Patty Nolan
2013 Candidate for Cambridge School Committee

Home address:
184 Huron Ave.
Cambridge MA 02138

Contact information:
Tel: 617-661-0729
e-mail: patty@pattynolan.org
website: www.pattynolan.org

Send contributions to:
Committee to Elect Patty Nolan
184 Huron Ave., Cambridge MA 02138

Or donate with PayPal on my website

Background
I am a proud Cantabridgian, although not lucky enough to be born here. My husband, David Rabkin and I have two children, both born here and in our public schools since Kindergarten and now at CRLS.

My grandmother did not graduate high school and mother had to fight to go to college. My father went to night school since he needed to help support the family. I was the first in my family to apply to and attend Harvard and a few years later I went to Yale to the School of Management. I've worked in the for-profit, non-profit and public sectors for large internationally known firm and tiny worker owned startups. My background and experience shape who I am as a School Committee member - able to synthesize information, sift through data and budgets to find the most relevant and important information. I bring skills to the job: wide-ranging management experience, deep training in strategic thinking, independent verification of information, and thoughtful analysis.

At the heart of all my work is a deep core belief that Cambridge, with its financial ($27,000 a student ) and community (Harvard, MIT, Lesley, biotech leaders, etc) and families (extremely passionate and involved) can do better. That is what led me to run the first time and inspires me to keep running. I have held true to the core values of high expectations and data-based decisions, delivered on my promise to hold the district accountable and proven to be an effective change agent.

I am honored that State Rep. Jon Hecht endorsed me as did neighbor and social justice intellectual pioneer, Christopher Jencks. Parents and residents from across the city have endorsed me too. Quotes and a partial list: www.pattynolan.org/endorsements.html

I hope that you agree I have earned your # 1 vote with my effectiveness combined with my willingness to take on tough issues and my dedication to doing what it takes to make progress. My honesty – about the disappointments and challenges of our school district – makes me vulnerable. Holding to my pledge to honestly assess our district - cheering what we do well and acknowledging when we fail to live up to our promises – has cost me politically.

Please vote #1 for Patty Nolan on November 5th. I needed #2s last time, and the time before won by 19 votes. Your vote matters.

Top Priorities and Issues
Thoughtful implementation of the Innovation Agenda.
Easy to say, not so easy to do. This year was challenging. The decision to restructure our district into the current structure of JK-5 schools and co-locating upper schools within our largest school buildings was wrenching. A larger cohort in the middle schools has improved some aspects of that experience for our middle grade students. Based on feedback from families and students, the goals of increased rigor and greater engagement have not been met.

One important initiative I have continually pushed is to have ongoing monitoring and meaningful outreach to parents and outside educational practitioners helps ensure we build on the best in Cambridge and elsewhere.

My continued service would ensure a forceful voice advocating for research-based decisions, broad-based input and transparency. The IA will not achieve the vision of balanced, engaging schools if we don't work together to: focus on outcomes, honor effective teachers and create respectful classrooms.

World Language starting in Kindergarten and strong support for bilingual immersion programs
One of the promises made with the restructuring of the district was a stronger and broadened world language program. That has not happened. I pushed for several motions to make good on that promise. Ultimately a majority of my colleagues decided to support the administration's request to hold off another year before passing a policy on requiring world language in all grades, starting with Kindergarten. I joined a motion to have a plan put forth this year on implementing a quality program of language. I stand in strong support of a second language. I was the first candidate, many years ago, to have second language as a priority. I am glad that many of the candidates have joined me in advocating for this key educational program.

I am the strongest supporter of bilingual immersion programs and using best practice to inform our decisions. I believe that Amigos, the King Chinese Immersion and Ola all deserve more support than they currently get. I have been a strong and effective voice for helping those programs continue in Cambridge. We can and should do more. As Gregg Roberts, a national leader in immersion educaiton, whom I brought to Cambridge, is fond of saying: "Monolingualism is the illiteracy of the 21st century".

We should explore having another immersion program, perhaps a French immersion, to respond to community need and increase the percentage of parents who get their top choice in the Kindergarten assignment lottery.

