Cambridge Schools
(updated Saturday, March 6, 2021 4:59 PM)

Superintendent Salim to resign from Cambridge Public Schools at end of (school) year (Jan 12, 2021, Cambridge Chronicle)
In a letter to the CPS community, Salim said he would leave his post June 30 and the decision came after "deep personal reflection" and considering what is best for his family.

Rules of the School Committee 2020-2021 - Adopted January 6, 2020 (document says 2019-2020)
(Revised January 16, 2018) (Revised March 6, 2018) (Revised June 19, 2018)

Rules of the School Committee 2018-2019 - Adopted January 1, 2018
(Revised January 16, 2018) (Revised March 6, 2018) (Revised June 19, 2018)

Updated Proposal for Reopening Schools: August 4, 2020 [Link]

Dear CPS Community -

I am writing to provide an update on my proposal for reopening schools this fall. Here is a brief summary of my updated proposal, which the School Committee will discuss tonight (Tuesday) at 5pm and consider for approval on Thursday at 5pm.

Proposal:

• CPS would run a remote learning model for Grades 4-12.
• CPS would provide an in-person school option as a choice for some families of our youngest learners, who are at lower risk of infection of COVID-19 (preschool to 3rd grade). At grades 2 and 3, this option will have limited in-person capacity.
• CPS would provide an in-person school option as a choice for families whose students have specialized needs, including students in substantially separate special education and sheltered English immersion programs (preschool-grade 12).
• CPS would open in stages to provide more time for educator planning and training, to provide time for students and families to practice new routines, and to focus first on relationships and student well-being. Students will begin school with half days on September 16 and transition to full days on October 5.
• CPS has put in place significant precautions to keep students, staff, and families safe and healthy, including preparing facilities, improving air quality, providing personal protective equipment, and employing hygiene practices to minimize transmissions.

There is no perfect plan to reopen schools this fall. Every approach will leave some families and staff dissatisfied and concerned. My revised proposal attempts to reflect feedback from the community while providing some families with safe in-person learning opportunities for students with specialized needs.

This is an important decision for our community and I know that we will come together to support students, families, and staff this school year. Please see the upcoming list of community meetings and a more detailed proposal below.

Sincerely, Kenneth N. Salim, Ed.D.
Superintendent

Upcoming Community Meetings:

• August 4 | School Committee meeting (Live-streamed at www.cpsd.us and broadcast on Cambridge Educational Access TV (CEATV) Channel 98/99)
• August 5 | 2PM: School Committee Sub-Committee: Special Education and Students Supports
• August 10 | 4PM: Town Hall: CRLS Families (Tentative)
• August 11 | 11AM: CPS Staff Q&A Session
• August 11 | 3PM: Town Hall with Special Education Families, Office of Student Services
• August 11 | 5:30PM: Joint City Council and School Committee Roundtable
• August 12 | 4:30PM: Town Hall: Spanish-speaking families
• August 12 | 5:30PM: Town Hall: Haitian Creole speaking families
• August 13 | 4:30PM: Town Hall: Bengali speaking families
• August 13 | 5:30PM: Town Hall: Amharic speaking families

Proposal Details:
Feedback from community on previous proposals:

• Acknowledge that students, families, and staff of color are at increased risk of COVID-19
• Address the potentially higher transmission rate for older students, ages 10 - 17
• Define metrics to determine if CPS schools will open partially or completely Start fully remote with exceptions for students with increased needs
• The previously proposed model that had students rotating in some time in school with some time at home during the week potentially created increased exposure, was difficult for educators to plan for, and could leave students insufficiently supported on remote days.
• Bringing some students into school means there would be different expectations for some staff.
• A more equity driven approach would provide some students with the greatest needs fully in-person learning instead of providing all students with some in-person learning.

