Fun With Acronyms - Take II

Thoughts on the Howard County Board of Education field. 

[video link deleted].

Author's note (9/21/14): Yes, I set the original video to private.  I didn't like how it turned out, primarily due to the length (and even with a long video, I was unable to cover such pressing issues as the optimal oversight role of an elected Board of Education, working successfully with other government agencies on matters such as housing, etc...).

So allow me to summarize some key takeaways:

1) From A to B: As of this writing, I plan on voting for Altwerger and Beams. I believe both are accomplished individuals who are subject matter experts in their respective fields. They can help elevate the discourse. Most importantly, they seem to be running for the right reasons: helping our students and making our already solid school system even better.

2) Of the eight candidates, I believe seven are actually qualified to serve on the Board of Education (all but Smith).

3) Of the eight, I believe six are qualified, have the proper temperament, and the ability to work productively and collaboratively for a four-year term of office (all but Smith and Dyer).

4) I believe it is highly likely that both French and Vaillancourt will be re-elected (80%+ likelihood for each placing in the top four).

5) I strongly recommend that anyone interested in the Howard County Board of Education race read through the following document.  There is some gold in here.  Very insightful information on each of the candidates, in their own words:

 http://oaklandmills.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/School-Board-Forum_14.pdf


Stay tuned, as more will follow.

  

Tear the Roof Off the Sucker

On certain days, one wonders about the advantages of an elected versus an appointed school board.  Sometimes, one ponders the benefits of humans as compared to animatronic platypuses as board members.  The Multi-Village Sponsored Howard County Board of Education Event (Cluster-Forum for short) invited all sorts of odd musings.

Was the forum, held at The Other Barn in Oakland Mills, informative? Absolutely. Was the audience packed with local luminaries, community activists, thought leaders, public officials, educators, parents, students, looky-loos and hangers-on? Definitely.  Was it a draining and slightly disheartening experience?  Unfortunately, yes.

Rather than craft a novella, I will explore some of the highlights:

The candidates were unafraid to engage in comparative politicking.  In their introductory statements, which included a verbal response to one of five questions for which they also provided written answers, Bess Altwerger talked about the high quality of teachers found in schools across the county (a rejoinder to Allen Dyer’s perspective, articulated in earlier forums, that the best schools were…essentially… hoarding the best teachers).  Mike Smith stated that there were some “misrepresentations” regarding Common Core, which he supports.  I don’t know if he mentioned Altwerger by name, but his comments were clearly directed at her. 

Author’s note: Mike Smith also said that, under certain circumstances, having 35 students in a classroom is “OK.” Then again, he did admit to being “mathematically challenged.” So perhaps he doesn’t grasp the absurdity of his position.

Dr. Zaneb Beams probably had the best night.  She received applause, twice, during her introductory remarks.  She offered up a seemingly heart-felt request that we think of students as people (I believe the sentence was: “We don’t have FARMS students, we have students who are receiving help with food.”)  Many in the audience also reacted favorably to her belief that “Scores don’t make us great, dreams (and doing?) make us great.”  Call me a cynical jerk who has been in and around politics too long, but I thought the second line was a bit schmaltzy.   

Tension in the room.  There were accusations expressed by some audience members that certain candidates were expressing opinions that were not aligned with the facts on the ground.  There was a vividly worded query about the best way to “stop the bloodbath at the central office” that evoked some emotional responses from multiple candidates.   There were concerns articulated about the role that developers play in our political process.  There was an excellent question about the idiots (author’s note: my characterization) at Glenelg High School who were sporting a Confederate flag; some on the stage handled this topic better than others.

Democracy can be messy and the School Board is not meant to be a gathering of best friends.  I get those realities.  Nonetheless, the present dynamic appears rather corrosive.  Passions seem to be running high and the current mix of personalities, with their differing perspectives, histories and talents seem to be intruding upon the Board’s ability to set “local education policy consistent with state and federal laws governing public education.” (this one-sentence summary of the Board’s job description can be found at http://www.hcpss.org/board/). 

