Fair Share | Public Hearing

Note: this post has been edited to add the image above and credit at bottom. A few (regrettable) typos have also been amended ~ mas

Raise Up MA has been beating the drum for a 10:30 'be there by' for the 11 AM hearing and it has worked! Gardner Auditorium is quickly filling up. Joint Committee on Revenue staff are taking sign-ups for folks giving testimony.

11:15 AM Chair Rep. Mark Cusack has given the Call to Order.
Rep. Cusack announces that testimony will come from Legislative colleagues first

Rep. Jim O'Day and Sen. Jason Lewis with the first testimony
Sen Lewis says he is thrilled to be joined by so many colleagues
They introduce themselves

Sen Lewis: tremendous unmet needs for families and communities
Cites state education underfunding
We can accept the status quo or do something about it
Now citing our unfair tax system
S.16 and H.86 will raise the revenue we desperately need for our Commonwealth

Applause

Rep O'Day: Thanks the Committee for bringing a hearing so quickly
MA holds ourselves at an extremely high level regarding education
We are short most years on education; roads and bridges
Business communities love our education system; this legislation ensures that will continue for years to come
$20,000/week is what you earn at a million dollars a year
If you  earn above that, you should pay your fair share
We cannot continue to build a strong economy on the backs of those who struggle
Vote this bill out in an affirmative manner as soon as you can

Sen Brady (Joint Committee on Revenue Member -- JCR): Education is a big priority; our roads are in a deplorable condition; if this passes, funds not available until 2023. Kudos to our chairs for holding a public hearing on this proposal so soon in the session. We are in desperate need of revenue in our districts. We need to do better. Only affects those making over and above a million dollars

Applause

Sen Jo Comerford: Want to call attention to Sen Lewis calling our tax system 'upside down'. It is. We all know the ROI on smart investment. 14,000 wealthiest households bring in $2B. Doesn't cover the $4B lost 20 years ago that those millionaires benefit from, correct?

Sen Lewis: That's correct

I missed who asked the Q, and Rep O'Day is giving a history on the Citizen Initiative
Oh! Qs from Rep. Randy Hunt, who follows up: How do we know the funds will be dedicated to the intended purpose?

Rep O'Day: Doesn't believe this body would take us in an opposite direction

Rep Hunt: I agree. My point is, we can't guarantee going in another direction, unless an election replaces all of us...How is the $2B calculated?

Sen Lewis: We can't know precisely. It's a reasonable estimate based on tax returns and the number of taxpayers

Reminder that Sen Lewis and Rep O'Day are the lead sponsors on S.16 and H.86

Sen Hinds: Thank you to all who are here in the room and active on this issue; know many of you came from further parts of the state. There were legal challenges previously, potential here?

Sen Lewis: with a Fair Share Redux

Sen Jehlen: Inequity in our schools; challenges with public transportation. It's the will of the people and the legislature. We have a constitutional obligation and we are not meeting it. We were counting on this passing last year. It's ironic that the SJC did what they did. It will take 4 more years before this will make a difference

Exit legislators, to applause

Raise Up MA Panel:
Cindy Rowe (JALSA): Increasing transpo fares again; updating education budget formula need; RUM strongly supports FSA because it dedicates funding for education and transportation.

Peter Enrich (Professor at Northeastern Univ, specializing in state and local tax law; Former Director of ANF in Dukakis Administration): Will try to answer two questions. Why do we need a Constitutional Amendment? Short answer, our state constitution requires it. The second question: is this a proposal in proper form to forward to legislators? You know the history, and SJC said no.

Alex Hoyt (? Social Studies/History in Worcester and Hudson): Fair is the most just solution to underfunded schools. Cites constraints on doing his job well because of underfunding. Says legislators would be challenged under the same constraints

Applause; a caution from the Chair to refrain from, but seriously, that was powerful testimony from Alex!

