BOARD OF EDUCATION CANDIDATES’ FORUM, OCTOBER 10, 2012
October 11, 2012
A
ninety-minute BOE candidates’ Forum on Public Safety was conducted October 10th in Silver Spring, sponsored by Safe Silver
Spring, Prezco (President’s Council of Silver Spring Civic Associations),
MCCPTA and Montgomery County Civic Federation.
Fred Evans and Rebecca
Smondrowski (District 2), Chris Barclay and Annita Seckinger (District 4), and Phil Kauffman (At-large) appeared; Morris Panner (At-large) was absent but was
represented by his friend David Esquith.
The
audience consisted of about 25 people (apparently largely from local,
down-county environs). The following notables were noted: Lynne Harris, MCCPTA
Vice President of Education Issues; Shebra Evans, MCCPTA Vice President of
Programs; Larry Edmunds, MCCPTA Vice President of Legislation; Jen Bondeson, Gazette reporter.
This
summary presents Candidates’ Responses and My Reflections.
Candidates’ Responses
Question 1: school resource officers.
Fred Evans. Mr. Evans supports SRO’s if the
program “operates effectively:” officers must be properly trained and must get
to know the kids.
Rebecca Smondrowski. Ms. Smondrowski supports SRO’s but
would make unspecified changes to the program. MCPS must work collaboratively
with the County Council (as she has a record of doing).
Chris Barclay. “Safety and security are
paramount.” The issues with the program are budget and management. If MCPS
contributes to program funding, it must be able to manage the officers.
Annita Seckinger. We must examine why we need these
officers. We have problems in the schools and must teach conflict resolution to
the students.
Phil Kauffman. Mr. Kauffman supports the program and
would expand it. The issue is, who pays? Typically in Maryland, counties pay for these officers.
Even if MCPS paid, the maintenance of effort law would require a commensurate
increase of County funding.
David Esquith/Morris
Panner. Mr. Panner would “think out of the box,” on this
question and generally. He would examine what the research shows. In this case,
the research shows that the program does not have a positive effect: schools
are no safer, their climate is degraded, and minority students find SRO’s
difficult. Mr. Panner would change the background.
Question 2: truancy court program.
David Esquith/Morris Panner.
Mr. Panner would review research to determine whether the program was cost
effective. We must distinguish an education program from a criminal program.
Phil Kauffman. If State’s Attorney John McCarthy
supports it, Mr. Kauffman supports it. MCPS is expanding the local program from
Key to Neelesville and Loiederman
Middle Schools. Again,
the issue is, who pays? MCPS cannot just pick up the tab.
Annita Seckinger. Ms. Seckinger would focus on why
students are truant.
Chris Barclay. Mr. Barclay would ask why
students are truant and what’s going on at home. MCPS may need to “partner”
(apparently a funding reference) with the Department of Health and Human
Services and with Mental Health Association. We must ask what MCPS needs to do
to get students engaged.
Rebecca Smondrowski. We must make sure students are
engaged. John McCarthy is a great friend of hers. This is a great program.
Fred Evans.
Giving two examples from Gaithersburg
High School where he was
principal, Mr. Evans said that MCPS must create a climate where intervention by
private groups is acceptable.
Question 3: fostering parent involvement
(with reference to neighborhood schools with high FARMS rates).
Chris Barclay. Mr. Barclay cited past Board outreach strategies: Parent Academies
and PTA single-cluster meetings. These are not enough. Not everyone is involved
in PTA. The Board must push its message out, getting out into the community,
and not just at election time. He understands the concerns.
Annita Seckinger. The Board must reach out, attend
meetings in the community, and be accessible through email and home telephone
to communication.
Phil
Kauffman. Mr. Kauffman agrees that the Board must get its
message out more. It has an advantage in that the new Superintendent is
pursuing new ways to reach out. The Board must move beyond the PTA: it hears
from PTA a lot, but many people don’t participate.
David Esquith/Morris
Panner. Mr. Panner would examine things from the other
end of the telescope. Parents have a very small window into the school. Board
members must accommodate parents, asking what the parents want.
Fred Evans. Mr. Evans’s campaign platform proposes
“Educate the BOE” forums. Parent communications are irrelevant if the school
does not follow up. MCPS must engage, especially in poor communities.
Rebecca Smondrowski. Ms. Smondrowski would continue her
record of presence in the community and advocacy.
Question 4: vocational education expansion.
Annita Seckinger. Ms. Seckinger is a huge believer in
vocational education, which would have been more appropriate for her than was
college. Not every child will or should attend college. Society should not view
them as inferior if they do not attend.
Chris Barclay. Mr. Barclay said that
career and technical education (CTE) should be available for students who want
to learn. MCPS students need more options. Edison
is a wonderful school. MCPS must have “vision forward,” including CTE and
distance learning. To succeed, all students need baseline skills.
Rebecca Smondrowski. She would work to expand voc-ed and
special education.