Detailed proposal

• Remote learning (at home) will be the default option for all families.
• Some families will have the choice to “opt-in” to in-person learning at school four times per week. We are prioritizing students who are at lower risk of transmitting COVID-19 risk and students who have specialized needs:
  • All students in preschool and JK - 1
  • All students in substantially separate special education programs (preschool, grades JK-12)
  • All students in Sheltered English Immersion programs (grades JK-12)
• Every elementary school building will open up to two classrooms for Grade 2 and Grade 3. Seats will be prioritized for students experiencing homelessness, students with disabilities, English language learners, and former English language learners. If additional seats remain, schools will identify students most in need of in-person instructional opportunities based on district criteria.
• All students ages 10+ (grades 4 - 12) will engage in remote learning at home.

Staged approach:

• Stage 1, Planning (Sept 1 - 11): Staff planning and training
• Stage 2, Planning & Family Conferences (September 14 - 18): Beginning September 16, students begin at-home / online learning experiences in the afternoon.
• Stage 3, Half Days (September 21 - October 2): Focus on well-being, building relationships and SEL skills, practicing safety routines. For those students in-person, grab & go lunch
• Stage 4, Full Days, with Wednesday Half Days (October 5)
• Stage 5, Reflection & Future Plans (Mid-late October)

Safety Precautions:

School/Classroom Setup

• Desks & tables spaced 6 feet apart
• Sinks in every classroom, additional sanitizer in the rooms
• Virus shields placed in some high traffic areas
• Quarantine rooms in every building
• 10 -12 people in typical classroom (depends on the size of the room)

Air Quality

• Most buildings have up-to-date HVAC systems
• CO2 meters for all buildings to check air quality
• 200 HEPA Air scrubbers to clean air
• Engineering firm advising on HVAC practices
• Window box fans to circulate fresh air
• Each classroom at least one easily operable window

Cleaning

• Additional custodial staff being for daily cleaning & sanitizing
• Purchased electrostatic sprayers to disinfect buildings
• Removed things that are difficult to clean or disinfect
• Cleaning & disinfectant supplies for every classroom

Masks, Face Shields, Gloves

• CPS has ordered 230,000 masks; 5,000 child-size face shields; and 1,000,000 pairs of gloves.

Testing

• Working with city health department to provide testing for all staff before school starts

Note (Feb 10, 2019): This page is currently being updated VERY infrequently - primarily because your Editor rarely has time to attend School Committee meetings or otherwise pay attention to matters relating to the Cambridge Public Schools. If you are a rational human being who follows the Cambridge Public Schools who might like the opportunity to use this space constructively, let me know. Political neutrality is essential. If you can live with that, let's talk. - Robert Winters

Cambridge Schools Update (Aug 11, 2015)

Participate in a focus group/community forum on Wednesday, August 26; Thursday, August 27; Monday, August 31; and Tuesday, September 1, 2015 to help develop a Leadership Profile for the next Superintendent. All community members are invited to participate in one of the Superintendent Leadership Profile Focus Groups and Community Forums. Sessions are scheduled for parents/guardians, students, teachers, staff, administrators, school council leadership, union leadership, family liaisons, community and business partners, members of the clergy, higher ed representatives, and other stakeholders. A number of community-wide forums are also scheduled which are open for all to attend. See focus group schedule
Superintendent Search Community Flyer

Cambridge Schools Update (July 29, 2015)

The Cambridge School Committee welcomes community involvement and is seeking to convene a Superintendent Search Interview Committee (SSIC) – representative of stakeholders in the Cambridge Public Schools – to screen candidate resumes and conduct preliminary interviews of candidates for the position of Superintendent of Schools. Interested? See the interview committee self-nomination form

The Superintendent Search Committee would like your input as they seek to hire a new superintendent. Take the survey

Mar 26, 2012 - Cambridge Public Schools (CPS) Budget and Enrollment History: FY2000 to FY2013
(by Cambridge Family Information Network (CFIN), http://cambridgefamilyinfonetwork.com.

Jan 17, 2012 - The Cambridge Public Schools Academic Challenge Plan for the new upper schools is now available. You can view it at http://rwinters.com/school/AcademicChallenge2012Jan16.pdf. You may also wish to read the Appendices at http://rwinters.com/school/AcademicChallengeAppendices.pdf.

