Exit Speech

Here is the text of my farewell speech for the SD57 Board of Education of which I have been a trustee for 3 years. Additionally, I introduced a motion that the Board of Education create a Freedom of Speech and Whistle Blower Policy to accompany other policies about employee rights and responsibilities.

The new board has some important work ahead in the next four years. Recently I asked our current Board to compile and review our work and pass it on to the new board. Although a majority of us agree this was necessary, it did not happen so I will take some time now to publicly offer my perspective on work that still needs to be done. I’m sure you’ll hear from others about all the good things going on so that gives me some space to talk about items of concern. 

For Partner Groups

Regarding Partner Groups and contributions to committees:

I have heard on several occasions that participation at a committee is irrelevant to that partner group if the topic is not of their interest. I would argue this. I would say that when partner groups are attending a committee they represent the whole district with a specialized opinion and not just their part of the district. Please send committee members who are willing to participate with that lens.

Regarding Partner Groups and Local vs Provincial: I often hear you speak to provincial work, issues, and initiatives. Please work harder to bring forward more local issues and recognize that the board has most of its power directed at making improvements to local working and learning conditions, and local organization and leadership.

Thank you for continuing to bring issues to the board. Keep pushing the board to meet with you often and stay on them about following up on issues. I am reminded of the standalone LGBTQ policy that received strong input from partner groups. At the beginning I was shocked to be the only trustee in favour of this, but after steady attention on this issue eventually the whole board supported it. This shows that advocacy works.

To all teachers and support staff: Thank you for all of your work to educate children in an ever changing world. Education has become complex and each of you regularly take on the role of social worker, counselor, teacher, and caregiver, even when it is not in your job description.

For Senior Administration:

The amount of times I have had emails or motions misunderstood has been astounding and it would appear that all we have done for three years is play games around agendas. Our board could have got a lot more done without those games being played. Please aim for improvements in these areas:

1. Standards of writing and statistics - we still see too many leading statements in documents such as the District Achievement Contract and Superintendents Report on Achievement. Statistics are used to meet minimum compliance standards for the Ministry, but do not make it clear what’s actually happening or justify spending priorities. In the District Achievement Contract  it says that we are a data driven district and yet there is little evidence of data beyond what the Ministry requires us to collect. Release and publish this data to that you are using to track spending and meet goals. No initiative should be released without parameters set for original data goals and timelines. Start collecting data on real cohorts of students and publish 8-10 years of data rather than 3-5 years in order to make more accurate assessments from that data.

2. Partner group engagement - speak to partners and collaborate before making key decisions. For example, instead of consulting end users about a new Student Information System a decision was made behind closed doors about where the district would go. I managed to catch this before it was a done deal, and the board actually created a brief window to collaborate about this. Sadly I think it turned into another game about how to get to the predetermined goal instead of true transparency and collaboration.

3. District wide initiatives - The Sea to Sky school district did it right, they held a district wide cafe and collaborated about the direction the SD would go to implement the BCED Plan. In our district we rebranded existing programs, called it the Essential 8, and then took $20 per student out of schools without the board being asked. In fact we were told at the start that the Essential 8 would not involve new money.

4. Communication - In regular conversation with principals, teachers, other staff, and I hear that communication from the board office can sometime be condescending and misleading. I really hope the new board will pursue higher and more transparent standards when communicating with staff. None of our employees should feel intimidated or handled by the district.

For the New Board, some areas to consider

1. Leadership - In my opinion, this Board acted largely as an extended arm of Management. The new board needs to start being its own entity and leading with Senior Administration treated as a partner group and not the 8th trustee.

2. Accountability - This is an important area of governance for the new Board. It needs to improve the way it review’s itself, does staff performance reviews, reviews HR practice, explains new spending and new initiatives, and communicates with different levels of staff, and the public especially its partner groups.

3. Tracking work - intended actions, motions, and commitments have been lost or forgotten multiple times during this Boards 3 yrs and that needs to be corrected with some form of tracking. I put forward a motion with the Board 2 yrs ago about this but it did not pass. I could not convince the Board that it is a problem when motions are dropped, correspondence is not printed, requests for information are misdirected, emails are not followed up on, etc.

4. Technology - this is a huge issue and a widening gap for this school district and the rest of the province. For example, it took two years longer than stated to update our district website and it still only meets standards from a decade ago. We are making technology decisions based on highly questionable financial arguments and not because they support the teaching and learning that our staff would actually like to do. While we wait on this, a whole generation of students is not getting the opportunity to learn with and about technology that students in other districts get.

