Fair Share Testimony

My testimony at the public hearing before the Joint Committee on Revenue, in Gardner Auditorium at the State House on April 11, in support of S.16 and H.86 (Fair Share)

Honorable Co-Chairs and Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of the Fair Share Constitutional Amendment. I’m Mary Ann Stewart of Lexington, one of the ten original signers of the Citizen’s proposal of this initiative, before it was knocked out of the hands of voters last year.

Decisions made beginning 20 years ago eliminated ~$4billion from our state budget and we have never recovered. I support the Fair Share Amendment because we badly need revenue for education and transportation.

I’m a parent and I’ve been deeply involved in education from a number of local, statewide, and national perspectives, including:

• School Site Council Member
• Town Meeting Member
• State President of the Parent Teacher Association (PTA)
• National PTA Achievement Gap Working Group; and their Council of States
• Northeast Area Director of the National Association of State Boards of Education Board of Directors
• School Committee Chair and Member, and
• current Member of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education; and the Board’s Budget Committee

Students need a well-rounded education; one that taps into their deeper learning and is based on a rich and varied curriculum that includes music, art, and athletics, and builds character, critical-thinking, courage, and more.

But, many of these programs were eliminated or severely eroded in many communities during the recession years.

To provide a sound future for our children and our Commonwealth, we must ensure that all children receive a high quality education, especially those who face the greatest challenges. We need a deeper investment in foundation funding for school districts, for early childhood education, for extended day & wrap-around services, and post-secondary education and vocational education.

Improving the quality of the education our children receive requires up-front investments for long term pay-offs to individual students, society, and to the workforce.

Determining how to raise revenue for these long term investments is a critical challenge.

One way that we can make those investments is by asking our highest income residents (who, as you know, currently pay less of their income in state and local taxes than the rest of us) to pay a little more on their income over $1 million. 

I urge an expeditious and favorable vote out of Committee for S.16/H.86, followed by scheduling a Constitutional Convention.

Thank you for your consideration.
⸻
Image credit: Portion of the actual thing ~ mas

Family Values

A granddaughter of a Pennsylvania factory worker and coal miner, and of immigrants from Armenia, Ireland, and Italy, I was raised in working and middle-class neighborhoods by parents who came from large, extended families. My parents were musicians and teachers and from them I learned persistence, the value of hard work, the importance of service, and standing up for what I believe in.

When we moved to Lexington, as a young family twenty-five years ago, it was through the Town's affordable housing program. My husband was born and raised here and still had deep roots in the community. We purchased our forever home five years later.

The loss of our family's health insurance (following the tech bubble bust in the early 2000s), proved to make me a stronger advocate. As a working mom with three young children I was beside myself with worry, yet I successfully negotiated coverage for our family from my employer, even though I wasn’t working full-time and my employer was reluctant to do so. I’ve learned to navigate a complex system of special education services and I know the heartbreaking loss of a loved one to opioid addiction.

It’s my story that motivates me to speak up for progressive change—before governmental bodies, elected officials, and other organizations that make decisions affecting children, families, and our communities. From revenue options to workers’ rights, paid family and medical leave to improved funding for public education and public transportation, I champion quality public services and policies people need to overcome the challenges they face everyday.

My most powerful experiences have come from working on local and state level issues. I was twice-elected to serve on Lexington's School Committee, including as Chair, during the worst recession of our lifetime. Those experiences taught me the value of earnest questions and a soft heart. I've served on the Leadership Team of the Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts and as Governor Patrick's Parent Representative appointee to the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education. Both have taught me what it takes to both advocate for progressive change and to navigate the body to forward that agenda on the state level.

We're in the first year of a new, two-year legislative session. State legislators worked quickly to file their bills. Activists urge them to sign-on to the bills that move us forward. We will continue to work to move the issues, speaking out at public hearings and lobby days, with the understanding that we are driven by the the values that shaped us, as well as those we choose to live by.

---

Photo credit: Personal family photo of great-grandfather Nubar, great-grandmother Rose Iskandarian, and grandfather Charles as a toddler, circa 1904.

