|
Writings/news
More in-depth information on
Patty's view on district issues:
vote.rwinters.com/nolan.htm
(responses to topics from the Cambridge Civic Journal)
NOTE: as with all things Patty does, she is thorough and thoughtful. Her responses are quite substantive. Her answers are longer than others, because she has accomplished so much and believes you deserve the full story on her approach to the job.
In Cambridge, a tale of two districts:
Patty Nolan's summary
of Cambridge Public School District's Challenge
Cambridge Chronicle guest commentary, September 24, 2009
www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/education/x1073703415/Guest-commentary-In-Cambridge-a-tale-of-two-districts
There is a district with truly enviable and laudable graduation rates for all students. In a state and country with a real drop out crisis and truly tragic statistics on education levels for low income and students of color, over 90% of African Americans and low-income students finish high school. A district with a school listed in the Boston Globe as top of the state for 8th grade Science MCAS results — overall. And that's for a class where a majority of students are non-white and about half low income — outpacing schools with no diversity. A district where parents can choose public Montessori or Spanish bilingual schools. Where no one pays for school buses or sports, average class size is 18 and the arts have flourished despite tough economic times.
That's Cambridge.
There is a district with 12 out of 13 schools on the just released watch list for poor MCAS performance, including 6 in restructuring. (And even the one school not on the list did not make adequate yearly progress.) A district where nearly a quarter of parents opt out of regular public schools and many academically strong students report not being challenged. A district where average 2009 MCAS proficiency of African Americans is an embarassing 35% — half that of white and Asian students, and only a little higher for Latinos at 42%. And while the 2009 MCAS shows some welcome progress in the Latino-white achievement gap, there's no progress on the African American achievement gap and some slippage in the low income achievement gap (low income average proficiency stayed about the same, while non low income increased.)
That's Cambridge.
A tale of two districts. What to do? Be inspired. Be encouraged. And be realistic. There is a wonderful sense of optimism and excitement in our schools, among our families, and in the community. Rather than focus on the bad news or dismiss the good, we can hold both in our heads and work together on addressing our problems, which we all must own. And unlike many districts agonizing over how to keep the budget balanced, our $25,000 per student allocation gives us tremendous opportunities, if we use it well.
A key to our success in meeting our challenges will be to resist the calls for more emphasis on testing. While MCAS shows us some areas we need to watch, it would be precisely the wrong answer to respond with an obsession on the tests. I already hear some saying the test results show we need to focus more on the tests. That is exactly the wrong answer. We have too much of that already — our own market research and my own experience as a parent say so. More would be counterproductive. Less might well be the trick.
MCAS is not and should not be the sole measure of any school, student, teacher or district. While it is useful for some measures, it is a means, not the end. And Cambridge can take heart. Our new superintendent came from Newton. That district not only does better on MCAS than Cambridge in the aggregate — but in virtually all subgroups, most by double digits. Almost half of Newton's special education students scored proficient, compared to only a fifth in Cambridge. And the story is similar for African American, low income and Latino students. Most importantly, higher achievement did not come from more teaching to the test, but engaged teachers, intense focus on educational needs, deep commitment to family involvement and inspiring leadership at every level. Cambridge, with our exciting new superintendent, who is already making waves by being highly visible in our schools, talking to teachers and stopping to chat with crossing guards and custodians, can certainly build on our past success and fulfill our mission to: "be the first diverse urban school system to work with families and the community to successfully educate all of its students at high levels."
Letter to the editor, Cambridge Chronicle:
Our green efforts are insufficient
October 15, 2009
Dear Editor,
These days everyone is green. And trying to outgreen each other.
As elected officials with long histories of personal, professional and political efforts on behalf of the environment, we applaud environmental initiatives. We have participated in Walk/Ride Days, enjoyed the offerings of City Sprouts, helped weatherize neighbor's houses with HEET, swapped our own incandescents for CFLs, promoted transit alternatives with Cambridge's Energy Smackdown team, spread the word about the Cambridge Energy Alliance's work and more. They're all good efforts, but they're only a modest start to the serious lifestyle changes needed to make a real difference in climate change.
We must be honest and recognize that our efforts to date, both individually and collectively, are insufficient. Despite our city's lofty goals and wonderful rhetoric, we have failed miserably in reducing our own emissions. The City's recent hearing on climate emergency made the state of the climate emergency crystal clear. The hearing also provided reason for hope. [Video of hearing on city website, and summary at CEA website.] The world, as we know it, does not have to end if we can muster the personal and political courage to change the way we live. But that is going to be very, very tough.
