Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workday Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Andover proposes flexible TA workday windows; staff raise coverage and safety questions
Summary
The school committee proposed locking TA workdays at 6.5 hours but allowing start/end windows by school level so principals can align schedules to student needs; teaching assistants and committee members pressed for coverage examples, impact analyses and safety assurances.
The North Andover School Committee on May 27 proposed changing teaching assistant schedules so staff would work the same total hours but within broader start-and-end windows tailored to each school level.
"We would like more flexibility with TA daily hours," Kristen, a district representative, said as she described proposals that keep the workday length at 6 hours, 30 minutes but allow principals to set start and end times within defined windows (for example, elementary TAs would not start before 8 a.m. nor end after 3:30 p.m.). "We would set your schedule at the beginning of the year," she added, saying schedules would be locked in for the school year but set to match building needs.
Multiple staff and committee members raised operational concerns. "If we just have a staggered one or two TAs and we have more one-on-ones than TAs, that is kind of unsafe," said Casey Kaplas, who spoke for program staff and asked about morning arrival coverage, parent pickup and dismissal logistics. Committee members also asked whether the district would provide overlap time for TAs to read Individualized Education Programs, check emails and cover breaks.
The district said building leaders would be responsible for scheduling coverage within the proposed windows and offered to provide sample schedules and impact analyses. "It takes a fair amount of scheduling on the side of the leadership team," Kristen said, acknowledging complex trade-offs for early-release days and professional development timing.
The committee and union did not adopt any schedule changes at the session. They asked the district to produce written versions of the proposals and an impact analysis, which the district agreed to provide before future bargaining dates. The negotiating parties scheduled follow-up sessions on June 8 and additional dates in August, September and October.