5. Special needs - One of my biggest advocacy issues was with our vulnerable learners. Having been a vulnerable learner myself I understand what it’s like to sit in a classroom and not know how to read when the rest of the classroom can. We need to make sure that designated dollars are not leaving these children. I think the SD should follow a model that allows schools to buy additional PEA time that they require to allow children to be assessed. At the very least this SD needs to double the permanent staff in the PEA dep’t and stop bringing in consultants to cover the gaps.

6. Lifting gag orders - I have had some serious conversations that this SD has unofficial gag orders for principals and other staff. When you as trustees go out and visit schools and seek to understand how there school operates, you want to know that the principal will not be interviewed afterwards about what was said. You do not want to hear that they are afraid to talk to trustees or put forward unusual initiatives. You do not want to hear that that the SD culture is about fear, and not innovation or collaboration.

7. Communication - This past term has been frustrating since we were often told to accept board decisions, keep our opinions to ourselves, and leave all media interviews to the Board chair or Superintendent. I would advise this new board to speak out and let people know that there are real conversations going on including dissenting voices. This Board also needs to upload Board info and communicate better on the website such as it is. The Sunshine Coast is a good example of a district with a well working website.

8. Finance - The Board has seriously missed the boat on this one. I have repeatedly asked for action items to be attached to recommendations and this has not happened. Here are some examples.

a) Set parameters set around any new initiatives. The $20 per student Essential 8 plan as well as the new $130,000 Trades position should have had openly shown what was to be accomplished and by when, so that it can be seen where public money is going and how targets will be met.

b) Recommendations - don’t just make recommendations and expect that to turn into actions. That has been asked of senior staff without results, such as with the ECOW recommendations last year.

c) More care around surplus spending - if surplus is spent I would suggest not using it to grow the size of the school board office size, but put the money back in schools and support the growth of the PEA dept staff. Some of the money spent in this way comes back the district in the form of new student designations.

d) Publish results of learning team grants or district initiatives - this would allow for qualitative collaboration, data gathered can back where professional development could be increased and allow for better spending and tracking of dollars spent for these initiatives.

Last and Least, a message for the Minister of Education and the government: Your actions over many years have strained public education to a breaking point, some would say on purpose to promote corporate investment and private schooling. You need to start taxing fairly so that our children get a better quality public education and are more able to take care of you when you are old.

So, the new board has its work cut out. I wish you all the best and encourage you to set your expectations high and do it early.

My Record

This post shows the work via motions that I have put forward in the last three years. These are only motions that I made in public, not in camera.

I have great expectations of this school district. Many of the motions have increased transparency and advocate for more collaboration with partner groups when decisions are made. When I have voted no I ask to have my ‘No’ vote recorded so that I am accountable for how I vote.

There are annual documents that we review and vote on and I keep on trying to improve the editing and communication process regarding this. I have not voted in favour of the Superintendents Reports on Achievement or the District Achievement Contracts for a few reasons:

1. Statistics: this school district has enough data to publish more than 5yrs of stats which could define a more accurate picture of if the school district is meeting its goals and what is working. Follow cohorts would give an even greater correlation.
2. Leading statements: Many statements are leading and give no examples for the reader to understand what is being said. We are left to assume many things.
3. There are many statements referring to things improving, but again, I think the goals are unrealistic and leading when statistical significance is lacking and full explanation is not provided.
4. Input not shared with Board: Feedback was asked for the board's very own achievement contract band yet we were not allowed to see this input. My motion to release this feedback to the board was blocked. I definitely voted no for that achievement contract attached to that feedback.
5. Lack of collaboration: The "Essential 8" were placed into the document without collaboration with the district or consultation with trustees. I feel that is important that a significant district wide initiative should not be implemented without at least talking with all groups involved. I also feared approval of this would end of costing the district money, although at that meeting I was assured it was not going to happen. Ten months later it was put into the budget, costing the district approximately $450,000 and most of that money was to be taken out of the schools ($20 per student), the rest from surplus or other parts of the budget.

The budget is another area that I have consistently challenged and voted no. I have done so since in my opinion I have not seen partner group input implemented into the budget. This Board started a committee with all the partner groups to look at the budget together, and agreed on themes and items to be included in the budget, but did not see the results we hoped for.  Two other trustees voted against that budget for the same reason. Our budget votes are complicated because the budget needs to be broken down more to enable greater understanding of where the money is going instead of large amounts under headings without reference to where it is going.

