jackiedoherty.org

I’m saddened and disappointed to write that Lowell Superintendent Karla Brooks Baehr, who was one of three finalists for the state’s Education Commissioner position, did not get the post. The Board of Education chose Mitchell Chester, Ohio Department of Education state superintendent, in what is being reported on WBZ as a unanimous vote. I don’t know much about Chester, but I know Dr. Baehr would have made an excellent Education Commissioner.

Today’s Sun has two op-ed pieces you may find interesting. The first is Kathleen Madigan’s bruising criticism of Lowell Schools and the leadership of Supt. Baehr. The second is my response to Madigan. I’m not sure if the Sun articles are online yet, but here’s a permalink to my text. An avid charter school advocate, Madigan is former vice president of Advantage Schools, a for-profit charter school management company. Personally, I’m somewhat neutral about charter schools (as long as we fund them fairly and hold them accountable), and I suspect Dr. Baehr’s position might be similar. Apparently, Madigan feels differently. She sent her inaccurate, misleading diatribe to newspapers across the state in an attempt to derail Baehr’s candidacy for Education Commissioner. The Worcester Telegram published Madigan on Friday, Jan. 11, and ran my response letter-to-the-editor yesterday. (They limited me to 250 words even though Madigan had 640.) I’ve been critical of The Sun in the past (and will continue to be when they deserve it) but our local newspaper let me rebut Madigan’s claims with the same number of words they afforded her. Thank you very much! Even so, I couldn’t include all the facts to discredit her many charges in the space allowed: She whacks us on, among other things, the dropout rate, declining enrollment, chronic teacher absenteeism, and funding. She also tries to belittle the measurable improvement we’ve seen in student test scores as “disappointing.” For a point-by-point response to all Madigan’s charges, see this memo by Paul Schlichtman, Lowell coordinator for research, testing and assessment. In the meantime, know that of the five largest school districts, in 2007 Lowell placed first for percentage of schools that made Adequate Yearly Progress in English and second for math. How’s that for disappointing? Although not there yet, we are clearly leading the pack when it comes to successfully meeting state educational standards amid the challenging demographics of an urban school system.

Just by way of background and to shed an interesting light on our current process, here are the actual members of the last Blue Ribbon Search Committee:

2000 Blue Ribbon Committee
7 members, each appointed by one of the School Committee members, including the Mayor, as follows:
          Mayor Eileen M. Donoghue       Atty. Michael Gallagher, Chair,  
          Regina M. Faticanti                  Ken Powers,  
          Timothy F. Golden                  Michael Kuenzler
          George D. Kouloheras             William Collins
          Kevin J. McHugh                     Robin Hall,  
          Joseph M. Mendonca               Dr. Garrett Thurston,  
          William S. Taupier           -      Victoria Hatem,  
3 union representatives:     Teachers – Paul Georges, President
                                        Clerical & Custodial – David Rodrigues, President.
                                        Administrators – Francis Picanso, President
1 current principal (selected by lottery)        Judith Rogers, Rogers School
1 Citywide Parent Council                            Richard Howe, Jr., Chair
1 Special Education PAC                     George Peterson, President
1 Lowell Plan                                      James J. Cook, Executive Director
1 UML                                                Dr. Don Pierson, Dean    
1 MCC                                                Molly Sheehy, Dean
Total:  16
 

By my count, at least five (and maybe more) of the above were parents of children in the Lowell public schools at that time.

As the fur begins to fly in the Superintendent search process, it might be helpful to take a step back and hear what others are saying.  I was listening to WUML on Tuesday morning when Attorney Michael Gallagher was co-host and Jackie Doherty was a guest, you can listen here (by the way, they are doing a great job getting the taped interviews up on the website as podcasts in a timely fashion – thanks, UML!).  The talk naturally turned to the superintendent search and the advisory board that will help winnow down the prospects.  Gallagher actually chaired the Blue Ribbon Committee that, back in 2000, convened to help select the next superintendent.  I was thinking it would be helpful to look up how the committee was configured back then, but luckily Dick Howe already thought of that, see list here. The panel then was made up of 16.  Gallagher seemed concerned that there be enough diverse voices on the panel, not simply representatives of the powers that be in the city.  For a similar perspective, calling for minority and low-income parents as well as Non Profit leaders to be involved, see Victoria Fahlberg’s letter to the editor on January 10.  

