jackiedoherty.org

Despite efforts by the mayor, a majority of the school committee, and several speakers from the community, the search for a new superintendent for the Lowell Public Schools was put on hold tonight due to a parliamentary move by school committee member Regina Faticanti. After hearing from speakers representing the Citywide Parent Council and Stand for Children, all of whom advocated for immediate action and parental input in the search process,  as well as much discussion between members, the committee voted 6-1 to support Mayor Bill Martin’s motion to move forward with the search to find a replacement for Supt . Karla Brooks Baehr. Dr. Baehr told the committee in late November that she would not seek renewal of her contract, which expires in June 2008. The mayor’s motion called for the committee to meet over the next few weeks to recommend a timeline for advertising the position, a list of criteria for applicants, and suggestions for ways to include community input in the search to replace the controversial superintendent who, in seven years, led an overhaul in curriculum and instruction that resulted in significant progress in student learning. After Faticanti voted against the motion, she changed her vote and moved that the matter be tabled for reconsideration until the next meeting. Under Roberts Rules of Order, by which the committee abides, Faticanti was able to stall any search actions until the committee’s next meeting on Dec. 19, which will be its last for this term. The new committee will not meet until Jan. 9, 2008. By delaying search efforts for another month and potentially losing qualified candidates in the process, it’s difficult to see how this maneuver will benefit Lowell children or the district’s efforts to replace Dr. Baehr with the best qualified candidate. Instead, the move appears to be politically motivated to safeguard the complete authority of the incoming committee. Other matters were also discussed at the meeting—more on that later.

I have been thinking a lot lately about the attitude of journalists and the established media toward bloggers.  On the one hand, you have the newspapers trying to co-opt the blogging phenomenon by creating their own blogs, but on the other there is a not-so thinly-veiled tone of contempt or attempt to dismiss blogging in editorials and articles.  These range from the mildly-disapproving tone of Sven Birkerts of the Boston Globe in his July 29, article (“Lost in the Blogosphere“) to the latest editorial rant in the Lowell Sun. 

Certainly, blogs come in many shapes and sizes and should perhaps be approached with more caution than most media, but what is upfront about blogging is the bias – the blog exists for a purpose, to propound a certain world view and that purpose is up for discussion, along with all of the blog content.  The bias of an established media outlet is often much less apparent and in many cases is buried beneath a façade of journalistic integrity. 

After reading Birkert’s article in July, I was thinking about how news used to be disseminated.  People who wanted to get their view of events or opinions out would write pamphlets and broadsheets, often sensationalized, that were then as widely distributed as possible.  Just recently I heard the term “the new pamphleteers” applied to bloggers and ended up reading an interesting article on the topic (Kochan, Donald J., “The Blogosphere and the New Pamphleteers” . Nexus Law Journal, Vol. 11, 2006 Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=908631).  In this article, Kochan cites “Common Sense” by Thomas Paine and “The Federalist Papers” as “revered” examples of pamphleteering in this country.  He goes on to equate blogging with pamphleteering as “an individual’s opportunity to introduce his ideas to the community.”  It’s extremely readable and well-reasoned and free on SSRN, so please check it out and let me know what you think!  Birkerts seems to fear the proliferation of ideas, the diffusion of our collective energies and the loss of accountability.  Yet, I submit that bloggers are highly accountable to their readers and more so because, as I stated above, their biases are out in the open.  And as those who blog understand, it takes discipline and consistency to maintain it so readers keep coming back.  Kochan makes the following point that responds to Birkerts’ fears:

…in the marketplace of information, the cream of the crop rises to the top.  That is why some blogs are merely rants or of interest to few that add little or no value, and others establish reputational value that leads to high visitation rates and wide attention.

I would add that some newspapers and other traditional media descend to the level of rants which may diminish their subscriber rates and the attention that is paid to them.

I admit, yesterday’s Column struck me—kind of like getting punched in the gut—as the bullies sank to a new level of gleeful meanness. From the moment I stepped into the political arena, I promised myself that fear would not stop me from doing what’s best for Lowell kids. Throughout my two terms on the committee, I have stayed true to that promise although it has gotten me several media beatings, and I knew it might cost votes someday—maybe even an election. My own children knew it too. From the beginning, it was important to me that they understand the positions I take are based on what I think is right and not what others want. If it costs me an election, that’s okay: I would be home more nights with them, comforted by the knowledge I did my best. Being a good school committee woman, like being a good parent, is not a popularity contest; often, both jobs require taking a stand that makes some folks unhappy. During this campaign, I chose to support the superintendent during her highly politicized attempt to move the high school forward—again, because of our progress under her leadership, her right to pick her team, and because it was the best thing for Lowell kids. Column writers attempt to frame me as a loser for this, and perhaps to them, I am (“…finishing fourth this year after topping the ticket in 2005. Oh my!”). For me, standing by my convictions to improve our schools is never a loss. As we go forward, I will continue to speak and vote my convictions as a member of the Lowell School Committee. And no matter what they write about me, that is a definite win.