Sabrina Davis (Coalition for Social Justice): We must invest in transportation, commuter rail, the T

Marie-Frances Rivera (MassBudget President): Think if we hadn't committed to forward-thinking investments (on edu, transpo). Glad to see education budget formula risen to priority on Beacon Hill. Cites MassBudget's report of last summer, HERE

Q: How many signatures collected?
Sabrina Davis: Exceeded all requirements
Q: Volunteers?
SD: Many volunteers
Q: Other state's experiences with similar measures
Enrich: Not a substantial out-migration due to increased taxes
Comerford: Payments on structures?
Rivera: MA is one of the most highly educated states; strong correlation between higher education and strong economy
Comerford: an indicator of strong ROI
Rivera: Yes
Hinds: Folks can be very creative how they file taxes. Provisions around shifting their income?
Enrich: Good Q. The reality, of course, is federal taxes remain far, far higher, even with the so-called federal tax reform.
Hunt: Federal tax planning would apply to any state. Tax planning when it comes to this type of constitutional amendment:
Enrich: MA taxable income is largely for federal taxes. Would people change? not likely. Would it lead people to change where they are taxed? Possibly.

High Tech Council (Chris Anderson and others)
Chris Anderson (President High Tech Council): Impacts of this proposal are actually borne out as *over-reaching*. (Cites Illinois, Connecticut, and a couple other states that I didn't catch. Basically, citing *out-migration* of some people in these states as a reason MA shouldn't pass Fair Share) 

Brad MacDougall (VP of Govt Affairs at AIM-- Associated Industries of MA): We're not afraid of tax convos. Instituting tax policy via constitution is a concern.

Chris Carlossi (?): Opposed, largely because of the impact on small biz

Q: How progressive taxes have failed, how many have been repealed or overturned?
Anderson: Several. Maine, Maryland were legislative decisions. We have anecdotal data.
Q: Is a small biz owner. Happy to pay business taxes bc employees help the biz achieve
Anderson: We're already a progressive tax state
VC Rep Schmid: Do any of your orgs have an idea of what they think we will raise?
Anderson: Says they cite decreased property values
Schmid: Represents Fall River and New Bedford. Schools suffer. I'm very interested in hearing of any forecasts or revised forecasts of what this proposal might raised
Anderson: Committed to these convos
Rep Hay: Communities your'e talking about -- do any of those states had increases in any of their budgets for education?
Response: We can do our best to find out
Comerford: Understanding S Corps -- all liabilities are substracted?
Carlossi: Yes
Comerford: On millionaire flights, three of the five states with the highest concentrations of millionaires have a millionaire tax...why worry about MA millionaires moving out of state?
Anderson: Data show numbers of millionaires going down
Comerford: Share concern about econ growth...if Millionaire Taxes are so bad, why is it that when I look at this, there is growth across the board in 8 states
Anderson: these are important questions; state fiscal stability probably are different in the examples I've shown (CT, IL)
Comerford: There are other factors that determine a state's health
Q: Clarification on flight and what it is based on; I think I heard it based on projections?
Anderson: Mine based on actual examples

Former Rep. Jay Kaufman, former Chair of JCR: Big fan of Fair Share Amendment; source of enormous regret this didn't pass on my watch; I have not the slightest doubt that our people will support FSA because they understand Adequacy and Fairness. Rep Hunt asked a Q about fungibility. (previously) We can and should legislatively establish a separate account as a guarantee of transparency

Raise Up MA Panel #2:
Melinda Marchetti (1199SEIU): Pay my fair share, time for wealthy to pay theirs

Phineas Baxendall (MassBudget): The proposed tax only falls on those over a million dollars; already gives a large tax benefit to those making the most;

Rev Andre Bennett (Zion Baptist Church in Lynn, and a couple of other orgs that I didn't catch!): Invites any other faith leaders to join them up front (several do); Speaking to the moral issue of a just tax system, instead of so many struggling families; education is a right, not a privilege

Cao Ling Zhu: Addressing in Mandarin; translator: speaking for more investment in transportation and great schools

No follow up Qs

Raise Up MA Panel #3:
Community Organizer in Chelsea: a woman of color; a mom to a college student; cannot provide our students with transportation;

Religious Leader: People in our Commonwealth are proud to contribute to an economy that works for everyone; employers need workers who are educated and can get to work on time;

Speaker is from the Small Business Alliance: Says small business often left out of policy-making process; reads letter written by Alliance members;

