This year our first grandchild was born in August. As one might expect from a new Nana, she is, to quote Kevin Henkes, absolutely perfect*. And I say that without prejudice.
Along with new grandparenthood is the realization that child-rearing has changed, considerably, in the past 39 years. Learning new ways of doing things can be disconcerting because my Mom muscle memory has proven to be a bit unreliable. And that is okay.
Which actually brings me to this blog and some changes in my (former) professional life. I have been retired for active teaching for nearly four years. Over the last few weeks, my decision to not renew my treasured teaching license - which I have held since 1974 - has been made. While I am a little hesitant about doing this, I know my time as an active educator is gone and that in my new phase of life, I will not be in a classroom.
Classrooms are different in many ways now. Although I am often sorry to hear that education has morphed to be what
Watching last evening's school committee marathon and you come away with a sense of just how much educating is going to be needed in order to ensure that the Promise Act is successful this Spring.
Some will not have heard of this act. So in a nutshell, it is the (retooling) of efforts made during the last Legislative sessions to update (some) of the Foundation Budget computations. Some of those calculations, by the way, are 25+ years old.
Six months ago, my podcast partner Mickie Dumont and I started a new project for our local union, United Teachers of Lowell 495: we started a podcast that we hoped would be a short listen about some local and state issues that affected members.
We also wanted to highlight some of the great things educators in Lowell do. As an active teacher, I knew about many of the great ideas implemented by teachers in my own building, but it was really rare to hear about what colleagues in other schools were up to. So armed with a digital microphone and open-source audio editing software, we started the weekly podcast "Straight Talk".
Along with issue-based recordings, we've met some terrific people of course. One of our recent podcast recordings was with AFT-MA Director of Organization, Brian LaPierre.
One of the most talented and passionate advocates for public education, Brian is a member of the Lynn Teachers Union. He formerly taught at the Thurgood Marshall Middle School and at Lynn English High School. Tireless, enthusiastic, and resolute, Brian’s energy, enthusiasm and support for public education makes him a force to be reckoned with. As a political organizer, and now as AFT-MA’s Director of Organization, Brian was our go-to for the 2015 First Book Books on Wheels event here in Lowell, he was on the frontlines of the No on Two Campaign, and he's already deeply involved in pushing for Chapter 70 Foundation funding through the Fund our Future Campaign.
Brian has twice been elected city councilor-at-large in Lynn, MA. In both 2015 and 2017, Brian topped the ticket in Lynn.
It is the passion and energy of people like Brian who will help shift the punitive test-and-privatize culture of public education today to what some of us remember.
At last evening's Personnel Subcommittee Meeting, there was a discussion about the applicant confidentiality during the screening process. Which seems to lead to Massachusetts law about quorums and school committee participation in hiring/personnel issues and open meeting law.
If I understood correctly, the entire school committee cannot participate in the screening process and maintain confidentiality for applicants during the screening process.
Education institutions talk a good game when it comes to equity in education, but the reality is just a little off-the-mark.
Last week's college admissions stories just was a highlight to one kind of inequality. Colleges and universities as well as private schools have always had "legacy" admissions. No surprise there. Was anyone truly surprised that more wealthy parents of potential students were able to find a way to ensure their child was admitted to the school of their choice even if it meant a more qualified candidate was supplanted?
We all can and should be outraged by the extent to which the college admissions scam permeated the process. But really, is anyone truly surprised by more than the fact that these people were caught?
Equity also applies to public education funding though.
Of prime importance to me as a former educator is updating public school funding. Since 1993, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has made only minor revisions to the Foundation Budget, the funding formulae that determine how much state education aid is allotted to each public school district as well as the calculation of what the school district municipality is expected to contribute.
As a former educator - and as a parent and now grandparent - I have witnessed the impact shorting public schools has had over the 30 years I was actively teaching. Special education, English Language Learners and students impacted by poverty all need supports that have dwindled or become non-existent. Social workers, nurses, class sizes.... all impacted by the Commonwealth's inability to live up to its responsibilities to educate all students no matter where they live.
An effort to update those formulae in 2015, the Foundation Budget Review Commission (FBRC), made recommendations not only to the calculations and basis for funding, the FBRC also made other recommendations. A summary of the FBRC recommendations can be found on MASC's website (here) or you can download the FBRC 2015 report in its entirety here.
On a recent Monday evening, I listened to two of our local state representatives talk about school funding. The two Representatives, Rep. Nangle and Rep. Golden, do not support updates to the Commonwealth's Foundation formula. While recognizing that the formula is out of date, their objection appears to be in how to pay for increased funding for schools.
