On the issues

• Patty's top priorities
• How business know-how helps
• School budget
• Charter schools
• Future plans

1. Better Use of the $23,000 per student we are spending.
   No matter how you cut it, we spend almost twice the average for districts in our state. We simply must use our dollars more effectively and efficiently. Some of our spending is on items we all support, like no fees for sports, full day Kindergarten, good transportation options supporting working parents. Some of it is due to small class size. However, those items combined explain less than half our excess.
   
   I call it the $50 million question. Why do we spend $50 million more for the same number of students as districts about our size, like Brookline. In per student terms, we spend about $9,000 more per student than others districts our size, on average. ALL the items mentioned publicly in defense of our budget account for at most $4,000 per student extra. Let's honestly assess the other $5,000 per student. Maybe we'd still spend much of it where it is, but let's have a clearly understood transparent process by which we lay out the differences. The DOE already has the data, we don't have to engage in data wars. We just have to commit to reviewing the full information.
   
   I believe there are ways we might redirect our resources to improve instruction. For example, the Montessori model is predicated on a full time teacher and full time assistant teacher in each classroom. Should we have that model in every classroom in our district? Well trained adults in the classroom boost achievement. As small as our class size is — about 17.5 per classroom in grades K-8 — other districts have similar ratios (Brookline's is about 19) AND many high performing private and innovative inner city public schools aim for lower ratios.
   
   We should invite the community, and our educational leaders, principals, teachers, coaches, as well as parents and community leaders, to give their ideas for helping kids who are struggling and for encouraging academically advanced students.
   
   I believe we should be comparing ourselves to the top districts in the state, not just the low income ones, which is what our administration continues to do. Let's commit to being a poster child for the notion that urban school districts can excel!
   
   
2. Walk the talk of not succumbing to teaching to the test.
   We've heard from parents across the district, from people who leave and anecdotally from people who don't choose CPS that teaching to the test is a problem. While the state mandates MCAS and some testing, that doesn't mean becoming a test prep factory. Many charter and regular public schools have proved that when engaged learning is the goal and the approach, kids will pass the test, along the way, not as the end. Some of our innovation and creativity are threatened by our overcorrecting for perhaps too much past resistance to tests.
   
   So many things about our schools are terrific, which is why my kids are enrolled and I spend so much time thinking about these issues (aside from the fact that for now, you pay me a salary to serve on School Committee, which I hope continues!). But, they can be even better.
   
   And our efforts to draw people back into our district could be more effective. I support our elementary schools, which include a range of choices. I would like to see us take a look at programs across the different schools to see which ones merit replication in other schools. I believe that we need to build on the market research to better understand what families in Cambridge want, in order to ensure our enrollment continues to go up. The demographics are with us; the city projections show an increase over this decade in school age children. Let's make sure we capture more and more of this group. I believe a very reachable goal is 100% of Kindergarten parents getting one of their top 3 choices.
   
   
3. Address our achievement gap, and stop blaming our kids or our teachers.
   When people explain our relatively low district results as due to our "diversity" I emphatically reject that excuse. I don't buy what they are implying: that poor kids or kids of color don't or can't learn. It's our own fault not to have provided them with the right school culture of respect, discipline and excitement about learning. And when they imply the problem lies with teachers, I emphatically reject that excuse. Of course there are some teachers who aren't effective. If they can't become effective by changing their instructional strategies, they need to be counseled out of teaching. But if a teacher hasn't gotten the proper evaluation and help, it's a management issue, not a teacher issue.
   
   Here's the summary: we have some truly commendable results as a district, and we have challenges. Our graduation rate for all students, especially African American boys, is far above most cities in the nation. Yet on average the achievement gap in proficiency between African American students and white students is 30 points. This sobering fact needs to be constantly in our minds as we continue to work on making our district tops in the state. There are schools who have addressed this issue by raising proficiency of students to very high levels, proving that it can be done. Yes, our district is doing great things and others can learn from our example in many areas. But we should also learn from schools doing better than us in other areas. A race to the top is what we should all want.
   