No follow up Qs

Raise Up Panel #4:
Ann Roderick (8th Grade Teacher): Unfair competition due to money; it's a system being bred in our schools; too many cuts in our schools leave students with significant lack of resources; inequality, competing for school choice spot bc their own cannot meet their needs...and takes district dollars with them;

Melissa Jones (Cape Cod Regional High School): Kids are hungry, abused, homeless; we fight for underserved because we care; not asking for extra funding -- asking for enough funding

(Teacher in Amherst Public Schools): cites perspective of a student with special needs in her school; large class sizes; poor air quality; we need systemic change

Rep Domb: Thank you for making the trip and speaking to this issue
Amherst T: Systemic change will help every child in the Commonwealth

No follow up Qs

(My own public testimony -- which I will post separately!)

Speaker is talking about the good of the Fair Share Amendment and trickle up economics

No Qs

Mark Callahan is President of Mass Building Trades, 75,000 members: sees deplorable conditions of infrastructure; state of our budget and of our Commonwealth depends on investment; everyone needs to pay their fair share

No Qs

Harvard Business School Panel:
Erica Eiderhoven (?) is a HBS student: says classmates will have a net worth of a million dollars within  10 years; morally reprehensible not to pass this amendment; failing and unreliable transpo system; we earned our fortunes because the rules are rigged to our benefit; 'every billionaire is a policy mistake'; tax the rich
Another student speaks to the rigged system; justice and fairness are necessary; we are subsidized by low-income households;

Rep Schmid: TY; you're obviously going to be successful and hope you stay in MA

Mass Taxpayers Foundation in opposition
Q Rep Domb: Clarify: the reason you cite for not doing this is why we were elected to determine the budget process, identify needs, we're not predetermining, we are in the moment
MTF: The Q is how and what will we make those priorities?
Rep D: With respect, the voters are telling us; I'm in the process right now; that's the job for us right now. to prioritize and direct, not have every piece in place. I agree we should be looking at other forms, so when we talk about corporate reforms I hope you'll come back
Q Rep Whipps: When you talk about 'we need a plan before we spend', many don't understand the rural school situation like where i live; need for funding mechanisms in place for local control
MTF: Needs in communities are different; concerned the money might not come in as people expect

No further testimony
Joint Committee on Revenue is adjourned
2:14 PM
———
Image credit: A fair day for the fair share public hearing ~ mas

Public Hearing: Phoenix Academy Public Charter High School, Lawrence

At least one member of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) attends one public hearing on a pending application for a charter school and reports back to the full BESE. The idea behind the hearings is to provide members of the public an opportunity to voice their opinions on proposed charter schools and to present information for the Department and BESE to consider in deliberations. This year, there were two public hearings -- in Lynn and in Lawrence. (Read this Press Release for more on the process.)

The Phoenix Academy Lawrence (PAL) is an in-district school that the Phoenix Charter Academy Network (PCAN) is contracted to operate. PCAN is proposing to close PAL and open a new, regional  Commonwealth Charter School to be called "Phoenix Academy Public Charter High School, Lawrence" (PAPCHSL). If approved, it would also draw from Haverhill and Methuen Public School systems.

The hearing I attended and presided over was held in the Main Branch of the Lawrence Public Library. It was a lousy weather drive and getting there took much longer than I had accounted for and, so it happened, I arrived with literally one minute to spare. We were in the library's auditorium and there was a full, friendly crowd. And lots of students. At least as many students came out to support this proposal as came out last year to support the MAP Academy Charter School in Plymouth. All of the oral testimony was in support, by the way. No one speaking indicated they were  from Haverhill or Methuen:

• 14 Students, Alums
• 9 Teachers, Staff, or Administrators
• 5 Parents/Guardians
• 3 Community Members
• 2 Phoenix Board Members
• CEO, PCAN
• Receiver, Lawrence Public Schools
• ED, CPSA