All of us need to be held accountable for our own carbon and emissions footprint. We need to be doing little and big things -- including some things others consider unnecessary or wacky, whether it's giving up meat or promoting composting toilets at home and school. On a daily basis we need to discourage car use, radically change our consumption patterns, mandate following energy audit recommendations, avoid long distance travel and, on every level, make it morally irresponsible not to conserve.
The word "emergency" was not used lightly when discussing climate change. Our response, individually and politically, must reflect the massive nature of the challenge.
Sincerely,
Patty Nolan
Huron Ave. (School Committee member)
Craig Kelley
St. Gerard Terrace (City Council member)
Endorsements
Cambridge Chronicle endorses Patty Nolan:
"for her consistent and intelligent questioning of the issues"
Endorsed by Harvard Crimson editor, Paras Bhayani (oped October 25):
"In the recent search to hire a superintendent, Nolan strongly backed Newton schools chief Jeffrey M. Young—and, along with several of her colleagues, stood her ground against the many residents who evidently did not like that he is white and from the suburbs. The experienced and savvy Young possesses both the strong managerial skills of his predecessor, Thomas D. Fowler-Finn, and the grace and consensus-building style of Fowler-Finn's predecessor, Bobbie D’Alessandro. As Young makes controversial staffing and curricular decisions, as he surely will, it will be important that committee members are allies in promoting reform and not agents of obstruction.
On financial issues, Nolan's record as a school-committee member has been exemplary. She has developed a sophisticated understanding of the district’s finances and has pushed for cutting central administration spending and redirecting it to classrooms. Early in her tenure, she sponsored a proposal to reclassify the district’s surplus money as discretionary funds for principals—an effort to see the dollars spent in the schools—but it received only the votes of Nolan and committee member Luc D. Schuster, who is not seeking reelection. Her intimacy with the data has also allowed her to discover worrying information, like the fact that Cambridge spends so much more than other districts but without the lower teacher-to-student ratios to show for it. . . ."
Endorsed by Cambridge Democratic Committee Ward 6:
(so far no other wards have endorsed).
Also endorsed by parents, residents, and community leaders across the city.
Selected pieces from 2007 below
Nolan: Research shows schools
can't focus only on tests anymore
(Guest editorial by Patty Nolan, Cambridge Chronicle, June 14, 2007
www.townonline.com/cambridge/opinions/x1935633211)
Last year, the School Committee authorized qualitative and quantitative market research to "determine the possible causes behind the decline in enrollment, assess potential new programs, how to attract more residents into CPS and measure overall satisfaction with the school system." We recently received a report on the survey part, and look forward to a thorough report on the other half of the project, a synthesis and summary of the focus groups. The project will inform our work as a district.
The results confirm some of our district's great aspects. Almost all of our parents believe that their children are getting a quality education, and are appropriately challenged and appreciate wonderful teachers. Tremendous affirmation of hard work all around.
Of course, both current and withdrawn parents identify some areas we fall short, which should inform us on continual improvement. Unsurprisingly, withdrawn parents score our performance lower than in-district parents.
One surprising finding: Majorities of current and withdrawn parents believe our district does too much teaching to the test. Based on other answers, this finding doesn’t appear to be an MCAS rejection sentiment, but a more nuanced sense that we have focused too much on testing, not enough on excellent education.
The report debunks at least one myth: overwhelmingly those surveyed who withdrew cited academic quality as the single most important reason; just 8 percent cited housing or transfers. Those who left care deeply about public education — a whopping 86 percent would have preferred staying.
The survey confirmed another issue: behavior is a problem. Of those who left, 57 percent said that "classroom behavior issues played a large part" in the decision. And a significant portion of our parents, 37 percent, agree that "bullying is a real problem for my children." Those who deny this problem should read the report. Acknowledging a problem is the first step to solving it.
For too long, we dismissed people suggesting this issue needed addressing. I hope now we discuss solutions and listen to the voices speaking. In classrooms where teachers reach all students and get them engaged, behavior problems disappear. This finding might mean we need to help some teachers develop better strategies around this topic.
There is one glaring lapse: the survey left out people attending private, parochial and charter schools — ignoring 20 to 30 percent of our school-aged population. How can we increase enrollment and market share without talking to people who never entered? I hope we will include all families. As one independent parent put it, most "do care about the public education system in the city that they live, pay taxes and raise their children in." Many would prefer to be in our public schools, and struggled with the decision.
There are too many results to cover briefly — on controlled choice, middle schools and other issues. Summarizing: it is great to have real market research. The project yielded discomforting results and positive ones. If we openly face the former and celebrate the latter, our district will continue on the march to where we belong: at the top of the state, make that country.
