Mepham High School - Treasure Chest Yearbook (Bellmore, NY)

Page 26 text:

Board of Education SEATED: S. Mugavero. B. Rivere, F. Rerman ST ANDING:J. Rooney, J. Groen, A. Kirsch, M Pulewit , I. Mark, N. Billig Central Administration SEATED P. Scrafino, T. Guamore, S Mugavcro, G. Liftman. E. Stevens STANDING: M. Lurel, A. Biun- nhoelzl, S. Goldstein, L. Vida, A. Oppman. M Bright. D. Brown. A. Iserra Faculty 22 TREASURE CHEST

Page 25 text:

MR. VICTOR AMOROSO Administrative Assistant MS. MICHELLE D’AMOUR Administrative Assistant DR. HOWARD FINE Assistant Principal MR. ARTHUR McQUILLAN Assistant Principal MR. KENNETH RUTLEY Principal DR. LOUISA KRAMER VIDA Administrative Assistant I Amomo — Vida UNCOVERING EXCELLENCE 21

Page 27 text:

umming Up The School For the last three years, each high school m our district was evaluated by the research branch of BOCES, teachers, and administrators from other schools in our district, and members of the PTA. Mepham got evaluated during the 1985-84 school year and happily enough, received the most positive evaluation of all the high schools in the district. 'I feel that (the visiting team) came away with the same good feelings I have about Mepham. noted Dr. Fine. The visiting team evaluated Mepham as a learning as well as a community environment. Before com- ing to Mepham. they prepared a struc- tured approach. Our school was divid- ed into 21 academic sections with each section (composed of the subject teachers) writing a self-evaluative report based on their views, both positive and negative. Seven global committees ' covered aspects of the school other than academics, such as physical features. Prior to their visits, the evaluators studied these reports thoroughly, enabling them to better understand our situation. They had a pretty accurate picture of the school, said Mr. Rutley. The team approached each problem specifically. First, it wrote an introduc- tion to the problem and then wrote its commendations. They then inspected apparent needs and gave recommenda- tions to lessen or solve the problems. Three items were said to require at- tention. The first item was academics. The team suggested establishing a social studies resource center, improv- ing the computer program and adding blackboard space in the math and health rooms. It also advocated in- creasing the understanding of regular teachers in relation to special educa- tion students. The second item addressed was communication. It suggested there be more articulation between the driver education teacher and the driving teacher. Increasing communication between the junior highs and Mepham. the team observed, would ease the transition from one to the other. The third group of items concerned attendance and the physical at- mosphere of the school. One recom- mendation suggested a reorganization of the guidance office to make it easier to obtain college materials. Other recommendations included better ventilation in the art suite and parking by permit only in the parking lot. An interesting suggestion recommended that Mepham graduates be sent a survey asking if Mepham had provided them with a solid education. The team was favorably impressed with the openness of the school. They found a warm, nurturing relationship between the teachers and the students, and they felt that the staff was truly concerned about each student's welfare. The team also found our self- concept of the school to be a realistic one. All in all they were very impressed with Mepham. Said Dr. Fine. They came away with a glowing feeling because ... we are doing well. — Amy Susman Custodians R. Bett A. Watts L. Ferrara R. Bursky NOT PHOTOGRAPHED: C. Bene R. Blumenreiter W. Cheeres L. Faltermayer P. Formisano D. Johnson F. Ranelli V. Santonicola J. Scrivano P. Zidlicky Monitors K. Pianka II. Austein A. Carroll NOT PHOTOGRAPHED: A. Cannavo D. Marinello P. Vezina St hool Staff UNCOVERING EXCELLENCE