The Somerville Public Schools has requested a study of guidance services within each school as to the effectiveness of those services as they are provided for students, parents, staff and community. During the months of September to December interviews (Focus Group and Individual) were held with personnel directly related to guidance services and with those individuals who provided a reliable source of information based on first hand experience with guidance staff. Data collection for this review was primarily gathered through "Focus Groups" of which specific questions were established based upon the group participants' use of, or involvement with, guidance services. The Individual Interviews included guidance staff K- 12, Principals, Department Supervisors that have taken on additional guidance responsibilities for the 2003-2004 school year, Central Office Administration, Vocational School Director, School to Career Counselor, Guidance Secretary, Director of Full Circle/Next Wave, Building Masters, School Committee/Parent and the Supervisor of Mediation Services. The F ocus Group interviews included two student groups from the Somerville High School, one student group from Full Circle, High School Guidance Staff, Building Masters, Parents and Teachers.
The participants in both the individual and group interviews were most cooperative and exhibited an enthusiasm for the stated outcome of the review, which was to make recommendations for improved system wide guidance service delivery. On occasion one or more of the participants would share an event or situation that cast a shadow on the guidance operation K- 12. It is fair to say that the majority of the participants were well aware of the reductions of staff and services over the past years and did recognize that the financial impact on the school has impeded guidance services. It is also fair to say that the participants also recognized weaknesses in the guidance service delivery, especially at the high school.
Interviews with the High School Headmaster, High School Vice Headmaster, Guidance Staff K-12 and Elementary Principals established the framework for this report. The analysis of the data collected from all those interviewed (individual and group) supports the commendations, constructive criticisms, and recommendations made in this report.
Four of the local multicultural newspapers printed a notice that provided information regarding the guidance evaluation. Parents and former students were encouraged to respond to the questions printed in their newspaper. Responses could be sent to the school with complete confidentiality or e-mailed to the Evaluator.
The interviewers found a true sense of community in the Somerville Public Schools as well as a true sense of responsibility and commitment to maintain a level of educational excellence that currently exists within the system. This responsibility and commitment to the Somerville Public Schools was exhibited in the direct responses from those interviewed during this four-month review.
The Somerville Public Schools has been recognized nationally and locally for its excellence in academics, vocational programming, school building initiatives, school and community mediation, and most recently in the Boston Sunday Globe (11/30/03) where Somerville High School teachers were recognized for providing an "interdisciplinary" approach for the four major subject areas (English, Math, Science, Social Studies) when students are assigned cross-curriculum projects. The Somerville Public Schools are also effective in providing an environment that is conducive to a high percent of minority students with a wide range of diversity and multiculturalism.
While much can be said of the positive aspects of the Somerville Public Schools the budgetary cuts that incurred during the last budget session are making an impact on the school program operations. This is evident in the area of guidance.
The Somerville Public Schools provides guidance and counseling services in each of the elementary schools, high school, vocational high school and to a lesser degree at the New Wave/Full Circle alternative program. The counseling and guidance program varies in service delivery in that these school counselors have specific job related tasks to perform. For example; Counselor Educators (Grades K-8) provide individual and group counseling based upon school issues and academics and provide counseling and guidance between teachers, students and the home. In some cases Adjustment Counselors, with primary responsibility to special education, will be called upon to effectively deal with more involved and long-term problems because the Counselor Educator's time would be further divided among several job performance responsibilities. Unlike their counterparts at the high school and the vocational school, the Counselor Educators are responsible for health education within the classrooms of the schools that they are assigned. This assignment in the classroom has many positive ramifications such as; exposure as a counselor and educator to the student body, establishing relationships with the teaching staff, presenting timely agendas of health and social/emotional well being, and establishing a trust and visibility between the Counselor Educator, staff, students and parents. The Counselor Educator program is a continuation of a School Health Grant that originally funded these positions several years ago. The current Counselor Educator program configuration for staffing and program/service delivery works well in that there is a close working relationship in each school between the Principal, Assistant Principal and the Counselor Educator. The Cummings School and Capuano Early Childhood Center share Counselor Educators. The Brown School Counselor Educator has been assigned additional teaching responsibilities at 7th and 8th grade in each of the other elementary schools and at the New Wave Alternative Program.