Patty Nolan is a member of the School Committee.
[Originally published under another School Committee member's name.]
Letter distorted image
(Letter from Patty Nolan, Cambridge Chronicle, July 12, 2007
www.townonline.com/cambridge/opinion/x1549862756)
Cambridge -
Solid analysis and intellectual honesty are hallmarks of my participation on School Committee. Thus, it was personally disappointing to read Nancy Walser's article last week, which distorted my positions for political purposes. It is a disservice to the public and needs to be corrected.
I wrote a balanced summary of a market research project, designed to understand why people leave, why people don't enroll and concerns district parents have. I noted two lapses, based on my professional experience and comments by two national public opinion professionals. Paying for qualitative research and focus groups without getting a written report was an oversight. Leaving out the 30 percent of residents who never entered our public school district and were in the contract as an explicit focus was, as well. I encourage people to watch the June 5 meeting with the survey presentation (www.cpsd.us/ceatv/sc_archive.htm).
Why spend money on comprehensive market research and ignore the full range of findings? If we tout only the positives and gloss over problems, how will we solve the problems and be credible policymakers? For example, to assert parents are satisfied, with "only 5 percent expressing dissatisfaction," when almost half stated they might leave misrepresents the findings. The firm we hired labeled that high number "a clarion call" to action." Most of us love our schools and appreciate our strengths and tremendous achievements. But we also have concerns.
I do hold our district to higher standards, since I believe Cantabrigians do not want to be compared only to low-income districts, as the administration does, who spend on average half what we do. We should celebrate our strengths, but surely our high spending levels, phenomenal teachers, and incredible community can get us to the top of the state.
I did help organize forums with award-winning public schools that have excelled with many types of students, especially low-income. A majority of our elected officials co-sponsored these opportunities to learn from others, just as others learn from Cambridge, which also excels in many areas. Does the fact that some such schools are public charter schools mean we shouldn’t learn from them?
Anyone can find votes where I stood on principle and voted my conscience, as you can with all of us. Please judge each of us by our full record, not a subset distorted for political purposes.
PATTY NOLAN
CPS Parent
School Committee Member and Candidate
Open letter to reject negative campaign
Dear selected leaders who know me:
I know that you stand for principled campaigns, constructive dialog, and voting on issues, not innuendos. I also believe that you know I always act with integrity, even if you don't agree with me on all issues. I respect that you are busy, but I believe this request is important. I am asking you to join me in rejecting a negative campaign. A group called Progress for Cambridge is engaged in a subtle misinformation campaign and distorting the record of School Committee votes. The group was set up to endorse a slate, Nancy Tauber, Gail Lemily Wiggins and Stefan Malner. I have asked those candidates to reject the campaign run on their behalf.
If you are a supporter of any slate member, please ask them to reject the tactics of misinformation. I have a policy of not responding to personal attacks in kind, but I do correct misinformation. Below is the letter sent with specific examples of how I believe the group's information is flawed enough to be worthy of a Swift Boat Veterans for Truth award. I believe any ethical candidate would disavow much of the website content. If you agree, please let the group and/or the candidates know.
The candidates are not behind this misleading campaign. I am calling on them to disassociate themselves from those engaged in the misinformation.
I understand why I would be a target. I have been effective and have accomplished a lot in my first term, and clearly am able to work collaboratively, since none of us can get anything done on our own. Many times I acted on principle, even at political risk. I have stood up for transparency and full information, the whole story, not just part. Whether it is asking for full examination of our extraordinary budget of $23,000 per student or pointing out that despite a wonderful, even stellar graduation rate of African Americans and other groups from high school, our district continues to have a 30 point Achievement Gap in proficiency for African Americans and lags many districts with fewer advantages, or calling for public input into major decisions, I have stood up often.
But it still hurts, personally and our democratic process. I remain optimistic that most of us don't want negativity and misinformation to win in Cambridge. Please join me in asking for a rejection of the Progress for Cambridge tactics.
Sincerely,
Patty Nolan
************ letter sent by email Oct. 29, 2007 **********
Dear School Committee candidates Nancy Tauber, Gail Lemily Wiggins and Stefan Malner:
I respect each of you. If you are elected, and I am re-elected, I look forward to serving with you.
Each of you have campaigned constructively and with integrity. I personally appreciate that you are willing to serve and that you each have an important perspective to add to the campaign. Thus, I request that you publicly reject the endorsement of the Progress for Cambridge [PFC] group, take all mention of them off your website and materials, and refuse to allow them to use your name, until they stop the misleading, irresponsible campaign being run on your behalf.