As I understand it, there are many areas of Commonwealth's budget in need of increased funding. Transportation. Infrastructure. I would fully agree that these areas - a quite a few more - are in need of increased funding. Which is why I was surprised to learn how much the state income tax rate has been lowered over the years.
The Commonwealth has gradually lowered to income tax rate from 5.95% to where it currently sits at 5.05%. (This posting from Citizens for Limited Taxation shows the timeline of tax increases and decreases beginning with the Dukakis administration.) That last percentage, however, is not where it will land as the income tax rate will again lower in 2020 - this time to 5%. Massachusetts, unlike the federal government, applies this flat rate across all income levels. This post from MassLive tells about continued efforts to reduce the income tax rate in 2019.
Does this collision between the need for funding to increase and the pandering to taxpayers seem
I've had a teaching license since 1974. It was a lifetime license, first in K-12 music, then Instructional Technology and finally Elementary education 1-6. But starting June 14, I've made the decision to let that go.
As a young, inexperienced educator, I was fortunate to have some exceptional mentors, although they weren't called by that name. The people who helped me find my way as a teacher were my colleagues in neighboring classrooms. When I was frustrated by my inability to manage behaviors, or I was clueless in how to help a child, they were there with suggestions borne of their own experience. But more importantly, they were there to listen, to commiserate, to just be.
Our respect for each other was born from friendship and trust, and while I was the "kid" of our teams, they also did not reject my ideas or suggestions, some of which were not-so-bright. Those educators who I looked up to encouraged. They allowed me some freedom in which to experiment and find my way so that my pedagogical practice became reflective of me.
But now, it is time to let go. Oh, I still feel a burning passion about all things education. However, in many ways, I almost do not recognize my chosen profession. The constant, and in my view unhealthy, monitoring to prove that your teaching is
You've got to be taught to hate and fear
You've got to be taught from year to year
It's got to be drummed in your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught
You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade
You've got to be carefully taught
You've got to be taught before it's too late
Before you are six or seven or eight
To hate all the people your relatives hate
You've got to be carefully taught
One thing I've learned as a parent and as an educator: children mirror our own behavior. That makes sense, doesn't it? Has anyone had their own child pick up some naughty language which was repeated at a most inopportune moment?
Besides being excellent observers, children look to adults - those who are their caregivers and those encountered through media as "celebrity" - for models of acceptable behaviors and interactions.
This, of course, causes me to wonder about the effect the racist and hyper-charged hate-filled "soundbites" that are blasting into our lives on a daily, and oftentimes hourly basis. What impact is this having on our children?
When adults use disparaging taunts and insulting nicknames to refer to others around them, particularly those with whom there is a disagreement, children intuit that this is an okay way to react and respond. When an adult feels compelled to tell someone to "go back where you came from" or targets people of color, the message is again condoning what I believe and know are unacceptably racist behaviors.
It won't take much for this to spill over into diverse classrooms. School staff - all of us really - will need to be ready to counteract and replace the unacceptable with inclusiveness and kindness. While that is going to be challenging when each day brings a new low in personal interactions from some corners, it is important, essential work.
Because they've got to be carefully taught can run both ways.
I was once called an education technology pioneer, probably because there wasn't anything I wouldn't try at least once if it seemed like it might be a good fit for my students. Drawing on my experience in the private sector, and as an Instructional Technology Specialist in public schools, I embraced the idea that technology was a tool and there was a core of programming that should be in every student's technology toolbox.
Briefly, the article tells of less-affluent communities who are embracing a Pre-School curriculum developed by Waterford. You can learn more about the mission of this non-profit here and read more about their partnerships.
While "preschool for all" should be must be a priority for US education, replacing a face-to-face preschool with screen time and 15 minutes of technology programming bothers me. I agree, every child should have access to preschool. As an early grade educator, I recognize that the fact that many communities that cannot and do not offer a quality preschool program puts some young children at a disadvantage which is difficult to overcome.
For some communities, offering universal preschool education through public schools is a matter of economics. There just isn't adequate public funding for the public schools to offer preschool programs to every family wanting to send a child to preschool. Community budgets are strapped, and there are as many reasons for short funds as there are preschoolers, so community leaders do as the mayor in Fowler, California has done: offer a freebie program for online preschool access.
While I understand that this may seem like a good idea on the surface, it is not. In an effort to ensure every child can read by Grade 3, academics are being foisted onto 4 year olds. That is wrong.