Who, if anyone, is to blame?  I am certain there are a variety of answers to that question.  That is not the point of this post.  My intention is to move the dialogue forward and ask, given where we are and given the pressing issues facing HCPSS, which four candidates, if elected, will do the most to help improve our schools?

With that in mind, I am likely to state my preference(s), for whatever that information is worth, next week.

 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Sunny Side Musings - Part Three

Slats needed to get to Lansing for what he described as an “urgent assignment.”  I didn’t inquire further.  Before he departed, we met at Frank’s Diner in Jessup.

“So why are you writing about the forum?  Is there any money in it?” he asked, perusing the menu.

“Not a dime. I am just trying to sort out how I want to vote,” I paused, “Oh, the sausage here comes in links, not patties, in case you were wondering,” I replied.

“Seriously?  So really I need to decide between bacon and corned beef hash, is that the deal?”

“Yep.”

“Well,’ he shrugged, “it might not be ideal, but those are some decent options.”

With that, he pulled out his phone to check his email.  I shifted my attention to my coffee and the notes I took.   Here are the final audience questions and responses from the Columbia Democratic Club’s Board of Education forum and my thoughts:

Audience Question Four:  How would you prioritize resources?

French: We need more feedback on this.  I lean more towards human resources.  Relayed the anecdote involving the teacher who wore a sign saying, “I am your best app.”

Furman:  The key consideration is, “What is in the best interest of the students?”  We need a balanced approach.

O’Connor: We need effective teacher development.

Vaillancourt: Apocalypse-scenario.  If all of the buildings were gone, teachers would be left, so it is about the teachers.

Altwerger:  Equity across the schools.  More school psychologists and counselors.  Keeping the facilities equitable.  Hiring and maintaining the best teachers, increasing their time for preparation.  Ten days on testing is ridiculous, money could be spent elsewhere, such as on arts and music.

Dyer:  Proper direction of the resources that we have.  Teachers should be where they are most needed.  I raised this issue before and was ignored for four years.  FARMS kids could have more experienced teachers, we need to move them around.  Start high school classes later.    

  

Spartan Considerations thoughts: I thought the incumbents delivered the best replies to this question, strictly in terms of connecting on a visceral level with the audience.  As usual, Altwerger gave a detailed, thoughtful answer (more head than heart).  Furman suggested a reasonable test and appeared to be focused on reaching a consensus, which may give voters an idea of the type of Board Member he might be, if elected. 

Audience Question Five:  What resources could you use to work together as a board

Spartan Considerations translation:  “So how can the new Board learn to act like adults and drop all of the public acrimony?”

Furman:  There has been contention for years.  We need to be in a position to work together.  Create “personal connections.”  There is no one workshop or program that will resolve these relationship issues.

O’Connor: “My personality.”  (Spartan Considerations chess notation: !?!).  I am a good listener. I take time to make decisions.  I work things through.

Vaillancourt: I would not define disagreement as contention.  The “Golden Rule” is missing.  We need to be respectful of each other.

Altwerger:  Respect.  Civility.  It should not be a matter of personalities.  The recent HCEA – Board contention led to a lot of “bad press that tarnished the system.”

Dyer: I believe in the “cacophony of democracy.”  Things can’t be done behind closed doors.  Open decisions, openly arrived at….this is part of having an elected Board of Education.  We worked to get this.

French: “Shock of shocks.  I agree with Allen Dyer.”  This is part of the rough and tumble of politics.  “No one Board Member has authority.” We deliberate in public.  We need to accept decisions that are made. Some people need to “let things go.”

Spartan Considerations thoughts:  Although the question was focused on the heavy matter of the seemingly sometimes dysfunctional working relationship involving multiple current Board members, this query led to one of the lighter moments of the evening. The French reply generated genuine laughter.  Of course her admonition that some needed to “let things go” was clearly directed at a fellow Board Member, which ramped up the tension in the room a little bit.

Dyer, channeling his inner Woodrow Wilson, delivered a thoughtful response.  In my estimation, O’Connor gave the riskiest reply, but it seemed consistent with her plain- spoken persona.   

