Press "Enter" to skip to content

Tag: accountability

In No Uncertain Terms: Committing to the Use of Opportunity Gaps

“There was a time where my presence would not have been welcomed in different environments. And I acknowledge that and I embrace the advances that our society has made and will continue to make.”

–Acting Education Commissioner Dr. Angelica Allen-McMillan, Black woman
(State Board of Education Meeting, March 1, 2023

Dear Members of the NJ State Board of Education,

You all are currently considering the readoption of the state’s policy on education equity, formally known as New Jersey Administrative Code (NJAC) 6A:7 Managing for Equality and Equity in Education. First adopted in 2003, it is up for its third readoption.

Assistant Commissioner Dr. Christopher Irving of the Division of Field Support and Services in the NJ Department of Education (DOE) and his team have presented you with many proposed amendments and repeals over the last several months. The proposed amended definition of “equity” speaks to the elimination of disparate educational outcomes of NJ’s public school students through a focus on changing structural conditions to create and ensure opportunities for all students:

“Equity” means [when] all [groups of] students have the opportunity to master the goals of the curriculum [to approximately the same degree] in an educational environment that is fair, just, and impartial to all individuals. Equity focuses on [students’] consistent and systematic access for all students to [knowledge] curriculum, resources, instruction, and environments that sustain opportunities for excellent outcomes.

The roles of both the DOE and State Board of Education (SBOE) are to create structures so that localized solutions and practices can be shaped according to what the State deems as a “thorough and efficient system of free public schools.” Judged by these terms, this amended definition is stronger. All other proposed amendments and repeals should flow from this definition. They do not.

Of the numerous proposals that are inconsistent with this amended definition, I focus here on the DOE’s continued use of the term “achievement gap” as well as the way DOE staff crudely define the newly added term “opportunity gap.” My comments elucidate how centering achievement gaps perpetuates existing inequities and how achievement gap discourse (Center for Education Policy Research, 2020) is antithetical to equity. The work of achieving equity is not work done in neutrality; a liberal approach just will not do.

A Discussion of Inputs and Outputs: Getting It Right

I concur with professor emerita of education Dr. Gloria Ladson-Billings (2006) that an “all-out focus on the ‘Achievement Gap’ moves us toward short-term solutions that are unlikely to address the long-term underlying problem” (p. 4). So I applaud the DOE’s addition of the term “opportunity gap” as this act seemingly reorients the DOE’s approach to public education.

Furthermore, urban teacher educator scholar Dr. H. Richard Milner (2012) poses a most important question: “…should we expand our emphases from an achievement gap problem to an opportunity gap problem that inherently places attention on educational practices and processes?” (p. 697). At Second Discussion, the DOE made it clear that the response to this question is “yes” as demonstrated in the Agency-initiated Changes section of the Comment/Response Form: “‘Opportunity gap’ represents inputs…. ‘Achievement gap’ represents the results…” (p. 39).

“Achievement Gap” No Longer Serves Our Purpose

Milner (2012) argues for a focus on inputs, namely educational practices and policies, in our quest for high academic and social achievement for all students. The outputs we seek are spoken to by vision and mission statements as well as strategic plans at the school, district, and state levels. It is our responsibility as educators to construct a set of experiences to foster these articulated outcomes. Achievement gap discourse forces a narrow focus on standardized test scores, one measure of student academic and social success. However, like how all learners will not follow the same trajectory after their formal primary and secondary education, they should not be expected to demonstrate proficiencies at the same markers.

Milner (2012) outlines many more problems with an achievement gap framework (p. 696): 

  • Undergirding issues that explain disparate educational outcomes among student groups go unchallenged;
  • Whiteness stands as the norm and the supreme as we’re tacitly looking for Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) to be like their White counterparts;
  • Student, family, and educator deficits are the point of study rather than assets (which contradicts the DOE’s desire to reframe the code from an asset-based approach); and
  • Individuals and student groups are interrogated rather than oppressive systems, structures, policies, and practices.

