Our Revolution Cambridge says endorsees would bring strong credentials to the School Committee
The School Committee members elected this November will address many important issues in the Cambridge Public Schools, and the candidates endorsed by Our Revolution Cambridge are well qualified to address them. Our schools continue to suffer from racial and socioeconomic gaps in student progress and racial, ethnic and economic inequity, and these candidates are committed to programs that will close the gaps. The candidates support increasing the diversity of educators and staff. They support greater participation of caregivers, students and educators in decision-making. They support excellent salaries, benefits and working conditions for educators and other public school employees. They support ending the MCAS graduation requirement and using more authentic and less punitive methods of assessment. And they support working toward a universal after-school program and continuing to expand universal prekindergarten.
Each of ORC’s endorsed candidates brings important credentials to this work:
New candidate Andrew King grew up in Cambridge and graduated from the Cambridge Public Schools. He spent seven years working for the New York City Council, directing youth and education policy in schools in East Harlem and the South Bronx. Collaborating with youth, civic leaders and community organizations, he helped develop policies and programs on youth violence prevention, educational opportunities for marginalized youth, participatory budgeting, opposing stop-and-frisk and increasing funding for sports and other after-school programs. He holds a doctorate in education policy from the University of Massachusetts at Boston and works as an education policy researcher at Boston University. He is also on the board of Citizens for Public Schools.
Former School Committee member Richard Harding grew up in Cambridge, and he and his daughter are graduates of Cambridge Rindge and Latin School. Starting in 2001, he served on the committee for seven terms. He has served as vice chair, Budget Committee chair and Contract Negotiations co-chair. He is vice president of the Cambridge NAACP and is a founder of the Port Action Group, a neighborhood group focused on violence prevention. He has received the NAACP Education Excellence Award and the Cambridge Peace and Justice Award. He works at the Cambridge Public Health Department as manager of community engagement and Bipoc men’s health.
Incumbent Jose Luis Rojas Villarreal came to the United States from Mexico and received a master’s degree in international finance and economic development from Columbia University. He has two children in the Cambridge Public Schools. He was on the Amigos School Council for seven years. As chair of the Building and Grounds Subcommittee he played a major role in developing the district’s Covid health and wellness plan and safety manual, which became a model for other districts. He is also co-chair of the Budget Committee. He works as chief financial officer of Leaf, an organization that advises and finances U.S. worker-owned companies and the Mass Food Trust Program.
Incumbent David Weinstein is a former classroom teacher with a master’s degree from the Harvard School of Public Education, where he studied school reform and teacher leadership. He has two children in the Cambridge Public Schools. In both terms on the School Committee, he has been a strong supporter of Level Up honors-level classes for all students and has chaired the Curriculum and Achievement Subcommittee, engaging diverse stakeholders in the subcommittee’s work. He has also co-chaired the Community Relations and Communications Subcommittee. He works as assistant director of Enact, a 50-state nonpartisan civic education program based at Brandeis University.
Incumbent Rachel Weinstein is a Cambridge Public Schools parent who grew up in Cambridge and attended Cambridge Public Schools. She participated in the Building Equity Bridges Project that led to the creation of the Office of Equity, Inclusion and Belonging in the district and is a consistent voice for considering issues through an equity lens. She serves as vice chair of the School Committee and co-chair of the Budget Committee. She works as chief collaboration officer for the Boston Compact, coordinating a partnership of Boston’s district, charter and Catholic Schools to improve outcomes for historically underserved populations.
We hope that Cambridge voters will vote for all of these candidates in their order of preference. Collectively, these candidates have the experience and understanding to ensure that all students develop the skills, abilities and character to function and engage with our challenging world.
Visit ourrevolutioncambridge.org for our detailed platform and more information.
Sheli Wortis and Nella LaRosa-Waters, education committee of Our Revolution Cambridge
Our Revolution’s criteria sound great…until you really think about the implications for our children.
When they increase participation of caregivers and parents in decision making, they are often substituting their judgement for that of the teachers themselves. This has been popular in many MAGA-dominated districts, and has led to harassed educators and banned books.