The high school and vocational school have five (5) guidance counselors and one (1) school-to-career counselor to provide standard guidance services. At the beginning of the 2002-2003 school year, there were six (6) guidance counselors, one (1) school-to-career counselor and one (1) guidance supervisor who were responsible for K-12 guidance services and all the related guidance programs such as testing, staff evaluation, curriculum recommendations, public relations, informational surveys for new students and follow-up surveys for those that have graduated, notifications to parents, students and the community regarding guidance events, community liaison, etc. Due to budget constraints, the elimination of two guidance department positions at the high school (one (1) counselor and the guidance supervisor) were chosen.
In an effort to maintain the needed supervisory services, other department supervisors who have affiliations with the guidance department were assigned components of the guidance supervisor responsibilities. The rationale for this move was based upon the necessary supervision of the guidance activities even with the reduced staffing. The English Department supervisor accepted the responsibility of testing including SAT's, MCAS, PSAT, and standardized test assessments. This testing component is currently being accomplished with assistance from the guidance staff. The Department Head of Health Education works with and supervises the K-8 Counselor Educators in their roles as classroom health teachers. The Vice Principal at the high school acts in the capacity as guidance supervisor within the high school and holds regular meetings to discuss guidance roles, responsibilities and assists in the resolve of guidance issues that require administrative action. In addition to the parceling of the administrative responsibilities of the guidance department the practice of alphabetical assignment of the high school student body was reconfigured by grade level. In past years with the six (6) counselors and one (1) guidance supervisor the high school students were divided by an alphabetical list., This approach gave a great deal of flexibility in services to the students in that (l) the counselor would have a student for four years, (2) consistency of services would be spaced over a four year period, (3) college and career counseling would be easier to establish because of the longevity of the student and counselor and (4) if needed, students could change counselors.
With the elimination of the two guidance position the high school administration aligned the remaining five (5) guidance positions by grade level; one each at grades 9, 10, 11, and two at grade 12 and the vocational school. The high school administration took into consideration the loss of staff in guidance and also the loss of a Building Master that impacted the organization and affiliation with the guidance department. In order to provide better administration of guidance it was determined that aligning the counselors with the grade level of the Building Masters would provide better availability and accountability between guidance and the Building Masters.
The budget reduction for this school year has had a great impact on service delivery, not only within the K- 12 guidance area, but in many other departments as well. The most noticeable effect on the guidance staff is in the areas of support, supervision and administration for program and services. The most noticeable effect on students is less direct services. The most noticeable effect on teachers is confusion and frustration.
The purpose of this evaluation and review of the Somerville Public Schools Guidance Program is to assess those areas of strengths and weaknesses and make recommendations that would enhance the service delivery to students, parents, staff and the community.
The Individual Interview provides first hand documentation of a participant's insight and understanding of a particular subject. In the case of those interviewed for this evaluation each person had significant contact or exposure to the guidance department staff. The interviews were based on specific questions developed for each person relative to their involvement with guidance. For example, a set of questions would be developed for guidance staff, a set of questions for supervisors, a set of questions for administrators, etc. There was a familiar theme in each set of questions, allowing the interviewer to gather data more readily. Responses to the questions varied from person to person within each of the departments. Those individuals interviewed did not have prior knowledge of the questions to be asked nor the purpose of the evaluation. Each person interviewed was informed of the purpose and expected outcomes of the evaluation and that their input would be extremely important to that outcome. They were advised that their responses would be held in a confidential manner. They were also advised that they could share whatever they felt comfortable with but were not compelled to answer anything that they didn't feel comfortable sharing.
Focus Group
The purpose of the Focus Group is to concentrate the effort of a group on a particular issue or problem. Work in a group can produce trust and confidence and increase communications through involvement and teamwork. Focus Groups provide collective ideas and resolution. Focus Groups must maintain a sense of confidentiality in order to further the concept of trust. Focus Groups create a genuine interest to establish a positive change. Focus Group participants contribute to the discussion, speak positively, clarify opinions, listen, support other participants and balance their individual needs with group needs. The Focus Group Facilitator clarifies the task, encourages all to participate, keeps the participants focused on the tasks, repeats and reviews comments and suggestions, and supports the development of positive recommendations. The Facilitator also charted the information the participants shared so that immediate feedback and review was available for observation by the participants. The participants could change or clarify any statement that wasn't accurate or didn't represent the true intent of the words or idea presented. In addition to the Facilitator, a Recorder became an important part of the process. This Recorder was part of the evaluation team with the responsibility of accurately recording statements of fact, perceptions, and feeling. The Recorder and Facilitator analyzed their collected data and incorporated the outcomes into this report.