Here are most of the motions I've put forward:

Oct 28 2014

Motion: That the Board of Education direct district staff to hold and not destroy any Mac computers recently removed from the network until the board has had a chance to review this decision in terms of our disposal of surplus equipment policy. Carried unanimously.

May 27 2014

BCSTA Advocation Motion: That the Board, in writing, request that the BCSTA call on the government to reconsider their Lockout tactics and actively seek a negotiated teacher contract or failing that, appointment of a mutually agreed upon mediator. Carried unanimously.

June 2014

Motion: That the Board of Trustees write a letter to the Minister of Education to express concerns that the Ministry of Education has removed written sections from English 10 and Social Studies 11 graduation program exams. This action is not in keeping with the designation of provincial exams as an essential service and compromises the valid assessment of our students. Carried Unanimously.

May 13, 2014: 2014/2015 Budget proposal

Motion: That the budget increase to C&I of $248,000 for the implementation of the “Essential Eight” be reduced to $124,000 in order to mitigate cuts to other departments and allow the hiring of a Speech Language Pathologist. (amended to put all the $248,000 back in the schools - Defeated)

Feb 17, 2014

Motion: that the Board of Education in SD57 write a joint letter with the PGDTA asking the Ministry to respect the BC Supreme Court ruling, fully fund restored services and to bargain with respectful and collaborative intentions. Carried unanimously.

Jan 28, 2014

Motion: That the OpenStudent organization be invited to make a demonstration/presentation in our district in the next two months for a similar audience as the Aspen SIS presentation in December 2013. The purpose is to allow staff to compare the two systems that will be used in BC to replace BCESIS. (amended to “at their expense”, then carried)

Nov 26 2013

Motion: That the board receive information on registration transfers between schools in the district by month from March to Sept 2013. Carried 4:2 (Against - Bella, Bekkering)

All these motions were moved to committee, Carried 5:1(Kate against). I agrued to keep the conversation at the Board table for a transparent conversation.

Motion: Moved to committee

That district staff be directed to draft a new technology vision and policy in conjunction with our partner groups to reflect our immediate and future technology needs, including strategies for meeting the BC Education Plan goal of “learning empowered by technology”. (Board believes this will be drafted in response to the strategic plan, Carried: 6:0)

Motion: Moved to commitee

That the school district conduct an anonymous employee survey every three years to understand the technology needs in our school district to help set technology goals and identify challenges. The survey questions should be formed in collaboration with partner groups and the results of the survey made public. (recommendation from committee of the whole starting 3 years after the Strategic Plan starts, Carried 4:3 Sharel, Betty, Sharon against)

Motion: Moved to commitee

That the school district allow district schools to purchase media tablets and mobile technology of their choosing in accordance with their own technology planning process and the Acceptable Use of Networks Policy. (moved to an adhoc committee, still meeting, Carried 5:1, Bekkering against)

Motion: Moved to commitee

That senior administration bring together a working group made to examine and assess AspenEsis and OpenStudent student information systems. The working group shall be made up of two (or more) of each: administrator, tech analyst, SASO or secretary doing student data entry, counsellor, and teacher. (Sent to Education services committee and defeated by trustees in committee, Trustee’s Bella and Bekkering)

June 25, 2013

Motion to postpone accepting the District Achievement Contract in order to review the input that the senior administration asked for on trustees’ behalf. The final edits and input had not been offered to trustees prior to acceptance. Defeated - motion not seconded. (This was in reference to the District Achievement Contact).

May 14, 2013

motion: That the Senior Administration prioritize the hiring of two Occupational therapists and on Speech Language Pathologist for the 2013/2014 school year without loss to current staffing levels, using current unappropriated surplus for the first year and securing sustainable funding for subsequent years.

additional motion May 14: That this motion be postponed to the regular Board meeting following the approval of the 2013/2014 budget. Carried. 4:3

postponed motion May 28: Defeated. 5:2

April 2013

Motion: That the Superintendent or designate release the current kindergarten registration numbers to the board. Carried 5:1 (Bekkering against)

Nov 5, 2012

motion: that the Superintendent or designate report twice a year, October and March, on class size and composition in the district. After much debate and amendments, the motion was passed as “that the Superintendent or designate present a report twice a year, November and March, on class size and composition in the district to the Management and Finance committee”. Carried

June 26, 2012

motion: that the Policy and Governance committee examine practices and consider updating or drafting a new policy for hiring, review, evaluation and support of administration. Carried 4:3. (Bella, Bekkering, Bennit against).