Beth Anderson, Chief Executive Officer, Phoenix Charter Academy Network: good work happening in Lawrence and we want to do more, especially with our youth
Student: transferred from a school in NH; Phoenix is a caring community
Jeff Riley, Reciever, Lawrence Public Schools: graduation rate has increased more than 20 points in 6 yrs, but still well below state's average; need options for children; Phoenix has proven to be a great model; need to expand
Lane Glenn, President, Northern Essex Community College: wears many hats in the community; $275K lost with each student dropout; in six years has seen "triple the number of students transitioning from Lawrence High School (LHS) to their local community college"
Student: LHS felt way too big; with Phoenix has a better, more flexible schedule; can complete her work
John Connors, Phoenix Board Chair: students are awesome; students tell their stories; wants to help more students; Phoenix is there to help them; nationally recognized model; wants 11 BESE voting members to support the move to become a Commonwealth Charter School
Student: a 17yo senior; moved from NY; Phoenix has earned her trust; people at the school help a lot; school starts at 9AM is a big help
Teacher: been teaching there since 2013; supporting young moms; expanding means opening up to older moms
Admin: using project-based learning; lots of support and flexibility; majority of students are young men right now; expanding to a regional shool will bring changes; need to get to know Haverhill & Methuen; need to expand ELT program
Alum: now in second year at Brandeis University; had behavior problems at LHS; Phoenix gave her a second chance; gave her support, taught self-advocacy
Alum: "lots of support at Phoenix...looking back, they were the only family I had"
Alum: left LHS because it was too big, no support; dropped out -- has 6 sisters -- "went back to school to graduate to be a role model for them"
Student: "Phoenix has had a positive influence on me"
Parent/Guardian: "don't know if they do magic there or not, but they got it"
Parent/Guardian: "care about my kid's education...no one wants to see their kid fail"; dropped out -- got a GED 25 yrs later; "students need 1:1 attention; they're not perfect, they're kids and each one learns differently"
Staff: is a sister, aunt, cousin, friend; "building relationships is our heart and soul for students"; Phoenix really is a family; home visits and phone calls
Student: went to LHS and did well freshman year; slacked off sophomore year and made "bad 'friends' "; had to go to Phoenix; great relationships with teachers; "Phoenix makes me want to go to school...I've been applying to colleges I've never heard of"
Marianne Paley-Nadel, Owner of Everett Mills: Phoenix is the tenant of her building; building a Lawrence partnership; impact not only on the student, but on family and community, too
Parents/Guardians: 2 children - 1 in college, 1 at Phoenix; were reluctant to send him to Phoenix at first; "he's a smart kid who sometimes steps out of the box...at Phoenix there is love and support"
Student: moved a lot; "schools feel like a business...have always been on the edge, with respect to grades...at Phoenix, there's a human connection, as opposed to one that feels more robotic"
Teacher: Phoenix believes students will succeed; "we build trust with our students"; teachers collaborate with each other; "we give them feedback and let them revise their work"
Student: able to be responsive to needs of students; got Ds and Fs at LHS; at Phoenix,  must maintain at least a C average -- lower is not acceptable; "skipped a lot of classes at LHS"; now feels ready for college
Admin: growing up "felt like a statistic because I was failing, a teen mom, and -- on top of all that -- a Latina"; can relate to students at Phoenix
Staff: works in college services at Phoenix; is a Haverhill High School grad; feels that will give him an edge with students when Phoenix expands
Alum: skipped a lot at LHS; had to go to Phoenix; "Phoenix built a foundation for me"; is currently in a bachelor of science nursing program
Student: Phoenix is one big support; "they really care for you...becoming a charter school would be a big step in the right direction"
Student: supports becoming a charter school; "personally, didn't have a lot of problems with school or problems with attendance...Phoenix challenged me and I wanted to do better"
Tim Nicolette, Executive Director, Massachusetts Charter Public School Association: "proud and moved by students and parents"; charter schools are to provide new models; Phoenix is a unique model; "the power of second chances...deep connections in the community build a web of support"
Trisha Perez Kennealy, Phoenix Board Member: shares personal story; parents from Puerto Rico; parents worked hard to give her a good education; knows the value of it and wants all children to have one; believes in the Phoenix model
Teacher: a first year teacher at Phoenix; students here "are the most misunderstood young men and women in the state"
Student: younger, supportive teachers who care; came from CA then KS then MA; in KS he failed courses, had to pay $91 for each class failed; "can you imagine that"; been at Phoenix since September and has a good feeling being there
Parent/Guardian: parent of a student at Phoenix; student was very attracted to LHS; "people said Phoenix was a school for bad kids"; soon came to realize that students had very different needs; Phoenix has heart; students have friends
Gregg Croteau, MSW, Executive Director, UTEC: Phoenix is building a community

Deflected attention

Public education advocates were in good company in the Gardner Auditorium at the State House this past Monday, March 7. The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing on seven bills, including two in response to ballot initiatives (the charter cap lift and repeal of Common Core), one on summer learning, one on mental health education in high schools, and three others. I'd prepared testimony in opposition to the charter cap lift (written and oral).

