A portion of their email exchange is below.
I would prefer to eliminate the language about "significant investments" not being made.
"Significant" is fairly subjective. At both Presumpscot and Lyseth the principals went out of their way to talk about the many improvements in their physical plant in recent years (mechanics, new windows, etc.).
I would prefer to focus on the fact that in 40-60 years, how schools are structured has changed greatly. Students have more differentiated needs which requires frequent regrouping a small group instruction, teachers are asked to collaborate with each other, we place a premium on presentations and other exhibitions of student performance... none of the four schools can accommodate that.
Note that we just received a facility assessment for all of our buildings and the four schools have differing levels of needs (i.e., Reiche has large needs, Presumpscot not so much) and non-BFOF schools have much larger needs than most of the BFOF schools. So, focusing on delayed investments in those four schools begs the question about the other delayed investments. So, I would prefer to steer away from the delayed needs/upkeep and focus on the 21st Century Learning needs.
Beyond that, I'm comfortable with the examples you provide and with the overall approach. Please share the final copy so that I can give principals the heads up that their PTO is going to come with the flyer for distribution in backpacks.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Emily Figdor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Terrific, thank you! I made the edits you suggested, and the final is attached. I’m coordinating with the PTOs at the four schools.
Also, is the facility assessment a public document? If so, I’d love to see it.
Thanks for all you’re doing, and good to work with you on this!