State Education Laws Enacted in 2017

Sharing a document from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education: the following laws relate to the Department and were enacted in 2017 (in chronological order):

LEGISLATION

An Act relative to the Mohawk Trail Regional School District and the Hawlemont School District: Chapter 31 of the Acts of 2017 (see H.2859), effective June 30, 2017. This is follow-up legislation to a 1993 law filed to confirm the Mohawk Trail Regional School District's budget process and their right to approve future amendments in accordance with law and the terms of their agreement after the participating towns approved a change in their regional agreement.

An Act relative to language opportunity for our kids (LOOK): Chapter 138  of the Acts of 2017 (see H.4032), Sections 47-54 inclusive, shall take effect on May 1, 2018. The new LOOK law establishes language acquisition programming flexibility for districts and oversight requirements for the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

• Provides districts with flexibility in choosing a language acquisition program that best fits the needs of their English Learner (EL) population, while ensuring accountability through Department oversight.
• Requires districts that intend to offer new programs for ELs to submit specific information for review by the Department and the District's Parent Advisory Council. All programs must be based on research and best practices.
• Directs the Department to notify a District and provide the corrective steps that a district must take before commencing a program if the Department finds that a proposed program fails to meet the applicable requirements.
• Districts that intend to offer a new sheltered English immersion or alternative instructional EL program in the next academic year must submit the required information to the Department and the District's Parent Advisory Council by January 1 of the current academic year, which means new EL programs may open no earlier than the 2019-2020 school year.

Increased input from Parents and Guardians 

• Requires Districts that serve a significant population of ELs to create EL Parent Advisory Councils, made up of parents/guardians of ELs in the District.
• Requires Districts to provide notification to parents/guardians of ELs regarding various topics, including their right to choose a language acquisition program among those offered by the District.
• Parents/guardians of ELs may select any language acquisition program offered by the District, provided that the program is appropriate for the age and grade level of the student.
• Parents/guardians of ELs may request a transfer of the student to another language acquisition program available in the District, subject to approval by the Superintendent.

Educator Qualifications

• Requires the Department to establish licensure endorsements for various language acquisition program types (for example, Two-Way Immersion Programs).
• Requires the Department to annually provide Districts with reports of all educators who have current language acquisition program endorsements.
• Requires Districts to verify, prior to the beginning of each school year, that each educator in an EL program is properly endorsed for that program.

Benchmarks, Guidelines, and Templates

• Requires the Department to establish:
  • (i) benchmarks for attaining English proficiency for ELs;
  • (ii) guidelines to support districts in identifying ELs who do not meet benchmarks;
  • and (iii) an EL success template for use by districts to assist ELs who are not meeting English proficiency benchmarks.

• Requires Districts to provide a copy of these materials from the Department to parents/guardians of ELs within the timeframes specified in the law.
• Requires districts to adopt procedures to identify ELs who do not meet the English proficiency benchmarks and establish various processes relating to them.

Data and Reporting

• Expands EL related reporting requirements for Districts to the Department.
• Establishes a Data Commission to study the collection and dissemination of data on ELs and to make recommendations on streamlining data reporting.

State Seal of Biliteracy

• Directs the Board to establish the State Seal of Biliteracy. Districts may award the Seal to students who meet the state criteria in attaining a high level of proficiency in English and at least one other language.

Pre-K English Learners

• Expands the student census requirement for Districts to include ELs who are in Pre-Kindergarten.

FY18 BUDGET LAWS

An Act Making Certain Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2018 Before Final Action on the General Appropriation Bill: Chapter 25 of the Acts of 2017 (see H.3775), effective June 26, 2017. Directs the State treasurer to make advance payments for some or all of periodic local reimbursement or assistance programs to any city, town, regional school district or independent agricultural and technical school that demonstrates an emergency cash shortfall, as certified by the Commissioner of Revenue and approved by the Secretary of Administration and Finance, pursuant to guidelines issues by the Secretary.

FY18 General Appropriations Act (GAA): Chapter 47 of the Acts of 2017 (see H.3800) effective July 17, 2017. The GAA includes total state spending of $39.4 billion, representing a $652 million (1.7%), increase over FY17 spending. This spending recommendation is based on a projected 3.4% increase in tax revenue for FY18.

• The Department's recommended appropriations total $5.324 billion, which represents an increase of $113.5 million (2.2%) over FY17 spending. The GAA affirms a commitment to fund education aid for our Districts but does include reduced spending to a number of the Department's accounts due to the lowered revenue forecast for FY18. In signing the budget, the Governor vetoed spending of $5.6 million in Department accounts, most of which represented legislative earmarks for specific local projects. These vetoes were subsequently overridden by the Legislature.

