jackiedoherty.org

The Lowell School Committee will meet tonight in council chambers at 7 pm. Since there’s only one motion on tonight’s agenda and it’s from me, I’m including it here: “Request the Superintendent determine whether the Commissioner of Education would waive the physical education requirement for high school students who participate in school-sponsored sports programs. If allowed, request the Superintendent explore the feasibility, benefits, and drawbacks of instituting such a waiver system at the high school, providing a report with recommendations to the Lowell High Subcommittee.”

As I will explain during my remarks, under former Education Commissioner Dave Driscoll these waivers were allowed. Also, since the high school has very large physical education classes—upwards of 40 students, which was a criticism noted by the re-accreditation team—it makes sense to explore the opportunity. As we examine class scheduling and options for students to take electives under future budget constraints, it is especially worth considering the state’s physical education mandate given the fact that our student athletes practice about two hours a day, six days a week.

Tonight’s meeting, which is televised live on channel 10 (with replays and streaming video offered on demand through LTC), will include a Spotlight on Excellence for the Daley Middle School, winner of this year’s Knowledge Bowl, as well as reports from the Superintendent on an update of student enrollment projections over the next decade, professional development spending, a comparison of teacher attendance, and costs for using our facilities among other things.

There has been quite a hullabaloo about my motion last Wednesday to review the policy regarding committee interaction with school staff. (For context, check LiL and a video of the meeting, yesterday’s Column, and an earlier article by Jenn Myers.) Whether I am “on a mission” as one colleague muses, I admit it freely: Yes! I am on a mission to improve our schools. I do that by getting information from all levels of the system, from pre-k to the high school, from administrators, parents, students, teachers, custodians, security officers, community partners—you name it; if they’re involved with our students, I want to learn their perspective and use it to improve our schools. I am always respectful, professional, and mindful of the boundaries. What’s not clear is the protocol, especially when my understanding turns out to be different from an administrator’s, and my colleagues have varying approaches. Access to good information is critical. It becomes even more serious when it is curtailed, as indicated by one administrator insisting all questions to his staff be made in his presence—regardless of chain-of-command approval in his absence or the nature of the questions. (In this case, the question was what the recycling club needed from the city, and the visit included, at the invitation of a teacher, watching a science experiment for five minutes.)

One colleague suggested that staff may feel “threatened” and not “want to speak” with us, and that may happen to certain members. In my experience, people welcome the opportunity to share their ideas and concerns when it is for informational purposes and is asked in a non-threatening way. Far more alarming, however, is the idea that staff may be discouraged, even forbidden, from sharing insights with us. That is not a model for good management, nor does it help move the schools forward. Fortunately, we’re not talking about a private business, we’re talking about our public schools, funded by taxpayers to educate our children under the leadership (and scrutiny) of an elected school committee. As the motion requests, we will clarify the policy so we may continue to be effective at improving our schools. For some questions that have helped me in the past, see: more »

Self-described as an upbeat column, yesterday’s “Chat” took a side trip from its usual tone to swipe at the Lowell School Committee: “The best idea I have been given over the years calls for an abolishment of the school board and the addition of three to five members to the Lowell City Council — five of whom would sit as a subcommittee on education…” notes Kendall Wallace, chair of the newspaper and longtime critic of the school board. As a five-year board member who has worked for more than a decade to improve our public schools, my initial response was: How does eliminating the school board and making it a subset of the Council improve its focus or efficacy? Secondly, if there were some justification for that and it happened, count on me to run for Lowell City Council. (I don’t imagine I would be alone in that pursuit.)

The problem with this column is its attempt to paint the entire board with one brush regarding recent student vacation trips on school time. All votes permitting such trips, specifically to Quebec and Spain/Portugal, have been approved by the vast majority of the board, and one member’s comments against them clearly does not represent the entire committee. Student attendance matters, yet my primary concern has always been improving the quality of the school day. We only have our students for 180 days, making it imperative that they attend school, yes, but also that each moment in school offers students engaged, meaningful learning experiences. That means our focus, from the board to the classroom teacher, must be on high-quality instruction and effective curriculum that challenges our students to their potential. I recognize that learning happens outside the classroom, which is why the board unanimously supported the policy update regarding student travel. (More on the district’s travel policy in a separate post.) In the meantime, read the “Chat” with a hefty grain of salt, as with most education editorials in this paper—there’s more to the issue than printed here.

In another blatant attempt to bully the school committee, today’s Lowell Sun features its second editorial in eight days lambasting the board while ignoring basic facts and context: “How this perk was ever extended to the nonunion sector is anybody’s guess. But the shame of it falls on the School Department’s Central Office financial whiz kids who didn’t see the error of their ways, and on the school board for its lack of oversight in rubber-stamping the payments.”

It is not a guess how this benefit extended to non-union employees: it is a way for management to dissuade employees from joining unions, which allows them greater flexibility in scheduling and other management rights. Extending these benefits has been such a longstanding practice, in fact, not only in our schools but with Lowell city employees and municipalities across the state, that it defies logic for the Sun to blame it on the school committee. (But then logic and truth don’t factor much in these editorials.) For instance, Lowell Code 56-6 E clearly specifies that employees “shall be paid for unused accumulated sick leave on a forty-percent ratio” with a maximum buyback not to exceed $20,000 and without a longevity requirement. (The benefit for school employees—including the 47 non-union members—pays only those with 15+ years of service and accrues at a 33 percent ratio with no cap.)

The major problem with sick-leave buyback is that it is extremely expensive; this year’s school budget allocates $1 million to pay for it. However, removing the benefit for most employees can’t happen by a simple vote from the school board or the city council. Sick-leave buyback was negotiated into union contracts decades ago—presumably as an attendance and retirement incentive, as well as a perk when salaries were low. The only way to get it out of our contracts, which impacts more than 2,000 unionized school employees, is to negotiate it out.