When they say we will ban the MCAS and “punitive” methods of assessment, that can be code for not rigorously evaluating all our students so that we can address their weaknesses. Kids who are struggling need extra assessment and support, not a gentle negligence that pushes them through before they are ready.
Worst of all, Our Revolution is supporting candidates who stripped our middle school kids of advanced math programs in a misguided effort to narrow the achievement gap. When we narrow the achievement gap by refusing to help certain students reach their full potential, we create an anti-intellectual environment that harms all students.
I’ll be leaving all of the above candidates off my ballot, and looking for a new school committee that will focus on our children and help every one develop to be the best student and person they can be.
By closing the gap, does that mean raising supports of struggling students, or lowering standards for struggling students, because that is extremely important when we think about closing achievement gaps.
Many of these folks were on the SC when the way to manage the achievement gap was simply to give up on struggling and marginalized students by doing things like cutting advanced math.
Regardless, I’m ambivalent about their vagueness of getting rid of MCAS, “alternate assessments” that don’t actually help our marginalized and less privileged students without more specifics that they are offering in their place.
Replying to Peter G.
I do not know who Peter G is, but he is not well informed about the Cambridge schools.
Doing away with the MCAS does not mean giving up on evaluating our students – there are alternative ways of doing assessment as already suggested by educators and state legislators supporting The Thrive Act. The MCAS is not only discriminatory, but since it has led to teaching to the test, it is a big part of why the joy has gone out of education.
The statements by Peter G about math programs are incorrect. Without consulting the School Committee, Algebra instruction in 8th grade was stopped during Covid. Three members of the current School Committee (David Weinstein, Rachel Weinstein, and Caroline Hunter) brought in a motion to create a timetable to bring back Algebra for All.
And where in some places increased participation of caregivers and parents has led to book banning, that is no reason to lessen input from those affected. The problems with the recent schedule changes, which were done without input, could have been avoided if the administration had worked with caregivers instead of imposing their plan without input.
We can ensure that no books will be banned, and that all children are given the best chance to grow and have their individual needs met by electing the candidates endorsed by Our Revolution Cambridge.
Rena Leib
Former School Committee Member
I find it interesting that the endorsed candidates are so different than those endorsed by educators who work in the district. This mentions a focus on “less punitive methods of assessment,” and yet educators are being punitively punished using methods of assessment. Furthermore, this says that the candidates”support excellent salaries, benefits and working conditions for educators” but the incumbents have failed to settle contracts before they expire for two cycles leaving eductors without excellent salaries, benefits, or working conditions.
I also worry about the lack of trust in educators as professionals. I agree with what was said about that “increase[ed] participation of caregivers and parents in decision making, … often [means ]substituting their judgement for that of the teachers themselves. This has been popular in many MAGA-dominated districts, and has led to harassed educators and banned books.”
I am concerned about the process that our revolution used that resulted in these candidates. As an educator, I am deeply committed to ensure that “students develop the skills, abilities and character to function and engage with our challenging world” and I am hopeful that school committee members will partner with all stakeholders to make this happen, but based on past practice, I am concerned about the likelihood of this happening
Adeline, Just want to say that Our Revolution Cambridge supports a new contract with educators along the lines proposed by CEA and we are very happy to be part of the CEA’s community coalition.
We don’t believe there is a conflict between educator empowerment and greater participation of caregivers and community members. It is our understanding that the CEA shares this view.
[see ourrevolutioncambridge.com]
Replying to sheliwortison: thanks for stating our rev’s support for the contract as well as highlighting the value of being in solidarity. I agree that educator empowerment and greater participation of caregivers/community members are not exclusive issues and I do still wonder about what the balance is. While comments are not the most conducive means to thoughtful discourse, I continue to be off put at the selection of incumbents who have not, to my mind, proved themselves to value educator empowerment and have very much shown a disinterest in settling fair contracts. These are certainly not the only issues or responsibility that school committee members are charged with, but they are a large part of the job and it is striking to me that these facts weren’t included in this piece.
Thanks again for sharing OR’s stance!