I. Education Local Aid & Reimbursements

• Chapter 70 aid (7061-0008) is increased by $118.9M (2.6%) over FY17. The increase is designed to allow for a minimum aid increase of $30 per pupil over FY17 for every school District and provides $25M to begin addressing the increased costs of employee and retiree healthcare.
• GAA funding for the Special Education Circuit Breaker account (7061-0012) is increased by $4M over FY17. Regional School Transportation (7035-0006) has a $500,000 increase. The METCO grant program (7010-0012) and Charter School Tuition Reimbursements (7061-9010) are level funded. The Department estimates the latter will cover 100% reimbursement for the capital facility component of Charter Tuition ($893 per student) and 69.3% of first-year tuition increases.
• Non-Resident Vocational Student Transportation (7035-0007) and Transportation Reimbursement for Homeless Students (7035-0008) were reduced by $7,500 and $250,500, respectively, from FY17 levels.

II. Student Assessment

• The GAA funding for the Student Assessment account (7061-9400) was insufficient to meet the Department's planned program spending for the upcoming school year. The Governor made a reserve draw to bring the account total to $31.1M.

III. Departmental Grant & Targeted Support Programs

• The majority of Department grant and targeted support programs were either level funded or reduced.
  • Targeted Assistance (7061-9408) reduced by $183,955 from FY17.
  • Copnnecting Activities (7027-0019) increased $555,250 for both earmarks and additional grant funding.
  • Adult Basic Education (7035-0002) increased $829,289 for both earmarks and additional grant funding.
  • ELT Grant Program (7061-9412) reduced by $197,685 from FY17.
  • After-School Grant Program (7061-9611) funded at $3.5M to fund both earmarks and additional grants.
  • Consolidated Literacy Program (7-1--0033) is $76,907 higher than FY17 spending, while Bay State Reading received an increase of $206,167.
  • Special Education in Institutional Settings account (7028-0031) received an increase of $4M over FY17 level.
  • Safe and Supportive Schools Grant Program (7061-9612) is funded at $500,000, an increase of $101,400 over FY17.
  • The GAA transfers of the WPI Schools of Excellence (7061-9624) account from the Department of Higher Education to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, funded at $1.4M.

IV. Administrative & Operational Resources

• The GAA reduces the Department's administrative funding below its maintenance level for FY18. This reduced funding totals $756,764 in the following three accounts that fund agency staff:
  • 7010-0005 Main Administration $256,096
  • 7028-0031 Special Education in Institutional Settings $233,061
  • 7061-9200 Education Data Services $267,067
• Outside sections that are of significance to the Department and to Elementary and Secondary Schools:
  • Section 90. Designates the Secretary of Education as Chair of the Homeless Student Transportation Commission established by Chapter 133 of the Acts of 2017
  • Section 126. Requires a feasibility study to be conducted by the Executive Office of Education on minimum number of instructional hours substituted for the minimum number of days as required by the Board of Education. As part of the study, the Executive Office of Education shall determine cost savings associated with an instructional hours based system including but not limited to, energy costs, administrative costs, and transportation costs.
  • Section 127. Requires a feasibility study to be conducted by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education on rural school district aid.

FBRC. Again*.

A quick post as we head into the weekend, in light of statements reported in the Herald, the $98M in 9Cs, and Legislators sworn in to a new legislative session this week.

The genius of the original foundation budget was the commitment by so many to address the education challenges facing Massachusetts (yes, they were motivated, due to the decision of the SJC╹). Not surprisingly, new challenges have arisen in the 20+ years since: Too much funding today is being siphoned away from the people and things our students need ─ teachers and classroom materials.

A generation of students had gone through our public schools before a systemic analysis had been done of what it costs to educate a child from pre-school through high school. We've had high academic expectations, but an outdated financial plan. The state legislature sought to amend that by establishing the Foundation Budget Review Commission (FBRC) and charging it to "...review the way foundation budgets are calculated and to make recommendations for potential changes in those calculations..."