These problems have shown up throughout the public discussions on NJAC 6A:7 held over the last several months but possibly the clearest examples occurred at Proposal Level. All of the problems are represented in Vice President Andrew Mulvihill’s commentary on the DOE’s use of “equitable educational opportunities”:

…I’m not comfortable with blaming discrimination as the cause of the achievement gap…While certainly it’s a factor, there’s no doubt, I don’t think it’s the root cause in my estimation. And, I think it’s simply our failure to run good schools in areas that serve minorities. And, I’m just not comfortable being part of a document that pushes that narrative. And, I don’t know that if it’s intentional or if it’s just kind of a throwaway comment, but I’m not comfortable with that. We’ve seen the charter schools that serve minorities are outperforming the state average. We see that Asians, who are terribly discriminated against, actually score better than Whites on standardized tests, so blaming the achievement gap on discrimination as much as it does here, I’m just not comfortable. (State Board of Education Meeting, March 1, 2023)

Here, I’d like to highlight Mulvihill’s lack of making a distinction among the histories of different groups of minoritized peoples in this country, which furthers the argument why people of color often should not be lumped together. Even in his emphasis of Asians outperforming Whites, Mulvihill has been trained–like us all–to always speak of educational achievement in terms of how Whites perform. And though Board Member Arcelio Aponte also has demonstrated a problematic adherence to the term, the way he speaks to the “complexity” of the achievement gap acknowledges the different lived experiences:

Certainly, each community has its own history, its own challenges. And therefore we need to address them and ensure those communities are getting the resources they need to be successful. (State Board of Education Meeting, March 1, 2023)

When we do not interrogate the ways in which we make and discuss comparisons between racialized groups, we allow implicit bias to govern our beliefs about student achievement, particularly that White students’ achievement is the standard. In a continued thought, we also are not interrogating Whiteness itself– we don’t question how those identified as White have been able to be “successful.” Until we move away from this, until we truly reckon with the role institutionalized oppression and discrimination have played in the structuring of this country, until we receive that the ideology of White supremacy is embedded in our education system, we will continue to merely tinker toward utopia. However, a shift to speaking about education inequities–and enacting policy–in terms of “opportunity gaps” will open space for the confrontation of the socioeconomic disparities that result in educational disparities.

How We Define Orients Our Thinking

During Second Discussion, Assistant Commissioner Irving defined “asset-based” as “using language in the positive” and “having a growth mindset,” but then he and his team define both “opportunity gap” and “achievement gap” as being “a result of membership in one or more of the protected categories.” As written, the definition puts the onus on the individual, citing their membership in a marginalized group as the cause of their lack of opportunity and success. “As a result of” speaks to cultural deficit theories. Rather, the lack of opportunity and success should be written as a result of institutional racism, oppression, and other forms of discrimination; make these the actors, i.e., the responsible parties.

The explanation of the proposed amendments is better written than the definition itself and is in alignment with my suggestion:

The Department proposes a definition for “opportunity gap” to mean the difference in academic performance among student groups due to differences in opportunities [emphasis added] that include, at a minimum, experiences impacted by the protected categories listed at N.J.A.C. 6A:7-1.1(a). “Opportunity gap” is an asset-based term that is oriented toward equitable educational opportunities that are regulated by this chapter (First Discussion Summary Memo, pp. 5-6).

All in all, in the proposed readoption of NJAC 6A:7, the DOE’s considerations of the assets BIPOC and economically challenged students bring to school as well as multiple ways to measure achievement are perfunctory at best; the staff remain all too comfortable presenting these students’ shortcomings through speak of the achievement gap

Final Words

To conclude, we need to move from “intentions” to “intentionality.” The stakeholders called on to craft the proposed readoption of NJAC 6A:7 may be “experts in the field of educational equity;” however, they clearly don’t come from a critical approach but rather a liberal approach. It seems the only thing they had to offer was the addition of the “opportunity gap” terminology without an understanding of the implications this term brings for the code in its entirety.

Adding the phrase “fair, just, and impartial to all individuals” to the code’s definition of “equity” would seem to anchor the DOE’s commitment to identifying discrimination as the basis of education inequities. Nevertheless, while “achievement gap” may have served a purpose at one time, possibly through the data disaggregation mandate of No Child Left Behind, continuing to center it demonstrates the DOE’s attachment to a liberal approach to education that perpetuates institutionalized racism and other oppressions.

I, and others, are calling on you, members of the SBOE, not to waver but to take a clear stance on equity.

Yours in Justice,

Dr. Leah Z. Owens

References

Center for Education Policy Research. (2020, December 4). Achievement gap discourse has a downside. https://sdp.cepr.harvard.edu/blog/achievement-gap-discourse-has-downside

Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding  achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035007003

Milner, IV, H. R. (2012). Beyond a test score: Explaining opportunity gaps in educational practice. Journal of Black Studies, 43(6), 693-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934712442539

Leave a Comment

Call for a Moratorium on Instructional Staff Nonrenewals

TRANSCRIPT

Good evening President Haynes, Board Members, Superintendent Leon and Leadership Team.