Today’s “Column” got this right: I did call The Sun to complain about their article endorsing school committee candidates. As you can see from my post, Thanks for the Endorsement, my problem with the article was its refusal to give the schools credit for the significant gains we have made in curriculum, instruction, and student learning. As usual, The Sun denigrated the schools while announcing its endorsements, and that’s an injustice I couldn’t let slide—endorsement or not. It is also the point completely lost in today’s coverage of the conversation. I know of at least one editor who told me he was not happy with the “sarcastic, thanks but no thanks” attitude of my post, and perhaps that was part of his motivation in twisting my words for today’s column.  Either way, I stand firm in my conviction that we are making progress, and we must continue to build on that momentum. The current school board is key to that success—not as a rubber stamp—but to support and push for initiatives that make sense for all kids, to ask the right questions, and to hold the administration accountable.

Sorry if I seem ungrateful, but I wasn’t thrilled with yesterday’s editorial even though I got endorsed.  Instead, I’m disappointed because once again the paper has belittled student progress while unfairly whacking the schools: “The district has made some progress in its MCAS scores, but still has too many schools on the state’s ‘needs improvement’ lists and too many students struggling. The pace of progress must be stepped up.”  So, double the state improvement average is no big deal. Apparently, so is seeing 29% more students achieve advanced or proficient while moving 18% more out of failing since 2005. How about the fact that it takes two consecutive years of meeting AYP in all subgroups to get off needs improvement?  (AYP is a moving target based on 100% proficiency by 2014: for details, check here.)

My point is not that the progress is enough—we are clearly not done. But we are moving in the right direction, and we are now seeing the fruits of seven years of intense focus on curriculum and instruction. Yet, all the schools get for their hard work (the hard work of students and teachers led by an administrative vision that made it happen) is a nod and several whacks about pacing etc. Speaking of the pace: How much time is allowed to turn around 23 schools, 1,200 teachers, 14,000 students, and countless support staff with shrinking resources?  How long should it take to develop consistent, standards-based curriculum from kindergarten to eighth grade, get all staff onboard and using it effectively, and inform parents of the standards their students will learn each year? Not to mention changing the culture so that teachers, students, administrators, and parents expect more from themselves and each other. And one last question: Why give credence to unsubstantiated claims of a hiring conspiracy (as opposed to simply trying to choose the best, most qualified candidates) when those choices are leading to student success?

Student learning is the single most important purpose of our schools, and it is the standard from which I base all my decisions. Perhaps I have the bar too high, but it is also the standard I expect our business, political, and media leaders to set for themselves regarding our schools. So dear editors, thanks again for the endorsement, but your pace joining the movement for excellent schools is a bit slow.

Even before I had my coffee today, I experienced two media moments I have to share: First, an article in today’s Sun (not online yet) detailed progress the district has achieved with MCAS. I had written here about astounding jumps in sixth grade math scores; last night at the school committee meeting, we compared 2005 math scores with 2007 and learned that 29% more students moved up to proficient/advanced while 18% more moved out of failing—raising the ceiling and the floor on student performance.  Other significant factors in the improved math scores is that in 2007, 67% more Lowell students took the test and 64% more had limited English skills, as well as 75.5% being at the federal poverty level—showing we’re raising all boats in student performance. Second, today’s Globe discussed the results of the MCAS science test, in which more than 25% of our students failed. In Lowell, we have teachers working on science curriculum in collaboration with UML to better meet state standards and align middle school and high school expectations. As the district continues to move forward with these initiatives, MCAS data will be used to inform curriculum decisions as another way to improve student performance in science, which will become a graduation requirement in 2010. One challenge that remains is the limited number of science labs at the high school, about half what is needed considering the size of the student population.

Now that the state has released the MCAS results from last spring, it’s great to see the progress being made in Lowell Public Schools demonstrated in our test scores—one measure of success taken quite seriously by the state and the federal No Child Left Behind law. The efforts of school administrators and teachers to provide strong curriculum with excellent teaching are paying off with substantive improvements in students success. To help put that success in perspective, compare what’s been accomplished in Lowell to state results: First off, the overall average rate of improvement in Lowell was 10% while the state achieved 5%. (State results obviously include progress made in wealthy communities, as well as suburban and urban schools.) Lowell’s ability to double the state’s progress is especially significant when you consider that our student demographics include the highest percentage of second language learners in the commonwealth, not to mention poverty levels at about 65%. Some middle-school scores, in particular, were astounding. For instance, 14% more Lowell sixth graders scored advanced/proficient in math while the state average jumped only 6%. On the other end, the number of sixth graders who scored in the warning category was reduced by 15% in Lowell while the state reduced only 5% on average. Lowell eighth grade math results showed a 13% reduction in students who received warning scores while the state warning category reduced only 4%. These advances are significant, but there is still much work to be done. It is encouraging, however, to see test scores that affirm the focus on high-quality curriculum and excellent instruction are paying off in substantive ways. Congratulations to the administrators, staff, teachers, and especially the students. Keep up the good work!