Universal Junior Kindergarten or Preschool for all 4 year olds
The issue of ensuring that every four year old in Cambridge has the opportunity to be in a high quality educational setting has been discussed for years. The community has increasingly supported the idea and now is the time for us to act. The reason is based on research that the achievement gap starts early, and can be prevented with a focus on caring educational settings during the first years in a child's life. The Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education and Care in 2010 (co-chaired by School Committee member Marc McGovern and City Councilor Marjorie Decker) provided excellent summary of the issue. The School Committee team further built on the idea that we should expand our offerings. With my colleagues, I have worked to champion and improve early education in Cambridge. The pledge must be for high quality and affordable early childhood programs. If re-elected, I will continue to work with both the school administration and the city to ensure that Cambridge prioritizes early childhood education.

Currently the age of entry into our public schools is about 4 1/2. Yet research has documented that children who have successful early experiences establish a foundation for future success. Instead of starting behind, children from impoverished backgrounds or households where books are not available or English is not spoken can start on a par with their peers. Early intervention also can reduce the need for and/or intensity of special education services later.

The effort to have all 4 year olds in excellent programs can be accomplished through a partnership between the city and the school department. I invite everyone in the city to join this effort. With all our resources, this idea is one we should be implementing now. Although concerns over where such programs could fit, in light of a space crunch in our schools, I believe that if we commit to the program, we will find a solution. Other cities have built early education centers, which might e a better solution than trying to add junior Kindergarten classrooms in every school.

Better Use of the $27,000 per student we spend
We need to use our dollars more effectively and efficiently. I have successfully led a change in our budget process which focused more on effectiveness and consciously examines ways to spend money to greater effect. The issue is not our spending level, but are we getting expected results? We spend an astounding $27,000 per student, twice the state average. Yet we are not (yet) considered the best district in the state in all areas. In fact, compared to ALL districts anywhere near our size, we spend LESS as a % of our budget on classroom teachers and more on items not tied directly to effective teaching, which all research says matters the most. We need to carefully look at what supports are needed in our classrooms to address the needs of all children. And by all children I mean both those not at grade level, which is as many as half our students, but also those in need of greater challenge. Engaged learning reaches and invigorates children across the ability spectrum.

I believe that we should consider spending more in the classrooms, putting effective adults (whether they're teachers, aides, tutors, as long as they're effective I don't care what level or title they have) working directly with our students.

We will need to make thoughtful decisions, and be vigilant about basing the budget on proven programs, with well-researched evaluations driving decisions, and a comprehensive review of every non-educational aspect of running the district with an eye towards greater efficiency. The state's finance department compiles comprehensive budget information on all districts. That comparison shows a number of areas we should explore for re-allocation of dollars into educational uses. For example, we still spend more dollars on central administration this year than three years ago and FAR more than other districts anywhere near our size. It is critical that someone with my background represent you, as we face these budget questions.

With the Innovation Agenda, we are spending even more on administration. We need to make sure that spending yields more engaged learning.

Use our data on school choice to improve programs
As co-chair of the Controlled Choice Team, I worked very diligently and successfully to identify issues related to our policy of school assignment. Our team's work was instrumental in getting a number of improvements: some policy changes, new plan in process now for overhauling all our communication materials, the piloting of an online registration system, which will be expanded over time to all students. Our district needs to be more welcoming to families, and also provide the support to staff so they can be effective ambassadors for the district. The continued emphasis over the last year on this issue is a testament to collaboration among the entire School Committee.

This fall we will be discussing specific ways to improve the attractiveness of underchosen schools. Too many people opt out of our district due to worry about not getting their school of choice or trying and not getting it. The choice system has strengths, and its core value of the importance of having balanced schools is wonderful. A key strength of our district is the range of educational programming offered in our elementary schools. Building on that by expanding offerings in schools needing to be more chosen will lead to 100% of families getting into a school they want.

I see three programs that would attract families: another Montessori on the east side of Cambridge, another immersion school (French or another language), and an International Baccalaureate school.

The reason this issue is a top priority is that it feeds into our areas: the families who opt out are ones we fail — there is no reason families should not be confident that every one of schools would be a great place for their child(ren).

No one has worked longer or more consistently than I have on raising issues of choice, of new school models, of clear delineation of our enrollment numbers, of the complexities around discussing how choice plays out over the year. As we address the policy it is very important that the district and the Committee are thorough and equitable. Based on my past experience of providing the leadership necessary to avoid a potentially embarrassing policy change through diligence and collaboration, I am certain that I would be able to provide that leadership in future discussions and decisions.