A number of DESE staff were on hand for most of the hearing. Commissioner Chester gave his testimony in opposition to the Common Core ballot question. Two of my BESE colleagues, James Morton and Ed Doherty were there, too: James to give testimony in support of the summer learning bill, and Ed in opposition to the charter cap bill.

I had thought I would do a bunch of tweeting on the Committee's proceedings, but I lost focus for quite some time due to the compelling BPS student walkout happening on twitter.

I had caught wind of the protest as it was developing over the weekend (twitter), thanks to parents who shared their excitement of their kids taking civic responsibility on their own terms, planning the event in order to speak out about the $50M in proposed cuts to their schools.

The pictures began showing up on my twitter feed, telling the story of students leaving school at about 11:30 AM, some
bringing posters and signs they had made, and meeting at the gazebo on the Common. First there were images from around
the city of students getting ready to make the trek. Then there were hundreds beginning to gather. Then hundreds more. And the kids were streaming up and out of the trains, headed to the gazebo, and soon there were hundreds and hundreds of students there. And then there were a thousand students peacefully assembled on the Common and still the students continued coming up from the trains and it was clear that there were well over a thousand students. Someone tweeted out that there were about 2,000 students. And after that, someone said that there were about 3,500 students.

An exuberance of students on the Common.

Then, they began their procession across the Common, up to the State House and I could barely keep up with the pictures then - and I tried to retweet them all, to no avail. Beacon Street was full of students. A sea of students from the front of the State House, expressing their dissatisfaction with the proposed, devastating cuts to their schools.

I couldn't hear from inside the State House, but apparently there was chanting. Periscopes and short videos were attached to tweets. Councillor Tito Jackson was being interviewed out in front. He said he supported the students. He said that the recent approval by the BESE to expand charter seats in Boston would add nearly $20M more to the BPS shortfall. I was riveted. It was a powerful display of youthful concern and civic engagement.

Eventually, I had to turn my full attention to the hearing when it was time to give my testimony. I spoke as part of a panel with Lisa Guisbond, Executive Director of Citizen's for Public Schools, and Kevin Murray, Executive Director of the Program for Human Rights and the Global Economy at Northeastern University's School of Law (their November 2014 case study of Massachusetts charter schools is a must read). Lisa noted new waitlist data that CPS had analyzed and Kevin cited an article that related charter school conditions reminiscent of the subprime mortgage crisis. (Parent Imperfect blogged about the article).

Public ed hearings are a great opportunity to see many fellow/sister advocates, friendships forged in the fight for strong public schools for all kids, and to make new face to face connections. It was great to finally meet Heshan and to briefly catch up with Tito. Barbara, Paul, Angela, Tom, Paul, Phyllis - frequently a presence at the State House when the the Joint Committee is hearing testimony. Great seeing them. And I always enjoy hanging out and catching up with Tracy and Margaret whenever possible. 

My testimony didn't feel complete - there's just so much to say about charters and so little time! So, I gave a short testimony on Monday, and sent a long written one to the Committee today.

I left the hearing a bit before 4:00; Tracy tweeted out that the hearing adjourned at about 5:00. If you want to read a more coherent account of the hearing, you'll want to read from her blog.

Oral Testimony (short)

Public Testimony of Mary Ann Stewart in Opposition to H.3928

to the Joint Committee on Education

Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz and Representative Alice Hanlon Peisch, Co-Chairs

Gardner Auditorium, State House, Boston MA 02133

Monday, March 7, 2016

10:00 AM

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. For the record, I’m Mary Ann Stewart from Lexington, parent representative on the state board of elementary and secondary education, speaking only for myself and in opposition to H.3928 - the act related to lifting the charter school cap.