Audience Question Six:  If the school day started later, won’t kids just stay up later at night? 

Spartan Considerations note:  With time running out, we entered the “rapid-fire” round at this point.  Candidates gave short answers, if at all, for the rest of the questions.

Dyer:  The science bears out that later starting times are better.

Altwerger:  Spoke about Circadian Rhythms of teenagers and that some kids are “more likely” to get in trouble in the early afternoons, in the window of time after they are currently let out of school.

O’Connor: We need to see more studies on this subject.  Wondered about the impact on the sports schedule.

Furman:  Said he raised the question of pushing the school day to a later start time back in 2002.  Believes that kids will go to bed at a “reasonable time.”

Spartan Considerations thoughts:  On a personal note, I had to chuckle at Altwerger’s response.  I was working on a presidential campaign back in ’99 and we focused on that early-to-mid afternoon timeframe as a potential danger zone, when teenagers were out of school but before their parent(s) came home from work.  Fifteen years later and society is still grappling with the same fundamental question.

Audience Question Seven:  By a show of hands, do you have any guns in your home?

Spartan Considerations thoughts:  I am not going to record the candidate’s responses here.  I thought the question was inappropriate for this forum.  It merely served to remind me that it would be challenging for Slats to be a candidate for public office.  His first instinct would be to invite the individual to knock on his door at an early hour of the morning so they could find out, up close and personal, if he owned any firearms. I commend the candidates for exercising the appropriate level of restraint on that question.

Audience Question Eight:  Common Core is state law, so how would you fix it (if at all)?

Spartan Considerations notes:  This was a great question because it compelled skeptics and advocates alike to recognize the world, as it is, and address the question based on the political and legal realities of the situation and not treat Common Core as an abstract concept.

Furman:  More funds should be spent on professional development.

O’Connor:  Spoke about the need for greater interaction, education between the PTAs and parents (French liked this idea).

Dyer: Students can’t be treated differently if their parents opt them out of high-stakes testing.

French:  When I hear a concern, I go to the Superintendent.  They are often “six months to one year” ahead in their thinking.  They [those in the HCPSS administrative offices] are professionals, they have a plan. Also, parents of 3^rd graders, all they know is Common Core.  The ones who are skeptical tend to be older parents.

Altwerger:  I have conducted a great deal of research on Common Core.  It was not field-tested.  It is not scientifically-based.  Gave an example regarding phonemes.

Vaillancourt:  We need to be honest about resources.  Talked about curricula, lesson planning.

Spartan Considerations thoughts:

French positioned herself as the Defender of the Current Regime on this question.  In terms of subject matter expertise, Altwerger again emerged as the candidate who articulated the most detailed reply.

Overall Forum Implications:

Of the eight candidates, I am still pondering which will receive my vote. I have ruled out two, leaving six as “possibles.” I hope to settle this question soon, preferably before Slats winds his way back to the Mid-Atlantic.  He doesn’t like to be in the States for more than a couple weeks at a time, so I imagine he will be back in our neck of the woods soon enough.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Moderately Spicy Wisdom - Part Two

I tracked Slats down around noon today.  He huffed that I shouldn’t have interrupted his meditation session.  I noted that he was lounging about in a booth, at Bonefish Grill off of Ritchie Highway, scarfing down Bang Bang shrimp. 

“Those activities are not mutually exclusive,” he remarked.

I brushed aside his pithy declaration while he handed me the lunch bill. Sighing audibly but apparently not harshing his crustacean-augmented mellow, I asked if he read my post from yesterday.  He nodded.

“Too long, right?  Too much detail for the format?” I inquired.

“Just give ‘em the feel of the room,” he replied.  “Fuck, they never give you enough napkins, do they?”

Both are solid observations.

So with that in mind, I will do the best I can in this, Part Two, featuring the first three questions from the audience.

1) Promoting school safety.

Vaillancourt was up first and had the most evocative response, calling for schools to follow the “El Al” model (engage in “profiling,” presumably of students or others associated with the school who might be showing warning signs of being a threat to others or themselves). 

