Summary of HBOE Candidates Based on Top Qualities of Board Members and Answers to Hoboken Patch Survey (Part III)

Here’s a summary of the current Hoboken Board of Education candidates based on the New Jersey Board of Education qualities—vision, collaboration, fiscal responsibility, integrity, and advocacy—applied to the candidates’ answers to the recent Hoboken Patch questions and answers. 

Note: This information is simply to assist in making assessments of the candidates on one simple rubric - a Q&A published by a local news outlet. Factors involved in voting are many and varied. Make your own voting decisions accordingly. This site does not support any particular candidate for the 2025 Hoboken Board of Education election but encourages everyone eligible to vote. 

Leslie Norwood 

Norwood demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of governance, ethics, and strategic planning. Her emphasis on data-driven improvement, fiscal responsibility, and student-centered decision-making stands out. She links her professional expertise in finance and infrastructure law directly to district needs, reflecting both analytical skill and ethical stewardship. Her service on multiple boards, her proactive pursuit of NJSBA certification, and her advocacy for literacy training show deep commitment to accountability and continuous improvement. Norwood embodies nearly every quality of an effective trustee—visionary, collaborative, and grounded in ethics.

---

Antonio Graña

Graña’s combination of long-term public service, experience on the state legislative subcommittee on PILOTs, and current BOE leadership positions him as a strong, experienced policymaker. His responses show strategic thinking, particularly on facilities expansion and intergovernmental collaboration. While less detailed on community engagement, his data-oriented and policy-driven approach fits the trustee profile well. His refusal to politicize national issues also reflects integrity and professionalism, though his lack of transparency on his vote slightly weakens his openness rating.

---

Elizabeth “Lizy” Velez

Velez brings strong advocacy skills, professional discipline as a litigator, and genuine empathy rooted in her work with special education families. Her support for inclusive practices (like collaborative team teaching) demonstrates creativity and student-centered vision. While newer to governance, her responses indicate analytical rigor, ethical awareness, and a deep respect for process and community engagement. With more board experience, she could become a top-tier trustee.

---

Laura Block

Block offers sincere commitment and community involvement but lacks the strategic and policy-oriented depth of the top three. Her answers are earnest and focused on facilities and inclusivity, but they remain general. She’d bring valuable parent perspective and collaborative spirit, yet her responses suggest limited experience in data-driven or fiscal governance.

---

Tim Smith 

Smith’s community engagement and listening focus are commendable, but his answers show limited understanding of board responsibilities, governance ethics, or fiscal policy. His resistance to universal free lunch and emphasis on “listening” over decision-making suggest a reactive, not visionary, approach. He appears earnest and community-minded but underprepared for the complex, policy-level responsibilities of a trustee.

---

The 2025 Ragamuffin Parade is Friday, October 31; Plan for road closures and detours; HPD Halloween safety reminders

Residents are reminded that the annual Hoboken Ragamuffin Parade kicks off at 4:30 p.m., on Friday, Oct. 31. Lineup will begin at 4 p.m., at the intersection of 10th and Washington Streets. The parade route will head down Washington to Fifth Street, where participants can take advantage of a step and repeat photo opportunity.   

Hoboken Board of Education Candidates' Summary of Answers to Key Questions (Part 2): Who Supported the School Referendum? How Does Each feel about Superintendent Johnson?

Recently, Hoboken Board of Education  candidates were questioned on a number of issues concerning public school education in Hoboken. Today is Part 1 of a two part analysis of the candidates' responses. The original answers to the surveys can be accessed on Hoboken Patch (Responses 1; Responses 2).  

 Part 2 of this summary is presented here today: 

Here’s how each of the five candidates responded regarding support for the $241 M facilities plan in 2022:

• Elizabeth “Lizy” Velez: Supported the referendum (voted in favor) but criticized the lack of community feedback.

• Antonio Graña: Supported the referendum as a private citizen prior to joining the board.

• Leslie Norwood: Voted in favor of the referendum, while noting the process was flawed and needed better community participation.