Longer school day:
My thoughts on a longer school day are that we need to spend time thinking about how and whether this policy change makes sense, which means defining our goals and deciding the best way to meet them. I realize that I should clarify my position on my website and other places related to this policy question of a longer school day. I can tell you more of my thoughts on the idea as a policy and budgetary matter, apart from any collective bargaining implications.

I am open to more instructional time - during the school day and/or during the summer. To vote on a policy to add more time to a school day, or year, I would need to be confident that the extension of time would be well done and I would need to know how the time would be used.

To the first criteria, of using time well: research on longer school days shows that if the current school day is well run, and instruction is excellent, then extending it can improve achievement. I do not believe in CPS we have that precondition. There are many places in our district where we need to improve instruction, especially in the new upper schools, where my sense is that we fell behind where we were before the restructuring. Following best practice, I advocate for us to work on improving instruction, and once that is done, consider adding more time. While many teachers feel the crunch of time, adding time without acknowledging the work we need to do to improve the current instruction would be a mistake.

To the second criteria: adding time without knowing how the time would be used is unsound policymaking. We need to involve the entire community in how any additional time would be best spent. If a longer school day policy was decided, without a guarantee that some of the time would be for world language in elementary, I could not support it. I have said publicly that at the elementary level, having more time for art, music, recess, tutoring and world language is something I could support. At the middle school level, more time for electives, tutoring, physical activity and the sciences seem to be the areas most desirable to lengthen. At the high school level, I see students who are already overwhelmed with homework. And many don't even time to participate in the wonderful clubs since they have too much work. Others at CRLS may not have enough homework. I cannot support adding instructional time at the high school unless students have less homework.

I believe that we need to use research-based decision making, including a review of how our two extended learning time (or ELT) schools are doing. As we explore the policy question of a longer school day, we need to review the evidence of what is effective. Our two ELT schools have not performed as well as hoped in some areas and are performing well in others. We need to understand what leads to success. Based on my own review of the data, pending a review by the district, the results are not impressive enough for me to be confident the program should be replicated now. STudents at the ELT schools, based on MCAS and performance of students as freshman at CRLS, perform near or slightly above the district average - in terms of student growth and proficiency. However, the ELT schools are not the top performing CPS schools in growth or proficiency, even when comparing the same subgroups. Other schools which have not had two extra hours a day for seven years are at the top of the district by those measures. Given that, I believe we need to look more closely at our achievement data if the goal is to increase achievement.

Another question that has been raised is the amount of time. Should we consider adding a half-hour? an hour? or lengthening the school year? THese questions deserve a full discussion as a community, to ensure we base decisions on best practice.

I hope that we continue the recently started community-wide discussion on the issue, apart from collective bargaining which cannot be discussed publicly. That is why I sponsored a motion to discuss it. The motion led to a public presentation by the superintendent at our last meeting, which was making the case for a longer school day, not a review of the issue. There was also thoughtful public comment at that meeting. However, we have not had a community discussion and dialogue, which was the intent of the motion, which passed unanimously.

I will note that most nearby schools have about the same amount of time as CPS. While many private schools near us have school more hours in a week, they tend to be in school two weeks less each year, which essentially evens out the additional time. Many charter and other schools extend the day- yet it is not clear whether that time is responsible for whatever success the schools have. Or whether it applies to the entire school population or a subset.

I have read some reports cited by proponents of a longer school day. Interestingly enough, the reports include a number of examples of summer learning programs used to address issues of achievement. They cite the importance of working with unions - although for the most part the examples used are not implemented wholly by the current school district staff. Meaning it is in collaboration with community partners. Those partners have been very involved here in Cambridge, and are very interested in being part of the solution. At a community Relations Subcommittee Meeting last month there was a lot of energy around engaging those groups in our discussions on how to achieve the goals of higher achievement without a longer school day for all.

Also, I am concerned about engaging in another disruptive, large scale change districtwide without a clear idea of the goals and the implementation plan. We need to make sure the restructuring is fully implemented and monitored and adapted based on our review. Having more time might be good for some cases, but it is a massive change that will be disruptive - and the system can only handle so much systemwide change at once. That is why I want to hear from the entire community.

To summarize my thinking: in a high performing organization considering ways to improve, options are developed, discussed, vetted, and then plans are made to adopt the most promising. I imagine a process where many options are developed: expansion of summer programs [e.g. a version of Breakthrough for all], a longer school day [with time from 20-60 minutes longer]; universal preschool/JK; different grades having different options. Those options would then be studied and discussed widely in the community before adoption.

