Talk about your paradigm shifts, Newton Public Schools Superintendent David Fleischmann has announced, in a letter to elementary school parents, that it will be system-wide policy to no longer allow parents to accompany children into school at drop-off*. Details to come**, but this is huge.
When parents are not allowed in the building, all sorts of good flows. Parents have no reason to park or idle any longer than the time it takes to kick the darlings out of the car. When they can’t accompany the children inside, maybe parents will decide to drop them down the street, relieving the knot of traffic right in front of the school. When families realize that walking a little to school is good, maybe they decide to walk a little farther. It’s the beginning of a very virtuous cycle.
Newton knows this works because it has been the policy at Carr (for Angier and now Zervas refugees) and at the re-opened Angier. Now, the policy and benefits will spread system-wide. Importantly, one of the factors cited for the new policy is to “Foster student independence.” Having students get themselves in(to) the school on their own is developmentally appropriate.
For those of us who have been advocating for a system-wide stop-drop-and-roll-(on) policy for over a decade, this is very satisfying. It is an important recognition that the school policies drive driving behavior and that leaving it to school-by-school decision-making is not going to create the change required.
Bravo, NPS!
* Forgive the awkward construction. NPS hasn’t framed it as no-parents-allowed, though that’s the effect.
** Undoubtedly, there will be exceptions for appropriate cases.
In addition to other benefits, it’s a very clever way to relieve traffic problems around the schools, as you said. Exceptions to the policy can be handled on an individual basis. Good decision.
Some schools have been doing this for years, Burr and Countryside that I know of. There’s been leeway for the kindergarten kids for the first month, then it’s walk in just like the big kids, and it works. In addition to the benefits mentioned above, it allows the teachers to focus on the kids and getting the day going, instead of parents. And it’s a huge security hole to allow open access to the school every morning.
Great policy change.
As mentioned above, this has been the policy at Burr. It was a little nerve-wracking for my son who is anxiety-prone, but drop-off goes much smoother this way. Plus, parents going into the classroom with their kids could throw off the teachers’ entire morning routine. It might take some getting used to for some parents, but I think it works.
Yes, hopefully this will help reverse the trend over the past decade or two and give kids a chance to be more independent. That’s consistent with the mission of our schools. It would be better still if we could get the administration to refer to “arrival” and “dismissal” instead of assuming that children will be “dropped off” or “picked up” #languagematters
The benefits of this change are clear… but NOT as clear as the benefits of changing high school start times. The pathetic losers on the School Committee should take a cue from Superintendent Fleishman. When change is in the best interest of students, you make the damn change. Everything else sorts itself out.
As usual, Mr. Roche conveniently provides only that side of the story supportive of his limited transportation agenda. Briefly: no parents at drop off will in all likelihood reduce the level of connection and community families have to these schools. In such a touchy-feely community such as Newton it is irresponsible (not surprising) of Mr. Roche for not even mentioning it.
Moreover, in my family’s 12 years of elementary school drop off, I cannot say that any of the teachers seemed particularly thrown off by what certainly was a somewhat chaotic morning routine. Perhaps some were, but all in all, the substantive problems associated with the elementary schools (and there were many) appeared independent of whether parents were present before 8:45 AM.
Congrats to Mr. Roche on his continued contribution to the civic life of Newton! Without you, all we would have is molehills.
Elmo,
Thanks for your warm words.
Why would you want your kids to start their day in a chaotic routine (your words)?
My kids walked to Bowen every day, starting in Kindergarten. I rarely, if ever, entered school with them. Yet somehow (chiefly by volunteering), I managed to feel connected to the school community. Sorry you haven’t had that experience.
In the future, I’ll endeavor to limiting myself to life-and-death issues, like whether or not kids are safe at and around schools.
I’m a long-time Angier parent, and I do not think there has been a drop in the level of connection or community since the school adopted this policy last year. Parents still congregate outside the school at arrival and dismissal times.
The chaotic atmosphere in halls crowded with kids and parents was never a great way for kids to start the school day. Now you see kids massing outside the door at around 8:10 and most are ready to file in and get started as soon as the doors open at 8:20. Also I see more kids walking or being dropped off a couple blocks from school now that parents don’t face the perceived pressure to put in morning face time with teachers. Happy to see this change made across the city.