First, I want to acknowledge the life and activism of our Ms. Wilhelmina Holder. Many things in this city will never be the same but particularly these school board meetings. May she rest in peace and power.

Tonight, my comments are focused on the recruitment and retention of teachers. From Tuesday’s Business Meeting, I heard a lot of great things. I heard about the multi-pronged approach of a teacher pipeline and bringing in retired teachers.

What I didn’t hear as a part of the long-term plan is the retention of the teachers we already have. I heard an approach that is coming from a space of equity but not necessarily a place of humanity.

To these ends, particularly concerning retention, I submit a resolution for a moratorium on instructional staff nonrenewals:

Whereas, we have a teacher shortage, period;

Whereas, nonrenewals affect non-tenured teachers and it takes time to develop teachers into effective practitioners; and

Whereas, instructional staff nonrenewals can be given for reasons including poor performance, reorganization, and economics, and these generic reasons, without any details, are what get listed on nonrenewal letters;

Therefore, be it resolved, that the Newark Board of Education decline to approve the instructional staff nonrenewals except in cases where the instructional staff have proven harmful to our children;

And further, be it resolved, that direct, clear support program be given to anyone issued a nonrenewal so that they have an opportunity for further professional development.

As you prepare for the Donaldson Hearings next month, I would suggest board members look to have answered questions that stem from the space of how the instructional staff member cared for students, how (if at all) they were notified of their lack of performance and then provided coaching to improve said performance.

Policy and programs can be written up and presented nicely. But sometimes folx spend more time on the aesthetics of the presentation than they do on the implementation. And the actualization of the policy or program doesn’t serve children, by way of their teachers in this case. So, again, for both the Board and those who will be preparing for Donaldson Hearings after the vote tonight, the key question, from a humanizing perspective: how has the teacher shown how they have cared for students? That’s what I would like to see this board and District focus on in determining whether an instructional staff should be nonrenewed.

Leave a Comment

Creating a Leader: Learning from Ms. Wilhelmina Holder

Prologue: Yesterday, a mass murder occurred at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, resulting in twenty-one people dead, 19 children and 2 adults. They were shot dead by an 18-year-old high school student who was from the community. Eleven days ago, another mass shooting occurred with 10 killed; this was in Buffalo, New York at a supermarket and the shooter, another 18-year-old, targeted Black folx. We, humanity, are suffering from great losses. We are in pain. And this is the context in which I write this post.

On Friday, May 20, 2022, a community celebrated the life of one Ms. Wilhelmina Holder–mother, activist, advocate, educator, friend. I knew of Ms. Holder before I knew her. A teacher-friend explained how he met her at his school, West Side, and that she told him about Abbott Leadership Institute (ALI). ALI held Saturday classes at Rutgers-Newark for parents and community members to teach them about policy, organizing, and advocacy in the space of education. Ms. Holder was an honor roll student of ALI, holding a close friendship with the director, Junius Williams.

I was a second- or third-year teacher (2006/2007) when I attended my first ALI class and remember being struck by the information presented about a pro-privatization school reform plan called Renaissance 2010 in Chicago. But even more striking was the power of the everyday Black folx sitting in that room. Newarkers. Smart and learning more. Leaders. This wasn’t the picture of inner city parents painted by Savage Inequalities, a book I had read in undergrad. In fact, it isn’t the story told by most of the literature about urban education reform. If not carefully curated, the syllabi of courses for prospective teachers can easily lead them to believe that they are the only hope for their students. ALI was framed by a critical pedagogical approach; it put the gross reality of Newark public schools in the context of power, leadership, and transformation. And it provided space for Ms. Holder, and others like her, to build on the strengths they brought to the table.

It did not take much time for me to come to admire and love Ms. Holder. As my elder, I knew she had earned the right to say anything she wanted, but her outspokenness I saw coming from a different place. I wanted to come from that place too–at the intersection of love, passion, commitment, knowledge, and experience. So, in February 2021, I answered a call put out by Kaleena Berryman–longtime assistant to Junius Williams turned ALI director upon his retirement–to get as many people as possible to nominate Ms. Holder for the Russ Berrie Making a Difference Award–and she won!