Personally, I'm primarily interested in the plans for mathematics in the upper schools and the high school, and it's hard to discern from this plan what exactly will happen. There appears to be a rigidity of thought regarding sticking with "differentiated instruction" without any mention of what might happen if the difference in skills within a classroom turns out to be too great. There can be a breaking point where all the "professional development" in the world cannot yield appropriate instruction for all students. This report indicates only that "the Math Academic Honors option will offer students the choice of selecting honors on a unit-by-unit basis rather than enrolling students in a separate honors course." A quick read seems to suggest that the plan is to merely direct advanced mathematics learners to supplement their education with online options - something that advanced mathematics learners may well be doing regardless of the plans of the Cambridge Public Schools.

The plan will be presented at the January 17 School Committee meeting (starting at 6:00pm) and voted on in early February.

I am very interested to hear what others may have to say about this plan. - Robert Winters

Comments?

My Follow Up Comments & Questions (based on the Jan 17 presentation):

1) I would like to hear more details about the "Subject Acceleration Protocol". It sounds almost like an IEP (individualized education program) for advanced learners. What are the possible choices that could be proposed for such students who are several years above grade level?

2) What will happen if the plans for systemwide "differentiated instruction in heterogeneous classrooms" fails to deliver on its promises and the result is primarily chaos and mediocrity? The plan leans heavily on teachers to carry out this plan - and the teachers were barely consulted in the development of the plan. It's easy to claim that "professional development" can prepare all teachers to carry this out, but the reality may prove otherwise. Is there a backup plan?

3) The Scholars Challenge outlined in the proposal is terribly vague. Much of it sounds like things I thought any school system would already be doing routinely.

4) The Math Honors Option seems somewhat contrived - an acknowledgement that the Cambridge Public Schools must do something with accelerated students while remaining strapped to the mast of its ideology. One School Committee member noted that it's a very real possibility that there will be two kinds of students - one group who chooses the honors option for every unit where this is permitted and another group who never choose the honors option. The system abhors sorting students by ability, but the students will likely do it on their own (and have no problem doing so).

5) Might there be a conflict between the Math Honors Option and the Subject Acceleration Protocol? I can easily imagine students first choosing the (embedded) honors option and then deciding to seek a more appropriate solution via the Subject Acceleration Protocol. Will acceleration be denied by school staff in order to make the embedded honors option work?

6) How exactly will the Math Honors Option be engineered? Will the Honors students gather in a separate room for these selected units? One School Committee member seemed horrified at the thought - even though this may be the only practical and sensible way to engineer this option. What will happen if there's a great disparity in the number of students choosing the Honors option? Is there sufficient flexibility in the design to manage this?

7) What will be the protocol for dealing with noncooperative/disruptive students in heterogeneous classrooms? You can talk about beliefs and "habits of scholarship" and "creative environments conducive to learning", but you cannot wish away problematic behavior.

8) What exactly is meant by culturally competent teaching? How does this differ from what teachers do now?

9) Is there a transition plan for students who will be in the 7th or 8th Grade this coming fall? [The new upper schools will consist of Grades 6, 7, and 8.]

10) How does the new plan mesh with the high school curriculum and protocols?

11) Most people will agree that choice of electives and "leveling" of classes becomes appropriate at some point. What is this point? The underlying belief in this Academic Challenge Plan is that such choices are not appropriate at Grades 6, 7, and 8 (and earlier). Is Grade 9 and the beginning of high school the point where student choice becomes permissible?

Superintendent's Contract between Cambridge School Committee and Jeffrey M. Young, 2011-2015 (HTML)

Superintendent's Contract between Cambridge School Committee and Jeffrey M. Young, 2009-2012 (HTML)

A lesson in Advanced mis-Placement (Junia Yearwood, Boston Globe, Apr 25, 2011)

Mar 8, 2011 - 'Upper school' proposal goes on with minor changes (Marc Levy)

Here are the main changes:

1) The revised Agenda now proposes an upper school campus in the Cambridgeport/Riverside neighborhood rather than two campuses in East Cambridge.

2) The revised Innovation Agenda district configuration provides JK-­8 immersion opportunities for students in the Amigos two-­way immersion school and for students in the Ola program.