The question is: Just what should a preschool program look like? Should a preschool be 15 minutes of drill and kill on a computer? Who is deciding which computer-aided skills are taught? I ask this because I was stunned to discover the Waterford program teaching silent letters as a phonics skills appropriate for preschoolers. When I actively taught Grade 2, "i+gh" for example was a second grade skill, not a preschool/pre-reading skill.
Preschool, in my opinion, should be heavily weighted toward teaching children to get along with each other, to share and take turns, and to learn appropriate group social behaviors. Preschoolers should also be allowed to learn by experiences; those experiences are important to everything that comes later in learning. Preschool children need to form a strong, compassionate, relationship with the adults teaching them. A positive preschool experience sets the stage for lifelong learning attitudes. These are the things a 15-minute daily online preschool program can never provide.
Our education leaders, in fact all of us, need to step up efforts to make an affordable universal preschool experience available to all who would like one, and stop relying on questionable "free" software to fill in the gap.
For the first time since 1974, I no longer hold a teaching license. I decided not to renew my licenses (I have three), and that is something I am discovering to be a source of some apprehension. I retired several years ago from active teaching, however, my identity for most of my life has been, and I imagine will continue to be, synonymous with education.
I've wanted to be a teacher since the second grade - which oddly was my favorite grade level to teach - and despite a few detours, that is what I've done with most of my working career. But like most things, it is time to officially bring that to a close; my time has passed and it is time to officially let some things go.
Throughout my years of teaching I experienced, as you might expect, good days and bad days, but, as with most who enter the field of education, I wouldn't have traded for another career. Working with children and families and learning from colleagues has been a rare privilege.
I was fortunate to re-enter education when teaching was, I think, at its best. I think it is difficult to describe that to people. There was a level of collegiality between administrators and teachers based upon mutual respect and trust. And it was that mutual respect and trust that made the hard work of education exceptionally rewarding. We worked hard, the children worked hard, we all learned. And still we had fun.
My principals were exacting and their expectations were high, yet I never felt that I couldn't try new ideas for reaching students. I trusted my administrators and colleagues, but more importantly, they trusted me.
As I move into this next phase of my life's story, I do know that I am not leaving education far behind. I have a granddaughter who will be entering school in the next few years, and thus, my interest in education is changing focus a bit.
The paper proclaiming my legitimacy as an educator may have expired, but there is still much to think about and speak up for. And that is what I will continue to do.
Budget season is going full tilt in Lowell and the outlook is definitely not very palatable.
The School Department is running on fumes: no K-8 libraries this past academic year, proposed cuts to fine arts positions, proposals to cut services for students in guidance, behavioral supports, Special Education. Who knows where it will end?
Well, here's where I get off:
I think a question should not be just about what services and positions will need to be cut. I think the big questions is this: Why isn't the Commonwealth of Massachusetts adequately funding schools so our children receive all of the services they need to succeed?
By all, I mean: why are schools going without libraries, or technology, or nurses, or social workers, or paraprofessionals, or class sizes that enable an educator to address the needs of the students in front of them in a consistent, thoughtful, reflective way? Why are these and other services that enable our English Language Learners, our Special Education students and our students living in trauma and poverty to be better supported on the chopping block?
Today, across Massachusetts, educators, parents, students, community members are gathering in both Boston and Springfield to SHOW our Legislators that we are not willing to accept the flimsy excuses that have left public school funding scratching for scraps for the last 25-plus years. We are showing up to let you all know IN PERSON that it is beyond time to fix the Foundation Formulas and that our Commonwealth needs to fund our schools so that all of our youngest citizens get an equitable and adequately funded public education.
So even though I could be doing about a million other things today, I will show up, not only for the Rally at 5, but also to engage any Legislator who will agree to speak with me about the importance of funding our future through supporting the Promise Act and the Cherish Act. This is for all the students I've taught, the ELLs, the SpED students, the children living in poverty - and for my baby granddaughter, who just might be able to attend a fully and adequately funded school when she enters Kindergarten five years from now if the Promise Act is passed this year.
And that is why I'll be attending today's Rally to Fund Our Future on the Common. Will you?
Every time I lead a Balanced Literacy course, I ask the participants to create a list of what is needed in the classroom IF funding were no problem. This Spring Semester group came up with these ideas. (yup, a couple tongue-in-cheek, but mostly serious).
Unfortunately, most of these are out-of-reach as our school budget reflects a 25-year under-funded and outdated Foundation Formula.
