Board Ponders SMASH Agreement

By Juliet McShannon
Staff Writer

Feb. 23 -- Both the School Board and the district’s unions expressed concerns Thursday night that a partnership between SMASH and a Rhode Island-based company could strip the alternative school of some of its identity, force it to relinquish local control to a private organization and give it an unfair advantage over other schools.

The worries were aired at a first reading of an agreement between SMASH and the Big Picture Company (BPC) that requires that the school abide by the “core principles” of the BPC philosophy -- such as “one student at a time” and “real world learning” -- and boost its fundraising to pay for some of the cost.

Presented to the board by SMASH Principal Carrie Ferguson, the agreement also calls for the non-profit corporation to provide "professional development" with "like-minded educators," Ferguson said.

The proposal -- which comes in the wake of a failed request by the staff of SMASH to turn the school into a Charter model -- was questioned by teachers union president Harry Keiley and Keryl Cartee, chief steward of service employees union, who worried the school would be losing some of its control.

"Is a MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) really necessary to provide for professional development?" Keiley asked. "It seems as though there is more to it than just 'professional development,' as though a measure of control is being given over to the BPC."

Keiley referred to a clause in the agreement allowing for the BPC to have some say in SMASH's hiring of staff, such as the choosing of a principal.

"So far the BPC has made no attempt to contact us, and in the light of our concern over Charter Schools, we need a meeting," he added.

BPC Co-founder Elliot Washor, who addressed the board on the background and ain philosophy of the BPC, responded to Keiley's concerns.

"We don't push ourselves on anyone,” said Washor, whose organization partners with 20 schools, three of them in California.. “They come looking for us. Some of the schools we work with are union, others charter. We are happy to meet with the union."

Board President Jose Escarce questioned the BPC's stipulation that it be involved in the future hiring of a SMASH Principal, a requirement Principal Ferguson defended.

"The principal needs to be driving the vision,” Ferguson said. “If we believe in this model, then it is important that the principal chosen advocates the BPC philosophy."

Board members Michael Jordan and Julia Brownley suggested a cautious approach.

Jordan sought assurance from Washor that the MoU was not merely an "adjunct to a private school," while Brownley applauded the BPC's philosophy, but queried the language of the MoU, which pointed towards "a feeling of autonomy and separation from the rest of the district."

Major sticking points in the agreement proved to be funding and fundraising, as Board members grappled with the issue of just how much leeway could be given to SMASH in light of the restrictions and budget cuts imposed on other district schools.

Board members worried that in providing for a class ratio of one teacher per 20 students, the MoU called for the district to give more funding to SMASH, to the detriment of other schools in the district.

Superintendent Deasy responded that the "20:1 ratio is an ideal, not a requirement," and said a pertinent question was whether “gift money” could be used to meet the lower ratio requirement for grades one through six.

"We must also ask the question, ‘If budget cuts forced the schools to cut back could SMASH fundraise independently?’"

Escarce worried that using gift money to support class size reduction would be "opening a Pandora's box." But in the same token, he said, "If we are going to support the model then we have to get behind SMASH and give our full support."

Ferguson tried to persuade the board that any involvement with the BPC could only benefit SMASH, and reassured the board that the BPC would not be reimbursed for its services in any way, at least for the foreseeable future.

The Board agreed that a refined and revised contract would be returned for consideration and that there were still unanswered questions that had to be debated, such as juggling the needs of SMASH with the needs of the other schools in the district.

"If we make exceptions for SMASH, can we allow other district schools to make independent decisions?" asked Board member Maria Leon-Vazquez.

The meeting concluded in a mood of optimism. Jordan summed up the general feeling of many board members by saying, "SMASH is an alternative school and is unique where different ideas are pursued.

“We can raise questions of equity, but by definition, we want them to be different,” he said. “In the spirit of alternative education, we ought to support them in their request to be different."