Democratic City Councilman Jimmy Sanchez grew up in the north end of Hartford, in a small, Puerto Rican enclave; later, his parents moved to become homeowners in the south end.  He went to the old Barnard Brown School and the old Vine Street School (later named for Hartford’s first African American mayor, Thirman Milner – and now perhaps a school on the chopping block).  So what priorities does he see for Hartford schools, based on his experience?

Councilman Sanchez’s parents pulled him out of public school and sent him to parochial school – but his travels in the Marine Corps, especially to Japan, have made him anything but parochial (please see his bio online here).  Here are some of his perspectives about school improvement in Hartford:

• When his parents sent him to St. Joseph Cathedral School in his neighborhood, Mr. Sanchez landed in the Fourth Grade with Second Grade skills.  He was branded with “F” scores; indeed, he and his brother were termed “mentally retarded” back in the day.  “Little did they know, we just didn’t know the alphabet,” he said in an interview last week.  Lesson One.
• Lesson Two: he graduated from South Catholic High School, joined the Marine Corps and traveled the world.  He saw, in Japan, the importance of discipline, not just for academic subjects, but for what he terms etiquette – good habits, like saving money.  Emphasizing financial literacy, he warns against the cultural tendency to spend every dime you have – and recalls when he was a transit coach operator early in his career.  He encountered students who did not even know how to count out the right coins to pay their fare.
• So today Councilman Sanchez is all about emphasizing early childhood education, including spelling, grammar, punctuation, diagramming sentences, and understanding math.
• He appreciates the re-start of the school closure, consolidation, and relocation planning in Hartford, concerned about the level of community involvement in the consultants’ various proposed scenarios.  “Buildings do not educate children,” he declares; it’s what happens within them and at home.  “I am not against magnet schools,” he adds.  “What I am against is taking the right of the neighborhood child away.  There is a huge neglect in the North End and that neglect has traveled down to the South End.”
• Indeed, given the numbers of students who are bumped by the choice lotteries into low-performing schools, he believes, “There is no choice in this system for many, in my book.”
• As the original Hartford Public High School was knocked down rather than honored for a place on the National Historical Register, he argues, other landmark Hartford schools need to be preserved (the Dr. Martin Luther King School, the original Weaver High School, and the Burns Latino Study Academy come to his mind).

Recognizing that the City Council has a major role in financing public schools, Councilman Sanchez would set as a priority the improvement of neighborhood schools – and the presentation of disaggregated magnet school performance data, so that Hartford students’ progress is not masked by “the suburban lift” of those achievement scores.  Moreover, he questions why the regional public safety academy is in Enfield – and why Hartford has such a low proportion of Spanish-speaking teachers.

“Education is the basis of all things in life,” he said in a recent interview.  As unemployment, health, environmental quality, and housing deeply affect school quality, those issues must be faced, as should what he calls the “etiquette” he witnessed in Japan.  There, teachers are respected and education is valued – and the good habits that come from the discipline of working hard are part of the culture.

The Bottom Line.

The life lessons of Councilman Sanchez are worth heeding.  While many in Hartford do not see members of City Council as responsible for education outcomes in the city, their leadership can be invaluable, and we hope to involve them more in school improvement strategies.

Editor’s note: This article is part of a continuing series on the views of City Council members, with links to the earlier articles here.

At last month’s Hartford Board of Education meeting, a $120,000 contract to sustain student-centered learning almost got voted down.  What was going on?

Student-centered learning obviously is a misunderstood phenomenon.  Some see the expected learning via the chromebook at home as government over-reach – a sort of loco … in loco parentis!  Others worry about whether teaching is becoming too electronic – or that there won’t be sufficient resources to provide the one-on-one tutoring student-centered learning calls for.  The digital divide, in which some students do not have Wi-Fi at home, certainly is another issue.  All of these concerns are real.

Yet students never before seen participating in class now seem to find a voice with the personalized, internship-backed, and mastery-based activities where they own their learning, the District’s Executive Director of Planning and Partnerships, Michelle Puhlick, said in an interview this week.

At Bulkeley High School, partnering with the Journalism and Media Academy; Pathways to Technology High School, partnering with the Engineering and Green Technology Academy and High School, Inc.; and the Law and Government Academy, Nellie Mae Foundation grants have started and expanded student-centered learning programs here in Hartford and taken education innovation to real heights, of which we all can be proud.