I‘d like to share what I submitted:

Q: How has the Nominee “made a difference” in the lives of others, or in the community? Why is this work important?

A: Ms. Holder has assisted countless students and their families navigate the educational system so that they can discover success. She is one of the most civically-engaged people in the city of Newark, serving on numerous boards and councils as both a member and a leader of them. Her input and decision-making is always grounded in the real experiences of young people and families. Ms. Holder has also led the High School Academic Support Program which provides direct assistance, care, and love to high school students in their process of applying to college. Her expertise in this area is incomparable. Ms. Holder’s work is so important because it speaks to what we can accomplish as a community when we believe in each other and our young people especially.

Q: What are the Nominee’s major accomplishments?

A: Through Ms. Holder’s work in the High School Academic Support Program, she has helped graduating seniors secure hundreds of thousands of dollars in scholarships. The Program also hosts on-the-spot college admissions nights, assisting hundreds of students to matriculate into college.

Q: Please respond to this in your own words. “This person should receive the Russ Berrie Making a Difference Award because…”

A: Ms. Holder should receive the Russ Berrie Making a Difference Award because she gives of herself with no expectation of anything in return. Ms. Holder is a true definition of selflessness. We love her here in Newark and believe she deserves to be recognized by the world!

Ms. Holder’s obituary and news articles written about her passing (see here and here) outline well who she was and the life she lived. Extra touching are two memorializing pieces written by Kaleena. In the tribute printed on the homegoing program, Kaleena writes about Ms. Holder’s creation: “He was surely creating someone to do [H]is work, for over five decades, in schools and for children that would need His power and presence” and that “She needed to be able to mold others, just by being.” Both tributes speak to the dispositions (i.e., ways of being) forged in fire of a leader committed to education justice. Here, I highlight, from Kaleena’s poem “A tribute to Wilhelmina, OUR HOLDER,” some of those critical dispositions–those values, beliefs, and habits of mind that oriented Ms. Holder toward the just response to injustice.

1. Committing to a vision is a primary disposition to hold in the struggle for education justice. We’re instructed, “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he” (Proverbs 29:18 KJV). Kaleena writes that Ms. Holder had an “unrelenting vision” (2) and “Decades of focus on freedom” (12). No one can articulate what we want for our children better than ourselves. Ms. Holder “held the flame / Of the highest expectations / The school system in her system / Our children, in her lap” (5-8).  

2. Speaking truth to power can, and must, occur from all positionalities–parents, teachers, students, community members. And even though we may envision ourselves in one lane, it is when we see ourselves as everyone, when we know the “I” is in “You,” that we can voice our concerns from a collective space. In the poem, Ms. Holder is described as “our Superintendent of Showdowns / Our Principal of Passion / Our Teacher of TELL THE TRUTH / Never ever holding back / Or holding her tongue” (29-33).

3. Sharing the power means dismissing the theory that power is a zero-sum game. Again, seeing the “I” in “You”–when “I” have power, “You” have power. Kaleena writes that “They held the titles, but Wilhelmina held the power” (23) because even when they thought their title entitled them to more power, Ms. Holder was quick to remind. Ms. Holder believed in intergenerational organizing; for those younger coming along with her, “she held us high / Held us close / In the highest regard / She encouraged us / And made us fearless / Through her example” (40-45).

4. Embracing an ethic of care defies the White supremacist logic that has programmed us to look out only for self. Instead of this oppressive logic, Ms. Holder “Fed us / From the flavor in her voice / And the chicken in her bag / And the presence of her integrity” (46-49), and she lovingly held “Tens of schools in the palm of her hands” (13). Care is a precursor to community. 

In her shift to a conclusionary call-to-action, Kaleena writes:

“What we must do

Is hold on too

Hold on to her memory

Her love

Her work

Her smile

Each other

Her children and grandchildren

Hold strong to her spirit and all that she left undone

Hold on to her legacy

Her memory

Her mission

All of which can be summed up as

HER LOVE” (54-67)

Yes, Ms. Holder, we’ll “hold on too”.

Leave a Comment

Politics of Respectability: Who Has the Ear of the Newark School Board?

We persist in our call for the resignation of Board President Josephine Garcia and tonight’s meeting provides further evidence as to why this demand should be met.

I applaud aspects of the Program & Instruction report–I’m looking forward to the “forthcoming” information on the teaching and learning presentation and, yes, tracking the strategic plan is a responsibility of the board, though that is not a new idea and should long have been a priority of every committee of this board. However, the Governance report underscores how this board falls short of authentic, critical civic participation.