3) The King School JK-5 will remain at the Putnam Avenue building.

4) The Amigos School JK-8 will relocate to the Upton Street building.

5) King upper school students will attend the Putnam Avenue campus (rather than the Rindge Avenue campus).

6) Morse upper school students will attend the Putnam Avenue campus (rather than the Spring Street campus).

7) Kennedy-Longfellow upper school students will attend the Putnam Avenue campus (rather than the Spring Street campus).

8) The Ola Program JK-8 will remain at the Cambridge Street building.

Revised Upper School Campuses & Feeder Schools

March 8 revisions (PDF)

Feb 1 (schedule updated Mar 8) - Cambridge Superintendent of Schools Jeffrey Young presented the proposed Innovation Agenda to the School Committee on February 1, 2011. Among the many aspects to the plan, the core recommendation is that all 12 Cambridge elementary programs would become Kindergarten through Grade 5 schools grouped into 4 groups of 3 schools which would each feed a common upper school (Grades 6 through 8) that would share space in the largest school buildings in the system.

The Report    The Appendix File    The Powerpoint Presentation

The groups:

(1) Cambrideport School, Fletcher-Maynard Academy, and King Open would feed the Cambridge Street Upper School (shared with King Open)

(2) Baldwin School, King School, and Peabody School would feed the Rindge Avenue Upper School (shared with Peabody)

(3) Amigos School, Kennedy-Longfellow School, and Morse School would feed the Spring Street Upper School (shared with Kennedy-Longfellow)

(4) The Graham & Parks School, Haggerty School, and Tobin School would feed the Vassal Lane Upper School (shared with Tobin)

In addition, the Ola Program would be moved to the King/Amigos building - the home of the district's three language immersion choices. The Graham and Parks School and the Tobin Montessori School would switch buildings.

Numerous factors were involved in these choices, but geographic proximity and the location of the four largest buildings were major factors.

Every plan has its positive, negative, intended, and unintended consequences, but this is overall a solid and simple proposal. Already, staff and parents of some schools are expressing concern about possible displacement in order to accommodate the new configuration. One can also imagine parents making choices for elementary school programs based on what they perceive as preferred upper school choices down the line. The simple fact is that no matter what plan was proposed, there was guaranteed to be some who would seek to protect what they now have and others who would figure out how best to game the system to get what they perceive as the best deal for their children.

A series of meetings will now take place culminating in a School Committee vote anticipated to occur on Tues, March 1. Here's the amended schedule:

Thurs, Feb 3, 6:00pm - School Committee Roundtable Meeting - no public comment (City Hall, Sullivan Chamber)

Wed, Feb 9, 7:00-9:00pm - Public Town Hall Meeting (Frisoli Youth Center, 61 Willow Street)

Thurs, Feb 10, 6:00-8:00pm - Public Town Hall Meeting (West Cambridge Youth Center, 680 Huron Ave.)

Tues, Feb 15, 6:00pm - School Committee Public Hearing (City Hall, Sullivan Chamber)

Tues, Mar 1, 6:00pm - Roundtable School Committee meeting on Innovation Agenda (City Hall, Sullivan Chamber)

Tues, Mar 8

6:00pm   School Committee Roundtable meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

Superintendent presents final Innovation Agenda proposal

Wed, Mar 9

6:00pm   School Committee Budget Presentation  (Sullivan Chamber)

Sat, Mar 12

9:00-11:30am   School Committee Public Comment on Innovation Agenda  (Sullivan Chamber)

Mon, Mar 14

5:30-8:00pm   School Committee Public Comment on Innovation Agenda  (Sullivan Chamber)

Tues, Mar 15

6:00pm   School Committee meeting  (Sullivan Chamber)

- VOTE on Superintendent's Recommendations for "Innovation Agenda"

Feb 1, 2011 - Cambridge may reduce its middle schools to 4 (by Meghan Irons, Boston Globe, Feb 1)

If the School Committee meeting tonight goes on as planned in spite of the weather, School Superintendent Jeff Young will present his proposal to reconfigure the Cambridge Public Schools to provide better and more consistent educational opportunities for students in the middle school grades 6 through 8. The proposal is not expected to go without challenge as many elementary school parents remain skeptical of any changes to the familiar K-8 model.

