While I watched the Hartford Board of Education’s 2022 public hearing on the non-renewal of a teacher’s contract for the 2022-23 school year, aside from noting that the first question to the assembled members came from Board Member Escribano and concerned when they were getting a break rather than a question about the teacher’s case, I noted that this teacher was being fired for not meeting HPS’ expected goals of professional development, among other things. 

As I watched the meeting, my mind ventured where no current board member has gone before, and I thought how appropriate it would be to apply the goals assessment standard to the performance of Superintendent Torres-Rodriguez. And I’ll even let her set the goals.  Which she did and presented to the BOE just weeks before the start of the current school year as part of her “Strategic Plan” for HPS.

The Superintendent’s “Strategic Plan” listed six major goals for 2024.  Although it would be appropriate to compare the 2024 goal with data from the current school year, we are only in the 21st century where, although data travels faster than ever before, it is more fashionable to keep the public in data darkness until at least after the election or some other critical juncture on a public servant’s calendar.  So, while I compare the 2024 goal to data available from the 2021-22 school year, expect an update on the road to the goal using the current school year data sometime in October.

The Superintendent’s first stated goal is to have “at least 48% of Grade 3 students meeting Reading Proficiency as measured by SBAC (Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium).”  While all sorts of issues come to mind when a Superintendent’s goal to is to have more than half of her third graders be unable to read at grade level, we have to note that as far as available state education data is concerned, the hard working folks at EdSight do not provide us with “Reading Proficiency” data.  How convenient for the Superintendent.

EdSight does provide us with ELA (English Language Arts) data, which I assume consists of but is not limited to “Reading Proficiency.”  For the 2021-22 school year, only 15% of HPS third graders met or exceeded state standards for ELA as measured by SBAC.  In fact, since the reign of Torres-Rodriguez began nearly 8 years ago, we have not seen HPS third graders score better than 24% on this assessment.  And for those on the COVID crutch, this number was not trending north prior to COVID.

Goal number two is favored more by failed school leaders because it speaks to “growth” rather than student proficiency.  The Superintendent’s goal for SBAC’s “ELA Average Percentage of Target Achieved” is 73%, which she states is the state standard, it is not.  The state’s target for this measure is 100, which is the “average percentage of target achieved for ELA,” which is a measure of “how much of the growth target was achieved, on average, by students.” 

In 2021-22, HPS’ score on this measure was a lowly 51.9, which is 8 percentage points higher than where it was 3 years before COVID.  Since the 2016-17 school year (omitting the 2019-20 COVID shutdown year), HPS’ score on this measure has grown 20%.  With a 2021-22 score of 51.9, there must be a 40% increase between last year and next year to meet the Superintendent’s goal.  A 92% increase is required to meet the state’s target on this measure in 2024.

Whenever you hear the Superintendent mention the terms “high standards” and “rigorous education” in relation to her educational philosophy, point to goal number three, where she states that in 2024, “27%” of 8th graders will meet SBAC measurements for math proficiency.  This is like General Eisenhower telling his troops before the invasion of Normandy, “just get to the beach and it’s a win!”

The Superintendent’s goal of 27% in 2024 for 8th grade math proficiency will require a 172% increase over the 9.9% recorded in 2021-22.  The highest score recorded for this measurement during the Superintendent’s much too long stay in the driver’s seat of HPS is 14.9%.  

Goal number four, like number two (hmmm), is based on SBAC’s “average percentage of target achieved,” a growth measurement for which the Superintendent expects HPS students to obtain a 75, the state expects a 100.  Last year HPS students achieved a score of 65.2, the highest score since at least the 2016-17 school year.  So, no post-COVID excuse needed here.  However, not counting the 2019-20 school year, this measurement has grown less than 1% year over year, making the 75% target in 2024 a longshot.

Goal number five is a joke as anyone not drinking the Superintendent’s Kool-Aid knows the chicanery used by HPS to prop up graduation numbers.  That being said, the goal in 2024 is to prop up the “4 year cohort graduation rate” to 83%.   While the state is looking for a 94% number, HPS’s 4-year graduation rate in 2021-22 was 73.8%.  Again, this is another measure that has increased since at least 2 years before COVID, albeit only 2%.  Naturally, if you give them 6 years, the graduation rate is higher (77%), and if they stayed in high school until the age of 26, that number would be even greater.

Finally, goal number six states that chronic absenteeism in 2024 will be 12% or lower.  It’s one thing to set goals, it’s another to be completely delusional.  Last year, HPS had a chronic absenteeism rate of 46% and it was at 36% last month.  Despite HPS’ CA rate being at 36% last month, 7% higher than it was at the beginning of this school year and failing to drop over two consecutive months during this school year, the Superintendent calls this “positive momentum.”

Switching back to the earlier mentioned case of one of nearly 250 teachers who have left HPS this year, the district attorney presented evidence at the meeting to show how professional development assistance, coaching assistance, and peer counseling was provided to this teacher to help him obtain professional development goals.

A similar comparison can be made in the Superintendent’s case.  The Superintendent spends millions of dollars each year on tutoring assistance, new curriculums, programs by “top ranked” third parties promising excellence, assistance of local “non-profits” and for profits, programs to drag students out of their jammies and into school, and a plethora of other resources designed to assist the district in meeting its educational goals.

The district’s case against the fired teacher mentioned in part that despite his seven years of teaching, he was still not meeting professional development goals.  That exasperation, the facts, the missed goals, and the dim outlook for improvement was used by the BOE to follow the district voice and vote not to renew this teacher’s contract.

When they next raise a Kool-Aid glass to consider the Superintendent’s next contract extension, the BOE should consider the goals set forth here which she herself set. They should consider her nearly 8-year tenure question the outlook.  They should weigh the costly resources she employs to miss goals and maintain mediocrity, if not failure.  They should ask why nearly 250 teachers left the district in 2022-23. 

When goals cannot be met, don’t adjust the goals downward, make an adjustment to the means employed to reach that goal.