- Bethlehem School board backs superintendent on no frosh class for September.
- District has not responded on reason
DELMAR -At a March 11 special meeting, the Bethlehem Central School District Board of Education failed to pass a resolution countermanding Superintendent Jody Monroe’s decision denying Lab School enrollment to current 8th graders this September. New enrollment will now be “paused” while a committee reviews the program. Any committee recommendations are not expected to be implemented until Fall 2026.
During its pre-vote discussion, Board President Holly Dellenbaugh said, “I know that a lot of the public conversation has been about enrollment numbers in the Lab School and I did want to acknowledge that the board is aware of information with respect to the program that cannot be shared publicly because it is confidential.”
In January’s announcement of Lab School changes, meetings held with parents, and at board meetings, low enrollment was the sole reason given by the district for the pause. At its February 28 meeting board member Ewan McNay challenged the data the Superintendent offered to demonstrate low enrollment. The Board voted that night to hold a March 11 special meeting to consider whether to pause new enrollment while the program is under review. A decision announced Monday, March 4, allows 9th graders to remain in the Lab School or return to the regular high school in September 2024.
At the March 11 special meeting, the Board was slated to consider a resolution recommending that “the District assess the Class of 2028’s interest in enrolling in the Lab School program.” McNay again questioned whether data presented supported pausing Lab School. “It’s pretty clear that over the past – at a minimum 6 years – there’s been no decline in enrollment. If anything, there’s been a slight upward trend.” McNay said. “There is not an enrollment argument that would support cutting the program.”
McNay moved to amend the pending resolution to specifically require holding a presentation about Lab School by assembly, ascertaining the interest of the 8th graders, and continuing the program during the committee review.
After spending about an hour discussing and tweaking that language, the Board voted down a resolution that “The Board directs that current 8th graders should be offered the opportunity to enroll in the Lab School program, subject to the Administration’s determination that enrollment is sufficient.” It failed by a 4 to 3 vote.
McNay, who said he does “program reviews of educational programs all the time” commented, you “don’t stop people from enrolling while a program is being reviewed. We wouldn’t consider stopping offering English or math to say, hey, we think we can do better. We would still continue to offer the best we have currently and work to improve it.” During the public comment period, parent Erin Dolen, who holds a Phd in Education and is a professor, echoed that idea. “You don’t stop programs while they are being reviewed.”
Objectors Dellenbaugh and John Waltson, who voted with the majority and the Superintendent, thought it was unfair to allow 8th graders to enroll when the program may end up as something different than the one they enrolled in as freshmen. Watson also tried to make a sales analogy, stating, “if a product doesn’t sell, you don’t keep trying to just slap lipstick on the product and try to keep selling it” to which McNay rejoined that 8th graders should be asked. He noted that Volkswagen did not stop selling its Golf model during redesign.
Citing the confidential information the Board “is privy to that is unable to be shared”, Board member Robert Tietjen jumped in saying the pause is warranted. He said, “regardless of interest, the question is whether the product is “appropriate.”
Fellow member Willow Baer said the board has the authority to decide this issue, but should do so on the recommendation of experts. She said the experts – unidentified – recommended a pause “because of things we can’t talk about.”
At a meeting break, when asked by Spotlight to respond to questions about the secret reason for pausing Lab School, Dellenbaugh declined and referred The Spotlight to the district’s spokesperson for comment. The district has not responded to those questions.
Attendees questioned the legitimacy of the “secret reason” for pausing Lab School. Lab School parent Rob Cole said, “there is no secret reason. And even if there is, I don’t think it’s sufficient to close the program.” Analogizing the situation to a doctor with a sick patient, Cole said,“If a doctor learns you have a fatal illness, they don’t tell you it’s too confidential to share.”
Jason MacLaughlin, another Lab School parent, said the reason given for the change had been low enrollment numbers, but “now we are hearing about a major problem in the program. This is news to me.”
Another meeting goer, a pastor, said while he understands “confidentiality”, the board’s rationale sounded “disingenuous.”
Parent Lisa LaCours questioned why the board cannot “tell us what is wrong” and noted that the data is “different every week” and now there is a “secret problem with Lab School” that is “so bad we can’t continue, cannot even bring in another class.”
Parent Brian Rose said, ‘there has been secrecy from the beginning of this process and it seems like there are things we haven’t been told. The initial reason for the pause – low enrollment – seemed contrived which was made clear by the arguments about the enrollment numbers.” He said, “it hurts us to be told you can’t be told the real justification” for the board’s decision.
Leezah McCarthy, a parent, called for the Superintendent’s dismissal. “We learned tonight of a nontransparent issue that cannot be discussed, but the administration now uses as a primary reason to close Lab School.” She rhetorically asked why this was coming up now. “Is it because the original rationale of low enrollment has been found to be exaggerated?”
Prior to the special meeting, a petition containing 666 signatures was submitted to the board. Signers asked to keep Lab School fully open while the program review committee convenes and to require “meaningful methods of recruitment” to current 8th graders.
Over 80 Lab School students, parents, alumni and alumni parents attended the special meeting. Before the vote, nearly 30 individuals spoke to the board, urging allowing 8th graders to enroll in Lab School next September. Hoots and applause followed each speaker and tears shed when the board rejected the resolution.
Lab School parent Katie Quinn took issue with Watson’s sales analogy. “This is not sales. This is people. These are kids.” She and others warned that a pause will mean no cohort model for six years.
Others voiced concern that a pause will be the “death knell” for Lab School.
Several speakers, recalling how the 8th grade class had survived COVID learning, laughed off the suggestion that 8th graders would not be able to handle it if the program changed mid-way through their high school careers. 8th grader Saramarie White called it “unfair” for the board to assume students could not handle a change in the program. “We deserve a chance to grow as the program grows and to grow with it,” she said.
After the vote, Annabel Rose, a disappointed 8th grader who hoped to attend Lab School in September said, “I thought that after all the people spoke, I didn’t think they’d be able to go against everything the community was telling them they wanted.”
2005 alum Paul Bassinson said,“Without Lab School, Bethlehem is just going to be another school district.”
Dellenbaugh concluded the meeting saying, “I don’t believe if we don’t enroll a 9th grade class, it means the death of the program because I trust in the process of doing an evaluation and I hold a secret hope it will happen faster than we think.”
This story was update on March 14 at 3:40 p.m. to clarify the date of the decision for 9th graders.