• Laura Block: Fully supported the 2022 plan and emphasized the need to upgrade facilities for the growing student population.

• Tim Smith: Did not support continuing with the same approach, citing the community’s clear rejection of the 2022 referendum.

So, in summary: Velez, Graña, Norwood, and Block supported the 2022 plan; Smith opposed it.

Here’s what each candidate conveyed—explicitly or implicitly—about Superintendent Christine Johnson in their responses:

---

Leslie Norwood

Opinion: Strongly positive and confident in Johnson’s leadership.
Evidence: Norwood explicitly praises Johnson’s work, saying she has “done an excellent job developing innovative programs such as the aviation program, the innovation lab and the new financial literacy lab with Bloomberg terminals.” She supports Johnson’s focus on closing achievement gaps and applauds the district’s overall academic gains, which she attributes in part to Johnson’s vision.
Summary: Norwood views Johnson as an innovative and effective superintendent whose leadership has driven the district’s progress.

---

Antonio Graña

Opinion: Very supportive and affirming of Johnson’s leadership.
Evidence: Graña notes that since joining the Board, he has become “even more impressed by the leadership, vision, and dedication of our faculty and administration.” As a current trustee and committee chair, he implicitly credits Johnson’s administration with the district’s growth and success.
Summary: Graña expresses confidence in Johnson’s strategic direction and teamwork with the Board.

---

Elizabeth “Lizy” Velez

Opinion: Respectful and implicitly supportive.
Evidence: While Velez does not mention Johnson by name, her repeated references to the district’s strong performance, inclusivity, and responsiveness to families suggest she credits the current leadership for these achievements. Her focus on collaboration and community engagement aligns with Johnson’s leadership approach.
Summary: Velez supports the current administration’s outcomes and priorities, even if she stops short of naming Johnson directly.

---

Laura Block

Opinion: Neutral to mildly positive but nonspecific.
Evidence: Block’s answers praise the district’s direction and express appreciation for the schools’ progress but do not mention Johnson or her leadership. Her comments center on facilities and community collaboration, not district administration.
Summary: Block does not explicitly evaluate Johnson; her responses suggest general approval of district performance without a clear personal stance.

---

Tim Smith

Opinion: Generally positive about staff and district performance but avoids specific praise for leadership.
Evidence: Smith says the “Hoboken Public School District is doing an excellent job educating the students,” noting that “the entire staff is working hard.” He never refers to Johnson directly, framing his praise around teachers and the broader community rather than administration.
Summary: Smith expresses satisfaction with district results but is noncommittal about Johnson’s role.

---

Overall Summary

• Explicit supporters: Leslie Norwood, Antonio Graña

• Implicit supporters: Lizy Velez

• Neutral / no comment: Laura Block, Tim Smith

Norwood and Graña clearly admire Johnson’s leadership; Velez seems aligned with her outcomes and philosophy; Block and Smith remain neutral, focusing instead on facilities and community relations.

Hoboken Board of Education Candidates' Summary of Answers to Key Questions (Part 1)

Recently, Hoboken Board of Education  candidates were questioned on a number of issues concerning public school education in Hoboken. Today is Part 1 of a two part analysis of the candidates' responses. The original answers to the surveys can be accessed on Hoboken Patch (Responses 1; Responses 2).  

 Part 2 of this summary will be published on Friday (October 31), and a final ranking will be published shortly afterwards. 

This year, the candidates for three open spots are:

• Leslie Norwood (incumbent)
• Antonio Grana (incumbent)
• Elizabeth "Lizy" Velez 
• Russ Koyfman
• Laura Block
• Tim Smith

Here’s a concise comparison of the candidates’ responses to Longer Question 2 (Biggest Challenge), Longer Question 4 (Overall Impression of the District), and Longer Question 6 (Facilities Plan and Buildings):

---

Longer Question 2 – Biggest Challenge Facing Hoboken Schools

Similarities:
All five candidates agree that space and facilities are the district’s biggest challenges. They consistently connect enrollment growth with aging infrastructure and the need for expansion. Everyone acknowledges that the district’s academic performance is strong and that physical capacity must now catch up with success.

