HOME Return to Townsman Articles Next Article

	We Need to be Fiscally Responsible to Future Generations (The Wellesley Townsman – 4/3/2008) By Gerry Murphy, Guest Columnist Recently, I reread the “Wellesley High School Education Program and Plan aka the Dejong Report. It is this report that has ostensibly driven the high school building project. I have a concern. How do the goals discussed in the section entitled “Executive Summary and Critical Issues” subsection “Educational Program – Goals” relate to the “gut rehab” and “new building” proposals currently being put forward? The goals, taken by themselves, are independent of any particular building configuration. They have been and would continue to be achieved by acting upon our current educational philosophy, practiced by our teachers and administrators. At the moment, as in the past, the Wellesley education community believes in and practices these goals. The goals are dependent upon professional educators carrying them out rather than on a particular building configuration. The Dejong report has, in effect, put the building before the goals, the cart before the horse, the tail wagging the dog. I agree with the goals enumerated in the Dejong report. They are the important and necessary bases of a sound educational policy. They are universal, not new or innovative. They formed the cornerstone of education in Wellesley for countless years. According to the Dejong report, “Wellesley education in the future will; a) continue excellent programs, build from today’s educational success in an evolutionary manner” –This is sound policy. To continue it is wise. To continue it is to continue excellence. b) “meet the needs of all students” – this has been a long standing policy and practice at Wellesley High School. c) “develop interdepartmental connections” – Connections such as mentioned here depend upon people, not a building configuration. Presently we have one interdisciplinary course. Others were eliminated for budgetary reasons. d) “foster collaboration” – This is done when necessary by individual teachers or departments. This cannot be successful if arbitrarily forced upon people by a building configuration. e) “enhance student centered focus” – This is done currently and is done, as Dejong says, by “developing the curriculum” and “by the roles and positioning of adults.” f) “utilize a variety of teaching styles” – One of the hallmarks of excellent teaching for generations has been the variety and uniqueness of teaching styles encouraged by supportive administrators. g) “recognize a variety of learning styles” – This is being done, and has been done for some time. h) “broaden access to technology” – this is worthwhile, but not dependent upon “gut rehab” or a “new building.” i) “establish community context” – We have had service learning and internships since the late 1960s. Attempts to broaden such opportunities have been denied in the past for budgetary reasons. All of these admirable goals are being implemented as they have been for years. They have nothing to do with elaborate “gut rehab” or a “new building.” We can continue to carry out these goals of excellence by updating our present building, adding classrooms and work areas for teachers, by modernizing electrical, plumbing and heating systems and by adapting space as needed. These goals are just that – “goals.” They are not “a program,” as the Dejong report states. They are important guidelines on which to build a program. There are guidelines already in place and have been for some time. The only program in place is the one we have presently. No one can anticipate program needs very far into the future. (I remember when we “had to have” a Science Lecture Hall, a wave of the future. It fell into disuse and disrepair and is now used as an area for the drama grogram). Programs change and evolve gradually as student needs change. I believe it is poor educational policy to build such defined structures as being proposed based upon tenuous assumptions so far into the future. Gerry Murphy, of Standish Road, is a Town Meeting member in Precinct E.

HOME Return to Townsman Articles Next Article