Dear Editor:
I was disheartened by the recent Hoboken Board of Education (BOE) decision to pursue further legal action against HoLa a third time, saddened by the impact on our small community, and stunned to learn that private monies will be now used. As an HoLa parent, I am very proud of its myriad accomplishments. Students would benefit from two more years of HoLa’s unique dual language curriculum and 8th grade would provide a “natural” departure point from which to enter high school (rather than a transfer to a new school for just two years). HoLa’s existing 6th graders do not deserve to have their existing state approved entry into 7th grade in just 4 months hanging in the balance. These are children, not political pawns or easier targets as I question whether the Hoboken BOE would have litigated against the Elysian Charter School if it were a K-6 program attempting to expand to 8th grade.
I appreciate the complexities and factors that the BOE has selected to focus upon when rationalizing their decision. This matter is deep, historical, and in need of a nuanced, community-based solution; one that includes a compelling strategy to garner funding reform at the state level. Ongoing litigation directed at HoLa focuses the conversation extensively on HoLa and not on the more important conversations that will lead to a brighter future for Hoboken’s public school students. Ongoing litigation against HoLa is not a grand solution. A grand solution requires elected leaders are willing to address tough questions straight on and non-defensively: 1) Why are the majority of Hoboken’s school-age children not enrolled in the public school system? 2) Why do many families leave Hoboken when children become school age? 3) How can we have a mature, compassionate conversation about poverty and its impact on educational achievement, and not just hint at it when it is politically convenient? 4) What specifically are the barriers facing low income children who are underperforming? What does research tell us about how to maximize learning? 5) What can we learn other communities with the same financial resources? 6) Who are the individuals and organizations in Hoboken that possess the talent and expertise to make a difference? 7) How can we better articulate needs to the State Department of Education in a way that comes from a place of “we” and not “us versus them”? Such questions do not invalidate prior efforts but present an opportunity to look at whether current efforts are actually working.
This is Hoboken. We don’t have to be that community that just blames lower test scores on poverty. Community cohesion, innovation, and the collaboration of Hoboken’s best and brightest adults is the soil in which a real solution will take root for our children. I hope that the divisiveness which has sadly been woven into the fabric of so many recent conversations can end. We may disagree on this matter, but a few things are clear…..we love our children, we love Hoboken, and we can do better.
David Celiberti