Differences:

• Velez, Graña, and Norwood take a strategic, policy-oriented view, discussing data, financing models (like Public Private Partnerships), and long-term planning.

• Block and Smith focus more generally on learning more about facilities and securing funding, showing less familiarity with specific policy mechanisms.

• Velez emphasizes community engagement and communication after the failed referendum.

• Graña stresses his state-level experience and coordination with developers and the city.

• Norwood highlights the academic implications of facilities design, tying space needs directly to educational quality.

---

Longer Question 4 – Overall Impression of the District

Similarities:
All five praise the district’s trajectory, academic performance, and dedicated staff. Each expresses pride in Hoboken’s progress and optimism about its future.

Differences:

• Norwood provides quantitative data (AP scores, rankings) and links them to district initiatives, reflecting a data-driven, governance mindset.

• Velez focuses on special education inclusion and her personal experiences as a parent.

• Graña centers his response on confidence in district leadership and his insider’s perspective as a current trustee.

• Block’s answer seems incomplete or repeated from another question, offering little substance beyond a general desire for collaboration with the city.

• Smith is positive but brief, noting the district is doing “an excellent job” without elaboration.

---

Longer Question 6 – 2022 Facilities Plan and Future of Buildings

Similarities:
All five agree that facilities need improvement and that space constraints persist. Most supported (or would have supported) the 2022 plan conceptually.

Differences:

• Velez, Norwood, and Graña voted for or supported the 2022 plan but criticized its lack of community input. They see future solutions requiring both transparency and creative financing.

• Block also supported the plan but focuses mainly on securing funding, offering less about process or engagement.

• Smith opposed continuing the same approach, emphasizing that the community’s rejection must be respected and that future efforts must start from consensus rather than advocacy for the old plan.

• Norwood provides the most detailed analysis, citing building age, capacity data, demographic projections, and state requirements—showing deep understanding of both facilities management and governance.

---

Summary

• Consensus: Space and facilities are the dominant issue; the district’s performance is strong.

• Differences: Norwood, Graña, and Velez are strategic and data-informed; Block and Smith are community- and parent-oriented but less specific on governance.

• Distinctive Strengths:

  • Norwood: Most detailed and policy-grounded.

  • Graña: Experienced, pragmatic, systems-level thinker.

  • Velez: Analytical advocate with empathy for diverse learners.

  • Block: Genuine community volunteer.

  • Smith: Grounded listener emphasizing community consensus.

Key Voting Regulations, Places to Vote, Vote by Mail Infomration for Hoboken, NJ - November 3, 2025

🗓 Election Day

Tuesday, November 4, 2025
Polls Open: 6:00 AM – 8:00 PM

---

🧾 Register to Vote

Deadline: Tuesday, October 14, 2025

You can register if you:

• Are a U.S. citizen

• Will be 18 years old by November 4, 2025

• Have lived in your county for at least 30 days

How to Register:

• Online: nj.gov/state/elections

• In Person:

  • Hudson County Superintendent of Elections
    257 Cornelison Ave., 4th Floor, Jersey City
    Open 9 AM–9 PM on Oct. 14

  • Hoboken City Hall
    Open 4–9 PM on Oct. 9, 10, and 14

---

✉️ Vote by Mail

• Apply by mail: by Oct. 28, 2025

• Apply in person: by Nov. 3, 2025 (before 3 PM)

Ways to Return Your Ballot:

• Mail: Must be postmarked by Nov. 4

• Drop Boxes (before 8 PM on Nov. 4):

  • 94 Washington St. (Newark St. side)

  • Corner of 6th & Hudson St.

  • Monroe St. (between 7th & 8th)

🚫 Do not bring mail-in ballots to early voting sites or polling places on Election Day.

