Access and Equity Policy: What To Do Next?

Peggy Freedson has laid out a detailed look at the issues surrounding implementation of the new Access and Equity policy. read the Village Green essay here: http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/freedson-stronger-early-education-key-access-equity-policy/

Oh dear, she said phonics in the essay.

tjohn said:
Oh dear, she said phonics in the essay.

?? That is your takeaway

Ms. Freedson writes: "In our district as around the country, achievement gaps among demographic groups start early and tend to widen over time. To translate access into equity, then, we must come together as a district and continue to strengthen our early education programs so that all of our students enter middle and high school with the foundational knowledge, literacy and math skills they need to reach their highest potential."

Could someone at the last debate tonight please ask her how she views how her running mates voted at the March 16th school board meeting? Wayne Eastman and Madhu Pai voted against a preliminary budget that provided more resources for elementary education, specifically at Seth Boyden, where student needs are greatest. This was a budget that the majority of the board supported. Eastman and Pai's vote came after desperate and eloquent pleas at several board meetings by the school's PTA presidents pointing out the need precisely for reading intervention in the early grades. Their vote seems to fly right in the face of Ms. Freedson's statement. What would she have to say about their votes?

I cannot make this debate. Would someone please ask her?

mod said:

tjohn said:
Oh dear, she said phonics in the essay.

?? That is your takeaway

Hardly. I was just reminded of intense discussion on the role of phonics years ago.

Johngillam189 said:
Ms. Freedson writes: "In our district as around the country, achievement gaps among demographic groups start early and tend to widen over time. To translate access into equity, then, we must come together as a district and continue to strengthen our early education programs so that all of our students enter middle and high school with the foundational knowledge, literacy and math skills they need to reach their highest potential."
Could someone at the last debate tonight please ask her how she views how her running mates voted at the March 16th school board meeting? Wayne Eastman and Madhu Pai voted against a preliminary budget that provided more resources for elementary education, specifically at Seth Boyden, where student needs are greatest. This was a budget that the majority of the board supported. Eastman and Pai's vote came after desperate and eloquent pleas at several board meetings by the school's PTA presidents pointing out the need precisely for reading intervention in the early grades. Their vote seems to fly right in the face of Ms. Freedson's statement. What would she have to say about their votes?
I cannot make this debate. Would someone please ask her?

As posted the last time you spewed this in another thread Ms. Pai discussed in the Budget discussion that preceded the vote that she favored giving Seth Boyden more robust support in the Budget in lieu of the ineffective 1x per week elementary foreign language and she asked Administration to go back and really think about ways to make World Language more meaningful in Middle School.

There is a lot in this essay ,which offers a detailed look at what implementation might consist of. Have Ms. Maini and Mr. Sabin any substance to add?

tjohn said:

mod said:

tjohn said:
Oh dear, she said phonics in the essay.

?? That is your takeaway

Hardly. I was just reminded of intense discussion on the role of phonics years ago.

Oh, misunderstood. Ms. Maini seemed to take some exception to Phonics in her SEPAC response so I thought you were alluding to that. Yeah I remember the language wars. Don't want to go back to that

That March 16th vote was about money for Seth Boyden. Everyone who attended or watched those board meetings would know that. They would hear the two PTA co-President's wrenching pleas for additional resources for their school. Seth Boyden is the elementary school in the district where the achievement gap can most effectively be addressed. It has the highest (and growing) percentage of free-and-reduced-lunch children in our district who start school without the advantages that children from higher-income families have. If school board candidates are serious about addressing the achievement gap, then allocating additional resources to this school for early grade academic intervention would be an obvious policy choice. This is what Ms. Freedson's seems to be calling for in her statement. I'm curious how would she respond to her running mates vote? Votes on budgetary priorities reflect values. Elections are a time to hold incumbents accountable for their voting record.

We get it. Seriously. We do.

Johngillam189 said:
That March 16th vote was about money for Seth Boyden. Everyone who attended or watched those board meetings would know that. They would hear the two PTA co-President's wrenching pleas for additional resources for their school. Seth Boyden is the elementary school in the district where the achievement gap can most effectively be addressed. It has the highest (and growing) percentage of free-and-reduced-lunch children in our district who start school without the advantages that children from higher-income families have. If school board candidates are serious about addressing the achievement gap, then allocating additional resources to this school for early grade academic intervention would be an obvious policy choice. This is what Ms. Freedson's seems to be calling for in her statement. I'm curious how would she respond to her running mates vote? Votes on budgetary priorities reflect values. Elections are a time to hold incumbents accountable for their voting record.