Board Vision exercise from 2012

I came across this today, it was a plan I made for a School District 57 Board Vision discussion that we had in March 2012. We ended up having this meeting but did not get all the way through the questions. I would like to pick some of these up again, maybe as part of the Strategic Planning process.

Here is how the plan went:

Check In:

Lessons learned: Learn personalities, have confidence, ask questions that get into areas that are difficult to talk about, recognize red-hearings in a debate, how to properly prepare for meetings, how to turn an idea that makes sense in my head into words, questions, and actions that others can understand

Questions:

1. When are detailed questions and discussion by email acceptable when getting together as a group may be difficult or may not happen in time for an issue to be addressed? 
2. Board decision vs. individual opinion, both are important - what kind of trust is needed for board members to know that individual responses to issues are professional and help resolve problems? 
3. What interest is there in having the board meet a few times as a group of seven to build our own relationship with each other and the issues facing the district and public education? (board discussion can take place like this, but of course any formal decisions need to be attended by a member of senior admin... School Act) 
4. What is our strategy for receiving frank partner group input in addition to public board meetings, and what duty do we have to respond? For example, when can we sit down for a rational discussion with PGDTA on their Bill 22 concerns? 
5. Can we write a bio and personal vision next to our SD trustee picture? In general, can we improve the way trustees use digital tools to communicate with the public? 
6. What interest is there in a board-hosted district and partners round table to help us share, focus and adapt our achievement goals and also our plans for sustainability?

Brainstorming: Focus for next 3 yrs. (can add my questions to these)

1. Safe Schools - action on drug users, dealers, bullies - are we giving too many second chances 
2. Parent concerns - how will we involve them on mandatory programs or aspects of 21st learning that might be pushed on students, loss of elective programs, where special needs funding goes 
3. Improving communication with trustees - more interaction, less passive listening, Q&A sessions, role we can play in building bridges between management and teachers more blunt honesty in documents 
4. Support for rural schools - why it’s important (community stability, equality or at least fairness in education, importance of rural regions for food security and resource stability, and what we can do, what’s the strategy for delivering education 
5. Board office communication - more open talk and blunt honesty in documents, better proof-reading of publications (e.g. internal VP application), less politics and message-management, consistent message on technology - the district is saying and doing two different things when it comes to technology 
6. Long-term planning - school plans and district plans are not taken seriously, need more editing or review from partner groups, no tech plan exists, no on-going sustainability plan, not enough input on plans (Sunshine Coast example) 
7. Sustainability - green schools, plant new trees, reduce/recover carbon taxes

Response to DPAC questions

School District 57 Parent Advisory Council (http://sd57dpac.ca/) asked trustee candidates seven questions. Here are my responses:

1. What do you think is important to parents in the district?
There are three basic things that all parents want: they want to know that their kids are safe, loved (or at least cared for), and learning something useful. Additionally, I think parents want to know that their kids receive adequate support, that problems (like bullying) will be dealt with quickly and fairly, that their role as parents will be respected, and that their kids will get a solid foundation in reading, writing, math, and opportunities to grow in the arts, phys-ed, citizenship, and practical skills.

2. Why are you running for trustee?
I am running for re-election because I have high expectations. For the last three years I have tried to raise the game for everyone involved in student success. I have worked for healthy caring schools and good relationships between all partner groups. I talk regularly with stakeholders and partner groups, especially when I know there are outstanding issues and dysfunction in our district. I have fought for transparent governance, asked tough questions of management and others, and refused to simply rubber stamp motions. Although I respect my fellow trustees, this usually puts me in the minority, often 1 out of 7.

3. What have you done to prepare yourself for the role of trustee?
To prepare for being a trustee I do three things:
a) I talk to people involved like teachers, principals, parents, and support staff to find out what's going on
b) I read the material prepared by senior staff and ask tough questions about it
c) I make motions to actually deal with the issues that come up, either on my own or with other trustees

4. How will you ensure that the schools in this district are safe and caring places for all students?
I will ensure safe and caring schools by continuing to find out what is behind the issues that come up and by holding senior management accountable for dealing with them. I will continue to be persistent. In 2012 I was the only trustee to support a stand-alone policy on LGBTQ bullying. Eventually the others came around. I also started out alone in pushing for class composition reports and better information release on school registration data and future projections. I keep in close contact with a network of parents, teachers, administration, and support staff.