   

1. Serious market research:
   I called for comprehensive market research for years. Within a month of inauguration, we had a proposal to engage a firm to do a project. My thought all along was that we needed answers to why parents leave, why parents stay, and why parents never try us out.
   
   The project yielded very valuable information. One unfortunate issue is that we left out of the project private and independent school parents. We must stop assuming we know why they didn't enter our schools, and instead of ignoring them, disparaging them or dismissing them as elitist, include them in the market research. The other related item we must do is have exit interviews for all who leave, so we can learn. We should have extensive exit interviews with staff as well. That's what well-run organizations (businesses & non-profits) do who want to understand customers and how to serve them better.
   
   
2. Understand in a non-partisan way our cost structure:
   Hundreds of hours, perhaps thousands, have been spent by many dedicated citizens trying to understand why our costs are so high. Now, the state DOE has a fabulous resource that allows very easy comparison of spending by district. I have been working on all of us agreeing to establish a set of comparable districts, and of high performing ones, so we might learn from looking at how their resources are spent. No other district has our resources, but looking at how some of the districts chose to spend more limited resources might give us some ideas for some reallocation of dollars.
   
   Let's agree to work towards consensus on how we'll lay out our spending, to explain why our costs are so high, and therefore whether and where we can put money into direct services to our kids. Instead of fighting over different models, let's honestly assess the strengths and weaknesses of various analyses, and keep the focus on how we deliver on the goal of excellent instruction in every classroom.
   
   
3. More resources working directly with kids:
   When those of us impatient for change suggest that innovation could make a difference now, we're told "ed reform is slow, we're doing all we can . . ." But we only have one high school and twelve elementary schools. We're not Los Angeles. Even Boston is TEN times our size. The analogy of turning an ocean liner does not apply. We are a very small district, and used to be at the forefront of educational change and reform. Now, we are lagging many other districts, or playing catch up, for example in the area of special education. By doing best practice and pouring resources into our classrooms — private schools sometimes have 10 or 12 students in a classroom — we won't have to be satisfied with slow, intermittent progress, but poised for strong achievement gains.
   
   For example, this term I followed up on the request from a group of parents across the city who had asked that all specialists, including librarians, family liaisons, social workers and technology specialists, be assigned to schools based on enrollment, just as art, music, and physical education teachers are. The reasoning is that all those positions, whether they are assigned specific classes or not, work directly with students. Thus, their workload is directly correlated with the number of students. My motion was discussed, for the first time. It did not pass, but at least there was some discussion of the merits of the proposal, which had not happened the prior time the issue was raised by parents.
   
   
   

School budget

We have many excellent administrators in our district. We are lucky to be so well financed that we attract excellent people. However, study after study has documented that CPS is not efficiently staffed in central administration. We need to address that issue, so more resources can be put to work in our classrooms. For the last few years, we have had multi-million dollar surpluses in the district budget. Much of the surplus is due to state reimbursements and conservation financial planning, which is all well and good.

However, once a surplus is known, I believe that we should have a plan for what to do with it. Recently most of the surplus has been put into a Debt Stabilization Fund, which will be used for school renovations. Buildings are important. I know, my children attend a school in need of serious repair. And putting more money into that fund was the School Committee's prerogative. But people aren't leaving our district due to our buildings, and achievement levels and chosen schools have no relation to building status. I would have wanted to see a discussion of whether that was the best use of ALL those dollars. The question wasn't even asked whether to try and restore the many classroom aides cut over the last few years from our classrooms.

What I hope will happen is that it will be an explicit discussion. This year when I proposed using some of the surplus by giving it directly to the principals for their School Improvement Plans, the motion did not pass. However, an alternate motion, that some of the funds be used by schools after discussion among the administration and principals, did pass. As a result, almost $1 million of the $3.3 million surplus was added to the schools' budget.