---

🕐 Early Voting

Dates: Saturday, Oct. 25 – Sunday, Nov. 2
Hours:

• Fri–Sat: 10 AM–8 PM

• Sun: 10 AM–6 PM

Locations:

• City Hall (Newark St. entrance)

• Mile Square Theater Annex, 420 14th St. (ramp entrance)

---

📍 Polling Place Updates

• Ward 6, District 3:
  From Hoboken Public Library → Brant School, 201 9th St.

• Ward 4, District 7:
  From Multi-Service Center → Monroe Gardens, 221 Jackson St.

---

♿ Accessible Voting

If you have a disability and need help voting:

• Call 201-369-3470 (Option 6)

• Accessible voting devices are available at polling places on Election Day.

• Polling Location List (City of Hoboken) (UPDATED 4/7/22)

City Ward Maps

The City of Hoboken is made up of six (6) wards, each with several voting districts.

• Hoboken Ward Map (updated as of 1/24/22)
• Ward Populations Revised
• 1st Ward
• 2nd Ward
• 3rd Ward
• 4th Ward
• 5th Ward
• 6th Ward

‍ONE PAGE HANDOUT/PRINTABLE

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Hoboken Mayoral Candidates Debate- Tues October 28 7PM

Hoboken Mayoral Candidate Debate / Debate de los candidatos a la alcaldía de Hoboken

• Tuesday, October 28, 2025
• 7:00 PM  8:30 PM

• TG Connors Elementary School
  201 Monroe StreetHoboken, NJ, 07030United States 

CLICK TO ENLARGE 

 

Equity, Integrity, Collaboration? Don’t Buy the HobokenBOE Trustees’ Sales Pitch

Recently, a letter to the editor in Hudson County View featured a group of current and former Hoboken Board of Education trustees—Sharyn Angley, Malani Cademartori, Sheillah Dallara, Chetali Khanna, and Ailene McGuirk—throwing their support behind two candidates in the upcoming election. While I take no position in endorsing or opposing any candidate, I do feel compelled to remind the community of this group’s track record. Words like “integrity, equity, and respectful collaboration” may sound noble, but when measured against actual actions, these trustees fall short.

First, integrity. For more than a decade, Superintendent Johnson falsely claimed to hold a doctorate. Not one of these trustees held her accountable for deceiving the public. Silence in the face of dishonesty is not integrity—it’s complicity.

Second, equity. District test scores consistently reveal a troubling truth: Black and Hispanic students in Hoboken lag significantly behind their White peers across the entire K–12 spectrum. Yet rather than tackling these disparities with urgency, the trustees continue to congratulate themselves and focus on image. Equity isn’t achieved through slogans—it requires real work, and that work has not been done.

Third, integrity again. Ailene McGuirk and her allies on the Board spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars on a public relations campaign branding all district schools as “blue ribbon schools.” This was flatly misleading. A handful of schools earn the Blue Ribbon designation nationally each year; Hoboken’s schools did not. Spending scarce resources to mislead the public is the opposite of integrity.

Finally, collaboration. In 2022, these same trustees attempted to push through a massive $241 million bond referendum ($330 million with interest) with minimal community input. Respectful collaboration means engaging stakeholders, listening to concerns, and building consensus. Instead, the Board tried to ram through the largest capital project in the city’s history under the radar. That is not collaboration—it is arrogance.

Taken together, this record paints a clear picture. These trustees may be polished in their messaging, but when it comes to governance, transparency, and accountability, their actions reveal a consistent pattern: prioritize optics over substance, spin over truth, and public relations over the hard work of improving schools.

As voters weigh this election, they should remember: words are cheap. What matters is the record. And this record shows that Hoboken’s students, families, and taxpayers deserve better.

I support no candidate or slate in this election. 

Hoboken Board of Education Candidate Forum - Hoboken Public Library — October 15, 2025

 

Hoboken BOE Candidate Forum- October 15, 2025

Hoboken Board of Education Candidate Forum

Hoboken Public Library — October 15, 2025
Moderator: Peter Biancamano

On October 15, 2025, I viewed the Hoboken Board of Education Candidate Forum held at the Hoboken Public Library. This event gave the community a chance to hear directly from the people running for the Board of Education about their ideas, concerns, and plans for the Hoboken School District. The forum was led by moderator Peter Biancamano and included six candidates: Laura Block, Antonio Grana, Russ Koyfman, Leslie Norwood, Tim Smith, and Elizabeth Velez.