At the board’s (BESE’s) charter-authorizing meeting last month, Secretary Peyser commented that for the past 20+ years he’s heard the same arguments against charter schools.1 We’ve all heard them, too: The problems with Funding. Governance. Transparency. The impact of increasing the number of seats and the drain on district resources from expanding charter schools.
The concern that continuing charter school expansion creates a two-tiered educational system.

I submit that these criticisms endure because they have yet to be resolved.

We’re all well-acquainted with the story of how charters were first promoted and then enacted as “laboratories of innovation”. Initially, a small amount of money from districts was needed for this experiment (effectively an investment in “R&D”) and especially that it came with the promise of bringing back replicable practices for implementation in the regular public schools.

That last part - the promise to bring back - has never happened. Families and districts, trusting that it would happen, want to know why it hasn’t.

Somewhere along the way, charter schools went from “labs of innovation” (that never shared what they learned) to schools in competition with regular public schools. When that happened, resources became less available for the regular schools.

At a time when regular schools have moved from isolation to collaboration across schools and school systems, charter schools remain marooned, apart from any system, apart from transparent practices and public authority. They’re a collection of “fiefdoms”, each charter school doing something different, out of public view and, by and large, doing it no better than the regular public schools do.

But now it’s time to find out: Has the charter school experiment been working? What are the innovations?

Until we know and understand the answers to our questions, perhaps no charter schools should be renewed or expanded and no new charter schools should be authorized.

We don’t need charter schools to know that the most important resource in a classroom is a highly qualified teacher.

We don’t need charter schools to know that districts must be adequately funded so students get what they need when they need it.

We don’t need charter schools to know that we need to make preschool accessible for more children.

We don’t need charter schools to know that children need a rich and varied curriculum at school and enrichment opportunities and support out of school all year long.

We know enough right now about how to teach ALL children. And we know that HOW children are treated matters; to know that classrooms and schools that are too punitive don’t help children develop tolerance, build resiliency, or foster curiosity.

Students leave charter schools at very high rates. Recent statements from the Office of the State Auditor inform of further problems with charter school waitlist data. So, something is going on with waitlists and something is going on with attrition rates.

There’s something about the enrollment practices of charter schools that create obstacles or barriers for students and their families, too. Why? What are they? Parents and taxpayers demand to know what that’s about. And we absolutely must know what’s going on before we begin to entertain a cap lift.

Notebook::Holyoke

Looking back to last March and April

Above and below: Emails, letters, and testimony about the Holyoke receivership from students, parents, teachers, administrators, residents, and community partners.

Of the letters and emails received, only one (unsigned) expressed support for receivership. Of the testimony heard, only a very few were in support of state receivership for Holyoke Public Schools.

Prior to taking the vote last April, the Board held a Public Hearing at the War Memorial in Holyoke (standing room only);
of 63 speakers just a handful expressed support for receivership.

One of the lighter moments when Board Chair Paul Sagan addressed the standing room audience through an activist-supplied bullhorn (while glitches with the on-site PA system were being worked on).

Charter School Public Hearings

Five charter school hearings have been scheduled within the first 10 days of December - all from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM:

• Springfield: Tuesday 12/1
• Springfield Public Library/Brightwood Branch, 359 Plainfield Street, Springfield

• Brockton: Thursday, 12/3
• Massasoit Community College/Conference Center, 770 Crescent Street, Brockton

• Sturbridge: Monday, 12/7
• Tantasqua High School Auditorium, 319 Brookfield Road, Fiskdale

• Lynn: Tuesday, 12/8
• Lynn City Hall/Council Chamber, 3 City Hall Square, 4th Floor, Lynn (rescheduled from 11/23 due to unforeseen circumstances at the Lynn City Hall)

• Fitchburg: Thursday, 12/10
• Fitchburg Public Library/Auditorium, 610 Main Street, Fitchburg

Please refer HERE for some of the information about the proposed Commonwealth Charter Schools.