School Department Administration & Superintendent
First, the single most important issue of any School Committee — the hiring and evaluation of the superintendent. I played a key leadership role throughout the search and supported Dr. Young to lead our district. However, while I supported Dr. Young happily, I have lived up to my promise of holding him accountable, asking tough questions, and continually seeking best practices from outside Cambridge to help us improve. At this year's evaluation, I named a number of areas in need of improvement — documenting each one with specific examples. The areas most in need of improvement are community and family involvement, educational program evaluation and school committee relations.

As for other district administration, we have some terrific staff. There are two main kinds of administration: in school administrators, like our principals and asst. principals, and out of school administrators, often referred to as central administrators. The main issue for me on school-based administrators is that they get the support they need and feel comfortable making decisions. They are central to our success as a district, and we need them to be the best. Currently, we have some weak leaders who need to be supported.

We need to give our principals, the frontline educational leaders, the full authority to do their job. We also need to have a stronger mentoring program for our principals, since many have little experience and all are facing the challenge of restructured schools. We should be setting policy and establishing goals. The superintendent should be ensuring that the goals and statewide curriculum frameworks be followed. The superintendent should also be providing support to principals, and holding high expectations for teacher and student performance.

The main issue on central administration is to figure out how to help the district improve the efficiency of those roles, especially since we may be facing deficits in the coming years. That would be a huge change from the past several years when we have had multi-million dollars surpluses in the school department each year.

School Department Budget and Capital Needs
This question of our budget could fill twenty pages. Our budget is phenomenal. When I talk to school board members in other place, we have an embarrassment of riches. We spend $27,000 per student. Other towns average about half that.

The most relevant question is now "why do we spend so much or where does our money go". The most important budget questions, given that we have enough money, are "Are we spending our money well? Are we getting our money's worth?"

In my view, no. We do have amazing programs and we are all lucky — students, families, residents — to have such a well-funded school district. Much of the money we spend IS well spent. Some of our excess spending goes to things other districts only dream about: no fees for activities or buses, all day Kindergarten, an array of afterschool programs, early childhood programs. We also have relatively small classes and relatively big school buildings.

Add that all up, and it accounts for a portion of the extra we spend. We owe it to ourselves to be honest that our extra spending is not just about no fees. Nor is it mostly due to small class sizes. All our extra spending on non-school based staff is great if it's leading to higher achievement. Not great if it's because we have not evaluated programs and positions and cut those which are no longer needed.

For example, we spend three times the state average, on a per pupil basis, on professional development. We have done that for a decade. People say "it's great to spend so much on training and professional development." I ask "Is our spending on professional development effective? How do we measure it? If we have spent three times the state average for over ten years, why isn't our district improving at a far more rapid rate than the state?"

Numerous studies have shown that for all the cuts we have made, we are still one of the most top-heavy districts in the state. With the Innovation Agenda, we will be allocating even more dollars to administrators, and have less available for classroom teachers. We need to be sure that every dollar spent ultimately improves the education of all children. Should we be re-allocating some of our professional development dollars to more art or music or second language teachers? Or tutors? I believe that is worth exploring.

The research on effective ed reform demonstrates clearly that the path to excellence is through school-based management, and pushing authority and resources into the schools, not keeping much of it centralized. Over half our spending is in non-teaching areas. That is too much.

One area that hasn't been addressed systematically is how we're doing on being a technologically up-to-date school district in terms of management. In a number of areas, teachers have told me we're behind a lot of districts. For example, a teacher can't process a purchase order for something for the classroom electronically. That seems very inefficient to me, and worth examining.

Over the last six years, the school district has had to close multi-million budget gaps, due to rising staff and energy costs and small budget increases. Since we start from very high funding levels, we have been able to close gaps without cutting essential programs or staff. That luxury will likely end soon. It is critical that someone like me, who understands budgets and can quickly synthesize information and take a top-level view of the budget serves on School Committee.

It takes a village to raise a child, including one in a school district. We must all work together, instead of getting caught up in petty politics, to ensure our budget dollars are spent in the most effective way possible.

I am very proud of the work Marc McGovern and I did as budget co-chairs a few years ago in getting the district's first ever budget guide out to every household in Cambridge. For a very modest amount of money - far less than we spend on some other publications, we send a comprehensive but readable guide to you, the city's taxpayers - who are footing the bill. The guide summarizes our budget spending, priorities, process and initiatives.