NEED was an invited guest of the Governance committee, and several other board members made time to meet with this group as private citizens–though that’s a fine line to be walking when the purpose of the meeting is to discuss what is at least tangentially board business. Meanwhile, several other community organizations and individuals also took the time to express input to appointing a board member to a vacancy, not only after the board took action, but BEFORE the appointment was made. Not ONE of the individuals who submitted official letters of interest for the vacant seat was invited to speak to a committee or to the board.

Further, these same community organizations and individuals followed up their requests and comments at board meetings in written form to board members. One or two received a response; the vast majority were ignored. No one was invited to discuss their concerns or ideas further. No one was publicly thanked for illuminating how the public education system is rooted in oppression and inequity and for how our contributions are a reminder of how we must all actively fight oppression.

Even teachers are ignored. Nicole Sanderson has come before this board numerous times this school year with the simple request of turning on students’ access to Gmail so that teachers can communicate with students through Google Classroom, thus improving their learning conditions. Tonight, we finally heard something. But how many months later? No acknowledgement. No follow-up. No response. ALL teachers, residents, parents, and students deserve responses.

The praise from board members for NEED’s work around a proposed board vacancy policy plays into respectability politics in that you’ll respond to certain folx but not others as a function of the approach used and the relation of the people to the board members. NEED is constituted by folx who are not bringing a critical or abolitionist approach to education and who are intimately tied to the charter school sector and Teach for America through its political arm, Leadership for Educational Equity. Members also have personal relationships with board members.

I urge you to reflect on your actions and not intentionally or unintentionally pit members of the community against each other because some did it “the right way,” or position the participation of young people as a shield against justifiable critique of your silence regarding President Garcia calling public participation “bullshit.” It’s both/and–accountability and transformative policy.

The call for Josephine Garcia’s resignation is a call to open up a space for the transformative leadership needed for this school board.

Leave a Comment

Oppression Will Not Be Tolerated by the Newark Board

TRANSCRIPT

My remarks tonight are all about what occurred at the Jan 28th meeting.

I’m not into #cancelculture. It contributes to the project of dehumanization and doesn’t allow for learning or what I refer to as re-constitution.

But I do believe in accountability and transformative leadership–and for those practices, I echo calls for you, President Garcia, to step down, preferably off the board but minimally removed from the chair position allowing Dawn Haynes to lead the board.

All that occurred on Jan 28th was not just a mistake or your legal right. It was a clear demonstration of how you’ve allowed yourself to be a tool of oppression. And it’s a pattern of behavior, some of which I experienced during my time as a board member.

From day one, you’ve led with a sense of entitlement. At the April 2018 meeting, you were nominated for president; I was nominated for president. At the call of general counsel, I spoke to my ability and character; you said nothing. And were elected.

Six months in, at the Oct 2018 meeting at Science Park, Student Rep Andre Ferreira spoke passionately about critical issues, including suicide as a problem in our schools and racism at Science Park. He called on us to “listen” and “acknowledge.” Your response was to tell him: “inform yourself more with the district’s website” along with a list of other things he needed to do; you said: “… and we are listening…you just got here…communicate…email us.” You were both defensive and dismissive.

Two plus years later at last December’s meeting: the same kind of response–feeling personally attacked and chastising board members for not “communicating” with you. Following your logic, I should have received a direct communication from you; I was a speaker on that list you had in front of you. I’m not requesting an apology, just pointing out how you fail to even follow your own logic.

The board, under your leadership, has resulted in short, shallow meetings. The January Retreat is a prime example with the (lack of) discussion on equity. I was left wondering, have you read the strategic plan? How did that conversation not lead with the equity statement?

Other board members: I, and many others, were in the WebEx. We saw your responses; your nonresponse is a response. Silence is consent. You don’t have to condemn anyone. You can say what you stand for to provide a distinction.

In conclusion, local control is not doing the minimum, not doing what you, personally, think is best. That is demonstrating strains of privatization–where your personal ideas rank while others’ don’t, discounting voices that you believe don’t matter.

We fought for a collective process, NOT to be oppressed by our own reflection, NOT to have to fight our own school board.

Public participation is indispensable and requisite to local control. We–actual parents and community parents, students, education workers, education advocates and activists–we bring perspectives you don’t have, we ask questions you don’t ask. We are, in effect, the 10th board member.

Good evening.

1 Comment
css.php