated that there are two different ways that an education commission can operate: as a school board or a total parish education commission. Last year when we re-wrote our Constitution and By-Laws, we decided that we were solely dealing with the school since Carol Gruelich, as Director of Religious Education for the parish, fulfills the needs of the children and adults outside the school setting. So, for the purpose of what Pat was describing, we consider ourselves a school board. She said that the archdiocese recommends that we are a “cradle-to-grave” Education Commission and as the constitutions are in constant flux to accommodate changing times, she stated that whatever works for the parish is what she recommends that we do – that neither is right or wrong.
Pat read our purpose from the information booklet that she passed out; made mention of our tie to Parish Council and commended us for having someone sit on our board (Lynda Sexton) who was our tie back to the P.M.T.
She asked us to consider what we are going to be about this year? Had we laid out our goals for the year? She recommended that we decide that in our first meeting of the year and then we can set the policy as long as we are aligned with the pastor and the principal.
Pat said that it was not necessary for Fr. Dave to be in attendance at all the Education Commission meetings, but if there is a need or reason that he should make himself available to be present if at all possible. She then added that we should be reviewing our policies every five years, ensuring that our policies remain time-sensitive, clear and easy to be understood. (During her talk, Pat referenced many pages in the handbook so that we would have this for reference during the year). She pointed out examples of policies and the expectation of the state as well as the archdiocese, but added that the principal establishes the rules in regard to all policies. Policies should be kept in a book and dated so that they can be reviewed in accordance with the five year cycle. If a new policy is made it needs to be propagated with the parents and make the policy known before it becomes implemented. (Pat cited an example of perhaps an “eligibility policy” for sports, connecting eligibility to a student’s academic performance and outlining consequences of poor performance as it relates to playing time in their sport).
Pat then went back to the roles of the commission members, how we should be included in and have input to finances when it comes to tuition. Under Karen’s guidance and leadership, coupled with the needs of the school, one of our roles should be budget-making/finance monitoring with respect to salaries and the like. She did add that this becomes much more challenging with reduction in force and reduction in enrollment.
Pat informed us that our archdiocese is the eighth largest in the United States, with 22 high schools, and 19 counties….continuing to market our catholic schools are key to the success of Catholic education as we move forward. She posed the question to us “What did we think Catholic education was going to look like in Cincinnati in the next five years? She commented that education is challenged greatly and the archdiocese is going to be calling on Catholic lay leadership in a way that has never been needed before.
Pat then talked about changes to our charter and how the approval chain works for such changes at the archdiocesan level. For example, if we were going to operate a pre-school or change the way we currently operate, the change would need to be approved by the Cincinnati Education Commission, the archbishop, superintendent and the Archdiocesan Education Commission. Information was shared on the National Education Commission that we could use as an additional resource throughout the year if we recognize a need for further information. Pat also handed out an “Issue Gram”, published by the NCA (a national publication that comes out four times a year) that deals with current issues that school boards are facing. She commented that there is a wealth of information contained in these publications; a link to their website can be found on the archdiocese’s webpage.
Pat spoke then about our roles as they related to sharing information and stated that we should keep our matters of the education commission confidential. This is a serious responsibility that we are undertaking and she made it a point to say that we are not covered by the archdiocese’s policy with respect to civil liability if we break our confidentiality. We need to treat with respect what we know as a result of being a member of the Education Commission. To this point, our minutes should not be posted on the website and only a summary of our minutes should be published and distributed. We spoke briefly as a group on the mechanism of “going in to an executive session” and how only voting members of the commission should be present during those type of sessions. She commented that with respect to parents getting time on a monthly agenda should be part of our policy; how to handle parent complaints – we are only here as an advisory group and are not second-guessing rules of the school. We are entitled to hear a situation about policies and reinforce that in that situation the chain of command should be followed – talk to the teacher, then to the principal, then to the pastor. We can not look at situations; only if there was a policy and if the policy was followed or ignored. After reviewing a situation like this, if we felt a need to have a policy revised or saw a need to initiate a new policy, we would talk to Karen regarding the policy. That’s why Pat recommended that we review policies every five years so that we all keep the most current information in front of us to ensure that the policy remains time-sensitive.
Pat informed the group that our schools in the diocesan get more state aid than any other schools in the United States. She told us to watch for the new c.d. coming out in September that encouraged further contact and support from our state representatives. She stated that we receive monies for each child receiving auxiliary services and additional funds come from Title I money and there are stipulations on how this money is spent. She added that administrative money can be used for anything involving education; there are no stipulations. Karen added that at O.L.L., ours goes to the parish which in turn comes back to the school. Numbers were stated that 30 to 40% funding is coming from the parish and that it should be made known to parents that every parent is getting financial aid for their child.
Pat then talked through a few logistics of running a monthly meeting; how to get the most of the time spent together and how valuable a concise agenda is for the success of the meeting. (We looked at agenda examples from our handbooks). Pat then talked about P.T.O. and fundraising and how the Education Commission should/would interact with these functions.
Pat then spoke about how we need to help waylay gossip and rumors – she stated that this is one of the biggest causes of dropping enrollment. She re-stated that our message needs to be positive and that we need to be proponents of the school and back up the school in a positive manner. She told us that some of the most successful schools have parents involved to do things like give tours to prospective new students and their families. Terri Brown asked Pat if she had any suggestions for what we should try to accomplish in a year. She suggested that we plan a ½ day on a Saturday or another convenient time and brainstorm on what we need to focus on as a commission this year and in succeeding years.
With no other questions on the table for Pat, she concluded her talk and time with us. She gave her email parmstrong@catholiccincinnati.org and said that method is the easiest way to reach her. She welcomes any questions that we may have during the year and encouraged us to write any time.
Terri then called our meeting to order; asked for approval of the meeting minutes from our June meeting. Terri also called Fr. Dave’s attention to the survey results and asked if he would like a summarization of those; Fr. Dave’s responded that he would only get involved in Karen needed him to review those.
Nancy Jamison approved the meeting minutes and Karen Rusche seconded.
Karen stated that she did not prepare a principal’s report due to the time spent with Pat’s presentation and information-sharing session.
The members talked briefly about what they wanted to focus on for the coming year – brought up a few miscellaneous topics such as the admission policy of the school, and the uniform policy. Terri Brown suggested that maybe we could have some board members attend another parish’s education commission meetings and observe what they do and how they run theirs and bring that information back to the group.
Terri Brown asked for thoughts on having an extended meeting the next time (September 14) so that we could brainstorm and come to alignment on what we are going to focus on this year. There was agreement on the time and that we would all “pitch-in” for a potluck style dinner that evening. Terri stated the starting time for our next meeting would be 6 p.m. to allow ample time to set our goals for the year.
Lynda motioned for adjournment; Karen Bergen seconded the motion. Fr. Dave said a prayer for our success in this school year.
Respectfully submitted,
Sue Kampel (for Julie Balzano)
Vice-President