Jones seeks meeting on waiver denial
Superintendent calls state’s rejection ‘unjust’
GREENWICH — After the state initially denied Greenwich Public Schools’ waiver to opt out of Connecticut’s new mandated K-3 reading curriculum, Superintendent Toni Jones requested a meeting with the state Department of Education to have the waiver reconsidered.
Jones sent a letter to state education officials on Dec. 15, requesting an in-person meeting for them to reconsider the district’s waiver since, she wrote, they reviewed the wrong materials.
“GPS requests a meeting because the department’s decision, as provided in the waiver template document provided to GPS, fails accurately to explain how GPS’s comprehensive reading curriculum does not meet the standard articulated in the statute,” Jones wrote.
Originally, a meeting was set up for Tuesday, but it didn’t happen because the state hasn’t provided documents needed for Jones to prepare for it, said Jonathan Supranowitz, director of communications for GPS. He said the meeting will most likely take place in February.
A state Department of Education spokesperson said in a statement that the requested documents are in the queue among “numerous” Freedom of Information requests.
“The Connecticut State Department of Education is doing its best to process all requests in a timely manner,” according to the statement.
The Right to Read Legislation was passed in June 2021 and requires the state to oversee school-led K-3 literacy efforts. However, districts with programs they thought could do the job as well as the state-recommended programs were able to request a waiver to use their own curriculum. Greenwich
submitted its waiver Feb. 27 of last year, according to a presentation made to the Board of Education in April.
In GPS’s waiver denial, the state said the district’s reading curriculum fell short on “comprehension,” and designated the waiver as “transitional.” State Department of Education Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker said at Tuesday’s Connecticut Black and Puerto Rican Caucus Forum that the “transitional” category means districts need “to do some addition and substitution” to their waiver.
Any district whose waiver was not fully approved can resubmit it, proving with data that its reading comprehension program meets state standards, which Greenwich has done. Jones wrote that Greenwich wants another chance, requested a waiver reconsideration and requested to meet with state education officials, including Russell-Tucker, in person.
“While we were pleased to see that the department acknowledged that our evidencebased and scientifically-based curriculum focuses on competency in the fluency, phonemic awareness, vocabulary and phonics, we are confident that our curriculum meets the statutory standard in the area of reading comprehension,” Jones wrote.
“Upon reviewing the feedback on our completed waiver tool, we noticed that the 2018 Reading Units of Study version was reviewed instead of the 2023 versions for grades K-2. Thus, the results provided to us on Dec. 1, 2023, are not reflective of the materials submitted,” Jones wrote.
Jones sent the nine-page letter, which included appendices, to Charles Hewes, the state’s deputy commissioner for academics and innovation; Russell-Tucker; state Department of Education Reading and Literacy Director Melissa Wlodarczyk Hickey; Greenwich Town Attorney Abby Wadler; state Sen. Ryan Fazio and some state representatives, including Hector Arzeno and Steve Meskers.
The 2018 Reading Units of Study version was criticized by the state for “materials (that) rely on cueing, including meaning, syntax and visual cues as a means to teach reading skills. The components of the program are not cohesive and often contradict the skills being taught, especially pertaining to the order of foundational skills instruction.”
“The updated 2023 versions do not have any references to the three cueing system for decoding,” Jones wrote to the state. “This was a major revision of earlier versions. The new units support our work in Heggerty, Fundations and Geodes. This is another area in the waiver review tool where there is a mismatch between the feedback and evidence given as to why the program does not meet standards and the version that was reviewed.
“It is unjust to use a review of a different product to score our waiver in the area of comprehension,” Jones wrote. “The criticisms indicated on our waiver review tool are not accurate and/or based on the review of the correct materials.”
Jones wrote that if the state, again, “determines that our submission has not met either standard, we request that the department clearly and comprehensively state, based on the requirements of the statute itself, how our curriculum program or model is statutorily inadequate.”
“We are providing a comprehensive early literacy curriculum in the area of comprehension, not only with high-quality instructional materials, but with effective instruction and robust professional learning for our teachers,” Jones wrote. “We strongly believe that our current comprehensive approach to K-3 literacy incorporates instruction in all five pillars of reading as well as being aligned with Greenwich Public School’s Vision of the Graduate.”