The Individual and Focus Group meetings were, for the vast majority of those persons interviewed, a very positive experience. The openness, honesty and enthusiasm shared with the interviewers were gratifying and informational. The information gathered in this interview process is incorporated into the FINDINGS section of this report.
The information collected through the interview process and the written documents that identify and explain guidance services provide the baseline data for the findings of the evaluation. The individual and group interviews revealed the information that could be identified as positive and constructive. There are several negative comments that were directly attributed to the high school guidance staff as opposed to the elementary Counselor Educators. Sample questions and responses by the participants are shared in this section.
The following shared comments are from individuals who have contact with guidance on a frequent basis. The names of the persons, their position and affiliation with guidance are not to be made available because of the confidentiality guaranteed to the participants in the individual interviews. Some of the statements below have been repeated by other individuals interviewed with slight variations in language.
The recommendations listed below represent a combination of data collected from the interview process. Several of the recommendations on this list may have partial implementation as it is currently practiced within the guidance department. Partial implementation does not resolve an identified problem, therefore it would be paramount that each recommendation be carefully addressed and fully implemented. Priority setting with a stated timeline for each chosen recommendation will be necessary. If, and it is highly recommended, a Guidance Supervisor position is reinstated these recommendations should become part of the interview process. How would this person incorporate a plan to allow the Somerville Guidance Department staff to meet and serve the needs of students, parents, staff and the community and regain their position as educational and service delivery leaders?
The recommendations are separated into the categories of Leadership, Procedures, Community Outreach. and Resources. There is definitely a category overlap in several of these recommendations and this should not impede the implementation but encourage those working on the recommendations that the far reaching effects for change will have a greater positive impact on the individuals to be served as opposed to the few who may become uncomfortable.
The evaluation and review of the Somerville Public Schools Guidance Department K- 12 was provided between the months of September and December 2003. During this period of time interviews were held with school staff, students, parents and community resource personnel. Guidance related documents (forms, procedures, directions, program overviews, etc) were reviewed in order to determine if guidance services were providing comprehensive service delivery to the school community. The data gathering from the Individual and Focus Group interviews and document review revealed that there were inconsistencies between what is expected from guidance service delivery and what guidance actually does provide. It is evident that the guidance department lacks organization and leadership. The current administrators/supervisors have taken on the added responsibility to provide a leadership and support system, and to a certain degree this has been accomplished, but not to the extent that guidance must have in order to be successful. The perception of the people interviewed is that guidance at the high school is dysfunctional due to lack of organization and leadership. Four major issues over the past year have added to this perception and in all probability exacerbated the problem (1) elimination of the guidance supervisor position, (2) elimination of one guidance counselor, (3) increased guidance caseloads, (4) distribution of the guidance supervisors responsibility to several other non-guidance administrators/supervisors.
The previous pages in this report give a detailed explanation into the evaluation process and the findings. The "FINDINGS" section provides the actual statements made by participants in either the group or individual interviews. The individuals who evaluated the guidance department searched for consistencies and themes, whether positive or negative, in an attempt to clarify the attitude of those participants who in some way are close to guidance. It is apparent that the perception of Guidance ranges from very positive to negative. Those individuals who were quoted as having made positive statements also had constructive criticism of guidance and those individuals who were quoted as having made negative/constructive criticism statements, also made positive statements. What was very apparent to the Evaluators is that the Somerville Public Schools and the Somerville Community take their educational programs very seriously and demand that excellence in programs and services should be everyone's responsibility. The community is well aware that budgetary restrictions have created staff reductions in teaching and service related positions, which has increased class sizes and specifically in guidance where caseloads have increased and supervision has diminished. Regardless of these setbacks there is still an expectation level that must be reached, an added effort put forth, a change in operation, a change in service delivery, a different way to maximize quality services. The interviews exposed a large group of professional staff that is well aware of the current budgetary situation and pending budget problems for next year. These individuals also expressed that regardless of the budget the job must get done and done well. When asked, "How do you propose to do the same with less resources?" They explained, "You do what you have to do to make it work." This is not an isolated statement made by one person but really defines an attitude for much of the Somerville school staff and the community. Unfortunately, a positive attitude can change rapidly if there is an overwhelming reversal of the support systems that have been available in the past.
Charles A. O'Donnell
Evaluation Consultant