Fred Evans. We are wrong in our disproportionate
emphasis on “college” readiness. Vocational education students still need the
core curriculum. Edison is a great school.
David Esquith/Morris
Panner. Mr. Panner does not want his special education
child to be a victim of low expectations, shunted into vocational education.
Mr. Panner would ask how effective the program is, reviewing outcomes,
consulting research. Vocational education should prepare students for future
jobs, not the jobs of 10-15 years ago.
Phil Kauffman. MCPS must not “track” students because
of their special needs. Vocational education should be an option for all
students. Vocational education should provide students with the option to go to
college. Edison is great, but undersubscribed.
The Board has asked MCPS staff to determine why students are not choosing Edison.
Question 5: disproportionate minority
suspensions.
Fred Evans. This is a problem. We must analyze why
it occurs, looking not only at data but at personal stories. MCPS must face the
racial differences in its schools by talking with staff about equitable
treatment. Pending MSDE regulations should not ban expulsion for weapons,
physical assault and drug infractions.
Rebecca Smondrowski. Ms. Smondrowski does not believe in
out-of-school suspensions. We must determine why students aren’t engaged, and
train staff to deal with this issue.
Chris Barclay. Mr. Barclay said that
MCPS has black male disproportionality problems with discipline and special
education. Staff must engage and get to know kids. Black males, whose bodies
are growing and hormones raging in middle school, are disciplined for dubious
infractions like “insubordination.” Suspension more than one time per year
predicts school failure. MCPS must get to the root issue: put race on the
table.
Annita Seckinger. Ms. Seckinger is not a fan of
suspension: students need to be in class. Race and ethnicity makes a
difference: MCPS is diverse. She would increase the ratio of minority teachers
and be sure that teachers are culturally competent.
Phil Kauffman. MCPS must be sure MCPS is culturally
competent. There is disproportionality in treatment. We need to look at the
data. He does not favor suspensions. He is concerned about pending MSDE
regulation of discipline and suspension.
David Esquith/Morris
Panner. Mr. Panner was a prosecutor: he understands
crime. There is an “epidemic of expulsion.” The education system dropped the
ball in this case, as it did in civil rights, special education, and female
extracurricular activity; then the judicial system had to take over. He noted a
conflict between supporting SRO’s and banning expulsion. We must find an
evidence-based solution.
Barclay/Esquith exchange. Following Mr.
Esquith’s response, Mr. Barclay erupted with frustration. He asked what Mr.
Esquith meant: schools triumphed in these instances; they did not “drop the
ball.” Mr. Barclay said that “folks are throwing out platitudes; we’re dealing
with real kids’ lives.”
Mr. Esquith
calmly explained that in the instances he mentioned, either the courts or Congress
were required to intervene because the schools did not sufficiently address
these equity issues themselves.
Audience Question 6: guidance counselors.
Rebecca Smondrowski. Ms. Smondrowski said that MCPS must
increase the number of counselors and change their allocation. Now MCPS
allocates strictly according to the number of students in the schools; MCPS
should evaluate schools’ needs, “based on sheer whatever.” We must be aware of
what’s happening with our students.
Fred Evans. Students watch how adults discipline
other students. This contributes to a spirit in the schools that kids
understand.
Chris Barclay. Supportive counselors and
professional development in class management support kids in understanding
their lives. The Board weighs one need against another. A lot is done by
formula. It is a struggle to balance, especially when money is short.
Annita Seckinger. Ms. Seckinger serves as a volunteer
mediator in the schools. Some schools do not admit mediators because they do
not want to acknowledge a problem in the school. MCPS has claimed that Montgomery County does not have gangs; that is
“just simply not true.”
Phil Kauffman. Mr. Kauffman said that this question
brings the discussion back to budget. He reviewed the formulaic ratios for counselors
and psychologists. The ratios have worsened as MCPS enrollment has grown.
David Esquity/Morris
Panner. Mr. Esquith referred to several behavior
modification programs. Four percent of students require intensive mental health
intervention. We must examine this issue at the systemic level, not position by
position.
Audience Question 7: Styrofoam trays. A
very bright, articulate, self-possessed student from Piney Branch
Elementary School
forcefully renewed the question of whether MCPS would support a pilot
dishwasher program to replace these “neuro-toxic” trays.
David Esquith/Morris
Panner. Mr. Panner would support this pilot program.
Phil Kauffman. The Board did not do a good job in
responding to this question when it was previously raised by the school. It
raises the issue of Board role. The Board should not micro-manage MCPS,
directing programs at any one school. Mr. Kauffman thinks the suggestion is
wonderful and hopes the Superintendent will support it. The Board is waiting
for the Superintendent’s decision.
Annita Seckinger. Ms. Seckinger does not see why the
Board cannot direct this pilot program.
Chris Barclay. Piney Branch has done a
great job in forwarding this proposal. Mr. Barclay sponsored a resolution to
reduce MCPS’ “carbon footprint.” MCPS already has taken certain steps:
apparently eliminating trays from high schools. However, the Board’s job is
policy and finance, not operations; that’s why the Board hires a
Superintendent.