Jan 17, 2011 - Current district model draws support in ongoing school forums (Mark Levy's blog)

Cambridge School Goals for 2010-2012   PDF version

Superintendent mulls changes that could transform Cambridge schools - Brock Parker, boston.com Cambridge, January 12, 2011

School restructuring to get five hearings - By Marc Levy's blog, January 10, 2011

Middle Grades Program - Recommendations of Jeffrey M. Young, Cambridge Superintendent of Schools, February 2, 2010

Cautious committee asks superintendent to flesh out middle school recommendation - By Marc Levy's blog, Feb 2, 2010

Cambridge School Committee Elections Near (by Sofia E. Groopman and Rediet T. Abebe, Harvard Crimson, Oct 27, 2009 )

Superintendent's Contract between Cambridge School Committee and Jeffrey M. Young (HTML)

2008-2009 Goals of the Cambridge School Committee and Administration

April 18, 2008 - Minding the Achievement Gap (by Vidya Viswanathan, Harvard Crimson)
Cambridge Public Schools focus on improving performance despite achievement discrepancy

April 4, 2008 - The Boston Globe yesterday reported that the current per pupil cost for the Cambridge Public Schools is $15,175 (compared to Waltham at $12,900; Somerville at $11,593; Watertown at $11,290; Boston at $10,872; Brookline at $10,546; Newton at $9,135; Lexington at $8,988; Belmont at $8,243; and Arlington at $8,225). However, in the 2007 municipal election campaign, several candidates said it was $23,000 per pupil. The greatschools website give the obviously wrong figure of $8,641. I found a 2003 chart from Alan Price on the cambridgepublic.us website that gives a range between $5,500 and $11,000 for various elementary schools. Metroprofiles.com puts the Cambridge figure at $17,551 in 2005. The Harvard Crimson in 2005 put the figure at about $15,000. For FY2004, the Crimson put the cost per pupil for regular education at $13,363. The Area 4 Newsletter said in 2002 that the projected cost per pupil was estimated to rise from $17,221 in 2002 to $21,419 in 2006. Councillors Toomey and Sullivan and City Manager Healy put the figure at $16,000 in 2000.

So, what's the accurate figure right now? Let me know.  I'm sure others would also like to know. - Robert Winters

March 19, 2008 - Who's Zoomin' Who? (Harvard Crimson story "School Super Urged to Stay")

The Cambridge School Committee, really three members and a mayor, appear to be crafting their own new brand of dishonesty. In January, the School Committee voted 4-3 to extend the contract of Superintendent of Schools Thomas Fowler-Finn, though they did not at that time specify a term for the contract extension. The devil may be in the lack of details. In the initial vote on contract extension, members Fred Fantini, Joe Grassi, Nancy Tauber, and newly elected mayor Denise Simmons voted for the contract extension. The opposing votes were Marc McGovern, Patricia Nolan, and Luc Schuster. Some (and this includes me) felt that Simmons' vote was tied to her getting the votes of her Council colleagues to become mayor. It's not unusual that the mayoral selection hinges on some understanding about how the selected mayor will act in his or her role as Chair of the School Committee.

There was some cause for concern at the time of the January contract vote that no term was specified. Cynics (and this includes me) worried that Simmons' deciding vote might have been just the formal conclusion of a deal with her City Council colleagues and that what followed might be a negotiation in which the proposed terms might be so minimal or unacceptable that it would amount to a de facto rejection. The fact that there has been no resolution after two months in what is absolutely a cut-and-dried question is an indication that this School Committee may not have any understanding of what constitutes an understanding. Simmons statement that “you don’t want to rush something that’s so important” is bewildering at best.