Altwerger centered her comments on the movement of students between the portables and the main buildings. 

Dyer concentrated on protecting against suicides.

French briefly discussed mental health, positive intervention strategies and “civility policing.”

Furman promoted the idea of a card access system for students, teachers and administrators as well as stepped-up anti-bullying efforts.

O’Connor said that she was not opposed to metal detectors in the schools, but that further research should be conducted (she called for additional studies more than once over the course of the evening).

Spartan Considerations thoughts:

Furman had his best moment of the night on this point.  He was both knowledgeable and confident in his response. 

Given credit where it is due, Dyer’s answer started out heart-felt and fluent.  But then he made a joke about how some folks like to “protect against asteroids” instead of focusing on more likely risks.  Why that moment for a comment like that?  It’s like he decorated a Christmas tree beautifully and, as a final touch, put a roll of toilet paper where the star should be. 

French’s reply was a little thin, felt a bit soft, for someone with her years on the Board.  She could have articulated some concrete solutions here.

2) Vision 2018: Where is the schedule? Where are the milestones?  

This is where some under-stated fireworks occurred.  The first two to respond to this question – Altwerger and Dyer – both agreed that it was a good vision but was light on specificity/progress.  Both thought that the Vision was being “sidetracked” (Altwerger) or “diverted” (Dyer) by issues pertaining to Common Core.

And then French spoke, holding up what she noted was a progress report issued by Superintendent Foose’s office.  She stated that the report contained a “tremendous amount of data” (presumably regarding the schedule and milestones) and that “implementation is underway.”  Giles, from the audience, also chimed in with a remark to the effect of “We have a date/We have dates.”

Furman commented that he was “glad we have this,” in a way that indicated that he was not aware of the public availability of the data that is said to be in the report.  He said there needs to be an implementation plan with hard deadlines, but there should be “flexibility” when needed to help meet the goals.

O’Connor re-iterated that she would be a full-time Board Member and that she would be going to the schools, presumably to check on the implantation of the Vision 2018 strategic plan.

Vaillancourt, in a not-so-veiled shot, wryly noted that, “we are good at coming up with the right words, but I want to put them into action.”  Zing.

Spartan Considerations thoughts:

This was fascinating.  The original question seemed simple enough, is there an on-track implementation schedule with specific milestones or not?  I deem it likely that every candidate on the stage performed their due diligence and studied up on Vision 2018, yet we appear to have a significant information gap.  Some believe there is forward movement and that the data exists and is publically available, while others do not believe that to be the case.  There should be a clear-cut answer here.  Who is wrong or misinformed? Is someone over-stating their position or willfully down-playing the amount of information that is available/progress made?     

3) Dual enrollment/remediation/Common Core-PARCC longitudinal tracking

So a heavy in the MD higher-education space came in to ask about the connection between K – 12 and collegiate performance.

Everyone said favorable things about dual enrollment.  There were no significant points of differentiation there. 

Dr. Freeman Hrabowski’s name was evoked by two of the candidates (French and Furman).  The former discussed his name in connection with UMBC scholarships for Howard County high school graduates, the latter in a response that focused on finding ways to help students bridge the gap (transition to college successfully? My notes are difficult to decipher here).

The rest of the conversation generally evolved (or descended) into a positioning exercise on Common Core, with Dyer and Altwerger stating their concerns:

Dyer: “fancy, expensive Common Core testing”

Altwerger: “I believe in high expectations,” but different learners learn at different rates, CC is “inflexible” and there needs to be a “local set of standards so teachers can meet the needs of the students they teach.”

French supports Common Core, believing it will help eliminate “inequities” in achievement.

O’Connor stated that she liked that Common Core was “trying to make it an even playing field” but also thinks that “more studies are needed.”

Spartan Considerations thoughts:

Your thoughts on who fared best on this multi-part question probably have more to do with your perspective on Common Core than anything else.  From a sheer communications perspective, Vaillancourt got a bit tangled up in her comments on remediation but no one tanked the question.