What's at stake is that the present system is about $2B short because of some basic flaws built into the foundation budget assumptions (i.e., health insurance costs, special education costs, and the programs serving multi-lingual and economically disadvantaged students). FBRC findings came with the expectation that they'd be addressed by the governor in his FY17 Budget. They weren't. (As has been noted elsewhere, the governor's 9Cs were part of his FY17 budget that the Legislature ultimately restored when they approved the FY17 Final Budget).

And, while the FBRC was commissioned by the Legislature for the Legislature, the Senate was the only chamber to champion FBRC's recommendations, enfolding them in the RISE Act.

The last legislative session may serve as a preamble for what's to come. It remains to be seen what Legislators will do to advocate for some progress with respect to FBRC recommendations this session. And many of us are eager to find out.
- - - - -

* Previous posts pertaining to FBRC, in whole or in part, may be found on this blog HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE. FBRC recommendations are central to everything the Board does.

╹More from DESE on the Chapter 70 Program HERE and HERE plus THIS go to from MassBudget.

The Fair Share Amendment

The Legislature meets in a Formal Joint Session this afternoon, scheduled for 1:00 PM, to consider a vote on the Fair Share Amendment.

In the last few days, an organization opposing the Amendment has sent out a scurrilously misleading and inflammatory mailing, district-wide, in the districts of several Legislators who have publicly supported the Amendment; my representative, Jay Kaufman, House Co-Chair of the Joint Revenue Committee, is one of them. I hope Rep.Kaufman and his colleagues who have been targeted have heard that their constituents want them to support the Amendment!

If the measure passes, this is what the Amendment will do*:

The proposed constitutional amendment would establish an additional 4% state income tax on that portion of annual taxable income in excess of $1 million. This income level would be adjusted annually to reflect increases in the cost of living by the same method used for federal income-tax brackets. Revenues from this tax would be used, subject to appropriation by the state Legislature, only for public education, public colleges and universities, the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges, and public transportation. The proposed amendment would apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2019.

Since this is an amendment to the state constitution, the Legislature needs to approve the measure in two successive constitutional conventions ("ConCon") before it can appear on the ballot for final approval in November 2018. We actually only need 25% support in the Legislature on each occasion, but I hope we do far better than that.

*The language of the proposed constitutional amendment, approved by the Attorney General's Office last fall.

Transgender Rights

Below,, my letter  sent to Governor Baker, copying Lexington's legislators. The letter was sent via the contact form offered on mass.gov

Governor Charles D. Baker IV, Office of the Governor, Room 280, Boston 02133

April 1, 2016

Governor Baker,

Only recently did I learn about the Transgender Rights Bill (SB 735/HB 1577).

I was astonished to learn that under current Massachusetts law, there are not explicit protections (protections you and I probably take for granted) ensuring that transgender people can’t be turned away from a hotel, or denied service at a restaurant, simply because of who they are.

I also learned that our Commonwealth is behind in this regard, as 18 other states plus Washington DC have already passed similar legislation: CA - CO - CT - DC - DE - HI - IA - IL - ME - MD - MN - NJ - NM - NV - NY - OR - RI - VT & WA!

Massachusetts has always shone like a beacon in supporting equal rights and this is not the time to diminish our radiance.

The bill is stalled in the Joint Judiciary Committee and hasn’t been reported out from either House or Senate, yet there is a veto-proof majority in both.

Furthermore, though the Speaker has confirmed he has the votes to pass the House bill, many legislators there are lacking the courage to speak out publicly with their support for the bill unless they know that their Governor will support them.

It’s past time for transgender people to be treated fairly and equally in our Commonwealth. As your constituent, I urge you to provide the leadership that is necessary to speak out in support of transgender rights and commit to signing it into law.

Thank you for your consideration and for all you do.

CC: Representative Jay Kaufman, Senator Ken Donnelly, Senator Mike Barrett

Public Testimony

My written testimony

On June 11, 2015, Massachusetts Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on several bills related to testing in K-12 public schools. I was unable to attend the hearing in person, but did submit testimony in support of H.340: An Act relative to a moratorium on high stakes testing and PARCC.

A panel assembled to speak in opposition of the bill included representatives from the Executive Office, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and Board of ESE, in the persons of: Secretary of Education Jim Peyser, Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education Mitchell Chester, Board of ESE Chair Paul Sagan, and a former Board of ESE member Jeff Howard. (Where available, I've linked each person's name to their testimony).

Note that at no time before or after the public hearing did BESE discuss any of the bills.