Though I have personally only gone to a couple of School Committee meetings this year, I have watched portions of several other meetings on TV. My impression is that this is one of the most dysfunctional groups to have ever occupied the seats in the Henrietta S. Attles Meeting Room. With two petulant children serving on the School Committee, I suppose this was to be expected. What we could use is some leadership from the mayor, but for that we may just have to wait and see. -- Robert Winters

June 22, 2007 - Survey of Parents Reveals School Shortcomings (by Paras Bhayani and Jamison Hill, Harvard Crimson, June 22, 2007)
Results point to school quality as explanation for declining enrollment

June 20, 2007 - MCAS Aces Fare Better in College, Study Finds - Low scorers are said to struggle (by Peter Schworm, Boston Globe, June 20, 2007)
Warning: Opinion follows, read at your own risk -- Say what you will about the pros and cons of MCAS and the negative aspects of “teaching to the test,” but these results do appear to speak for themselves. [It should, however, be pointed out that this “study” may simply be confirming the rather obvious fact that students who “apply themselves,” as my teachers used to say, will generally do well on standardized exams and in college, and it is not the case that exams cause better college performance. Again, correlation does not imply causation.] My personal feeling is that “teaching to the test” is not necessary to achieve good MCAS results and is, in fact, a sign of laziness on the part of teachers and administrators. If you set high standards for students, most students will be able to achieve those standards. Conversely, if you set low standards or offer primarily touchy-feely crap and tell students how wonderful they are, you'll likely produce a high percentage of self-congratulating dolts. A primary problem with MCAS and public education, in my humble opinion, is that they must do a better job of shepherding underachieving students through school without penalizing high-achieving students. Not long ago, CRLS did exactly the opposite when they placed high-achieving students in classes that were far below their capabilities - all in the name of “equity.” Fortunately, to the best of my knowledge, the Cambridge Public Schools have stepped back from that precipice. - Robert Winters, June 20, 2007

After Nationwide Search, Local High School Picks One of Its Own
Acting chief Christopher Saheed is named Cambridge Rindge's permanent principal (Harvard Crimson, Dec 22, 2006)

617 Massachusetts Schools identified for improvement (Sept 13, 2006 Boston Globe) - The list includes several Cambridge schools, most notably the Tobin School which is listed as "restructuring" for mathematics. The Benjamin Bannekker Charter School is listed, though not with the rest of the Cambridge public schools, and is also facing restructuring. [I'm not really sure what all this means, by the way.] The Baldwin School had been on the list for "subgroups in math" but has been removed from the current list. Read more in the Globe article: More Schools Falling Short

Sept 5, 2006 - The Cambridge School Committee tonight voted 4-3 to extend Superintendent Thomas Fowler-Finn's contract for an additional year (through mid-2008). Voting in favor of the extension were Fred Fantini, Joe Grassi, Luc Schuster, and Nancy Walser. There was a lot of tension in the air as the committee members made statements pro and con prior to the vote. Perhaps the greatest attention was paid to Luc Schuster's remarks since he was expected to cast the deciding vote. Having followed this story for the last several months and wanting very much to see the contract extended, I was not immune to the tension. Though the vote did end up as I expected, the outcome was unclear right up to the point when Luc cast his vote. This was not an easy vote for any of the members of the School Committee. My hat's off to the members who made it happen - not just Luc for casting the deciding vote but to Joe and Fred for their efforts in crafting the extension and, of course, to Nancy Walser for understanding all along exactly what was at stake. Congratulations to Tom Fowler-Finn on the contract extension, and now let's all do what it takes to make the most of the Cambridge Public Schools. - Robert Winters
Luc Schuster	Nancy Walser	Fred Fantini	Joe Grassi
Sept 6, 2006 Boston Globe article: School chief is given contract in Cambridge (by Tracy Jan) Luc Schuster's statement on cambridgepublic.us (Sept 6, 2006, link expired) Sept 7, 2006 Cambridge Chronicle story: New school contract cuts Super powers (by Dawn Witlin)

Wed, Aug 30, 2006
6:00pm   Special School Committee meeting  (CRLS, Henrietta S. Attles Meeting Room)
By order of his honor(?), Mayor Kenneth E. Reeves, acting in accordance with chapter I, section 3 of the rules of the school committee, there will be a special meeting at 6:00pm Wednesday, August 30, 2006, in the Henrietta S. Attles meeting room, Cambridge Rindge and Latin School, 459 Broadway. The committee may convene in executive session for the purpose of discussing strategy preparation for contract negotiations with non-union personnel as an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining and/or litigation position of the school committee.