Well, it was shorter than Part One.  The forum was quite informative. 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

An Unexpected Visitor - Part One

The day took an abrupt turn when I received a collect call from my former mentor, Slats MacCune.  He was at the Wicomico Regional Airport and he needed a lift.  Apparently, his mobile phone battery was juiceless and neither the car rental agency nor the pay phone would accept Maltese lira banknotes as valid currency.  I could hear him in the background, complaining loudly about unfavorable exchange rates, while the operator asked me if I would accept the charges.

Of course I would.

Three hours later and heading westbound on 50, Slats is slouched in my passenger seat.   He had just finished extolling the virtues of Machala in the summer and Oslo in the winter when the conversation drifted to politics.

“Listen,” I told him, “I need to head to the Columbia Democratic Club forum tonight, but I can drop you off at the house or Victoria Gastro Pub.”

“Bogota or Medellin?”  He suddenly seemed interested.

“Neither. Col-Umbia, not Col-Ombia,” I replied.

“Ah. Gotcha,” he paused.  “So is there an In-and-Out Burger we can stop at?” 

“We are east of Texas so no.  Anyway, you might be bored.  It is for the Howard County Board of Education.   Important but perhaps not your speed.”

Now Slats had earned, or at least acquired, a decent sum of money over the years.  Sometimes, these funds came from the coffers of political candidates whose ideologies or personal morals could charitably be described as “sketchy.”  Semi-retired these days, he nonetheless continues to hover around the edges of the Game and, lacking the ready availability of a more entertaining option, he stated emphatically and marginally profanely that he was up for attending the gathering.

We arrived shortly before the event was set to begin.  We were ten feet away from the main doors of the Jeffers Hill Neighborhood Center when Slats said he forgot something in the car, and could he borrow my keys.  Sure. 

I went in solo and grabbed a seat in the back of the room, which was best for observing the actions and reactions of the candidates as well as the local folks who assembled to watch the event and perhaps ask a question.  I chatted with a couple of people, waved at a few familiar faces, and took out my notepad.  I sat next to Maureen Evans Arthurs, who I wish was participating in the Forum as a candidate.  

The following analysis is based on the notes I scrawled hastily over the course of the evening:  

One last item before I launch into this dissection:  seven candidates participated, all but Mike Smith.  Dan Furman walked in right before the session began and Dr. Zaneb Beams had to leave early due to an important family obligation.  A couple of the current members of the Board of Education not up for re-election were also in attendance, Janet Siddiqui and Ellen Flynn Giles, in addition to around 25 other concerned office-holders, candidates, activists, and citizens.

Introductory Statement Mini-Summaries:

Bess Altwerger:  Bio. Equity.  Concerned about the implementation of Common Core and PARCC.

Zaneb Beams.  Bio.  “Wellness for the whole child.”

Allen Dyer.  Bio.  The need for the education system to “produce good citizens.” Openness (an oft-repeated Dyer theme). Closing the achievement gap. Working with County government.

Sandra “Sandy” French.  Almost all biography.

Dan Furman.  Bio.  “Equality of opportunity.”  Focusing on the specific needs of students.

Christine O’Connor.  Bio. Pledges to be a “full-time” Board Member.

Cynthia “Cindy” Vaillancourt. Bio.  Equity gap.  Achievement gap.  Getting people to recognize that problems exist and talk about solutions.  Start times.  Bad cereals/nutrition options.

Spartan Considerations thoughts: 

Given two minutes apiece, most of the candidates handled their introductions fairly well.  Altwerger deftly positioned herself as thoughtful academic and Common Core skeptic.  Beams had a solid point of differentiation given her background as a pediatrician.  Even Dyer, and this blog isn’t a fan of his, connected on some important issues.  O’Connor came across as practical, roll-up-our-sleeves, sort of educator who would spend time in the schools identifying, and helping find solutions, to challenges. Vaillancourt was energetic, and her “Lucky Charms” anecdote drew some laughter while being an effective means of talking about school nutrition.

