MRHS Facility Committee Report


SUPERINTENDENT’S REPORT

October 8, 2004

I thought I would do something different for this report.  Things have been going somewhat smoothly so there is very little of great substance to report.  The tennis courts are nearly complete.  They look great, so I thank you all for supporting this project.  Green Meadows is moving along.  The paving and most of the landscaping will be done by this weekend.  I believe that the grass seeding will occur next week.  Unfortunately, the flu vaccination problem we have been hearing about has hit home.  We will be unable to provide vaccinations to our employees as we have in the past.  We will wait and see how this problem unfolds in the weeks to come. 

Back to different! Several weeks ago as we were nearing the stage of selecting an architect, the MRHS Facilities Study Committee asked for my vision of Minnechaug.  They thought it important that they hear from me as to what I felt the needs of the school were from an educator’s view.  Some time within the next two to three weeks, the educational consultant from Dore and Whittier will meet with me to learn about my vision.  I thought that it was important to share my thoughts with you as well.  Remember, though, that these are my thoughts only and that other people will also be asked to share their vision of the school’s future.

The last time I did this was when a new high school was proposed back in 1988 in Somers.  At that time I felt that several key points needed to be addressed regarding a high school of the future and frankly I have not changed my mind much since that time.  Here are my thoughts in no particular order:

Issue #1:  Technology

The high school of the future should make a strong statement about technology as an integral part of the school’s learning process.  In fact, the school should be built around technology as it’s main theme.  I would advocate that an “information center” serve as the school’s focal point.  The information center would include an integration of print media (library), data (computer areas), and visual media (audio/visual tools).  In a centralized area we would find the school’s library and research center, a number of computer labs designed to address the many needs of the school’s curriculum and visual production areas such as areas for video conferencing, distance learning, and video production.  The technology center should be the core of the school.  In designing and providing this area, we need to realize that there are economic reasons for developing a cluster approach; it is more cost effective to build and maintain over the long term.  We also need to build a degree of flexibility into this area.  Technology changes rapidly so we need to build not for today but to consider options that may be available in the future.  In terms of design, this area need not be on a single floor but could be “stacked” with an internal stairway available to create ease of movement. There are issues relative to infrastructure that need to be addressed by the architectural consultants.  What is key is that the infrastructure needs to be flexible utilizing hard wiring as well as “wireless” configurations that support a multitude of services.  Adequate switches, routers and servers need to be placed throughout the building to accommodate current and future needs.  This will vary dependent on the educational program curriculum and administrative tasks that occur on a daily basis. 

Issue #2:  Integration of content areas

We need to begin to address the notion that content areas or departments should not remain separate.  Schools of the past were built with “wings” or “pods” designated for each department.  At best, I envision some separate configurations due only to the need for specialized equipment or safety issues that would require segregation of facilities such as science labs, food service, or music rooms.  (Even these rooms, however, can be integrated throughout the school.)  If we accept the idea of the technology or information center as our core, then I would also envision that the Science and Technology area, Humanities area and Visual and Performance Arts area would emanate from this core.  To be specific, Science, Math, and Consumer/Technology education (the former Industrial Arts and Home Economics) would comprise Science and Technology.  English/Language Arts, Social Studies/Social Science, and World Languages would be in the Humanities, and Art, Music, Drama would be in the Visual/Performing Arts section.  Having used the term “area” or “section” or “cluster”, let me state that my goal would be to integrate the school’s curriculum as much as possible.  The three areas would need to “talk” to each other so that integrated courses would become more of the norm rather than the exception and the “information center” would be the catalyst for this integration.  In short, this new configuration should lead to a movement away from a departmentalized curriculum structure with the school looking more like an integrated body rather than a university structure with single domains.  We would then create areas where students and faculty could move easily from class to class. Additionally, we would not let structural barriers become obstacles for ease of movement between classrooms.  Further explanation is simple, be careful not to build wings or floors that become labels.  Allow a seamless configuration so students see connections rather than separations.  This is a paradigm shift that needs to happen in the future.