While I appreciate fiscal responsibility, we must do a better job of figuring out how to use our funds well. When we returned $720,000 to the city last year, I did not think that was good. The money was given to us for use on educational programs. Imagine if we had had a way to boost morale by allowing every classroom teacher to pay for an additional field trip, IF they felt it would increase learning. That's the type of idea we should be developing.

If anyone says we have shifted dollars from central administration into our classrooms, ask for their numbers. The claim is simply not true. Half of the 83 administrative and operations cuts came from IN our schools, meaning the list includes principals and custodians from closed elementary schools. Plus the list doesn't take into account added administration. For example, it counts the second assistant principal cut from the merged schools, despite the add-back of a very similar position at similar pay scale with a different title. While some central administration dollars were cut, the combination of new positions added and salary raises has meant that we are now spending MORE dollars on central administration this year than pre-consolidation.

The bottom line: I believe that our children should have more resources spent IN their classrooms. I know how to oversee consultant's reports; I was a consultant for many years. I know what questions to ask in the job of oversight and governance since that is what my training is. That is why I need to keep serving on School Committee.

Charter schools
The issue of charter schools is very clear to me. Districts which meet students' needs do not have charter applications. Surrounding communities like Belmont, Brookline (which CPS uses as a comparable district), Lexington, Arlington don't have a single charter school. It is only in districts where families feel frustrated by the schools that charter schools are discussed, developed, and sometimes approved. It takes an enormous amount of volunteer effort to start a charter school. I know. I was the leader of a group to open one, based on the International Baccalaureate [IB] curriculum.

This term, in the spirit of learning from model schools, I put together a series of forums to look at high achievement — with City Councillor Denise Simmons, and the support of the Cambridge NAACP, Mayor Reeves, Vice Mayor Tim Toomey, Councillors Craig Kelley and Michael Sullivan and School Committee members Richard Harding and Luc Schuster. The idea was to bring into Cambridge some public schools with real success, to share stories. In the spirit of looking at success wherever it was, the schools invited included some regular public schools and some charter public schools. Instead of focusing on what we might learn from schools with excellent records of working with urban students, predominantly low income students, we got criticized for publicizing their success! I will continue to advocate for learning, all the while also touting our own successes.

1. I don't want only people who can afford private school to have a choice if our system has failed them. Who goes to charter schools? The same families we let down. Predominantly poor, minority families. I don't blame them for leaving or for seeking something else. Most charter schools in Mass. are started by grassroots community folks focused on giving kids a better chance.
2. Charter schools are based on exactly the same impulse that started three of CPS' most chosen schools. Cambridgeport, King Open, and Graham & Parks all started from parent desire to create an alternative to existing public schools to better meet their educational desires. That is the same promise of charter schools. I celebrate the idea of a community designing a school to match their needs.
3. Per above, only districts where parents and the community feel their children have not gotten the education they could, have charter applications. I support the idea that districts that have failed families need to face that fact, and families be given a chance to form an alternative. I don't blame folks WE have failed for wanting something better for our city's children.
4. The state requires that a certain percent of charters be granted in districts falling below state performance levels. If Cambridge were where I believe we should and could be, ABOVE the state average, charters would be less of an issue.

This issue is clear: if you are sympathetic at all to the idea that we should be supporting all children, including those in charter public schools, I am the ONLY candidate you should consider giving your # 1 vote. Every other candidate is on record publicly as opposing them.

Note: Incumbents and other opponents claim that charters are not public schools. Or that they haven't had much success. That is just wrong on both counts. Charter schools are not allowed by law to have any test for students who want to enroll. They must give MCAS, follow all state regulations for public schools. They are also required to accept special needs students, except for students who need a separate school. In other words, they are very much like every Cambridge school: people must apply to get in, but if there is space, they must be enrolled, and if there are more applicants than space, they select students by lottery. Our city tax dollars do not go to charter schools; state tax dollars do. Those dollars do reduce out city's educational state aid. BUT, the reduction happens over a period of several years, giving districts an opportunity to adjust their budgets. Plus, as we know, at least here in Cambridge, enough money is NOT our problem. Using it wisely is.

