12. Vicky Cutroneo.
A-. Polished, aligned quite well
with my expectations of someone who ran for the BoE in the previous election
cycle. Her response to Question Three
reminded me of then-Senator Joe Biden’s one-word reply during the 2008 Democratic
presidential debates. If you are going
to be concise, that is how it is done.
Downside: could have elaborated
more on the “tough decisions” that Dr. Martirano “avoided making” (Question
5). If one is going to open up that can
of worms, the average voter is going to expect to get a good look. Her
equity response could have addressed issues related to cultural competence and
inclusiveness, so her stated “interventions” might have seemed incomplete. She addressed these issues, in part, in her
priorities statement…but it would have made for a more cohesive and compelling articulation
for her to express a succinct worldview on equity as part of her Question 6
response. The “holistic” assessment she
outlined in her third priority, “school climate,” offers an interesting point
of differentiation from the other candidates and a distinct worldview on what constitutes
success. Frankly, her answers on priorities,
combined with the expression of a coherent worldview on the over-crowding problem,
elevates a B/B+ response to an A-, in terms of attracting voter support. I
might be a bit generous here, but overall, this is a helpful document for her
campaign.
13. Bob Glascock. B -. Faded rapidly after the experience and duties
questions. Great quals, on paper. I was
surprised how non-student centric his reply was. Sure, he talked about students in his response
to the equity question, but his short replies to the overcrowding and priority
queries seemed to place more emphasis on inward-looking matters and not the
impact that they would have on student populations. The average voter would want to understand how
specific policies might affect various populations. He could have revised and extended his
general thoughts on equity to cover additional programmatic elements (he did
some of this, but almost in passing).
His two-sentence over-crowding statement did not articulate much in the
way of a vision, although it touched upon procedural mechanisms for dealing
with such challenges. His stated priorities,
while all reflecting legitimate needs/concerns, felt a little undercooked. Sure, transparency, solvency, and supporting staff
are all important and laudable goals.
Tell us more. Many voters, particularly highly informed ones, might find
this completed questionnaire to be lacking in specifics.
That is all for today.
In solidarity.
No comments:
Post a Comment