My testimony below.

Members of the Joint Committee on Education

The Honorable Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz, co-chair

The Honorable Representative Alice Hanlon Peisch, co-chair

Sate House Public Hearing on Assessments

Room A-2 [the hearing was subsequently moved to the Gardner Auditorium in order to accommodate the high number of people who turned out for the hearing]

June 11, 2015

Dear Legislators,

My name is Mary Ann Stewart and I'm a parent of a high school student and two college graduates. Though I am a member of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, I am speaking for myself and not as a Board member; my comments are my own.

I have been following, with interest, mounting concern being expressed about the impact high-stakes standardized testing and test preparation is having on our public school students, their schools and districts, and educators who teach and work in them. Leaders in every level of government, along with folks in neighborhoods across the state and country, are expressing a range of views stemming from a concern about these tests and their impact: On narrowing curriculum (especially in the weeks leading up to testing dates); on educator evaluation; on the increased time and money spent to administer them; on the over-reliance of high stakes accountability measures on schools and districts for state and federal dollars.

In many states, the concern rises because the impact of these tests coincides with the increased use/availability of technology and also the implementation of new frameworks for educator evaluation, a condition for many who hoped for federal RTTT dollars. In Massachusetts, in addition to the educator evaluation implementation, high stakes accountability measures intersect with the development of district determined measures, the RETELL initiative, and soon, perhaps, the PARCC assessment (or MCAS 2.0). These concerns impact schools, families, students, and districts in the toniest communities, but students in low-income communities of color are hit the hardest - and at a time when we are trying to close gaps.

We are working against our future best interests if allowed to continue with the current testing regime. We want our students to be excited about their future. We want our schools to truly impart a love and joy for learning. We want creativity in teaching - and so much more.

Before we launch the next generation of assessments in Massachusetts, let's not just keep doing what we've been doing since we ushered in the MCAS.

It's time to call for a moratorium on the high-stakes standardized testing era so that we can work together with our communities, schools, educators, policymakers and legislators to re-evaluate with an eye to improving our schools from the inside out, not from the top down.

Thank you for your consideration, courage, and commitment to our children,

Mary Ann Stewart

Lexington MA

This testimony has also been posted to the Massachusetts Education Justice Alliance website.

#Storify: 9Cs

Our state budget reflects the choices we make to strengthen communities, support vulnerable populations, and build a thriving economy.

This past Tuesday, February 3, 2015, Governor Charlie Baker announced a series of reductions to the FY15 Budget in an effort to close a $768M projected budget deficit.

I created a storify story by pulling together some tweets and other resources related to the recent 9Cs - view my storify story embedded below.

Raise Up MA - Update!

RaiseUpMA advocates
at the Tuesday Farmer's
Market, Lexington

For the past two months I've been part of the Raise Up Massachusetts coalition working to gather signatures across Massachusetts for a ballot initiative that would see two questions added to the statewide ballot next November (see previous Posts: Raise Up Massachusetts; PDM). These two important initiatives would index the minimum wage and require employers to provide earned sick time to their employees.

The coalition has been successful! We succeeded in our signature drive - - gathering more than a quarter-million signatures, far surpassing our most ambitious targets. And, PDM has substantially exceeded its own ambitious goals. I was one of many familiar faces at the Farmer's Market each Tuesday from mid-September through the end of October and at several Town events. I also made a personal commitment to knock doors in my precinct - and I'm pleased to say that I successfully gathered 500+ signatures for my efforts.

The impact of Raise Up's statewide campaign has led the state Senate's leadership to advance a minimum wage measure that would meet many of the campaign's goals.

I stand with PDM and statewide activists who await this initiative moving forward, in both legislative and electoral settings, to see these important progressive reforms put into law.

Media Literacy Education

Advocates in support of the Media Literacy Bill (S.213) were in good company in Room A-1 of the State House on the morning of October 31st. Below is the testimony of Christina Brown on behalf of the Massachusetts PTA, followed by my testimony on behalf of the MASC Legislative Committee.

My name is Christina Brown; I am a parent, educator, and a proud member of the Massachusetts Parent TeacherAssociation, an affiliate of National PTA, the oldest and largest volunteer child advocacy association in the country, here to speak on behalf of the needs of families, parents, and children.  