Elmo, many Newton elementary schools have been doing it this way for many, many years, with absolutely no negative impact on families’ connection to the schools. I was a Burr parents for 13 years, a school where this policy has been in place as long as anyone can remember, and we have an extremely involved and tight-knit school community. Parents at schools where the policy has been implemented in just the last year or two have experienced the change and are saying that there hasn’t been a negative impact.
I strongly disagree with Sean’s central premise that the benefits for students from the proposed change would outweigh the negative impact. My youngest child is in fourth grade now, and I don’t walk her into Mason-Rice any more, but I have crystal clear memories of her excitement about showing me things in her classroom almost daily when she was younger. The brief visit often included a project she was learning about in class, a moment of connection with another parent, a warm smile with a teacher, and a school-home partnership-building experience that laid the foundation for the collaboration that is important for the child’s K-12 education. Here are five reasons why:
1. To suggest that parent-teacher-child interactions in those morning moments are preventing maximizing learning is to ignore the value of social emotional learning. Ironic for a district that says it’s working on this. I can’t believe that the letter from the Superintendent says this would be better for the kids’ social/emotional growth. What better way to learn the value of courtesy and appreciation and love for learning than to see your parent and teacher warmly greet each other and briefly share excitement about the poem on the wall, or the caterpillar that’s about to hatch. If you eliminate the opportunity for these connections, you are left with stilted parent nights and twice-yearly conferences as virtually the only time for parent-teacher interactions. The proposed change would also would encourage more email communications between teachers and parents to replace short fruitful verbal exchanges – an increased burden for both teacher and parent, and often a less effective way to work together to support a child.
2. It is developmentally appropriate for many students, particularly kindergarten students and first graders, to have an adult help them ease the transition into school. Is there really such ignorance of the benefits for the anxious child of having a caring adult help the child bridge the home-school transition? Do you really think expectations for a five-year old should be the same as for a 12-year old?
3. It takes the district years of discussion around a later start time for our sleep-deprived high school students and still there is no change–but this major decision comes as a sudden mandate without thoughtful review of data and the opportunity for community input?
4. The morning drop-off policy can be modified to accommodate security concerns– a smart team of people can devise something without this extreme measure that has so many negative ramifications.
5. Lastly, Fleishman wrote that this change will allow teachers to “start on time.” Effective teachers ensure children know what to do to as they enter the room each day. During the ten-minute arrival window, teachers who are having short, meaningful interactions with parents and children are indeed “starting on time.” I am sure that there are occasional parents who overstay – it just needs to be made clear that when the second bell rings, parents are expected to leave.
I am appalled that the Superintendent’s announcement was written in such a way to suggest that parents have “enjoyed” bringing children inside and may be disappointed, and that this policy will be “more efficient.” That’s condescending and minimizes how important the small human interactions are to building a vibrant, strong school community–equally important (& in fact enhancing) for academic outcomes for children.
Olivia, thanks for sharing your valuable perspective. Won’t you consider running for School Committee again?
I think that in this approach, there is no “one size fits all” and the new policy doesn’t recognize that.
The demands on our teachers and classrooms have only increased over the years my kids have been in school. Instructional time now starts well before the “second bell.”
I’m sure this decision will be unpopular with some parents, but it’s based on experience and educational principles, not popular demand. I will miss the extra time in my child’s classroom, but I recognize the need to foster independence. I’m glad the administration had the courage to take this step.
Here’s what I don’t get – many of our elementary schools already do morning arrival like this. Some have done it for the past year or two, some for decades. If there is solid evidence that it can and does work, for kids, teachers, and families at these schools, why do some folks feel that it won’t work at their schools?
A point that hasn’t been brought up: in terms of numbers, the majority of children enter their classrooms on their own. In 18 child years as an elementary parent, I walked into Cabot at the beginning of the school day a total of 3 times – the first day of kindergarten – because I had to be in my own classroom at the same time. Other parents were and are in the same situation. The teacher is responsible for creating a warm and welcoming tone to begin the day and that means that 100% of his/her attention should be focused on the students.