And elections are a time to evaluate the substance candidates bring to the table beyond the pablum of "child centered education".

By the way, does Ms. Maini and Mr. Sabin favor further deleveling at our High School? That would be an excellent question to ask at tonight's debate.

No offense @johngillam, but not everything is about Seth Boyden.

Really interesting piece by Freedson.

I'm not an educator, but she clearly did a lot of thorough research into the school district for what she proposes. I like her proposals about open enrollment and online syllabi as ways to execute the access policy.

[ EDIT ]

Of course not everything is about Seth Boyden. But that vote on resources for Seth Boyden IS about equity, the racial achievement gap, and early childhood education. Isn't that what Ms. Freedson is advocating for in her statement titled: "Stronger Early Education is Key" to equity and access? Isn't the incumbents' vote against providing additional resources for stronger early education at Seth Boyden a reflection that they don't really support what Ms. Freedson (and they themselves in their campaign rhetoric) are advocating?

For anyone who has never met Peggy Freedson, I urge you to do so! She is one of the brightest, most caring, most thoughtful and approachable people I know. (plus, she's my neighbor) She has a true passion for education and we would be incredibly lucky to have her on the BOE.

alp said:

I'm not an educator, but she clearly did a lot of thorough research into the school district for what she proposes. I like her proposals about open enrollment and online syllabi as ways to execute the access policy.
Also very much on board with her thoughts about our elementary writing program.

I like most of what Freedson proposes/champions in her piece. The online availability of MS & HS course syllabi is a great idea that I would extend to ES as well.

Buttressing K-5 curriculum to help level the field in upper grades makes sense, though it will take significant training and buy-in from the teachers and district curriculum administrators to execute her ideas. It also doesn't address one significant driver of the MS and HS gap: many under-prepared students who enter the district in MS and HS. I would be curious to see how they will be assessed and supported.

While I could've done without the gratuitous adulation for her running mates, Freedson gets points in my book for taking the time to lay out her specific proposals.

Johngillam189 said:
Of course not everything is about Seth Boyden. But that vote on resources for Seth Boyden IS about equity, the racial achievement gap, and early childhood education. Isn't that what Ms. Freedson is advocating for in her statement titled: "Stronger Early Education is Key" to equity and access? Isn't the incumbents' vote against providing additional resources for stronger early education at Seth Boyden a reflection that they don't really support what Ms. Freedson (and they themselves in their campaign rhetoric) are advocating?

I think you've made your point. No need to push it so far that it undermines your goal.

Xavier67: you have not pushed it too far. No idea what Johngillam189 is talking about. What else did she say?

I am very curious to hear other candidates' thoughts not only on the A&E policy but on big-picture issues like future direction of the district in educational philosophy, curriculum evolution, stand.testing, and the fundamental shift in thinking about the goals of public education.

xavier67 said:
I am very curious to hear other candidates' thoughts not only on the A&E policy but on big-picture issues like future direction of the district in educational philosophy, curriculum evolution, stand.testing, and the fundamental shift in thinking about the goals of public education.

Great questions!

No idea what Johngillam189 is talking about.

I'm talking about holding elected officials accountable for what they say vs. how they vote.

Johngillam189 said:

I'm talking about holding elected officials accountable for what they say vs. how they vote.

But as Mod just explained,

"Ms. Pai discussed in the Budget discussion that preceded the vote that she favored giving Seth Boyden more robust support in the Budget in lieu of the ineffective 1x per week elementary foreign language and she asked Administration to go back and really think about ways to make World Language more meaningful in Middle School."

What do you want to hold them accountable for? Is it really not giving SB more money?

They say they are for access, rigor and judicious spending. Looks like that's exactly what they advised the admin to pursue.

Equity.