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on the critical issue facing children in the 21^st Century, media literacy. Right now there are children all over the Commonwealth who have in their hands, in their lockers, and in their backpacks devices that connect them to the greatest collection of marketing, images, information, videos, social media, and personal data collection tools in the history of our species. This portable collection of media grows exponentially every day and our digital natives naively assume that knowing how to manipulate the functions of these devices means they understand and can make wise decisions about the content that pours out in torrents. 

As a parent of a second-grader, I know my days of having control over the media that my child has access to are limited.  My ban on his using electronic devices that connect him to this collection of media could end any moment as there is no place a child can go where there are not smart phones and tablets. I know full well that this media is as valuable as it is his dangerous to his development and socialization. I also know there are marketers doing brain research at this moment to understand how to keep him engaged and on their screen. I know that he hears my voice in his head asking him to think critically, ask himself what is being sold to him, is this true, what is the evidence for the veracity of the claim that comes with deceptively attractive graphics and colors? But I know parents can't do this alone.

This bill asks that in addition to their families' voices, children in the Commonwealth also hear the voices of their well-trained and skilled teachers who are provided with resources to support the development of media literacy in our children. Teachers can join parents on the frontline and add to the knowledge and volume of critical questions children ask themselves as they use new technology and navigate our 21^st Century world. In the same way MA teachers will for thirteen years support children's development as literate individual who are prepared for college and career as readers, writers, speakers, and listeners as detailed in the MA Frameworks, there is a desperate need for this comprehensive literacy instruction to fully include media literacy to support students in navigating a and increasingly complex media landscape.

The Mass PTA Position on Consumerism dedicates us to:

I. support efforts to protect children from exploitive marketing through advocacy, education, and collaboration; and

II. To support, expand, and improve efforts to inform parents on media and technology safety issues.

The Mass PTA Position on Technology in Schools dedicates us to:

I. Support, expand, and improve efforts that increase knowledge and skills for students to access, analyze, evaluate, navigate, and communicate a variety of media messages from the internet and other media sources.

The Mass PTA Position on Education of the Whole Child dedicates us to:

I. Support, expand and improve resources to ensure schools give every child access to a rich array of subjects and address children's basic emotional and physical needs.

II. Support, expand, and improve resources to ensure children are healthy, engaged, supported, challenged, and safe.

Media education is about making sure that students are prepared to think critically and ask the right questions throughout the 21^st Century and into the 22^nd Century. And it is essential, now more than ever that we give them skills they need for the lifetime that extends well-beyond their K-12 years. Thank you.

Christina Brown,

Massachusetts PTA

405 Waltham Street, #147

Lexington MA 02421

617/861-7910

* * *

Honorable Co-Chairs, members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the importance of Media Literacy in Education. I speak as a school committee member and member of the Massachusetts Association of School Committee’s Legislative Committee.

Members of locally elected school committees are very sensitive to public policy overload, education legislation, or any legislation that would mandate course curriculum content. At a meeting of the MASC Legislative Committee last Thursday night, members thoughtfully considered, then voted unanimously to support S.213 for the following reasons:

• The Bill is not written as a mandate. Media literacy is pedagogy, a method of teaching, not a subject area. One can incorporate media literacy into any subject. So, it’s not an add-on, but rather a powerful way to teach a subject that is relevant and engaging to kids who live in a powerful 24/7 media environment.
• The MTA endorses S.213 and has been on board as long as the Massachusetts PTA.
• It’s a matter of equity. Some districts already recognize that media literacy is written into the Common Core State Standards and those districts are moving forward to integrate media analysis; students risk falling behind schools and districts that are doing a better job preparing their students for work and life.
• This Bill calls upon the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to assist districts with implementing comprehensive media literacy education for the purpose of developing stronger critical analysis skills and independent thinking skills; these skills are in tune with curriculum frameworks aligned to Common Core State Standards and necessary for navigating our media-saturated world.

Today, literacy means media literacy. When you consider that nearly 6 trillion ads are displayed online each year[1], 400 million tweets are sent daily[2], and 4.75 billion pieces of content are shared on Facebook every day[3], it’s vital that students question and understand media’s commercial and political messages –– and to create their own messages and responses to 24/7 media. Thank you.

