Share This Article
On Monday the Sudbury Public Schools (SPS) School Committee discussed whether or not to welcome a parent group to a future committee meeting to review the results of a recent survey on after-school needs throughout the community. According to the parent group, Parents for Sudbury After School Solutions, they received over 300 responses to their survey representing 467 students. The results of the survey were announced on Monday and they demonstrated enormous unmet after-school needs and hardships for hundreds of Sudbury families.
Given the enormous response to the survey, and the acute family challenges evidenced by the results, the school committee was quick to thank the parent group for their efforts to quantify the challenges and bring the data to their attention. They voiced an earnest desire to discuss the challenges SPS families were facing, and an eagerness to work on solutions wherever possible.
The response from the committee was, in fact, quite the opposite. (1:01:50) All the members insisted that this issue was outside of the purview of the committee, with several claiming that they are limited to dealing with what happens within the school day. Some members opted to criticize the parent group, claiming this effort was a “regression” to a prior paradigm for SPS. Another said this was akin to a lobbying group, suggesting it was somehow unseemly or inappropriate, and not just a group of parents advocating to solve a challenge that all parties agreed existed. (1:10:30)
The jabs towards the public continued, including vague criticism leveled at all current candidates for school committee, and parents who objected to recent Valentine’s Day changes. Even the general public was passively criticized for not engaging enough on the school committee business that some members felt was more important. (1:05:00)
In short, the SPS School Committee doesn’t want to touch after-school care, primarily because they insist it’s not their business, even if they empathize with families about the very real problem that it is. Each member did make a point to empathize with what they felt was a legitimate challenge for parents, and several expressed a hope that this conversation could continue elsewhere in the community. But all of the members were adamant that it wasn’t within their purview.
Whose Purview Is It Anyway?
Somewhat amusingly, one member of the school committee acknowledged that the committee itself votes to approve the vendor for extended day (Sudbury Extended Day), but still felt after-school care was out of the purview of the committee. (1:17:15)
Upon further research, the claim that after-school and extended day programs were outside of committee purview appears questionable at best.Guidance from the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) on after-school programs says the exact opposite. It turns out school committees are explicitly given broad authority over district-run after-school programs under Massachusetts General Laws. That DESE guidance document opens with this rather clear statement:
“The Extended School Services Law (Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 71, Section 26 A-B) permits local school committees to establish and maintain school-age child care programs.”
Quality Standards for Public School District Operated School-Age Child Care Programs
You can also review the various sections of the relevant law here. Here’s how that section kicks off:
Ensuing sections of the law give the committee the authority to set fees and receive federal funds for such programs. Further details in the DESE guidance spell out the type of programs they’re talking about:
All of that raises the question: on what basis did all five members of the SPS School Committee come to believe after-school care was entirely outside of their purview?
Additional regulations encourage school committees to “exceed the minimum number of school days wherever possible, and to offer extended day and extended year programs that expand student learning opportunities.”
It appears the comments about the “purview” of the SPS School Committee are merely the opinion of the members, and are not necessarily based on the powers and authorities granted by law to school committees in Massachusetts.
Looking outside of Sudbury, it’s not hard to find examples of school committees working on after-school care or extended day programs. The Reading School Committee recently voted to authorize rate changes for their after-school program, and has been overseeing an expansion of their program to serve 700 students.
“The School Committee therefore affirms and declares its intent to:
1. Maintain two-way communication with citizens of the community. The public will be kept informed of the progress and problems of the school system, and citizens will be urged to bring their aspirations and feelings about their public schools to the attention of this body, which they have chosen to represent them in the management of public education.
2. Establish policies and make decisions on the basis of declared educational philosophy and goals. All decisions made by this Committee will be made with priority given to the purposes set forth, most crucial of which is the optimal learning of the children enrolled in our schools.
3. Act as a truly representative body for members of the community in matters involving public education. The Committee recognizes that ultimate responsibility for public education rests with the state, but individual School Committees have been assigned specific authority through state law. The Committee will not relinquish any of this authority since it believes that decision-making control over the children’s learning should be in the hands of local citizens as much as possible.”
SPS School Committee Policy Manual, Section A
There were several comments in the meeting suggesting the parent group was bypassing a proper process, or evading the administration by bringing this to the committee. Yet it’s unclear what process that would be in light of the committee’s own policy manual. Policy manual aside, the SPS School Committee chair confirmed for Sudbury Weekly that it was her understanding the parent group did meet with the administration already.
During the Monday meeting, one member suggested working directly with private businesses in Sudbury to help grow after-school opportunities rather than taking this to the school committee. Parents for Sudbury After School Solutions has already called for an inclusive, community-oriented approach that engages all parties, including businesses. From their website:
“Our approach is to provide data showing what the community needs are, start conversations about after-school care, work together with the community, and utilize the amazing businesses and resources our town has to offer.”
https://sudburyafterschoolsolutions.com/
Finding An Ally
It didn’t take long for Parents for Sudbury After School Solutions to find an ally in local government. A representative presented the findings of their survey to the Sudbury Park and Recreation Commission on Tuesday night. By the end of the discussion the commissioners voted unanimously to send a letter to the Select Board and Town Manager advocating for them to put the issue on the Select Board agenda, and consider creating a Town Manager’s Working Group to get to work on solutions. The commissioners appeared to find the data persuasive, if not alarming, and acted with urgency. (49:00) (Motion and vote at 1:47:40)
The idea was that a Town Manager’s Working Group would be the most effective vehicle to advance the town towards a viable solution. Insofar as after-school care often requires close coordination between Town and school departments, a working group might bring more of those parties to the table from the start.
It remains unclear what role SPS will play, if any, as after-school care conversations move forward. With a school committee that is adamant that it has no business dealing with after-school care programs, and an administration that offered no comment during the discussion on Monday, it seems clear the district wants the public to look somewhere anywhere else for solutions.
But what happens if a proposed solution from another department or committee requires just a little collaboration with SPS for the good of Sudbury students and families? Will the school committee maintain their hardline position on this issue? Or will a more collaborative attitude prevail?
Questionable comments about after-school purview aside, the SPS School Committee’s comments on Monday sent a chilling message to Sudbury parents who may wish to raise an issue to their elected school representatives: if you ask for “two-way communication” with the committee, you do so at your own risk of public criticism.