Regardless of the nasty editorials, the Lowell School Committee must vote regarding the 47 non-union employees. Unlike the city, we do not have an ordinance that grants the benefit in writing although the non-union members may fall under city jurisdiction. Nine of the 47 have served 15 years or more, which means they are vested and expecting to receive a total of about $136,000 in buyback payments if they retire today—a benefit they have seen their colleagues (both union and not) receive for decades. As is often the case with these editorials, the true shame is how inaccurately a complex issue is portrayed, and what a disservice that is to the public. (My response to last week’s rant here.) The school committee will meet at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, 2/4, which will be televised live on channel 10.

While it’s no surprise that a certain editor of our local paper has gone on a recycled rant against the Lowell School Committee (many of today’s accusations are retakes from ad nauseam tirades last summer), the simplistic, unbalanced, and inaccurate nature of the attacks never fail to amaze me. On point: There absolutely needs to be reform at all levels of government spending—the process is painfully slow and wrought with obstacles, many of which are completely out of the school committee’s control. It is, however, false that no progress has been made or that the Lowell School Committee, in particular, is to blame. Lowell school salaries are within range of other districts as well as its benefits, which mirror (or in some cases, fall below) the city’s compensation package. In the real world, most folks get that effective hiring requires market-level compensation. While blaming the board is easy and fits nicely with this editor’s agenda for an appointed school committee, it does little to accurately inform readers or to help achieve what should be our shared goal of continuing to improve the quality of public education despite diminishing resources.

Accuracy has never been at the top of this editor’s priorities, and that alone would be tragedy enough if it weren’t so distracting from the real challenges the schools face, or the reality of how critical it is to our economic survival that all students receive a quality education. The reality is that government today is faced with fiscal challenges that will require substantial cuts to services for all residents, with particular devastation to those most in need. The reality is that as unemployment, homelessness and poverty increase, so does domestic violence, drug and alcohol addiction, and families in crisis—factors that directly impact a child’s readiness to learn. The reality is that reform is desperately needed to control spiraling costs in health insurance, special education, and sick leave buyback, but many obstacles exist well beyond the scope of a local school board. Our future depends on our ability to continue to improve our public schools, despite the fiscal crisis, and to do that we need creative solutions, a new approach to complex issues, and all levels of government working together. Given that reality: simpleminded blame is not only misleading, it’s downright harmful.

Based on a comment I received to a recent post regarding “a disastrous and widespread bullying issue pervading the entire school system,” I thought I’d write about the issue, which profoundly impacted my own childhood and is a hot topic with the Lowell School Committee. (See safety subcommittee agenda for Thursday, Oct. 9.) There is no question that bullying happens in our schools, our playgrounds, and our sports fields. It also happens in our businesses, on our roads, and in all walks of life. If they don’t end up in prison, childhood bullies often grow up to be adult bullies. I have no doubt that bullying has impacted each one of us in some way. In my case, I was a silent witness to children being bullied on the bus and I never spoke up for fear the bully would turn on me. Later, as a seventh grader, I was the victim of bullying by a bunch of supposedly tough girls. I use tough loosely because I learned then and it remains true today that bullies are not tough, which is why taking a stand against bullying makes a difference.

In terms of Lowell, the culture and leadership at each of our schools have the greatest impact on reducing bullying, which is why the school committee continues to put time into establishing effective policies and procedures to make sure prevention and consequences are handled effectively district wide. My personal theory, based on anecdotal rather than actual statistical evidence, is that bullying is more vicious and prevalent in school communities where there is little diversity, where outsiders are so clearly marginalized because the general population is lily white and of a similar economic status. In Lowell schools, “everyone is different” to a certain extent and so there is more tolerance for being different. That said, bullies are out there, so we’re working hard to improve school culture and educate children and staff that bullying is not okay, and it will not be tolerated. (More on this in a later post.) In the meantime, think about your own experience with bullying and the impact it had on you. For me, standing up to those seventh grade girls changed my life.

Must-see local TV: Televised live on cable channel 10 beginning at 7 p.m. tonight, the Lowell School Committee will hear from Supt. Chris Scott, UML Chancellor Marty Meehan, and MCC President Carole Cowan regarding their plan to expand the partnership between the Lowell Public Schools, Middlesex Community College, and UMass Lowell.  The goal is to increase the number of LHS graduates going to college, improve their readiness for higher education by better aligning academic requirements, and provide a clear path that enables graduates to earn a two-year degree as an extension of their diploma experience. Whether or not the state will have funding to implement any of the governor’s readiness project, Lowell schools want to be first in line with a plan for meeting the state’s education goals.

Tonight’s agenda will also include a report comparing recent Lowell MCAS data with state averages for 2008. Overall Lowell MCAS scores improved better than the state average on 8 of 14 tests. Based on a report by Paul Schlictman, coordinator of K-12 research, testing and assessment: “Overall state performance in English Language Arts was flat or showed a slight decline in the middle schools (5-8), while Lowell students increased the percentage of students in the proficient or advanced categories in all four grades and significantly outpaced the state in grades 5 and 7. Middle school mathematics gains also significantly outpaced the state in grades 5 and 7.” For instance, statewide grade 5 math scores had a 1 point increase in proficiency and 1 point decrease in warning while Lowell had a 5 point gain in proficiency and 5 point decrease in warning. Seventh graders statewide had a 1 point increase in math proficiency and no change in the warning category while Lowell students had a 6 point increase in math proficiency and an 8 point reduction in warning. If you can’t watch this must-see local TV tonight, visit the LTC website to catch a replay or for streaming video on demand, which should be up by 6 p.m. Friday.