What the Referendum Leaves Out: Images and Notes From a District Employee
A district employee shared these images with NJ21st in response to claims that the current STEAM space is “antiquated.” The images below are presented alongside that employee’s observations. The photographs show the equipment and room features pictured. The accompanying notes reflect the employee’s perspective. NJ21st is publishing them to provide additional context about the existing space and to raise a straightforward question: what, specifically, is lacking in these rooms that justifies the proposed referendum changes?
NJ21st welcomes a district response identifying the specific deficiencies officials believe remain in the current space and why those needs are not met by the equipment and infrastructure shown here.
Course Offerings and Existing Program
“Students learn basic woodworking, laser cutting and engraving, and robotics, as well as architectural design, 3-D printing, metalworking, jewelry design and construction, and Technology Engineering Design.”
Room Layout and Existing Space
“The district called our STEAM area antiquated, yet one can see from the pictures that there are several up-to-date technologies that we have procured over the years.”
“
“We already have space between the sturdy, stable tables to do demonstrations in robotics.”
Electrical and Infrastructure Already in Place
“The presenter of the referendum said we could have handy electrical sockets hanging over the desks, but as in the science classrooms, we already have them installed.”
Fabrication and Design Tools
“Students learn basic woodworking, laser cutting and engraving, and robotics…”
Woodworking Tools and Equipment
“No one from the district has told us what is lacking in the rooms.”
Jewelry and Finishing Equipment
“Students learn … metalworking, jewelry design and construction …”
Program Demand
“Our robotics team regularly places at competitions. The classes are full as are the teachers schedules.”
This observation is the employee’s characterization shared with NJ21st.
Source note: Images and accompanying observations were provided to NJ21st by a district employee. The images show the equipment and room features pictured. The quoted notes reflect the employee’s account.
Submitted directly by the author; content reflects their own views
NJ21st allows for confidentially sourced articles from employees of local government agencies or volunteers of non-profits whose organizations would take retaliatory action against their employees and , in the case of volunteer organizations, officers for exercising their right to express an opinion about local government. We have verified the confidential source for this article and have met with him/her face to face. For more information see our Policies Page.
Our goal in covering the Berkeley Heights Public School referendum, as with any major local government decision, is to provide a platform for residents to make informed decisions, share their perspective, and be armed with the right questions to ask.
We hope residents avoid either cheerleading or trashing the referendum — the best approach is to ask hard questions and encourage the BOE and Administration to make changes that better serve the needs of our students while also respecting the economic realities families face in our community.
Our Referendum Hub provides a thorough fact-based analysis of what works and what needs to change.
Related Articles
Berkeley Heights Referendum Results Fall Squarely Within Recent Regional Voting Trends
Disparities in Distribution: Analyzing Funding Gaps in Referendum Question 2