Approval of new charter schools is scheduled for February (including discussion at the special meeting of the Board on Monday evening):

Monday, 2/22/16 - 5:00 PM (location TBD) - last year at DESE
Tuesday, 2/23/16 - 8:30 AM (location TBD) - last year at DESE

Public hearings provide an opportunity for feedback on the applications. At least one member of the BESE will attend each hearing and report back to the full Board on the testimony provided. Members of the public may also submit written comments about the final applications through January 6, 2016:

MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
c/o Charter School Office
75 Pleasant Street
Malden  MA  02148

or by eMail to: charterschools@doe.mass.edu

When writing or eMailing, please remember that the Secretary of State's Office has determined they are a public record.

Welcome to my World [PARCC::Part I]

The Board has convened five Public Hearings on PARCC. I attended three (in Fitchburg, Lynn, and Springfield) and I'm in the process of reviewing public testimony from all of the hearings.

I appreciate that educators from schools and districts with first-hand experience of the Commonwealth's unique two-year testing trial shared their insights at these public hearings. From educator testimony the Board has heard, some concerns stand out for me, including:

• developmental appropriateness of some ELA questions, especially in the 4th grade test;
• the chaotic nature of administering a new test format [online] and challenges in scheduling the computer-based test;
• appropriate accommodations, such as extended time for all students, including students in special education and ELL;
• lack of equity with regard to technology in all buildings;
• lack of planning time for districts [for funding and professional development]

In a PARCC Position Paper*, MASS Superintendents expressed their preference for an "...implementation process that is regarded as ongoing in nature with frequent opportunities for feedback regarding the success of our efforts..." and shared their thoughts about:

• what constitutes a high quality assessment;
• ensuring the new generation of assessment supports teaching and learning, paying particular attention to
• frequency and timing
• necessary conditions
• logistical considerations
• critical roll out 

Some members of the public noted that some parents and community members were unable to get to venues in time to sign-up for live testimony due to work and/or family schedules. Parents who were able to give live testimony noted:

• excessive time for standardized test-taking;
• a narrowed curriculum, especially in the days and weeks before testing days;
• equity concerns between the paper-based test and the computer-based test;
• questions about the validity of the new test
• lack of clarity about what they wanted to know about the new test and what they would be responsible for if schools and classrooms shift to online learning and testing;  

I've taken several practice maths, finding it challenging at times to "drag and drop" parts of equations into the answer box, often located on a different part of the screen that is unseen when answering the problem. "Screen freeze" was frequent and work not "saved" when this occurred. These might be frustrating for some students (results of a student survey state that 32% of students found this to be true), but perhaps issues such as these could be ameliorated over time.

Questions I still have about the PARCC:

• Is this the right test? Rather, is there such a thing as a "right" test?
• If implemented, how much autonomy and control will Massachusetts have regarding specific testing features?
• What is our vision for 21st c learning?
• What do families need to know? What is the outreach to all families about the changing educational landscape?
• If PARCC represents "next-gen" assessments, what's the implementation process to ensure districts, schools, and classrooms are also next-gen, with instruction, professional development, and technology aligned?
• What resources do teachers and teams need to access high quality training? How much time is necessary with peers to collaborate, brainstorm, and share best practices?
• Are resources for professional development adequate? Do they ensure great instruction for every child no matter who they are, where they live, what language they speak, or how they present?
• Which is more important for students: to be engaged in their careers or to be work ready for their careers?

- - -
Notes, Quotes, tweets
* To read the PARCC Position Paper referenced above, it's currently posted on the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents website: go to Professional Development and scroll down to "Conditions and Considerations for a New Generation of Student Assessment in Massachusetts".

Note that a final public comment session will be held at Malden High School auditorium Monday, November 16 from 4:00-7:00 PM - this is in lieu of a public comment period at the regular Board meeting Tuesday, November 17 beginning at 8:30 AM.

If we teach today's students as we did yesterday's, we rob them of tomorrow.
~ John Dewey

I think the most important thing that young people should be taught at school is how they can decide what they're being taught is true.
~ Harold Kroto, 1996 Nobel Prize recipient

Looking forward to @karinchenoweth's series with educators on using data to improve: http://t.co/6R7QRi6eSX via @HuffPostEd #eddata #k12

— Carnegie Foundation (@CarnegieFdn) October 2, 2015

Complicating MCAS vs. #PARCC decision in MA, new study shows two tests equally good at predicting college readiness. http://t.co/xqOjasdEkr

— Michael Jonas (@bostonjonas) October 13, 2015

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.

