Debate here about the Boston mayoral race has taken a caustic turn recently. Disagreements haven’t been feisty so much as they’ve been bitter. I think this has a lot to do with how people view organized labor. Those of us who think a strong labor movement benefits everyone are easily exasperated by Democrats who treat it as just another special interest. I have to stop myself from ranting and raving about history, class, and the crisis of income inequality. I’m glad others are making these points in appropriately passionate tones. But they don’t seem to get much purchase. Undecideds say they don’t want to hear about backgrounds or bases or ideology, but just want substantive comparisons of policy and “vision.” That’s understandable.
And it’s not hard to deliver. I’m going to aim each Monday between now and Nov. 5 to do a direct comparison on a major issue: education, jobs, economic development, maybe housing too. I’m relying mainly on the detailed proposals the candidates have published on their websites, supplemented by facts about their records and some of the public comments they’ve made. I’m biased as a Walsh supporter, but anyone can check up on my claims by simply visiting their websites. Where we might have some productive debate is if people challenge my interpretation of these differences or my reasons for preferring Walsh’s vision.
Turning to education. As expected, they are fairly close together on a cluster of high-priority items: high school reform aimed at college and career pathways; developing good principals; connecting schools to social services for students facing various issues; and ambitious long-term building plans. The major difference at the top of their priority lists are Connolly’s focus on extending the school day (Boston’s is on the short side, though not by much) versus Walsh’s plan for universal K1 (more than half of Boston’s four-year-olds currently don’t get placed in a school). In education research, early childhood education has a more consistently documented impact than lengthening the school day, but the reform movement is currently focused heavily on adding classroom hours. That speaks to the alignments that people say they don’t want to hear about.
But looking more closely at that issue of the school day, there are concrete differences that I think help define a real contrast in vision. Connolly lists it as his first item, saying he will mandate an extended academic day in “every school” in the next teachers’ contract. Walsh, by contrast, lists it further down under his “collaboration” heading, saying he will work to make additional time available to school communities that want it, but will achieve it in the only way possible: by collaborating with teachers.
This difference resonates through their plans. Connolly makes bold promises and paints an alluring picture of high-powered, high-scoring schools on every block. Walsh sets out similar goals, but focuses his policy plans on what it will take to get there and how to respond to the diversity of needs in the student and family population.
It’s a contrast that already has shaped how the two candidates have built their records on education. Connolly describes his focus on education as a city councilor as the groundwork for what he’ll be able to achieve as mayor. The problem is that much of that work, while certainly influencing the conversation, proved divisive, creating rifts that will need to be healed in order to make many of the major changes he has proposed.
Walsh appeals to his legislative record on public schools and his work backing parochial and charter schools with successful college and career programs. Just as important, the overwhelming detail of his plan stems from the campaign’s massive grassroots listening project. As such it recognizes the breadth of interests in the school community, not just by acknowledging the teachers’ perspective but by recognizing the differences of need and choice among parents. Some people don’t want their kids in school for eight hours.
If Walsh’s comprehensive approach strikes some as too nuanced, consider that he also takes consistent stands on difficult issues, from the Common Core to the appointed School Committee to the charter cap. He has issued a very forthright statement on why he supports lifting the cap and what he thinks needs to be done to ensure equity and accountability in funding charters. If anything, I think Connolly is the one who has played cute on this issue during the campaign, preferring to tell his just-so story about the Trotter’s turnaround while allowing his reputation on charters and neighborhood schools to make him all things to all parents.
This difference means a lot to me personally. It’s not just about style; how you approach the process has real consequences. Like Connolly, I have two young children in the Boston Public Schools, and like his, mine are in a school I’m happy with. But one of my children has special needs that A, cannot be served by a charter school and B, make an extended school day an unwanted and even cruel requirement. Changes that don’t have the flexibility to take his needs into account could turn our lives upside down.