Indeed, on Thursday, November 17, 2016 at Goodwin College, Pathways will celebrate its summer interns and their employers with a student showcase featuring intern presentations, Principal David Goldblum said yesterday.  Here’s the link to that program information.

Students in these Nellie Mae-supported high school programs report experiencing less absenteeism – and having more interest in personally driving their learning, Executive Director Puhlick said.

There is a misperception that student-centered learning merely plugs students into computers – and unplugs teachers from being educators.  That is not true.  Rather, the approach shifts ownership over learning to the students – and establishes a dramatically different, challenging, and perhaps game-changing coaching role for teachers.  It is, of course, new to some educators, parents, and students – but many have been on this road for a long time, seeing that young people must be equipped to cope with the global information economy.

Students who want to be car mechanics today have to develop the requisite computer skills.  By taking control of how they learn, they also can prepare themselves for the unforeseen jobs of the future – money in the bank, so to speak.

So Why Do Board of Education Members Sometimes Not Seem to Get It?

The Board of Education approved the Education Elements contract for student centered learning last month by a narrow 4-3 vote (with discussion within this video at the 1:11:45 mark).  The opponents thought the $120,000 could be better spent elsewhere, but they apparently didn’t realize that the grant funding was not transferable – or understand how this paradigm shift holds great promise to elevate individual and societal economic health in the years ahead.

This isn’t the first time that members of the Board have opposed contracts that push student-centered learning forward, which raises a question about how many Board members have even witnessed this new learning paradigm in action.

While impact reports expected in the next few weeks will provide an external evaluator’s assessment of student outcomes, we encourage Board members to visit the participating schools and see for themselves the difference a student-centered approach to learning makes.

A District program last spring, to provide a hands-on experience with students drew only a couple of Board members, and that’s a shame.  The November 17 event at Goodwin College – or site visits to participating high schools – would help spread the word that student-centered learning is an important modernization – energizing kids and teachers alike.

We will be looking into the state of support for SCL in Hartford, as it is critical to moving the work forward.

The Achilles heel of the Equity 2020 advisory process, to analyze school closing, consolidation, and relocation possibilities, was the absence of deliberation about raising school quality.  Instead, the focus was on closing buildings – with the assumption that more resources invested in fewer buildings naturally would enhance equity.  Is that a sound assumption?

Efficiency does not necessarily elevate equity, especially when no financial data is being used to inform just how much efficiency can be gained.  But it is clear to all that diverting attention and resources toward many low-performing schools, versus fewer mid-performing schools, makes a lot of sense.  No question there.  One central question remains, however: How will the larger buildings become super high-quality schools?

That’s the same question facing the Weaver Steering Committee, which just last week was re-launched after a few months of absence.  The area of focus: co-location.  How will three schools with three separate visions, missions, and goals co-exist and share resources in one building?

While this mandate is logical, it’s based on an assumption, which is  that Hartford Public Schools already knows how to operate a high-functioning neighborhood high school, where ALL students are prepared for post-secondary advancement.  We don’t hold that assumption, based on the track record of neighborhood high school performance.   There’s no question that HPS high schools do incredible work preparing youth, but the attendance, discipline, SAT, college enrollment and completion data tell a story of “almost” there, not “there already.”

The community has demanded that Weaver be the best; that it disprove the legend that only magnet schools can achieve near suburban school levels. The community has demanded that the Weaver design process address those problems still plaguing our schools – and, frankly, most urban high schools in American:

• Can we ensure ALL teachers know exactly how to get disengaged youth to engage more deeply than ever, such that they don’t want to miss even one day of school?
• Can we ensure ALL incoming students are READY for high school upon stepping foot into ninth Grade?
• Can we ensure partnership with the local University results in ALL graduates attaining an associate’s degree?

The Bottom Line.

The community demands more from HPS, advocates, and all partners working on the Weaver project; the way this process starts will determine how it ends.

Working with each school separately on issues related to co-location is not addressing the core issues that still prevent our neighborhood high schools from hitting their outcomes for all students.  A new process must start to do so – a process that can then be used to address school quality issues at other high schools.  We look to the community to voice its standards and ensure that the lessons learned from Equity 2020 fully sink in prior to the Weaver Steering Committee going much farther down the road.