Gallagher also made the point that Lowell may be at a disadvantage in the process given the way Karla Brooks Baehr has been literally forced out for reasons unrelated to her job performance.  Given that perception and the need to attract the most qualified candidate to lead our district, he felt that it was crucial to compose an advisory board with a priority on ’serious, meaningful citizen involvement.’ In other words, let’s not just go through the motions on this, let’s really involve the community – parents from diverse backgrounds whose children are at different stages in the system, Non Profit leaders who work with our most needy children and families every day, principals and teachers who have the inside view of the system and, of course, representatives from UML and MCC.  This, to me, is the core group that should be the priority in making up this committee.  Look over the two similar motions put forth to comprise the search committee (see previous post), and see if you think the priorities for membership in this group are straight. Sure, 16 may have been an unwieldly number, but to me that would be better than excluding people with a real stake in the matter. 

Tune into WUML, 91.5 FM, tomorrow at 7:30 a.m. to hear Jackie with Bob Ellis and guest co-host Attorney Michael Gallagher. They’ll be discussing the schools, the upcoming superintendent search, and education issues in general. If you miss the segment, you can catch it during the rewind portion of the show from 9:00-10:00 a.m. 

Others have commented already on the Lowell Sun’s editorial hypocrisy (here and here), but after reading the editorial myself, I have to add how insulting I find both the tone and the sentiment.  First of all, they come off like they care about public education; this after consistently undermining the Lowell Public Schools, attacking the superintendent, the teachers’ union and the school committee relentlessly, depending on which political connection they wished to favor, trumpeting any setback and denigrating successes.  Their “erratic opinions” as described by Dick Howe (see first link above), do serious damage and leave no room for legitimate, thoughtful discussion of the Lowell schools. Then, to look at their list of requirements for the next Commissioner of Education, the first qualification is “to be unbending in the relentless pursuit of student achievement.”  This was exactly what we had in Dr. Baehr as our superintendent, but when she was leading the Lowell schools, the relentless pursuit of student achievement wasn’t so attractive to the editors of the Sun. Then, to urge that geographical considerations should not be a factor, that “the best leader among the finalists should be named the state’s next commissioner no matter where he or she lives or works.”  This is okay for the State, but not for Lowell.  I guess our kids don’t deserve the best leadership and the best teachers, no matter where they live or whom they know. The mind boggles.

Dr. Karla Brooks Baehr, superintendent of the Lowell Public Schools, was named a finalist today for the position of Commissioner of Education. Long touted for her expertise in curriculum and high-quality instruction, Baehr is the only Massachusetts candidate named a finalist to the state’s top education post. Her leadership in Lowell resulted in record improvement in student test scores, among other measurable progress in the education of our children. For example, in comparing 2005 with 2007 MCAS scores, 29% more students scored proficient and advanced while 18% less failed. Despite these and other successes during her nearly eight-year tenure, the superintendent, who lives in Newton, also faced criticism from a vocal few regarding her availability at some community functions and hiring practices. Regarding the Board of Education’s search to replace former Commissioner Driscoll, who retired last summer, the board selected eight semifinalists two weeks ago from 16 in-state and national applicants. The board then chose three finalists from that pool, which includes Dr. Baehr, Ohio Senior Associate State Supt. Mitchell Dan Chester, and Wallace Foundation Education Director Richard Laine. The board will hold public interviews at the Omni Parker House on Jan. 7 and is expected to name the new commissioner by the end of the month. Meanwhile, the Lowell School Committee meets tonight to again discuss the process for beginning the search to replace Dr. Baehr. Due to a parliamentary maneuver by member Regina Faticanti at the last meeting two weeks ago, the search was delayed—most likely until the new committee officially meets on Jan. 9. More on that later.

I was lucky enough to spend 5 days in London at the beginning of the month (the weather was quite mild for December and there is still a lot of green around, even some geraniums and cyclamens blooming in pots and window boxes). It rained off and on almost every day, but we had umbrellas and were often just dashing from the Tube (the London subway system) to a pub or museum.  I didn’t notice any overt anti-Americanism, in fact, most people were quite friendly; however, we did overhear an exchange about American politics, during which one referred to Guiliani as ‘an idiot’, another said, ‘they’re all idiots’ and the first finished up to general laughter, ‘well, they’re Americans.’ 