Buildings are important. CRLS is undergoing a very expensive renovation. And we have a very long list of elementary schools in need of renovation and repair. It will be very challenging to find the money to work on those buildings. But we must figure it out, since all children should be in buildings that enhance their learning, not ones in need of serious repair.

On the disposition of school buildings
The school department is using the former Longfellow School (and former Ninth Grade Academy), as swing space for school renovations. After that, we will need space for school department administration, hopefully space for renovating elementary schools in dire shape, and space for an expanding enrollment. We are likely to need the Longfellow building.

The Upton Street building is now the Amigos School in the fall of 2012. The building itself needs major work if it is to be used for a school on a permanent basis (new fire codes, accessibility issues, no open space, few bathrooms). The funds need to be allocated, so all students in Cambridge, including those at Amigos, have access to appropriate educational space.

Achievement Gap
While I hesitate to compare any group to white middle class (which I am), the fact that there are such large disparities along both socio-economic and racial/ethnic line is troubling. The average gap between white and African American in Cambridge, as measured by the usual albeit limited measure, proficiency on MCAS in 2011, is over 25 points. For Low income, and Hispanic/Latinos, it's also almost as big. And for special needs students, proficiency rates are about 1 in 4. The proficiency of low income, Afr. American and Latino students in Cambridge is less than 50%. AND that gap is unchanged in nine years. I worked with the Cambridge NAACP to document the gap and ask for a clear plan to address it. That is what matters most to the implementation of the IA.

I note that while our achievement gap is unacceptably high for proficiency, our district has an enviable record of high school graduation for all, and an especially great record for a group very difficult to reach, African American males.

The answer is deceptively simple: higher expectations, balanced schools, and acknowledge the gap publicly, since that is always the first step to addressing an issue.

Enrichment Programs
There's enrichment, which is usually thought of as an out of school time thing, and there is the separate issue of challenging curriculum. They're both important.

On enrichment
Cambridge has an array of enrichment programs, but they have not been well coordinated or communicated. There are many programs that help children go beyond the classroom work. Some programs, like Science Club for Girls, happen in our schools. Some, like The Math Circle, happen outside our schools. We should have a more comprehensive approach, an explicit program to stretch all students.

On the challenging curriculum
First, we need to make sure we are not dictating curriculum across the board. Secondly, we need to do more to ensure that academically strong students are engaged. I believe we do a good job of providing challenge to academically advanced students at the High School level. I don't believe we do a good enough job at the elementary level. For the new middle schools, we need to be thoughtful about how to ensure challenge, since that was a key motivating force for parents.

I have heard -- all of us on School Committee have heard -- about programs for struggling students, but have not ever had a report on programs for the other end of the ability spectrum. At the high school, we have a full array of courses, not only AP, but in science internships at Biogen and other companies which provide those students involved college level and beyond exposure and experience. If you complete through the math offerings, some students go to Harvard Extension. If you are ready for more than AP English or History, you have a range of options to ensure challenge.

Not so at the elementary level. It is an issue I have worked on, and plan to do more on if re-elected. A concern of mine stems from some research suggesting that if a district is not careful, the pressure of No Child Left Behind can be used to basically ignore those already proficient.

Enrollment
Our enrollment is going up, following a very steep decline - far greater than any district within Route 128. Our future challenge will be a good problem to have: how to manage our growth as students fill our classrooms. The reasons are fourfold:

Improvements: With the high school rebuilding itself, and some of the turmoil of the last decade over, families now look to CRLS as a terrific endpoint instead of a question mark. A key factor for success of the IA will be whether we stop losing students, a few percent every year, so that by the time a Kindergarten class is in 8th grade, it is 30% smaller in number.

Demographics: the city's school age population is growing

Economics: some people who used to pay for private schools can't

Consolidation fatigue over: the consolidation, which caused major disruption, was long enough ago that the district has been able to settle down and parents have been able to focus on the positive changes in the district, instead of feeling betrayed by a process that ripped apart the district without a clear educational rationale.

Elementary Schools and Curriculum
I support our elementary schools, which include a range of choices. I would like to see us take a look at programs across the different schools to see which ones merit replication in other schools. I believe that we need to do additional market research to better understand what families in Cambridge want, in order to ensure our enrollment keeps going up. The same schools have been overchosen for 15 years now. It is time to address the need for a new program, so that 100% of Kindergarten parents get one of their top 3 choices. That is a very reachable goal.