Our students deserve better. Get to Thursday's Rally to #FundOurFuture on the Boston Common and send a clear message to those Legislators (and yes, there are some uncommitted in #Lowell who don't see this as a problem) that it is time to throw on those big boy/girl pants and support the revenues that will enable our public schools to function on more than fumes.
There are events starting at 1 pm for anyone able to get to the Statehouse for them; the Big Rally begins at 5 pm on the Common. If you're coming from Lowell - look for the Lowell sign so we can stand together.
Look at the faces on the students who are about as engaged as any child can be. These are fifth graders and they are not only having the time of their life, they are making a memory never to be forgotten. What would their school experience be if there were no music opportunities in their young lives?
The former music educator in me can certainly appreciate the skill and organization that propels this group of musicians. But I would argue that the connection made to an art like music is just as important.
As a high school freshman, when my Dad's career took him to New England. it was music that made the culture shock of moving from the comfortable Midwestern community in which I had grown up more bearable. There were friendships that were made in the music room; it was a place where I had something in common with my otherwise foreign New England peers. It was the only place I felt less of a freak or outsider.
What if that safe place that my high school's music program provided had not been available to me? Because I was different, I already felt a lot of teenaged alienation, and yet, the experience of practicing with other students in our orchestra and chorus helped me to belong. And by belonging, I had a pathway in as a student; it made me into an engaged learner which is something that has stayed with me throughout my life.
One of the impacts bothering me about the test-driven curriculum that we see today is that the arts are in increased danger of losing funding during tough budget times. The disciplines of music and art are often looked upon a frills. I would disagree.
While not every student will choose a career as an artist or musician, our schools should be places where students can experience and appreciate the arts in a personal way. Sometimes, as it was for me, that encounter with the arts may become the difference between a dismal and exceptional educational experience.
As the budget season gets underway in our public schools, Gateway communities in Massachusetts are faced decisions about which programs to keep and which will be cut. When municipal school budgets like we see in Gateway cities do not adequately provide for educational expenses, the temptation will always be to jettison the arts. That I believe is not only short-sighted, it is wrong.
The solution, however, is within our grasp. With 25-year-old Foundation Budget formulas driving which programs are funded and which are not, the answer lies with the Legislature's capacity for adopting the Promise Act and for making progress toward fully and adequately funding all of our public schools.
So on May 16, I'll be on the Boston Common rallying with my colleagues to demand our Legislature does the right thing for our students. Somewhere in that crowd might be a young person for whom the arts is a safe way to engage in learning, just as it was for me. I not only won't give up on you. I cannot give up.
When I first met my mother-in-law, I was totally fascinated by the organization she used to allocate family finances, the system we fondly refer to as the "envelop system". My mother-in-law would take an amount of money each week, break it down into smaller portions, and put each portion in its own coin-sized manila envelop which was kept handy throughout the week.
For example, if she budgeted $100 for food shopping throughout the week, five $20-bills would be put into the grocery envelop. When the money was gone, she either shifted cash from another envelop to buy something or went without until next payday.
In my mind, this is an apt analogy for what is happening in the Foundation Budget nightmare currently in place in our Commonwealth. The Commonwealth assigns a set dollar amount of aid for each community based on particular spending allocations, the chunk of money arrives at the municipality and when it doesn't fully cover one spending category, the schools shift the funding from one category to another that has been shorted.
However, one of the biggest issues with the Commonwealth's envelop system is that the money going into each envelop is the same amount as was used in 1993, over 25 years ago. Imagine trying to run your own household using the same amounts of cash as you comfortably spent in 1993.
Lowell Superintendents' Forum, 4/22/2019
In Lowell, we heard last Monday about a shortfall of nearly 500 classroom teachers each year. Big underfunded and under-calculated items in the Foundation Budget are surely contributing factors to this. If a district such as Lowell has huge differences between the Commonwealth's foundation budget determinations for school spending and the amount spent is more than what has been put aside, there are two choices.
Applying the "envelop system" demands a municipality either a) add money from the municipal coffers to make up that difference or b) shift funding from one category to another.
Of course these differences between state funding and actual spending are quite common - not to mention quite large - when the basis for the Foundation Budget calculations have not be updated in about 25 years. If state funding is based in the 1990s but actual expenses reflect the reality of 2019, it follows logically that there will be a huge conflict between state funding and reality. The differences are exacerbated when a municipality, like Lowell, Brockton, Springfield or Worcester, cannot contribute beyond what has been calculated in the Foundation Budget numbers, something a more affluent city of town might be able to do. It follows, then that some difficult educational budgeting choices must be made.