To give context to Mr. Gillam's myopic and repetitive comments, per the Village Green articles at the time, what was being voted on was part of an overall operating budget of 2.41%, which required a tax increase. They were not voting on one item, they were voting on an overall budget, some of which was for additional funds requested by Seth Boyden for several things (not just one), including increased field trips and cultural arts. Some of the comments which Madhu Pai made following this vote: "It pains me that we board members spent so much time about needing to find `creative solutions' to our budget woes, and then defaulted to the one convenient solution we know - raising taxes. We can't tax our way out of a $20MM budget deficit. We can't hide our heads in the sand about needing to make painful cuts. We can't continue to stop just short of asking Administration to dig deeper and find those creative solutions."

"someone needs to speak up for all the people who weren't there - maybe because they're at their second job, struggling to pay the mortgage or rent so that their kids can live here and have the chance at a good education. You can't simultaneously talk about helping disadvantaged children, and then price their parents (and many others) out of the district. But that's exactly what we set in motion tonight."

Back on topic, Freedson (who did not vote on this budget) has some terrific (and specific!) suggestions for improving Language Arts instruction, particularly at the elementary level, in this piece. I've noticed some of the other candidates are not specific or forthcoming about what they would do if elected. I have no idea what it means to "put the needs of all children first," especially since that also means that no children would come first.

"You can't simultaneously talk about helping disadvantaged children, and then price their parents (and many others) out of the district. But that's exactly what we set in motion tonight."

Let's be clear: This was a modest increase, in response to the very immediate and dire needs of an increasing number of children reading below grade level one elementary school. (The public speaks statements by teachers and parents from Seth Boyden are worth listening to). In fact, the tax burden for families would have increased by very little--$5-$15, and it was going directly into the classroom, helping so many children. Ms. Pai's statement seems disingenuous to me. Spreading the tax burden among all the families in our community to help address the achievement gap is what we're talking about. I understand that we have an unsustainable budgetary situation, where property taxes increase every year, but not enough of an increase to avoid cutting educational programs. This is unsustainable. It is a long-term problem and absolutely must be addressed with creative solutions. But Ms. Pai has been on the board for 3.5 years. What has she done to address this sustainability problem? Our district doesn't even have an in-house grant writer, let alone any forward-looking initiatives to address the budgetary crisis. I don't see anything in Ms. Pai's record that shows she has done anything on this score. If I didn't just read her statement here, I wouldn't have thought to look. It seems to me the least she could do is to vote to help alleviate this short-term, immediate need with a modest expenditure of funds.

I'll stop now, as I'm obviously I am annoying people, but perhaps only the Eastman supporters?

David Heumer made the powerful argument at the March 16th board meeting for why providing this funding would actually SAVE taxpayer dollars over the long term. As he said: "We do not have a low tax alternative." "Incrementally higher taxes" to provide services for worthy academic programs makes sense for taxpayers.

"Any money that you don't spend now...makes next year's decisions harder...Why would you not use all of the tax cap until the needs of our children are met?"

This argument seems to have convinced Mr. Bennett to vote for this modest increase. Why not Mr. Eastman and Ms. Pai?

Here are Mr. Heumer's powerful and persuasive remarks: Fast forward to 3:34:50

http://somatv.pegcentral.com/player.php?video=fb86e74a6c17b469c39f1adecc8c92bf

Kudos to Ms Pai for trying to take a stand against our unsustainable and oppressive tax burden.

http://villagegreennj.com/schools-kids/board-ed-passes-streamlined-goals-defeats-pai-motion-cap-tax-hike-2/

"Board 1st Vice President Madhu Pai proposed a motion to eliminate language that she said promotes the board’s ability to raise property taxes above the state-mandated 2% operating budget tax cap."

"The board voted 4-3 with one abstention against the measure, with Pai, Eastman and Donna Smith in favor and Elizabeth Baker, Maureen Jones, Stephanie Lawson-Muhammad and Johanna Wright opposed."

Johngillam189 said:
But Ms. Pai has been on the board for 3.5 years. What has she done to address this sustainability problem? Our district doesn't even have an in-house grant writer, let alone any forward-looking initiatives to address the budgetary crisis. I don't see anything in Ms. Pai's record that shows she has done anything on this score.

I think I'll wait for Mr. Bennett's version of why he voted as he had. I highly doubt it had anything to do with the sage advice of Mr. Huemer who never met a tax increase he didn't like.