During the evening, candidates answered questions about important topics like school buildings, taxes, new programs, charter schools, and how they would work with the superintendent. Each candidate brought a perspective, shaped by their personal and professional experiences.

I took notes during the forum and organized them by question so that families, students, and community members can quickly see where the candidates agree, where they differ, and what their priorities are for Hoboken’s schools. Any errors are my own. Also, I do not endorse any of these candidates or tickets. (Full video is available HERE). 

Candidates

• Laura Block

• Antonio Grana

• Russ Koyfman

• Leslie Norwood

• Tim Smith

• Elizabeth Velez

---

Opening Statements

• Block emphasized growth in Hoboken and the need to align schools with the city’s future.

• Grana tied schools to the heart of community life and stressed transparency and new construction.

• Koyfman framed schools as the bedrock of society, calling for equity and responsibility.

• Norwood highlighted her long involvement, stressing leadership, capital improvements, and closing achievement gaps.

• Smith noted his perspective as a long-time resident and parent, with volunteer experience in athletics and schools.

• Velez focused on advocacy, especially for special needs inclusion, drawing on her legal background.

Overall: Candidates set a tone of pride in Hoboken’s progress, while acknowledging growth, facilities, and equity as persistent issues.

---

1. Challenges Facing the District

• Grana: Facilities and a long-term plan.

• Koyfman: Aligning all four districts, avoiding “winners and losers.”

• Norwood: Space needs; academic success but more process required.

• Smith: Gifted and vocational education; focus on workforce skills.

• Velez: Academic growth, but urgent building needs.

• Block: Facilities aging; even logistics like lunch schedules show strain.

Overall: Facilities and space dominated the discussion, but Smith brought in workforce preparation, while Koyfman raised structural inequities across Hoboken’s multiple districts.

---

2. Taxes and Financial Accountability

• Koyfman: Citizen oversight, responsive contracts.

• Norwood: Budget presentations happen; rising healthcare costs.

• Smith: Greater transparency, shared expenses, facility revenue.

• Velez: District operates within the 2% cap; regular audits.

• Block: Federal/state grants and rentals can ease the burden.

• Grana: Inflation is real, but district has improved academic standing.

Overall: Transparency and creative revenue were common themes. Norwood and Grana defended current practices, while others pushed for fresh accountability and external funding.

---

3. New High School Question

• Norwood: Cost and location of past plan were problematic; need more space but not necessarily a high school.

• Smith: Cost was too high, but consensus needed; kids learn differently now.

• Velez: Supported last referendum but emphasized community engagement moving forward.

• Block: A supporter of the failed referendum, but admitted mistake in not engaging the public enough.

• Grana: Called his own referendum effort a mistake; redevelopment must now include schools.

• Koyfman: Wants collaboration and clarity on funding sources; warned against siloed thinking.

Overall: Every candidate recognized the missteps of the last referendum. The common ground: community engagement is essential, and facilities planning must be transparent and inclusive.

---

4. Programs to Expand or Introduce

• Smith: Focus on average students; broaden vocational pathways.

• Velez: More advanced courses, high-impact tutoring, diverse faculty.

• Block: Comprehensive academic programs, from financial literacy to aviation.

• Grana: Use data to close gaps; double down on Orton-Gillingham (OG).

• Koyfman: Push for project-based learning, dual language, innovation labs.

• Norwood: Oversight role; supports OG program.

Overall: Strong focus on inclusivity across ability levels—OG for struggling readers, AP/advanced courses, and vocational training. Innovation and career readiness featured heavily.

---

5. Impact of New Governor on State Funding

• Velez: Funding cap limits flexibility.

• Block: Stronger oversight needed; rely on Education Foundation.

• Grana: Cited NJ’s strong national standing.

