A school district’s equity policy signals to folks that your district is not becoming a charter school, which the Civil Rights Project at UCLA call a “civil rights failure.”

Having an equity policy on the books signals that district leadership is tenacious in its commitment to social justice.  An Equity policy represents a significant effort on the part of the district to ensure that its schools promote equity and inclusivity in education.  An equity policy represents the equitable and inclusive framework required to foster equality in an education setting.

An equity policy, says Hartford Public Schools Superintendent Torres-Rodriguez, is a commitment “to identifying and correcting practices and policies that perpetuate the achievement gap and institutional racism in all forms.” It is a tool to tear down the “structural issues unique to Hartford Public Schools.”  An equity policy is a blueprint for building an equity structure.  An equity policy links all the actions and policies that the district puts in place into a meaningful show of intentional justice. 

Also, a potential teacher running across an HPS ad for teachers, may be swayed by the presence of, or the lack of, a codified equity policy, as he/she browses the HPS website, Google, ChatGPT, and the Hartford Schools Report for a profile of Hartford schools.   It also could weigh heavily on the decision of veteran teaches to stay in the district.  It could weigh heavily on a suburban parent’s decision to send their child to Hartford, or a Hartford student’s decision to look elsewhere for his/her education.  Amidst teacher shortages and sinking enrollment, an equity policy may serve as a dam in a fast-moving river of failure.

A codified equity policy is required because people don’t react based on thoughts running through our head.  People react to our actions.  A codified equity policy is required because we are not in 1954 anymore, when an equity policy was fashioned in 3 words by a school board in Topeka, Kansas: Separate but Equal.

Yet, despite the Superintendent’s often cited “structural” issues at HPS - a “structure” she’s been standing over the past 7 years - despite the issues which gave rise to Black Lives Matter, despite George Floyd and others, despite the fact that everyone’s doing it, Hartford Public Schools does not have a formal, codified equity policy.

HPS has a policy on what color pants your child should be wearing to school, but they do not have an equity policy.  HPS has a policy on how a student may be held accountable for tearing a page out of a textbook (one of those not purchased and stored unused in the school’s basement), but they do not have an equity policy.  HPS has policies regarding the handling of student activity funds (hoping that the trustee doesn’t make off with the piggy bank), but they do not have an equity policy. HPS has a policy on keeping staff advised of policies, but they do not have an equity policy.

A 2021 audit by the good folks from the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE), showed that HPS had 247 policies.  None was an equity policy.  CABE said HPS needed at least 19 more policies.  None of those recommended was an equity policy.  On the HPS website is listed the 21 different departments of the school district, headed by 21 different well paid “Chiefs.”  None of them is a department of Equity, Inclusion, and Justice, or something similarly named showing a commitment to equity (not that I condone the adding another office of public rhetoric to the Superintendent’s central office, in their new million dollar downtown home ).  A reimagining of HPS’ 3-year “Strategic Plan” in May of 2021 did not mention a goal of having or a need for an equity policy.

However, it’s not like it never came up on the radar.  At a Policy Committee meeting on March 14, 2019, a “Racial Equity Policy” was introduced as a “New Category.”  Deputy Superintendent of HPS at the time, Alberto Vazquez-Matos, brought along an equity policy, for modeling purposes, from the Hillsborough County Public Schools, the one in Florida, not New Hampshire, my hometown county.  Former Board Member Karen Taylor correctly suggested that the policy’s scope be widened from a pure “racial equity” policy, to an “educational equity” policy.  She stated she would have a draft ready by the next Policy Committee meeting.

A Hartford Board of Education Member stating that she would “draft” an equity policy?!  Nowadays, it’s hard to get a BOE Member to draft a question.  Ms. Taylor, a former Weaver High graduate, now heads the city’s Office of Equity and Opportunity. 

In June, Ms. Taylor brought her draft equity policy to the Policy Committee.  There was a lengthy vetting of the idea, with many questions asked, and Ms. Taylor “gave the committee homework to think about for the next meeting,” stated the Committee’s report.  It’s interesting to note the absence of the Superintendent’s slideshows at these meetings, unlike at Board meetings she dictates today.

Ms. Taylor left these thoughts for the Committee:

• “Why there is a need for this policy.”

• “What is the context, vis a vis with other towns, tale of 2 states? Inner city to inner city?”

• “What is the best definition for educational equity?”

• “List of additional considerations.”

All was quiet on the equity front however, until February of 2020.  Board Members Ayesha Clarke, Shonta Browdy, and Ms. Taylor attended an “equity symposium” hosted by the Councils of Urban Education (CUBE) and promised the Board a presentation on the event. 

In March of 2020, the Committee discussed an “Equity Toolkit,” and that there had been “community conversations on equity.”

The report of the Policy Committee in November 2020 simply stated, “The discussion continued, on how the policies would be addressed.”

And then the idea of an equity policy appears to have gone MIA and was not brought up again until a Policy Committee meeting this past week.    No, no member of this Board offered to “draft” a policy for review.

The initial draft of a policy as presented at this meeting, is a morphing together of an equity policy from the Charlotte-MecKlenburg School District (CMS) in Charlotte, North Carolina, and a suggested policy from CABE.   CMS is currently undergoing a search for a new superintendent while the National Coalition Against Censorship is searching for evidence on why the CMS is removing 2 books from its library.

As of now, a “General Statement of Policy” of HPS’ work-in-progress policy contains the following “District value”:

“Academic and participation outcomes, not intentions, shall be the measure of whether we are successful.”

Actions, not thoughts.

The real trick will be for this Board to define “academic outcomes” and “participation.”  Policies must contain definitions of key measures, or it becomes merely a policy of intentions, meaning, whatever school leadership intends the policy to say.

A paragraph in the patch work policy states as follows:

“Practices, procedures, and programs that result in over or under representation of any group of students compared to peers shall be subject to close review to assure that such results are due to meeting student legitimate educational, social or emotional needs.”

When Bethany Silver, the Superintendent’s Chief Performance Office, was asked for clarity on this paragraph by Board Member Walker, Ms. Silver explained it with an excruciatingly ridiculous example. 

Ms. Silver stated that if 75% of a school’s student body were students on free and reduced lunch, then having a school baseball team made up of only those who are not socio-economically challenged, would mean that the baseball team has struck out on the district’s pitch for equity. 

After further questioning, Ms. Silver dusted off the plate and stated that the aim would be to ensure that the baseball team is welcoming to a diverse student body, to all students.  Let’s have the “baseball team” simply be a metaphor for “practices, procedures, and programs” and not an actual baseball team that needs to have 75% of its players be eligible for free and reduced lunch.  The aim is access for all.

This was the first reading of this policy, which means it will make another showing at a later Policy Committee meeting, hopefully within 2 years.  Ms. Silver, nor any member of the Board, gave out thought homework concerning this policy as the group moved on to discussing how Hartford children need “alternative education programs” in order for them to succeed.

Board Member Johnson, Chair of the Committee, would then cut the meeting short, stating, “I have a lot to do.”

The “community” was mentioned 15 times in this model policy, yet no discussion was brought forth by the Board recommending that they ought to engage that “community” in the crafting of this policy which intends to reflect respect for the “community.”  Actions, not thoughts.

I could go on about this, but I have a lot to do.