Overall, charter schools are like other public schools; some struggle, others exceed expectations. Massachusetts has one of the highest standards of accountability among the 40+ states with charter laws. Many studies show charters more than five years old outperform their district. For example, in Boston, five of the top eight non-exam high schools are charter schools and only charter schools and exam schools had 100% 10th grade MCAS passing. And innovation does happen. For example, the 2020 program's case studies on expanding the school day are half charter schools, since many of those schools already have longer school days. And many charter high schools have advisories that resemble private school guidance counselor ratios, which have been credited with higher achievement levels. CRLS might look at those. Finally, at least when a charter school fails, and doesn't meet their stated goals, the state closes it down. Every five years charter schools must apply to renew their charter; it often takes a lot longer than that for a regular failing public school to be reorganized.

On the question of more charters: I would support an expansion. Two years ago, I stated that we needed more information on success rates before deciding whether to lift the cap. Now, with some of the best public schools in the state being charters, and with MATCH being the first majority low-income students of color school to have 100% proficiency in Math, after just a year and a half, the proof is here. The state will continue to assess charters, and allow parents who want the option to have it. Maybe a compromise would be to raise the cap, to 15% instead of the current 9% of budget. Existing districts need incentive to learn from charters, instead of dismissing them and their success. Not all charter schools do well, but neither do all regular public schools. Let's learn from the best, no matter if private, regular public or charter public.

[Note: I am opposed to vouchers, which are fundamentally different from charters.]

Enrichment:
We need to talk about how to encourage and pump up the students who are in need of extra challenge. There are many programs that manage to help children go beyond the classroom work. Some programs, like Science Club for Girls, happen in our schools. Some, like The Math Circle, happen outside our schools. I would like to see more attention paid to a more comprehensive approach, an explicit program to stretch those students who already excel. It is our job to help each student reach his or her max, wherever that is. For some children, it will be an achievement to reach grade level. For others, it would be a disservice to accept grade level work. Cambridge is lucky enough to have the resources and energy to do more in this area. I don't want those enrichment opportunities available only to those with parents in the know or with the $dough.

Environmental leadership:

1. a WIN for the environment, which means our children's children will have a planet on which to live
2. a WIN for economics, since all the evidence shows that environmentally responsible buildings save money in the relatively short term
3. a WIN educationally: if students are living and learning in schools in which recycling is taken for granted and the indoor air quality is superior and all construction and maintenance uses sustainable materials and environmentally healthy practices are pervasive, they will bring that into the rest of their lives.

Our schools can and should be at the forefront of environmental education, building, and programs. WE are getting there, partly since I have championed this, along with my colleagues. Joe Grassi and I identified the need to look at remediating toxic emissions from school buses, Fred Fantini and I worked to ensure that the War Memorial construction project would consider some energy efficient options, Luc Schuster and I worked on a statement of policy that requires sustainability to be considered in every project.

Our city has made a commitment to being a city supportive of environmental sustainability. We have not done enough to have a culture of environmental responsibility. From use of recycled paper to saving paper to cafeteria programs to sourcing sustainable products to using eco-friendly building materials in every project, CPS has a ways to go. Kids are natural enthusiasts; our schools can and should build on that energy to provide models for other districts. We do not yet live the ideal of incorporating sustainability into our practices as a district. WE can and we should.

Develop new programs collaboratively:
Demographic trends, which correctly predicted this year's upswing in K and we'll need more next year. But to bring in and keep more people, we need some new programs. WE must examine a range of options, thoroughly vet the most promising, and include the community and School Committee and teachers. Then, pick the one that seems the best fit.

©2007-2011 Filetap Online Services & Patty Nolan