Issue #3:  Security and safety

There is no doubt that as the post World War II baby boom hit our nation’s cities and towns, the country witnessed three parallel school building eras.  In the fifties, the growth of our suburbs created newer and more modern high schools, i.e., Minnechaug built in the late 1950s.  Few municipalities, however, paid attention to the waves of students that would come during the sixties and as a result, many additions needed to be built to the then relatively new high schools.  It is common to see additions built throughout the 1960s and in the early 1970s.  Minnechaug followed this pattern.   With each addition came more entrances.  No one at that time gave much thought to the security problems that these buildings would encounter as our society and the world changed.  Any improvements or changes to our current structure need to deal with the issues of centralizing student “traffic patterns” and the utilization of effective safety technologies.  I do not want schools to mirror prisons, but rather security needs to blend subtly into the design of whatever we do.  I would suggest that this issue may force us to consider options that consolidate this building so that its 280,000 square feet be packaged in a more condensed area.  As we look to options, we also need to consider outside area that also impact safety and security.  Traffic and bus patterns need to keep bus traffic away from cars.  Parking lots need to be visible and easily accessed by administration and local police. At the same time, we need to be concerned about unwanted visitors.  With design enhancements, we can improve many of these situations.  We should also consider implementation of a number of security devices, including surveillance cameras, parking lot automated gates operated by scanning cards, etc.,

Issue #4:  Environmental needs

The children that come to our doorsteps today are much different than those who joined me as I entered high school in September 1964.  Today students bring with them many physical and educational needs.  Physical needs vary widely from physical handicaps to specific health issues such as allergies, asthma, and other physiological deficiencies.  We need to address these issues with an effective environmental infrastructure that heats, cools, and ventilates the building properly.  The last thing we need to have is a sick building.  The systems that we currently operate at Minnechaug fall short of providing the proper environments.  Along with an adequate HVAC system, we need to make sure that we have addressed handicap issues.  This is not the case in our present building and must be a priority as we review any options that are provided.  Finally, we would be remiss if we did not incorporate “green technology” into the building.  There are many passive and subtle design techniques that save energy by incorporating design with good old fashion practices that New Englanders have used for years.

Issue #5:  Student Activities

The American public school system has for the past 100 years provided areas for students to express themselves through physical activities, as well as through the performing arts.  Combing athletics and the arts in our schools set us apart from other schools in the world.  The concept of developing the mind and body is unique to the western world.  In Europe, South America, and Asia, for example, this task falls to local or regional groups not the school district.  This uniqueness will be with us for many years to come so we need to provide adequate facilities for our students to participate in both a competitive as well as informal structure.  I would envision that attention be paid to developing new structures that maximize space as well as address new technologies that are available for both the gymnasium, an aquatic facility, and auditorium.  For example, a field house facility should be investigated since it would respond to the size of our population as well as the variety of sports we offer.  To maximize long-term maintenance issues, we also need to consider the systems that are in place for our athletic fields as well as the use of all-purpose surfaces for multi-use by both our athletic teams and our physical education programs.  The auditorium needs to combine efficient lighting and sound technologies, as well as being responsive to the large student and community use of our current facility.  This is not the case currently.  In addition, adequate practice rooms for the band and chorus should respond to the size of our program and be equipped with technologies that promote music instruction.

Conclusion: 

The opportunity to develop a vision for such an important educational facility does not come very often in one’s career.  This is the second opportunity that I have had and admittedly this is an enjoyable task.  Minnechaug, as it currently stands, does not support today’s students or their education well.  The issues that I responded to in the visioning task - technology, safety/security, environment, integration of content areas, and student activities - present daily challenges for staff, students and administration.  We do seem to get the job done, but we need to combine the demand to address the building’s infrastructure with the opportunity to enhance its learning environment, and this represents a challenge that we must undertake for the generations that will follow.

PCG/kwb