There was a lot in the news about the American subprime mortgage problems and housing market ‘collapse’ (see recent post from Dick Howe here) and a sense that because of better regulation, ‘it can’t happen here,’ meaning there.  However, the current liquidity crunch, largely caused by the problems in the US, may put some UK homeowners in jeapordy.  They seem to have a much higher percentage of balloon mortgages (called ‘endowment loans’) which need to be refinanced to avoid paying off the ‘balloon.’  With funds scarcer and harder to get, some of those balloon payments are coming due.  (I think the US only has about 7% of this type of mortgage). 

The biggest shock about being in London was the high cost of everything.  Two coffees and croissants cost us 13 pounds one morning, not that bad for a major city, until you do the math:  the pound was worth over $2 when we were there which means our light breakfast cost over $25! Ouch! So, we took the tube or walked, went to pubs and got half-price tickets to see a play.  The good news is that there is a lot of free entertainment in London – just walking around, the many beautiful parks, most of the great museums and you can walk around Harrods without buying anything.

Both Bill Martin and Karla Brooks Baehr took the high road on the radio (UML 91.5) this morning in response to pointed questions about Lowell politics.  Martin maintained that whatever motives, political and/or personal, caused the delay in the superintendent hiring process (achieved through what he called “an obscure parliamentary move”), he didn’t sense that there was an attempt to try “to rig the process” for an insider candidate.  He regrets the loss of two weeks at what could be a prime time for school leaders to contemplate a career move, reasoning that the holiday vacation period would be a logical time for qualified candidates to think over their options and take a look around at what’s available.  He also agreed that the district will have to “up the payscale” to attract the right person.  No surprises there! I have to admit I was never a big fan of Bill Martin’s until this last term where he has shown real integrity and vision in a position of leadership, both on the council and on the school committee. I’m sure these qualities were there all along, but maybe not as visible. He’s really come into his own and I’m going to miss having him as our mayor. 

Both Martin and Baehr pointed out the recent successes in the district around hiring practices, new teacher training and test scores, while noting the challenges of our school population, some of which bear repeating constantly to critics of the administration:  Forty percent of our children who take the MCAS in English are non-proficient in the language, 75% receive free or reduced-price lunches – an indicator of poverty. Martin said that one of the things that impressed him about Dr. Baehr from the beginning was that she really wanted to come to Lowell, she wanted the challenges of the urban school system.  For her part, Baehr was more than generous in her praise of Lowell as a terrific city, a place where so many people care so deeply about the education of the children in our schools.  This was in response to what advice she would give to her successor about Lowell. I was thinking she might say, “watch your back,” but Karla Baehr is always classy, always forward-looking. I’ve said all along that we were lucky to have her in Lowell, and I wish her the best of luck in her next endeavor (hopefully as our new Commissioner of Education).

In today’s Sun, the “Column” mentions the compensation discrepancy between outgoing Lowell Superintendent Baehr and other school chiefs from smaller districts (such as Tewksbury paying about $35K more with less than a third of the students). Last week, I wrote about the issue here, and frankly, it still rankles: Having to pay thousands more to attract someone to replace Dr. Baehr adds insult to injury considering the demonstrated progress under her leadership. Interestingly, the same paper that spent months attacking the superintendent and her supporters (myself included), now has plenty of ink to devote to the costs associated with replacing her. On top of that, the recent delay tactic regarding the search for her replacement will not help the district attract the most qualified candidates—assuming, of course, that’s the primary objective of all those involved in the process. (Since some campaigned on the claim—which also got lots of ink despite little evidence—that the superintendent did not hire or promote enough Lowellians, there is the possibility that these players want to limit the outside talent pool or at the very least, have tight control of the process.) Regardless of the timing, transparency, or inclusiveness of the search, without competitive compensation, choices will be limited. A teacher I saw this morning put it this way: “You shouldn’t have to be altruistic to be superintendent in Lowell.” I agree, but this search is not only about paying more in times of shrinking resources. Given the job’s importance and the impact visionary leadership has had on student learning here, the real issue is the quality of education our children receive after Dr. Baehr. With student learning at stake, personal-political agendas could have devastating consequences, so pay attention please and be involved.