The curriculum should not be dictated from above, but decided upon by an individual school community, as long as the outcomes are mutually agreed upon. At Amigos, for example where my children attended for 6 years, the nature of a bilingual immersion program does not always fit with curriculum that might work at another school. Amigos should do what's best for its program. Similarly, an alternative project-based approach is appealing to many - the Graham & Parks, Cambridgeport and King Open all have aspects of it. Are we losing the specialness of these schools? Let's make sure the answer is no.

A policy change I advocate is second language at every school K-5. Our students live in a world where exposure to a new language, and to different cultures is not a nice-to-have, but a necessity.

High School Programs and Curriculum
Our high school is getting back to where it was many years ago: a highly regarded urban school. CRLS went through rough times, as it went through wrenching changes. WE now have a high school that works for many kids, with some stellar programs, and a sense of school spirit. The climate is important, since a healthy, vibrant school culture of high expectations is the best predictor for a high quality school.

It is also time to evaluate the block scheduling. Currently, unless a student doubles up on math, they go 8 months without math. Same with foreign language. This gap in learning is educationally problematic for those two subjects.

The range of course offerings, the great quality in so many areas and the upcoming renovation all bode well for continued success of CRLS. The challenges for the future include instilling small school feel and attention when the small learning communities are not allowed to differentiate and are not separate schools. The high school renovation project needs to be carefully managed. The new emphasis on science and engineering will take some careful thought as well.

There are other issues to address in the high school. We need to look at policies on AP grades and policies on use of technology in the classroom including when online and computer coursework is appropriate. I also believe that our discipline policy is too punitive and rigid. While we all like zero-tolerance, we also like forgiveness and support. Many of our policies sound too much like one strike and you're out.

Parent Involvement
Article after article, study upon study, research efforts across the board confirm: excellent schools invite, encourage, welcome and include parents and families. I will always advocate for participation and inclusiveness in discussions.

There is a new spirit of openness in the district. Let's build on the momentum coming from the new administration, and encourage families to be more involved.

Our communication efforts have greatly improved, but we have a long way to go. For a city which prides itself on being at a center of innovation, we have a school district that should be a top notch website and parent outreach program.

Environmental leadership
Due to my background and my passion, I have led the School Committee and school district towards greater environmental responsibility. My efforts led to the landmark hiring of our district's first full time Sustainability Manager. With the goal of a net-zero school for the King and Putnam Avenue Upper School, we continue to make substantive progress in this area.

With policies and practices, we are slowly moving towards high performance, sustainable district. The forum I put together on green school buildings with Harvard, MIT, and the state Green Schools program, led directly to some of the most innovative sustainable features of the CRLS renovation. Our school bus emissions program has helped alleviate toxic emissions from our buses daily polluting our air as they transport our children.

Our schools can and should be at the forefront of environmental education, building, and programs. Our city has made a commitment to being a city supportive of environmental sustainability. But we have not done enough to have a culture of environmental responsibility. I have been working in this area on a number of fronts, and if re-elected will continue this work. I bring my volunteer work in the community on environmental and energy issues - with Green Decade Cambridge, HEET, Green Streets - into my School Committee work. We do not yet live the ideal of incorporating sustainability into our practices as a district. We can and we should.

Explore extended learning time, including a longer school year
We need to have a community wide dialogue about how to avoid the summer backsliding that all kids experience. My colleague Richard Harding and I co-authored a column calling for extended school year for all CPS middle school students.

The summer backsliding is particularly acute for special needs students, for low income students and for students of color. Our school schedule is still based on a harvest that last happened in Cambridge more than a century ago. (Anyone know when?)

Ask any teacher what kids lose over the summer. Answer: A lot. I see it in my kids, and their Spanish. They are the part of the Amigos family that is not Latino at all. Without Spanish over the summer, they lose a lot. It is as true for other subjects, from math to writing to science. Ten weeks with no academics is too long.

A recent national educational study demonstrated the positive benefits of academically oriented summer programs, especially for middle school students. We should be at the forefront of addressing this challenge.

Patty Nolan 2013 Candidate Profile - Cambridge Chronicle

Candidate's 2009 responses     Candidate's 2007 responses

CCTV candidate video (2013)