A gateway city, like Lowell, has nearly zero percent chance of not feeling some excruciating budget pain which brings us up to the shortfall of 500 classroom teachers. It is indeed painful to Lowell and to our children.
Four major areas - think of them as "envelopes" - need Foundation Budget reform: English Language Learners, Special Education (not including the Circuit Breaker), Health Insurance and Low Income. All of these funding categories are based on amounts that were set in 1993 which means that when one looks at what the Commonwealth funds and what the expense reality in 2019 is, there are huge variances.
Lowell Superintendents' Forum, 4/22/2019
Let's consider the budget "envelops" for a couple of these categories. The Foundation Budget calculates Special Education spending at $16.7 million, but the actual cost of Special Education in Lowell is $31.1 million. That's a difference of $14.4 million which has to come out of one of the other budget envelopes. Health Insurance as budgeted through the Foundation Budget calculations is figured at $17.3 million, but the actual insurance costs, even after switching to a cost-effective plan like the GIC, is $33.1 million. Surely no one in Massachusetts is expecting to pay the same insurance costs as they did in 1993, so is it any wonder that the Foundation Fund amount is so out of whack?
As a taxpayer, a voter, and as a former educator, I am shocked when local politicians claim there's no money to correct this. I think it is more likely there is no courage because that is what it will take to face the reality of underfunding schools. Revenues to fund schools, as well as transportation and infrastructure, in our Commonwealth are essential.
The envelop is empty and there is no time to waste.
There is so much to digest from last evening's Funding Forum. So I'm just going to start with one aspect of Massachusetts school funding - the poverty level calculations.
When I retired in 2015, the Low Income Level in Lowell, was re-tooled as "Economically Disadvantaged". In 2015, the number of students considered economically disadvantaged in Lowell was reported to be 49.0%. One would think the world would be knocking at Lowell's door to find out how magically 25% of the public school student population was no longer economically disadvantaged. But, the world is not.
There was no magic solution. The same children I taught who needed supports because they came to us from low income families and socio-economically disadvantaged environments, simply moved up a grade level and experienced those same socio-economic traumas. This time, the supports were fewer. The change in counting these children was caused by the Commonwealth's redefinition of how low income status should be determined. Starting in 2015, the determining factors became participation in SNAP, DCF foster care, transitional assistance for families, and Medicaid (MassHealth).
How does this impact school funding? To begin with, the Foundation Budget allocations contain a calculation to support low income students. The low income multiplier is applied to a community's low income population to assist with supports these children may require in order to be on an equitable playing field with children who do not experience poverty. So when the Commonwealth changed the definition of poverty so that fewer students were considered economically disadvantaged, the amount of funding available for support also decreased.
This is some pretty fancy footwork with data and statistics isn't it? Correcting the calculations for low income support was one of the issues directly addressed by the Foundation Budget Review Commission 3 years ago. It is also one of the many reasons why the Foundation Budget must be overhauled this year.
Our children who need support, whether that means additional academic support or extra-curricular opportunities before/after school, or essential wrap-around services such as programs that address health needs and food insecurities, cannot wait. Changing the definition doesn't solve the problem. It just makes things more difficult.
As almost everyone with a stake in public education knows, Massachusetts funding of Public School education is in dire need of updating. Since 1993 when Education Reform and the Foundation Budget calculations were developed, there has been little done by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to update the funding formulae and account for changes in costs over the past 26 years.
Last July, after the Massachusetts Senate unanimously passed legislation to update the Foundation Budget formulae, the attention turned to the Massachusetts House of Representatives. Sadly, the Foundation Budget Reform legislation was unsuccessful in the House and the entire effort fell short.
A broad coalition of advocates for not only K-12 public education funding reforms, but also Massachusetts public higher education reform worked together throughout the Fall of 2018. In early January 2019 when the new Legislature was seated, the coalition presented two critical Acts designed to provide funds for all students across Massachusetts public education systems. The two acts, the Promise Act and the Cherish Act, endeavor to bring critical funding support to K-12 public education and public higher education respectively.
As part of the state-wide and local coalitions working together, Lowell Education Justice Alliance or LEJA, has been hard at work in the Merrimack Valley to bring attention to the critical effort to update funding of our public schools. Along with LEJA, there is broad support from Massachusetts Education Justice Alliance (MEJA), Massachusetts American Federation of Teachers or AFT-MA, Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA), SEIU, and teachers’ union locals in the Lowell area, including UTL495. By establishing this broad coalition and working with students, parents, and the community at large, we intend to bring attention to the needs that our schools are experiencing and work to fund our public schools adequately for the next school year.