I was panicking because I thought I had missed my chance to see the original scroll of On the Road, by Jack Kerouac.  A call to LZ Nunn, the Director of COOL (Cultural Organization of Lowell) reassured me that the scroll is still in town and will be on display at the Boott Cotton Mills until next Sunday, October 14th.  (The Boott Mills are open from 10-5, daily.) 

Why am I so anxious to see the scroll? First of all, NOT seeing it would be one of those classic examples of neglecting to visit the remarkable sites in your own backyard — like living in Lowell and never going on a mill tour, or if you live in Boston, never going to the top of the Pru’ or walking the Freedom Trail (I have done all of those things, by the way). And with the scroll being here all summer, I was kicking myself for not making the effort to see it and could imagine lining up to see it in some other city someday, when seeing it right here in Lowell will be so much more meaningful. Also, I am a Kerouac fan. I’ve read several of his books since moving to Lowell and I admire his lyrical, passionate writing. According to LZ, the scroll

has drawn tens of thousands of people into the city, and has been an international media event with the BBC, National Public Radio, Danish Television, Italian Vogue and the Rolling Stone all coming to Lowell to capture the energy around this exhibit. 

During this last week, members of the UML English department are planning ‘a stroll to the scroll.’  LZ is hoping that some Lowell High teachers will do the same and not miss this chance for their students to “see a one-of-a-kind literary document and learn about a legendary Lowell High graduate.”  Sounds like a good plan.

I always turn first to the Ideas section of the Boston Sunday Globe and, today, found Lowell featured on the front page under the dismal headline:  “What Renaissance?”  The same section features an article about Jack Kerouac’s ‘newly-burnished reputation.’  Yes, the author of On the Road is now ‘in’, having been recently inducted into the Library of America, joining Hemingway, Faulkner, Steinbeck and other literary legends; while, of course, being the subject of much celebration here in town on the 50th anniversary of the publication of his major work.

Lowell, however, is apparently ‘out’.  According to the article, Lowell’s heyday is over, and the ‘Lowell miracle’ is being questioned by many, including our own Bob Forrant, professor of regional economics at UML.  The criticisms seem to be that Lowell’s emphasis has been on large construction projects (such as the Arena, the National park and the stadium) to the detriment of the working class, and that city officials have consistently over-emphasized the city’s gains.   The really damning statistic is that Lowell’s poverty rate went up astronomically between 1980 and 2000, compared with Brockton, Fall River and Worcester.  This is worrying and gives credence to the fear, expressed by city council candidate Darius Mitchell in the last election, that there are ‘two Lowells.’

It might be interesting to graph Kerouac’s reputation alongside of Lowell’s.  Jack Kerouac came out of the post-industrial Lowell.  He was down a long time after his initial success, especially as his reputation was conflated with a generation with which he disagreed vehemently, struggling to disavow the title ‘King of the Beats.’  His talent though was real and is now more widely recognized.  I don’t dispute the points that Bob Forrant is trying to make, but I think the Globe author was stretching to make his point that Lowell is a failure:  the poverty statistics from 2000 are now nearing a decade old, positive events like the opening the Brew’d Awakening Coffee Shop occurred in the last five years, even Middlesex Street (a photo of empty storefronts on Middlesex Street is in the story) is showing some signs of revitalization and the National Park was surely the saving of the city - not in the same league as stadium and arena projects.  In addition, Manager Bernie Lynch had good answers to many of the criticisms raised, including the fact that ‘experimentation is part of the Lowell model.’  Lowell will no doubt continue to have ups and downs, but there is something here that is real and that persists despite the current fashions in urban renewal.

Fast forward a decade and this could be you, strolling along what is now a neglected area bordered on the north by the National Park Service lot off Dutton Street and on the south by Middlesex and Revere Streets. This morning, City Manager Bernie Lynch introduced Trinity Financial, master planner for the renovation of the Hamilton Canal District, to about 100 members of the community. The conceptual drawing shown above is a view from the lot which incorporates the original brick wall that exists today with new pedestrian-friendly bridges and wide sidewalks. Key factors of the Hamilton Canal District project include respect for the site’s historical significance, waterways, and environmental aspects, as well as making connections to the existing downtown and public transportation system. Touted as the most important development the city has undertaken since the Tsongas Arena and the baseball stadium, the completed project is expected to nearly double the size of the downtown, increase tax revenue by $2.2 million, and provide new jobs, residents, and businesses. Today’s meeting launched a series of informational sessions with the community that will continue over the next nine months. These charrettes (a French word defined by Trinity as an “intensive, collaborative, public-planning process to produce a shared vision”) are designed to get community input on the project. The planning process will include forming community groups to work on issues such as housing, retail, history, and open space. Ground breaking is projected for 2009, with the entire project taking up to 10 years to complete. Trinity, a firm that claims to “listen well,” appears to have a proven track record for accomplishing complex projects. For instance, they built an attractive, mixed-use space (housing, commercial, and parking) on top of an MBTA subway line in Boston. They also won a national award last year for a mixed-residential project in East Boston. Renovating the Hamilton Canal District will cost about a half billion dollars. (Not much was said today about financing other than the great partnership between the city, state, and private interests.) The project’s potential to transform the city makes it worth investing our own vision for what that future may be.