Public Hearing on PARCC

The Board of ESE will hold it's fifth and final Public Hearing on PARCC - I look forward to attending:

Tuesday, July 7, 2015
Springfield Technical Community College
Top of Our City Conference Center
4:00-7:00 PM

If you have not had a chance to attend and comment in person, or to offer written testimony, please consider doing so. I am grateful to all who have submitted their thoughtful commentary, written and oral. Over the Summer I will be reflecting on all of the comments received.

Resources about PARCC have been posted to the Department's website.

Prioritizing

On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 I will attend my fourth regular state Board of Education meeting. Meetings are public, of course, and are recorded, but are not broadcast live, which is different from many School Committee meetings across the Commonwealth.

Following that first regular Board meeting in September, I realized it would be valuable for me to prioritize my time and energy as I become more familiar with this role. I decided to put my energy in three areas:

1. The Dever School turn-around
2. Proposed Updates to Regulations on Time-out and Restraint and
3. FY16 Budget/Chapter 70

1. The Dever School Turn-around.

Paul A. Dever Elementary School,
(photo: Boston Public Schools)

The Dever School is a K-5 elementary school in Boston,
designated as a Level 5 "chronically underperforming school" (Spring, 2014). This being a new development for the Dever School, the Department of ESE, and a turn-around partner (Blueprint Schools Network), and also co-terminous with my Board appointment, I thought it useful to follow the school's progress until it exits Level 5 status...which raises the question: How does that happen? I visited the school with the Commissioner and other ESE staff on Friday, October 31. I learned that all but one (1) staff member are new. Yes - ALL but ONE. I have some questions about what input the Board has had regarding policies being implemented in this turnaround. It is clear that the Board voted the Lawrence Schools into State [Department] Receivership in November 2013, but Level 5 Schools? I think the Board should have much more of a role in that process and determination. More about that in a future post.

2. Proposed Updates to Regulations on Time-out and Restraint.

In September, the Board was introduced to the Proposed Updates to Regulations on Time-out and Restraint. The regulations (603 CMR 46.00 and 603 CMR18.00) haven't been updated since they were approved by the then Board in 2001. The regs impact public education programs, including those that operate under Chapter 766-approved public and private day and residential programs. The Board will vote on them at the next meeting, December 16, 2014. Since the Board's vote in September to open Public Comment on the proposed amendments, I have met and spoken with numerous stakeholders, including staff at the New England Center for Children, the Nashoba Learning Group, and Melmark New England, as well as with individual and groups of parents to discuss the impact the proposed regulations (specifically, those concerning restraint) could have on their programs, staff, and children.

3. FY16 Budget/Chapter 70.

First meeting of FBRC
(photo: mas)

I was pleased to have been appointed to the Board's Budget Sub-committee this September. Two meetings were held (10/17 & 11/10) to review the Commissioner's FY16 budget priorities. On December 1, 2014, the Board voted to approve the priorities and submitted a FY16 Budget request of just over $5 billion to the Executive Office of Education. Chapter 70 of the M.G.L. makes up 87.83% of ESE's $5 billion budget (General Administration is 0.33% of the budget; as of September the Department had 499 FTEs). For a number of years now, advocates and stakeholders, including the Massachusetts PTA, Massachusetts Association of School Committees, and Massachusetts Teachers Association, have submitted public testimony in support of an adequacy study of Chapter 70 aid to Massachusetts cities and Towns.  The General Court authorized the Foundation Budget Review Commission (FBRC) as part of its FY15 Budget. An initial meeting was held at the State House on October 9, 2014. Since then, the Commission has been hearing from the Public in regional Public Hearings across the Commonwealth. Dates and locations for Public Hearings are posted in the right-hand sidebar of this site and below:

Foundation Budget Review Commission Public Hearings:
Monday, November 17 | North Shore, Danvers, 4:30 PM
Monday, December 15 | South Coast, Somerset, 4:30 PM
Saturday, January 10 | Western MA, Location TBD, 11:00 AM
Saturday, January 24 | Central MA, Location TBD, 11:00 AM
Saturday, February 7 | Cape, Location TBD, 11:00 AM
Monday, March 9 | Boston, Location TBD, 4:30 PM