• Koyfman: More about resourcefulness than resources.

• Norwood: Warned of dire state-level cuts, especially Title I.

• Smith: Called for greater collaboration across city institutions.

Overall: Most agreed state funding will tighten. Candidates differed on whether the answer lies in advocacy, creativity, or partnerships.

---

6. Working with Superintendent Johnson

• Block, Smith, Velez: Expressed strong confidence in her leadership.

• Grana, Norwood: Emphasized governance and oversight roles.

• Koyfman: Positive but more distant—“heard good things.”

Overall: Consensus that Dr. Johnson has been effective. The candidates balanced praise with reminders of the board’s oversight role.

---

7. Relationship with Charter Schools

• Grana & Norwood: Acknowledge structural division of four districts; concern over PILOTs and funding.

• Koyfman & Velez: Stress collaboration rather than antagonism.

• Smith: Noted crossover of charter students into Hoboken HS, calling it healthy.

• Block: Stressed improved relationships, less divisiveness.

Overall: None advocated hostility toward charters. The debate was more about funding equity and integration into the broader educational ecosystem.

---

8. Unique Contributions

• Koyfman: Bridge builder, policy and accountability focus.

• Norwood: Legal expertise, personal stake in dyslexia advocacy.

• Smith: Strong listener, broad community reach.

• Velez: Litigator with advocacy skills, special needs parent.

• Block: Accessible, present at school events.

• Grana: Leadership consultant, zoning board experience, redevelopment law expertise.

Overall: Each leaned into professional expertise or personal connections. A mix of legal, policy, advocacy, and accessibility strengths.

---

9. Access to HHS Pool

• Norwood: Available now, but old and inadequate.

• Smith: Open to more public use.

• Velez: Public access when available; noted Special Olympics use.

• Block: Wants Recreation Department partnership; past failures.

• Grana: Sees municipal pool as priority; stressed safety.

• Koyfman: Open to community use, but students come first.

Overall: Agreement that community access is good but tempered by concerns over safety, facilities, and student priority.

---

Closing Comments

• Velez: Teaming with Norwood and Grana; praised district progress.

• Smith: Appreciative of community engagement; called for open eyes.

• Norwood: Emphasized importance of elections; noted her immigrant background.

• Koyfman: Pledged open heart and critical mind; uncompromising on quality.

• Grana: Pointed to steady record of improvement; cited strong community feedback.

• Block: Expressed love for Hoboken and belief in education’s central role.

Overall: Candidates closed with personal appeals and reaffirmed their core messages. The themes of progress, collaboration, and facilities planning carried through.

CLICK TO ENLARGE

Hoboken Board of Education Candidate Forum - Oct 15 6:30PM Hoboken Library

 

Hoboken Public Library will host a Board of Education Candidate Forum on Wednesday, October 15, from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. at the Main Library, 500 Park Avenue. This event is part of the Library’s Let’s Get Civic! civic engagement initiative to empower residents with nonpartisan election information. Moderated by Peter Biancamano of The Pulse with Peter B., the forum will provide an opportunity for candidates to discuss their priorities and answer community questions. Admission is free with required registration, and a livestream option will be available.

Registration Information:

https://hobokenlibrary.libnet.info/event/14572791

Stevens University to Offer Free Tuition for Low Income Families

Beginning in fall 2026, Stevens Institute of Technology will offer full tuition coverage for undergraduate students whose families earn $75,000 or less per year. The initiative, known as The Stevens Investment, applies to first-time, first-year, full-time undergraduate U.S. citizens or permanent residents admitted to a degree program.

To qualify, eligible students must complete both the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and the CSS Profile by the institution’s application deadlines. The program aims to increase access to higher education by removing financial barriers for students from lower-income households.

"At Stevens, we recognize that exceptional students come from all backgrounds and economic circumstances,” said President Nariman Farvardin. “Our role as an institution is to identify that potential and work to remove barriers that might prevent these talented individuals from accessing the transformative education Stevens provides.”