Translation: They still have not settled on a contract with Superintendent Thomas Fowler-Finn, though supposedly a new short-term contract extension is in the works and could be settled (in Executive Session) at this meeting. The speculation is that Mr. Reeves (as Chair of the committee) has been the main cause of the secrecy in this matter. It has been suggested that he has tried to buy time to either swing another vote against Fowler-Finn or make the contract terms so miserable that Fowler-Finn will choose a negotiated exit. There is also some evidence that staff in the Mayor's Office have been soliciting letters and e-mail from students and others in opposition to Fowler-Finn as part of Reeves' campaign to oust him.

Aug 18, 2006 -- School Committee Goes Private on Superintendent's Contract  (Harvard Crimson story by Paras Bhayani)

Aug 17, 2006 -- Chronicle contests secrecy  (Cambridge Chronicle story by Dawn Witlin)

Aug 16, 2006 -- New contract talks underway with Cambridge schools chief  (Boston Globe story by Tracy Jan - link expired)

July 28, 2006 - There's a well-written article by Paras Bhayani in today's Harvard Crimson on use (abuse?) of statistics in the debate over the renewal of the contract of Superintendent of Schools Thomas Fowler-Finn. This follows a Boston Globe letter by School Committee member Patty Nolan (July 25) and a Cambridge Chronicle letter (July 27) in Nolan's statistical crusade to banish Fowler-Finn from Cambridge. Perhaps the best summary of the situation is Paras Bhayani's closing paragraph:

THE REAL DEBATE

There is no doubt that during Fowler-Finn’s tenure, test scores have risen – by three points in ELA and by five points in math. There is also no doubt that they are still below the state average. And finally, there is no doubt that the administrative marks have improved substantially.

The true debate – the one for the School Committee and the public – is whether the speed of the improvements is adequate.

Fowler-Finn has compared the Cambridge Public Schools to an “ocean liner” in trying to highlight the difficulties in changing the system’s course. Nolan has argued that the system is small – with only one high school – and that it can be “turned around on a dime.”

Both sides have even cited influential educational research supporting their positions.

But unlike the debate over the EQA report, this debate cannot be settled by simply trying to make sense of statistics.

Jan 15, 2006 - Glenn Koocher's remarks at the Jan 2, 2006 School Committee Inauguration

Old news (before 2006)

Jan 11, 2004 - Fight the Charter - Information about what you can do to oppose the charter high school proposal of Paula Evans, et al.

For reference:
Feb 12, 2003 - In the February 2003 issue of the Phi Delta Kappan, the national education professionals journal, former CRLS Principal Paula Evans gives her take on her tenure at CRLS --- A Principal's Dilemmas: Theory and Reality of School Redesign by Paula M. Evans
The text was scanned from the magazine and reformatted.

May 13, 2003 - The Cambridge School Committee voted unanimously tonight (at midnight) to appoint: Dr. Thomas Fowler-Finn, Superintendent of the Fort Wayne Community Schools in Fort Wayne, Indiana as the new Superintendent of the Cambridge Public Schools effective August 1, 2003.

The school committee also voted to thank Carolyn Turk for her service as Acting Superintendent.

Apr 29, 2003 - The Cambridge School Committee tonight announced the 3 finalists for the new Superintendent of Schools. The finalists are:
Dr. Claudia L. Bach, current superintendent of schools in Andover, Massachusetts.
Dr. Thomas Fowler-Finn, Superintendent of the Fort Wayne Community Schools in Fort Wayne, Indiana
Dr. Mak Mitchell, Director of Community Learning for the Seattle Washington Public Schools

All finalists have LOCAL ties - Bach and Mitchell earned their Ed.D degrees from Harvard; and Fowler-Finn, formerly Superintendent of Schools in Haverhill, earned his doctoral degree from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

[The candidates were interviewed by designated Education Panel and Community Panel members on Fri, May 2, with public session interviews conducted by the Cambridge School Committee that same evening.]