You are right that your myopic tirades are getting tiresome and I actually noticed a few of your own team's supporters chiming in as such on this thread which is after all, about Dr. Freedson's detailed and substantive look at the actual implementation of a very important policy change Our district is about to embark on

Johngillam189 said:
David Heumer made the powerful argument at the March 16th board meeting for why providing this funding would actually SAVE taxpayer dollars over the long term. As he said: "We do not have a low tax alternative." "Incrementally higher taxes" to provide services for worthy academic programs makes sense for taxpayers.
"Any money that you don't spend now...makes next year's decisions harder...Why would you not use all of the tax cap until the needs of our children are met?"
This argument seems to have convinced Mr. Bennett to vote for this modest increase. Why not Mr. Eastman and Ms. Pai?
Here are Mr. Heumer's powerful and persuasive remarks: Fast forward to 3:34:50
http://somatv.pegcentral.com/player.php?video=fb86e74a6c17b469c39f1adecc8c92bf

I decided to vote for a larger tax increase in advance of budget season. I knew the economy was doing a little better, the local real estate market was very strong, and I knew that we would be facing another bad year of cuts. I made brief comments about a larger tax increase throughout budget season, voted to exceed 2.0% in opex spending after we refinanced and saved money on debt service, and then, at that March meeting, voted to exceed 2.0% in the all-in tax increase.

Although I accepted the larger tax increase for 2015-16 I have also been very critical of spending decisions the district makes that take money away from the classroom. I've criticized in spending on consultants and long-distance professional development (I don't think we need to send staff to CA). I have taken some potentially controversial stances on the need to reevaluate the Marshall-Jefferson pairing (no one has ever backed me on that) and even the costs of the consultant we needed to hire as part of our settlement with the OCR (no one backed me on that either). I was not in favor of the CHS pool either or continuing IB once teacher discontent was clear.

Pai and Eastman did not vote with me on the 2.1% all-in tax increase, they've also been critical of some of the non-classroom spending decisions the district makes. The two of them would see a reading specialist as a really meritorious expenditure (like we do), but would prefer that the money come from a less-prudent district expenditures rather than increasing the tax levy.

Wayne and Madhu are also people whose opinions change when the facts change. Wayne, for instance, accepted tax increases much bigger than 2.0% in 2010 and 2011 when our state aid was slashed by 80%.

Unless we faced an emergency, like getting our aid slashed again, I think using all of our adjustments and banked cap is a bad path to take. The adjustments are very significant - for 2014-15 we had over $900,000 in adjustments and banked cap. With the adjustments tax increases could exceed 3% in some years. That figure is way above inflation and local economic growth and is a real blow to people because our taxes are already so insane. No sitting Board member has said we should use all of our adjustments.

Echoing MOD's statement, yes, this should be about Peggy Freedson's ideas on curriculum.

No matter who is on the BOE the district is going to be under a lot of budget pressure. We therefore have to really focus on making sure our curriculum, writing instruction, and literacy programs are as good as they possibly can be.

When it comes to curriculum there is no one better than Peggy Freedson.

When David Huemer

mod said:
I think I'll wait for Mr. Bennett's version of why he voted as he had. I highly doubt it had anything to do with the sage advice of Mr. Huemer who never met a tax increase he didn't like.
You are right that your myopic tirades are getting tiresome and I actually noticed a few of your own team's supporters chiming in as such on this thread which is after all, about Dr. Freedson's detailed and substantive look at the actual implementation of a very important policy change Our district is about to embark on

When David Huemer was on the Board of School Estimate, he could always be counted on to join with the three South Orange members in approving any special question to exceed the budget cap of 3%. (Those were also the Calabrese days who also never met a tax increase he didn't like.)

eta - Remember that the increase in the school budget goes into the base on which the next year's budget cap is determined, i.e., if the budget increase is 2.4%, the following year's budget cap will be based on the 2.4% increase, and it compounds.

Establishment of an open enrollment period of several weeks early in the school year similar to the “add-drop” period we now have on university campuses. This will allow students to attend classes at their chosen level, but to have the flexibility to move up or down levels to find the best fit.

In college, the flexibility to drop and add courses is restricted when times conflict or a class is closed because the room is filled. Also, weeks to decide is less of a bite out of a semester than it would be out of a quarter. Given that middle and high schools face scheduling challenges that colleges do not, any ideas on what would need to happen -- if anything -- to make Ms. Freedson's suggestion workable?