Q&A

By Donald S. Havis

My responses to questions asked to the candidates by the District Teachers Association.

1. What specific plans do you have to support low-achieving students in our district?

I know that at least in some of the district's high schools, there are "directed study" programs and/or mentoring carefully matched "peer tutoring" programs, coordinated by a volunteer teacher (or they may get a small stipend) either after school or in a seventh period setting. I would like to either re-direct money from some other priorities (via a stakeholders-involved committee process) to greatly enhance these kinds of programs, and/or try to find grant money for strongly enhanced efforts along these lines. This sort of effort is just one idea I have in mind to support my point 7 in my 10 point platform.

2. Do you think it is a good idea to get community or trade groups more involved in our schools? If yes, how would you go about doing this? If no, please explain your stance.

YES. (The message below--amended in Mid-September, '07--is different from my original answer in which I expressed grave concern for the blatant LACK of inclusion of labor unions in "Career Day" types of events held by the SMUHSD. This "exclusion of unions" was pointed out to me by an active labor union leader. Subsequent to my learning this information, I relayed this complaint to the current Superintendent's office. Dr. Miller shared my concern. On Sept. 5, '07, I received the following reply--a very positive step in the right direction--from his office: "Last year the district held a separate College Fair in October, 2006 and then a Career and Trades Fair in March, 2007. It was decided to combine the two this year. On October 16, 2007 at Hillsdale High School from 7:00-8:30 PM a district wide College and Career Fair will be held. All the local trade unions have been invited as well as technical schools that offer vocational training. The suggestion to combine the two came from the college advisories at each site. They felt that students and parents should be exposed to all the career opportunities available to them."

3. Do you support the creation of a charter school in Foster City? Why or why not?

I support the establishment of a public high school in Foster City. It has already been much too long for F.C. residents to be deprived of a "neighborhood high school" in their city. However, I do not now support the establishment of charter schools in general. Why? A few years ago I was in favor of the idea of charter schools. I liked the opportunity they provided--being freed from many restrictive state restrictions--to create innovative, experimental programs, etc. However, in many instances such schools--also, ultimately, due to the same exemption from more stringent regulations--have not proven satisfactory for a variety of reasons it would take too long to go into here. The bottom line is that I would not favor the establishment of a charter high school in Foster City.

4. Describe your position on special education funding. (Does it get too much, not enough, or just about the right amount of money? Would you try to change how special education gets funded?

I spent many years as a special education teacher and 11 years as a special education administrator. However, this period of time ended in 1991. I am not as familiar with special ed. funding at this time. However, I clearly remember when the federal law PL-94142 came into effect. It mandated all sorts of fine things for the special ed. student and his/her parents, but it provided little or not federal funds. The state of California has, over the years, provided special ed. funding to attempt to comply with the very demanding federal law. I imagine that it is about the same now as it was in 1991; that is, the State money does not provide quite enough to really do the job up to the standards that the feds require, and that local districts must still, unfortunately, have to "dip in" to their State and what little local sources they may have (after prop 13) to try to patch together both a strong regular ed. and special ed. program. I understand that now the new under-funded No Child Left Behind legislation has since then made the problem worse! How would I propose to "fix" this? To tell you the truth, other than just continuing to press both the State Legislature and the feds for more money, better funding formulas, etc., I don't have a clue. It seems an interminable problem. And I would bet that, though other candidates may throw out some good ideas, they won't be able to do much in the way of acting on them until the above described situation changes.

5. All candidates suggested some reservations they had about mandated, high-stakes testing. What would you specifically do to change the increased use of high-stakes testing?

Obviously, we have to comply with the absolutely required-by-law testing. However, we don't need to administer any additional "fact-recall", fill-in-the-right-bubble standardized tests. I would greatly encourage teachers to take a look at the general body of knowledge/ideas/attitudes, etc., (and the State "guidelines" and/or district "outlines") that might be expected of any course they are teaching--math, history, art, P.E...doesn't matter--and at least attempt, after discussing these matters with the students, to get general agreement that "this" is what we are going for, (There will always be a few dissenters you may not get agreement from; but you can always assure them of their right not to learn) and then go about finding "constructivist/interactive" ways of discussing/doing/ teaching/learning (any number of verbs) toward those objectives. Of course, this is called "progressive education," (the John Dewey model) You all learned about it in college, and one of the disadvantages of it is--as you also know--that it is a lot harder to do than the "traditional" or "Prussian" model (the Edward Thorndike model) However, I believe it is a lot more effective. Then the teacher and the students will come up with ways of testing and/or demonstrating (to the student himself/herself and the teacher) that they have learned--to whatever degree they have learned it--that which they have all set out to learn/master, etc. Incidentally, I would NEVER MANDATE THIS SORT OF INSTRUCTION. I would only encourage it, perhaps with such things as in-service workshops for teachers, and/or monetary awards for the best "projects," etc.--say, $500. which the teacher may choose to share part of with his/her students in the form of something like a pizza party. It is my view that students may well end up doing BETTER on the State required fill-in-the-bubble tests than if one simply taught a list of facts that are likely to appear on the tests. And even if they don't do better on the high-stakes tests, students will learn more deeply, and it will be a heck of a lot more rewarding for everyone involved.