Rebecca Smondrowski. Ms. Smondrowski gives the Piney Branch
proposal her “100 percent commitment.” While it is not the Board’s job to
dictate to the Superintendent, its job is to represent citizens.
Fred Evans. Mr. Evans said that the Board has
every right to present this initiative to the Superintendent; the Board has
“influence” to attain its purpose.
My Reflections
Candidates’ perspectives. Observing
a span uncluttered with substance (“folks are throwing out platitudes here,”
Mr. Barclay unselfconsciously noticed), characteristic candidate perspectives
are easy to discern.
Fred Evans offers in-school experience; Rebecca Smondrowski—collaboration. Chris Barclay
offers passion coupled with on-the-job know-how; Annita
Seckinger—sympathy for kids. Phil
Kauffman seems willingly fettered by role restrictions; Morris Panner (if you can believe David Esquith,
which I do)—analysis.
I like
in-school experience, on-the-job know-how and analysis, each with a caveat.
It is not
yet clear, despite our experience with Mike Durso, that in-school experience
does not limit the ability to see long-standing problems and to bring disruptive
change. This concern is exacerbated, in Mr. Evans’s case, because he is
embraced by MCEA—the teachers’ union (as are incumbents Barclay and Kauffman).
MCEA power is wielded where it does not belong.
In the same
way as in-school experience, on-the-job know-how facilitates operations, except
when it becomes hide-bound organizational passivity. Mr. Kauffman’s tired
responses suggest he learned too well from strong-willed Superintendents Weast
and Starr, from MABE training and Broad seminars. It sure looks like the
current Board is being lead by the nose.
Study delay. Analysis, “outside the
box,” and the “other end of the telescope,” sound pretty atypical for the Board.
(I distinguish simple focus and forthrightness that seem to be disqualifying
characteristics, as Ms. Berthiaume’s fate suggests.) Mr. Morris (channeled by
Mr. Esquith) seemed to display some homework analysis when he advised that
SRO’s do not work. Most other times, repetition of his main qualification
covered over a failure to have substantive answers to the questions.
Of course,
this was only a variation of the tack taken by other candidates: Ms. Seckinger
thought that we must examine why we need SRO’s. Incumbent Kauffman wanted to
determine why Edison is undersubscribed.
Despite his experience, Mr. Evans still needs to “analyze why” disproportionate
minority suspension occurs; incumbent Kauffman needs to “look at the data.” Ms.
Smondrowski would determine why students aren’t engaged.
New studies
come every day, and I hope MCPS, the Board and parents will continue to review
and debate them. On the other hand, some problems have been with us for
decades. A claim for more study time does not excuse inaction.
Money delay. Our know-how guys, Barclay
and Kauffman, defend inaction on the basis of budget constriction generally and
a game with the Council of budget blackmail in particular. This seems to
reflect our pathetic national melodrama.
Lightness of dis-placement. Unlike any
other forum I’ve seen, this one was thrown by a particular neighborhood and the
questions particularly reflected that neighborhood’s concerns. Our candidates
missed this, in their intense preoccupation with the generic.
It is no
accident that questions regarding SRO’s, truant officers, vocational education
and disproportionate minority suspension were not emanating from Bethesda.
So, to
return to the previous comment, our candidates were unaware that the hostages
in their money game are the Silver Spring
people looking for public safety. And Chris “Safety and security are
paramount…we’re dealing with real kids’ lives” Barclay represents the
Downcounty Consortium!
While the
budget may not meet hopes, or even needs, the Board must spend the budget WHERE
the need is greatest.
There were
a couple of good, if grossly understated, exceptions. Ms. Smondrowski stated
the MCPS should evaluate schools’ needs “based on sheer whatever” (I think she
was searching for “educational load” or degree of concentrated poverty). Ms.
Seckinger knows that a gang-free MoCo is just not true.
Constricted Board function. The Board
displays profound decorum in deferring to the Superintendent on the neuro-toxic
tray issue. And its learned formulaic responses protect it from acknowledging
need in the red zone. Despite Board policy and regulation (on educational load,
for example) and Board resolution (on choice parameters, for example), the
Board does not act.
The Board
has power and a paramount political function. What is it doing?
Final miscellany. I salute Mr. Barclay
for trying to keep race on the table; I hope he’ll also locate it on the map.
MCCPTA has
been MCPS’ partner, and PTA’s have been MCPS’ primary vehicle of parent
engagement. Insiders Barclay and Kauffman, apparently following the
Superintendent’s lead, want to supplant PTA’s. If I were MCCPTA, I’d feel
dissed. (On the other hand, MCCPTA is outsourcing its function—to the Parent
Leadership Group, for example—so maybe it’s in on the game.) Myself—I’ve seen
the best of times and the worst of times with MCCPTA. I hope the best will
resume. I’m concerned about MCCPTA’s demotion, and potential replacement by isolated
and powerless small groups propped up by MCPS itself.