Mary Ann Stewart

Lexington MA 02420

---

[1] U.S. Digital Future in Focus 2013, www.comScore.com

[2] http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-21/business/37889387_1_tweets-jack-dorsey-twitter, by Hayley Tsukayama, March 21, 2013

[3]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151908376716729&set=a.10151908376636729.1073741825.20531316728&type=3&theater

Public Hearing on Media Literacy Bill

State House, Boston

I spent the better part of Halloween morning at the Massachusetts State House, specifically in Hearing Room A-1, for a Public Hearing convened by the Joint Committee on Education. The hearing was dedicated to proposed bills on curriculum in K-12 public schools, that included teaching of genocide, Civics education, and more. It was standing room only. Seats were filled and walls lined with staff, press, teachers, students, and advocates in attendance to hear testimony in support of a range of bills that would impact K-12 curriculum in public schools. I was there to testify in support of the Media Literacy Bill (S.213/H.472) on behalf of the MASC Legislative Committee.

Advocates speak in support
of S.213 before the Joint
Committee on Education

Room A-1

Bill S.213 is unique in that it is not written as a mandate for teachers or districts to teach a particular subject. Rather, Media Literacy is a methodology, a pedagogy, a way of teaching that incorporates strategies for critical analysis in a way that is relevant and engaging to kids. Teachers recognize the need for media literacy - they see the very real effects of too much media, unhealthy media, and lack of critical analysis. Many teachers are using media literacy across many content areas already and the Massachusetts Teacher's Association endorses this bill; they have been on board as long as the Massachusetts PTA. Some school systems recognize that media literacy is written into the Common Core standards and those districts are moving forward to incorporate it throughout all content areas. Those who are not risk falling behind the schools that are doing a better job preparing their students for work and life in the 21st century.

Literacy Today = Media Literacy

Lexington's community forum about the positive and negative impact of media on societal behavior and the development of children got me thinking about our current media landscape and what individuals, families, and communities can do to improve positive outcomes. The forum was held on October 10th at Lexington High School and was co-sponsored by the School Committee, League of Women Voters, and numerous Town and School Department groups, and individuals.

The impact of media on children is always a topic of concern and today's media landscape has dramatically changed over the last decade; all of us are now living in a world of 24/7 media saturation. One startling finding of a Kaiser Family Foundation survey (2010) showed that young people are devoting more than 7.5 hours each day with entertainment media - an increase of 1 hour and 17 minutes since 2004. The survey also found that:

"...because they spend so much of that time 'media multi-tasking' (using more than one device/medium at a time), they actually manage to pack a total of 10 hours and 45 minutes worth of media content into those 7..."

Schools and individual teachers are working to bring media literacy to students, but media literacy is not broadly implemented in our public schools and media literacy is rarely part of the public debate on education. A bill in the Massachusetts State Legislature (S.213) proposes to change that.

S.213/H.472 (language is identical in both bills) would bring media literacy education to all Massachusetts K-12 public school classrooms. Media literacy education teaches students to apply critical thinking to messaging and to use media to create their own messages. It's a methodology, a pedagogy, a strategy and key skill that's vital to the health and well-being of all children, as well as to their participation in the civic and economic life of our democracy.

The irony is that, used well, media can entertain and inform our children in positive ways. However, since most children are not taught to use media thoughtfully, they are not able to think critically about it's content. Research shows that media literacy education has been effective in reducing risky behaviors among children and youth of all ages and for all topics of focus, such as tobacco use, violence, and sex.

Media Literacy Now, a 501(c)4 non-profit organization focusing on grassroots and legislative media literacy activity for K-12 schools in each state, has formed a coalition in support of S.213. Public testimony is being planned to present to the Joint Committee on Education's public hearing on Thursday, October 31, 2013. If you are interested in being in touch with parents, teachers, and others working for media literacy education in our schools, visit their website, where you can learn more about media literacy and sign up to join their mailing list. Watch on this site, too, for updates to this issue.

Panel members, Anthony Brooks, moderator

Tom Fiedler, Dean, College of Communication, Boston University

Nancy Carlsson-Paige, Ed.D. Professor Emerita, Lesley University

Michael Rich, MD, MPH, Director and Founder of the Center on Media and 

Child Health at Boston Children's Hospital

Media Literacy

Media is powerful.

Today's media landscape has dramatically changed over the last decade and our children are now living in a world of 24/7 media.

Results of a national survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation showed (2010) that