I watched the May 21 Lewiston School Committee meeting in astonishment, as the Lewiston public schools superintendent danced around a question posed about adding additional administration positions through grant funds.
Committee member Tina Hutchinson discussed how in the recent budget the committee had removed an in-class teaching position at Lewiston High School, and that she could not support this new grant-funded position without the in-class position returning.
The superintendent replied that it was a “coordinator position” and implied that it was “not administration.”
This, folks, is exactly what is wrong with our schools and their budgets. We need a true definition of “administrative” costs in our schools.
This position will not have a daily student load. This position will not be grading assignments at 8 p.m. at night on their couch. This position will not be completing lunch duty. This position will not be attending IEP/504 meetings.
In two years, they’ll expect the local taxpayers to pay for it.
How is this position not administrative?
Benjamin Martin, Lewiston
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.