The PFC campaign calls for collaboration on the School Committee and more members who advocate for the district, not individual schools or neighborhoods. The implication is that none of the incumbents are being collaborative or advocating for the district, a baseless charge. Moreover, the PFC gathered a selective, biased and misleading list of School Committee votes which were picked with the goal of discrediting many incumbents, but especially me. That the list doesn't include all votes, nor even all split votes, not even all votes related to the same issues, is proof that there is an intent other than to inform the public.
It is clear that the PFC is engaged in a subtle misinformation campaign which involves distorting a few selective votes with the specific intent of raising doubts about my commitment to the district and my values. It is a sad day for Cambridge when such negative campaigning takes place. I hope you will reject that approach. This is not about my not wanting my record and votes known. Quite the contrary. I always publicly explain my votes, especially controversial ones. I am proud of votes I've taken, whether I've been part of a 7-0 vote, a 6-1, or anywhere in between, and whether I voted with a majority or minority. This IS about a misrepresentation of a number of votes.
Here are just 3 examples, and there are others on the list just as misleading:
1. School Choice motion
The PFC biased description:
"April 4, 2006: Grassi/Nolan motion to open up the Amigos School for transfers from outside of Cambridge under the state's School Choice program. Motion stipulates that any non-resident children attending the Amigos under this program cannot transfer to other CPS schools out of Amigos, but it could have prevented transfers into Amigos in future years due to non-residents taking seats."
The full story:
The description states "the motion could have prevented transfers into Amigos in future years due to non-residents". That scenario was virtually impossible. The Amigos School Council had unanimously asked for this policy change to help their school. The motion was extremely limited in scope, would have brought $5,000 per student (minimal additional costs were expected) and could have been eliminated after one year. The proposal allowed a max of 2 non-Cambridge students per grade, grades 3-7, grades with more then 8 empty seats, which historically had stayed empty for years. The Amigos community felt the loss of students was compromising their educational program. Furthermore, by law, this motion would need re-approval every year, when new limits could be specified or the program ended. Those of us who supported this were voting for something we viewed as positive for the district as a whole, as we do with every vote, not for something that might limit choices for residents, as falsely stated.
2. Report card report motion
The PFC biased description:
"April 4 2006: Grassi/Harding motion to require Superintendent to report on progress of baseline report cards/progress reports. [Note: In the prior 2005-06 term, the School Committee passed a motion by Grassi to mandate uniform report cards for all elementary schools, despite the superintendent's statement that there is no research linking standardized report cards to higher achievement.]"
The full story:
The description mentions a prior year's motion "to mandate uniform report cards". What the description of this vote doesn't mention is that this motion was NOT to mandate uniform report cards. Both Mr. Schuster and I voted for this motion only after specific assurance at that meeting (watch the videotape) that the motion did NOT mandate uniform report cards, as falsely implied by the PFC.
3. Controlled choice policy change motion
The PFC biased description:
"Feb. 27 2007 Fantini/Walser motion to bring to 2nd reading and amend the controlled choice plan to change FRL/PL ratio to allow apportion a sufficient number of seats to reflect the change in economic status of in-coming Kindergarten registrants, as well as to add Ks to Haggerty and Tobin and to add English- speaking K students to Amigos."
The full story:
This takes the cake! The vote on this policy is listed with myself and Mr. Schuster being absent, implying dereliction of duty. I was present for almost all this special meeting, but left early due to a babysitter emergency and Mr. Schuster was attending a national conference. By SC rules, all policy changes must be voted at two meetings. Thus, we both knew another vote would take place, which would be the decisive vote on the policy. At that required second reading, the previously voted-upon policy change was rejected publicly by 6 of the 7 members, since it had become clear that the change voted Feb. 27 benefitted the middle class at the expense of low income families. A DIFFERENT policy change was passed, one worked on by me and the result of a true collaborative effort by the whole Committee, which increased options for BOTH the middle class and low income families. That policy change passed unanimously. NO MENTION is made of this REQUIRED second vote, which effectively reversed the vote on the PFC list.
When I asked Gail & Nancy last Thursday to disavow the PFC and ask the group to stop spreading misinformation or reject their endorsement, you both said you didn't know some votes on the list were falsely and misleadingly presented. Now you know. I look forward to your response to my request to reject the endorsement of this group, whose tactics lack integrity. Let's all pledge to campaign positively.
Sincerely,
Patty Nolan
School Committee candidate
184 Huron Ave. Cambridge 02138
|
Did you know?