On Monday, March 11, 2019, the groups sponsored a well-attended Legislative Forum which included Senator Ed Kennedy and a representative from Senator Barry Finegold’s office, and Representatives Rady Mom, Tami Gouveia, Tom Golden, Marc Lombardo, and a representatives from David Nangle’s office. Parents, students, educators, school administrators, and community members spoke about how underfunding schools has made a personal impact. We were fortunate to speak to several of the participants before and after their testimony, and we have compiled some of their ideas in our podcast, Episode 35.
It is clear that while many in the Massachusetts Legislature do understand the impact of under-funding schools and why that must change, not everyone does. We hope you, our listeners will consider joining this effort to convince local Legislators that our students cannot wait. We need to fix the Foundation Budget Formula now and Fund Our Future.
You can listen to Lowell Legislative Forum participants talk about why the Promise and Cherish Acts are important on this podcast from Episode 35, UTL StraightTalk.
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Lowell is, according the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, underfunded by $42 Million each year. You can read more about Lowell’s underfunding by downloading this flyer.
BUT, Lowell is not alone in underfunded Foundation Budget funding. Get the Facts about Funding Our Future by linking to AFT-MA Fund Our Future website OR use this interactive map from MTA to select a city or town in MA and discover how much that municipality is underfunded.
Confused about how the Foundation Budget works. We were too - take a look at this short video featuring Colin Jones from Massachusetts Budget & Policy Center. Mass Budget & Policy Center also maintains an excellent website of resources if you are looking for more information.
Lowell Education Justice Alliance (LEJA)meets regularly in Lowell to advocate for students and public education locally. You can keep up with their efforts by joining the group on Facebook OR emailing lowelleducationjusticealliance@gmail.com for more details. All who are interested in Lowell Public education, whether a students, parent, educator or community member are welcome to attend meetings.
LEJA is affiliated with Massachusetts Education Justice Alliance or MEJA. You can visit the MEJA website for more information by clicking here.
If you are moved to contact your State Legislator to add your own voice and to raise your concerns about the Foundation Budget, you can find contact information for every member of the Massachusetts Senate or House by using Find My Legislator.
United Teachers Of Lowell 495 is participating in several statewide events for Fund Our Future. Please be sure to check our email blast, Five for Friday for dates and times. We welcome all members to make suggestions for future events.
Last week, the Lowell School Committee and anyone who was listening to the School Committee's meeting heard the LPS McKinney-Vento report. The report enumerates homeless students in the Lowell Public Schools as defined by McKinney-Vento act:
The McKinney-Vento act defines homeless students as students who lack a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence due to economic hardship, loss of housing or a similar reason.
- March 1, 2019 Report to Lowell School Committee
As of March 1, that number in Lowell was 982 - and actually climbed a bit from there due to students displaced by two fires in the City. The reported number of homeless children, however, represents 5 percent of Lowell Public Schools' students.
This is a heart-breaking situation, and it is one that I, a former teacher, was aware of when I was a teacher. Nearly every year in which I taught, I had one - and sometimes more - students who were identified as homeless. They lived in shelters, they lived temporarily with a neighbor or relatives, and yes, some of them were living in a vehicle until their situation was discovered by Social Workers.
This brings me to the point of writing this entry: in our public schools, we rely on Social Workers, Counselors, and Health professionals to help us not only to identify which students and families are in trauma, but to help mitigate the circumstances in which they find themselves. In our public schools, with 5 percent of a given student population in crisis due to housing uncertainty, that is a massive responsibility for which there are some, but not many solutions.
Lowell's McKinney-Vento report sparked a lot of conversations, as well as people asking "what can we do"? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know our school social workers, with caseloads stretched beyond reasonableness, are a key response to students and families living the trauma of becoming homeless.
With burgeoning caseloads, our schools need more professional, trained school counselors, social workers, and wrap-around services to support the homeless in our midst. That, of course, takes a monetary investment.
You may have heard me state that the outdated Foundation Budget calculations, now over 25 years old, are shortchanging Lowell Public Schools by $42 million each year. That is not just a guess on my part, but an estimate based on real numbers that come from Mass. Budget & Policy Center. School funding is a crisis for which the solution - fully funding schools by updating ridiculously outdated funding forumulae - should be a priority.
Budget season is going full tilt in Lowell and the outlook is definitely not very palatable.
