JG posts answers to candidate questionnaires

Surprisingly, the JG is publishing the answers to all the questions asked of this fall's candidates verbatim. Overall I thought candidates for school board did a pretty good job representing their views. Not surprisingly the (like minded) incumbents had similar viewpoints. The two questions which I think need further elaboration concern school choice and improved achievement at the "LEAD" schools.

Giving parents a choice of schools outside their normal attendance area doesn't seem to bother anyone as long as schools have room. I think it weakens neighborhood schools but it's also possible some of these "neighborhood" schools wouldn't be viable without the kids who are bused there. I think that "choice" was just part of the original program resulting from the 1989 settlement of the lawsuit to narrow the minority achievment gap. That gap has not been reduced at all but the "choice" program has persisted.

The district hired extra teachers to improve minority achievement, using money (more than $100m over the years) diverted from the capital fund. That money would otherwise have gone into building upgrades and maintenance, which the district claimed needed to be made up by the $500m bond issue. A gross overstatement, only partly true. Where are those extra teachers, what are they teaching and what difference have they made? The other, probably bigger expense is the cost of "choice" busing contained in the $27m annual transportation fund. How much is being spent for busing kids to schools outside their normal attendance area? I'm guessing $10m a year but whatever it is, is it right to ask the taxpayers to pay for it?

The incumbent board members who are running all think that the balanced scorecard and shuffling of teachers and administrators as a result of failing to meet the requirements of PL221 are going to fix the achievement gap. They also believe the increased passing rate on the 2010 spring test was real. I couldn't disagree more on either point. The die is cast for these kids by the end of the third grade. The performance of the middle schools and the high schools depend almost entirely on having kids prepared coming out of elementary school. Until that happens NO REAL GAINS RELATIVE to the REST of the STATE will be realized. The biggest push first has to be in the elementary schools and it will take years for that to filter up through the higher grades. What happens to the "LEAD" middle and high schools in the meanwhile is anyone's guess, especially if Tony Bennett is gaming the tests. But after a decade of denial and procrastination, we shouldn't have much sympathy for the district if any of them are taken over by the state.