School Committee votes to do nothing
Dec 17, 2002 - In a move that surprised no one, the Cambridge School Committee tonight voted to delay any decision on elementary school consolidation until at least next June and to delay any implementation until 2004. To their credit, School Committee members Alice Turkel and Nancy Walser did propose a partial action plan that would have closed the Harrington School next year and moved the King Open school into the Harrington building (as specified in the Superintendent's plan) with minimal disruption to the Harrington students. Ms. Turkel's motion also called for the closure of the Fitzgerald School a year later with a five-month process to determine the future of that school. (The Superintendent's plan calls for moving the Graham and Parks program into that building.)

However, Richard Harding's "moratorium" amendment, with friendly amendments from Mayor Sullivan prevailed. Once again, the Cambridge School Committee succeeded in doing the one thing it does best - Nothing.

Perhaps even more troubling than the School Committee's collective inability to alter the status quo is the contradictory message delivered by some members of the Cambridge City Council. On the one hand, the Council has unanimously endorsed a $2.6 million budget cut for the School Department and has called for the establishment of an independent advisory committee on public education, possibly the single most damning statement from the City Council to the School Committee in the last sixty years. Yet on the night of the vote to take action on school closures that would save money, four city councillors asked the School Committee to delay action.

Nancy Walser said this gave her "whiplash." She also noted that most of the members of the current City Council have served on the School Committee at some point and that they took no action when they were in a position to do so. To their credit, city councillors Ken Reeves and Henrietta Davis delivered a consistent message calling upon the School Committee to act without delay.

As a taxpaying citizen, all I see is another one-year extension of what has effectively been a ten-year moratorium on any meaningful action to make the elementary schools operate in a cost-effective way. Each time a plan or piece of a plan is presented, a reactionary lobby from one of the affected schools develops and the School Committee runs away at full speed. No wonder some people are calling for the replacement of this elected School Committee by an appointed one. For what it's worth, I think the problem lies more with the individuals who are elected than with the fact that they are elected rather than appointed.

Frankly, I'm disgusted. I see elected officials voting to dump taxpayer money down the toilet rather than make a difficult decision. This is not rocket science. Even more pathetic is the attitude of many of the parents who paraded to the microphone expressing their lack of faith in their own children's ability to adapt. To listen to these believers in a falling sky, one would think that the young people of Cambridge are incapable of adapting and thriving in any environment other than the status quo. The end result - do nothing. After all, "Cambridge has the money." - Robert Winters

Letter from CRLS School Committee member Curt Perry to the Cambridge School Committee

The following proposals were submitted to the Department of Education in September 2002.
(Both were not approved in this round of charter school applications but may be resubmitted at a later date.)
Prospectus for Cambridge Charter High School (submitted to the Dept. of Education, September 2002) [296KB PDF]
Prospectus for Amigos International Charter School (submitted to the Dept. of Education, September 2002) [963KB PDF]

Sept 19, 2002 - A class action complaint was filed on September 19 by 6 Holyoke students against the MCAS high stakes graduation requirement. The legal document is provided here (PDF, 65 pages) and is recommended reading for anyone concerned about the MCAS graduation requirement. It outlines the arguments (federal) against the high stakes portion of the law and provides some valuable research and analysis.    Class Action Complaint vs. MCAS

MCAS RESULTS (from the Boston Globe)

Spring 2002 CUE newsletter  [CUE = Cambridge United for Education]

May 21, 2002 - The Cambridge School Committee tonight voted 6-0-1 to change the name of the Agassiz School to the Maria Baldwin School. School Committee member Fred Fantini was absent for the vote.

April 23, 2002 - CAMBRIDGE SCHOOL COMMITTEE RESOLUTION ON MCAS

Cambridge School Volunteers

January 2002 Rappaport Institute Advisory Report to Cambridge Public Schools - a strategic analysis of the staffing and organizational structures encompassing all Central Office, Support Service, and Curriculum Leadership/Supervision programs in the Cambridge public school system.
Rappaport Appendix 1         Rappaport Appendix 2         Rappaport Appendix 3

Return to the Cambridge Civic Journal