Vice President for Enrollment Management Cindy Chin added, “The Stevens Investment represents years of strategic planning to ensure talented students can feel at home at Stevens. We are thrilled to have arrived at this milestone, and to be able to put a Stevens education within reach for more students.”

The new initiative complements existing aid offerings. For the incoming class of 2025, Stevens awarded over $38 million in institutional aid, with nearly 99.9% of students receiving some form of merit- or need-based support. In the 2024–2025 academic year, undergraduate students received more than $190 million in total financial aid from internal and external sources.

In April 2025, U.S. News & World Report ranked Stevens No. 9 nationally for return on investment 40 years after enrollment. The university has also introduced programs such as SUCCESS, a first-year student curriculum focused on life skills, and The Frontiers of Technology, a curriculum designed to expose students to emerging fields.

A Message from a Kindergarten Teacher

 

A message from a Kindergarten teacher:

After forty years in the classroom, my career ended with one small sentence from a six-year-old:

“My dad says people like you don’t matter anymore.”

No sneer. No malice. Just quiet honesty — the kind that cuts deeper because it’s innocent. He blinked, then added, “You don’t even have a TikTok.”

My name is Mrs. Clara Holt, and for four decades, I taught kindergarten in a small Denver suburb. Today, I stacked the last box on my desk and locked the door behind me.

When I started teaching in the early 1980s, it felt like a promise — a shared belief that what we did mattered. We weren’t rich, but we were valued. Parents brought warm cookies to parent nights. Kids gave you handmade cards with hearts that didn’t quite line up. Watching a child sound out their first sentence felt like magic.

But that world slowly slipped away. The job I once knew has been replaced by exhaustion, red tape, and a kind of loneliness I can’t quite describe.

My evenings used to be filled with construction paper, glitter, and glue sticks. Now they’re spent filling out digital reports to protect myself from angry emails or lawsuits. I’ve been yelled at by parents in front of twenty-five children — one filming me with his phone while I tried to calm another child mid-meltdown.

And the kids… they’ve changed too. Not by choice.

They arrive tired, anxious, overstimulated. Their tiny fingers know how to swipe a screen before they can hold a crayon. Some can’t make eye contact or wait in line. We’re expected to fix all of it — to patch the gaps, heal the trauma, teach the curriculum, and document every move — in six hours a day, with resources that barely fill a drawer.

The little reading corner I once built, full of soft beanbags and paper stars, was replaced by data charts and “learning metrics.” A young principal once told me, “Clara, maybe you’re too nurturing. The district wants measurable results.”

As if kindness were a weakness.

Still, I stayed. Because of the small, holy moments that no spreadsheet could measure —

a whisper of, “You remind me of my grandma.”

a shaky note that read, “I feel safe here.”

a quiet boy finally meeting my eyes and saying, “I read the whole page.”

Those tiny sparks were my reason to keep showing up.

But this last year broke something in me.

The aggression grew sharper. The laughter in the staff room turned to silence. The light went out of so many eyes. I watched brilliant teachers — my friends — vanish under the weight of burnout, their joy replaced by survival.

I felt myself fading too, like chalk on a board that’s been wiped one too many times.

So today, I began my goodbye. I pulled faded art off the walls and tucked thirty years of handmade cards into a single box. In the back of a drawer, I found a letter from a student from 1998:

“Thank you for loving me when I was hard to love.”

I sat on the floor and cried.

No party. No applause. Just a handshake from a young principal who called me “Ma’am” while checking his notifications.

I left my rocking chair behind, and my sticker box too. What I carried with me were the memories — the faces of hundreds of children who once trusted me enough to reach out their hands and learn. That can’t be uploaded. It can’t be measured. It can’t be replaced.

I miss when teachers were partners, not targets. When parents and educators worked side by side, not in opposition. When schools cared more about wonder than numbers.

So if you know a teacher — any teacher — thank them. Not with a mug or a gift card, but with your words. With your respect. With your understanding that behind every test score is a heart that cared enough to try.

Because in a world that often overlooks them, teachers are the ones who never forget our children.