Furman’s statement was fine but he is very low-key.  Having a mild-mannered Board Member isn’t a bad thing, in light of some of the personalities involved.  That said, his speaking style is a bit less than terribly engaging. 

French’s opening remarks were mostly, and perhaps entirely about her background.  That was disappointing.  Everyone else took the time to pivot to specific policy matters or other broader concerns but she chose to focus on her history.  A lost opportunity for French.

The only formal question from the Columbia Democratic Club, posed by Alan Brody, focused on the existence of inequality in Howard County schools.  Did it exist or no?  If yes, what examples could the candidates cite?  If no, how can the system remain free from inequality?

Unsurprisingly, all of the candidates agreed that inequities existed.

O’Connor focused on overcrowding, the need for a 13^th high school, and the importance of redistricting.

Vaillancourt talked about over-crowding, a more equitable allocation of resources, helping all of the children in an effort to meet all of their needs.

Altwerger discussed economic disparities and the need for diverse student populations in the schools.  She believes that the neighborhood feeder system should be retained while working out solutions to avoid overcapacity issues.

Beams said that the inequities spanned four areas:  nutrition, size/over-crowding, buildings/physical facilities, and musical education.

Dyer stated that there were connections between “pockets of poverty” and problems in the classroom and mentioned a correlation between FARMS numbers and the aforementioned poverty pockets.  In a comment sure the raise the ire of educators, but not pounced on by any of the other candidates, he stated his belief that some teachers were “resistant” to “working harder” and that this resistance is why great educators are unwilling to teach at schools that are perceived to offer tougher environments for teachers. 

French stated largely accurately, perhaps a bit too fatalistically, that there are “always inequities somewhere.”  She indicated that professionals were hired to look at redistricting as well as to work on nutrition and the physical facilities.  She stressed the need to collaborate with the State and County governments for funding.  She also mentioned the developments occurring at Bryant Woods regarding free lunches as an example of progress. 

Furman spoke about Maintenance of Effort and the need to look beyond per-pupil based funding and more at the needs of specific schools; that while Clarksville and Oakland Mills, for example, may be similar in terms of the sheer number of students enrolled, they have “different needs” and solutions should be tailored accordingly.

Spartan Considerations thoughts: 

Dyer stepped in it, but he knew what he was doing.  The downside, for him, is that statements like that will remind voters of his issues when it comes to working well with others.  French’s response was also a little underwhelming.  She hit her stride as she kept talking but she started off her response sounding like an HR manager, and not a Board Member, when she was listing the hires made by the HCPSS.  Furman made some good points, but damn he could use some media training.

As this is running long, I am going to stop here, before I launch into the questions posed by the audience members.   This looks like a two or three part post.

Side note: has anyone seen a black Honda Civic HX? 

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

The Treachery of Forums

Ceci n’est pas une recapitulation.

One experiences a certain exhilaration driving 75 mph on icy Michigan highways during a relentless January evening snowstorm.  Semis, operated by road-weary professionals who believe they are the living Bob Seger’s “Turn the Page,” merge and careen across the lanes.  It is no place for a vintage Mercury Lynx with a couple of near-balding tires, but you white-knuckle it out, teeth gritting past every mile marker.  Wide-eyed, artery-clearing terror intermingles with the mechanical no-thought of skillful driving and the warmth of hope as the promise of home and hearth draws nearer.  Just need to work the physics…avoid the spinout.

I kept thinking back to that drive, the Kalamazoo-to-East Lansing trip from early ’95, as I was watching the League of Women Voters of Howard County – Board of Education Candidate Forum(s).  I have a feeling some of the candidates were in a similar place, mentally, as they sat there fielding questions from the moderators.  No one ended up in a ditch, but it was only one short stretch of the journey.  Several turned in good performances, but for some of them, if you take a hard look at their qualifications or past experience or general philosophy, the shine comes off rather quickly.