Last year the city was considering new student assignment systems, to be implemented this year, the year my youngest was to start school. Given the basic structural limitations, the proposals didn’t look exactly revolutionary. So when I heard Connolly claim that he had a plan that would put an end to parental stress over transportation and school quality, like many parents I was excited and intrigued. Then I looked at it, and saw that its assignment promises depended on creating dozens of new, instantly high-quality schools all across the city. Calling it a school assignment plan was a gimmick to embarrass the mayor, raise parents’ hopes, and steal headlines. Making great schools available to everyone is a wonderful plan, but it has little to do with how you manage student assignment today. It will require years of hard work on funding, building, contract negotiation, poverty alleviation, job programming, social services, ESL, and disabilities. It’s the kind of work that Marty Walsh’s education policy takes the time and courage to envision.
for the content and the tone of your post. I look forward to the others.
race, but universal kindergarten is a better idea than extending the day. Kids need to enter school prepared to learn, and a substantial number of kids don’t come prepared. That early learning is extremely important to learning later on. There are mountains of data to support early childhood education.
There is little serious research on the effect of extended days. There’s no guarantee how the time will be used either. It’s costly if you pay for it, and obnoxious to teachers when you don’t.
Lifting the cap solves what problem exactly? I’m sure most Boston candidates have to pay lip-service to charter schools, but exactly how do they improve education in Boston or Massachusetts?
FYI
Wow, yeah. He’s really expanding on his plan for high school reform, adding a new section to the ed policy.
We don’t have kids, so this is not going to be a big campaign issue for us. Both candidates seem to have given the issue a lot of thought and have reasonable approaches. I am not sure what I think about longer school days, it might be good, but I could see how the teacher’s union would not be happy about that.
I am not super happy about charter school expansion. I always thought of charter schools as a way to allow latitude to experiment with different approaches to education to see what works. So some charters are fine, but I don’t think that creating more charters is the right way to improve the education system. Rather we should be applying what we have learned from the successful charters back to the regular schools.
for a while now as supporting a longer school day if it’s done right and, importantly, if it’s not forced on teachers with no additional pay.
Your diary’s pledge of direct comparisons on major issues, starting with education, caught my eye. That’s not really what this one is.
I hope the next four will be less emotional for you, and more analytic.
Using loaded terms like “cute” and “divisive” for Connolly and “comprehensive” and “consistent” for Walsh kind of hinted at some comparisons and analysis, but only hinted. It would be fair to compare their detailed education platforms, and conclude that Connolly’s was less specific, however.
This go inspired me to look up your comments. Among them, I see recent strong anti-Connolly bias. You even derided his two-year stint at the NYC Jesuit school where he worked only for a roof and tiny stipend. Apparently that was only to be expected of a law student or grad. Harrumph.
Regardless, you clearly feel strongly about schools. I do to, having put three sons through the BPS, the final one graduating last year. None had special needs. Navigating the suddenly, dramatically changing assignment process and making sure they got into good schools was still like a second job. It shouldn’t be for any parent.
By the bye, over at Left Ahead, we’ll have half hour shows with both Walsh (tomorrow) and Connolly (next Tuesday). There are serious limits in 30 minutes. We’ll try to focus (and help the candidates to focus as well) on salient points.
I do appreciate your very ambitious goal. You write that providing voters with “substantive comparisons of policy and ‘vision.’ (is) “not hard to deliver.” Here’s wishing you success in doing that for the next four topics.
Thanks for the feedback–I guess I didn’t explain my goal clearly enough. I’m aiming for substantive comparison, but in the service of my case for Walsh. The point is to invite more substantive debate, not to be neutral. To that end, I summarized their similarity on most items, then described a very specific and pervasive difference on the #1 item for the self-described education candidate. The contrast is decisive: on substance, it’s early childhood ed vs. extended school day, and on style, it’s promises versus processes. You seem to have found that basic observation convincing. Job done, as far as I’m concerned.
As for my “emotional” vocabulary, A, I value direct, everyday speech over polite, evasive pedantry; and B, the stakes are high. So don’t expect the future posts to be different. I appreciate the benefits of your detached approach — I’ve enjoyed your work in the past and will listen to these interviews — but I think people (especially here) want and appreciate arguments as well as descriptions.
that’s what my brain needs on this.
why expanded pre-K and a longer school day should be seen as mutually exclusive. We need both.