I tried to hack through the Gordian Knot and choose a final four, but that task will require more reflection, more time.  That said, I can winnow the field down to a top nine contenders.  Here are some impressionistic profiles of the seven Best-of-the-Best, the two Borderline who could move up (or down), and the four Others:

Top Seven (in alphabetical order, because I know you will ask):

Bess Altwerger: The Educator’s Educator.  Highly knowledgeable. Common Core skeptic. Recurring themes: well-rounded, individualized curricula & developing critical thinking. Positioned herself as an advocate for teachers and students (a plus in my book although others might view that differently).

Zaneb Beams:  Holistic perspective on child advocacy.  Brainy and a clear communicator. Recurring themes: Finding solutions, open communications, equity.  Showed some real passion during a discussion on technology usage (“every child should have it...” but made her opinion clear that advanced technology utilization is not an educational end-all/be-all).

Olga Butler:  Practical experience. History of involvement in the schools.  Recurring themes: building relationships, partnerships.  One of the highlights of the forum was her answer to a question asking about the biggest weakness of the system.  Her response was: “The Board.”  Regardless of your thoughts on that issue, you have to admire the honesty of the reply.   

Maureen Evans Arthurs: Good policy background. Recurring themes: collaboration, representing the will of the community. I think her “new voice” positioning is a bit risky, inasmuch as it highlights her relative inexperience.  Her best moment was a rebuttal of Mr. Dyer’s statement regarding technology, when she worked in a fitting reference to Oregon Trail. 

Sandra French:  Knowledgeable incumbent.  Frankly, I would like to see both incumbents seeking re-election on the November ballot if only for the largest possible electorate to have the opportunity to use the General Election as a referendum on the job performance of the incumbents…and the direction of the Board as a whole.  Offered up a weaker response on the technology question.  Support zero-based budgeting.   Favors giving the Board of Education some measure of funding authority.

Dan Furman:  Legal expertise.   Gets the importance of the budget as a policymaking/shaping tool. Recurring themes: proactive problem solving, relevant experience, knowledge of the budget.  Opposed to zero-based budgeting.  I can’t decide if he would be outstanding or merely OK, which is why I would like to see him emerge as one of the top eight vote getters in June. 

Cindy Vaillancourt: Energetic incumbent.  Would like for her to be on the November ballot for the reasons I articulated earlier regarding French.  Provided some thoughtful answers regarding system weaknesses (“too much focus on test scores”) and the importance of an educational system that equips students to travel down one of any number of potential life paths. 

The Borderline (also in alphabetical order):

Leslie Kornreich:  STEM.  Perhaps it is a question of presentation, but not much stood out about her performance at the forum, one way or the other.  She is concerned about the implementation of Common Core…and she adopted the most pro-STEM stance among the candidates.  Qualified for the Board of Education? Sure. But I haven’t heard a compelling vision for her candidacy yet.      

Christine O’Connor:  Teacher/education activist. Was caught up on the wrong side of a flood and was unable to attend the forum.  I have heard good things about her and would like to see more from her in the coming weeks. As of this writing, she is in the 8^th position.

The Others (also in alphabetical order):

Corey Andrews:  This may be unfair on my part, but I tend to prefer candidates with a bit more life experience.  An amazing presentation might have convinced me that Mr. Andrews was a top-tier candidate…but I didn’t see anything that demonstrated a remarkable depth of knowledge.  He has a future in something…but I don’t know what that “something” is.  I don’t think he would be a good fit, at this time, on the Howard County Board of Education.

Tom Baek: I don’t believe he possesses a great handle on some of the specific opportunities and challenges involved with the Howard County Public School System.  He has an interesting and deliberative communications style that might lead to a better, calmer, more functional group dynamic at the Board-level but he simply doesn’t have the education background that other candidates have.

Allen Dyer: A couple of good moments during the forum but I would direct anyone to review the extensive public record on Mr. Dyer.  Draw your own conclusions.

Mike Smith:  While he spoke extensively during the forum…I didn’t hear much beyond broad generalities and some life experiences overseas that may, or may not, be applicable to the responsibilities he would face as member of the Howard County Board of Education.  I don't think he is particularly well-versed on HCPSS issues.  

Will I do a final four before Primary Day?  Probably.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.