5. How do you see your role as trustee in relation to the superintendent and staff?
I see my role with district staff as being an important part of providing transparency and accountability. I have prepared detailed responses to each of the superintendent's reports and district achievement contracts, and have asked tough questions at every in-camera and public board meeting. I insist on better data for decisions, e.g. the new student information system, and set high expectations for board office communication and reporting, e.g. I've kept the pressure up for a better and more useful district website. One of my favourite roles was being the DPAC liaison for two years.

6. How will you demonstrate and communicate the accountability and transparency of the school board to parents and to the community?
I will demonstrate accountability and transparency by asking for a restoration budget to by developed alongside the balanced budget. This shows partner groups and the government what a fully funded schools would look like, and would be developed with inputs from all partner groups. In fact our partner groups made very good suggestions during the "Extended Committee" process over the last two years but we failed to implement those changes in part due to insufficient funds. I also believe we need less closed-door meetings and would push for more inclusion and a redesign of our meetings. Lastly, we have a strategic planning process coming this year and I would like to ensure that it is not a "done deal" process but one that actually listens to and uses the input of partner groups and the community.

7. Is there anything else you'd like to add?
There are different strengths and weaknesses on every board. By my own admission I am not a politician. I am in fact an introvert who works very hard because I am trying to make a change. My work may not always be in the spotlight, but it is important because many of the other trustees are not comfortable doing it, like bringing issues into the light and asking difficult or awkward questions on behalf of parents, students, and employees.

Answers to Questions

About two weeks ago I posted some questions that I thought voters should ask of trustee candidates. Here are some of my thoughts about how to answer these questions.

1. Why bother voting in local elections? What difference does it make?

Both the City of PG and School District 57 work with budgets of more than $120 million.  Because local government is accessible, citizens can have more influence over how these tax dollars are spent than they can over provincial and federal funds. The local school board makes a difference to local schools, not just whether they stay open but about how they are managed and what programs get developed to improve success for students.

2. Why is BC behind other provinces when it comes to funding? What has our school board done to show the need for stable funding from the province besides write some letters?

BC Education is underfunded for many reasons. One of them is that education was not a big issue during the last election. Another is that our government has an agenda to reduce costs and allow more privatization of our school system. Our board has politely raised funding concerns whenever it has met with provincial representatives, and of course it has written many letters, but I think we need to be more aggressive.

3. Why are our playgrounds so sparse? What would it take to get more trees planted or more variety in the landscaping and playspaces?

When the school grounds were cleared of dead pine trees a few years ago, almost no trees were re-planted. My understanding is that senior management or maintenance department sees a cost savings in groundskeeping when it is just grass and not trees or gardens. It is always complicated to add more money to budgets when they have been recently reduced, but where there is a will there is a way. Trees and children go together, this should be a right and not a privilege.  It is also an inexpensive way to make old shabby schools look a little bit better.

4. Are all of our partner groups (teachers, principals, support staff, etc.) free to advocate for their schools, students, and public education or do they have restrictions placed on them? How has the school board engaged these partners? Will the new Strategic Plan address this?

Aside from good news stories or mandatory reports, we hear quite a bit from PGDTA, CUPE, and parents. We rarely hear from PGPVPA (administration). From my conversations it seems that many of them feel there is a gag order to in place and don't get involved. Our board has not done anything that I know of to correct this situation. I will try to make open, blunt, and honest feedback a part of the Strategic Plan, but one person can only do so much. Other trustees have to be willing to see the problem and also act on it. I would love to work with the board to make this happen.

5. Why are so many busses so empty? What are some creative ideas for rethinking how to meet student transportation needs?

We reserve bus seats for everyone that says they want to use it, but many do not. This is one reason why we spend about $500,000 more than we are funded for on transportation.  One idea is to have gathering stations where parents are expected to drop off their kids. From there, fewer buses could pick up more kids. These stations would have to be safe and perhaps supervised by a district employee that could call in with any problems. We could also charge based on usage, although this is not usually a popular idea. Another idea that has been floated is to offer a transportation subsidy for remote parents instead of offering bussing. We have tried this before and it resulted in savings.

6. When is a school too big? How are we planning for the future? Should any of our closed schools re-open?

Some of our schools are crowded. I am also concerned that some school properties could be sold off. If Prince George expands, we will need these school properties back to rebuild or renovate schools. Mackenzie has one elementary school (Morfee) and many parents have asked to re-open a second (Mackenzie Elementary). I would like to see a more detailed study one whether this is reasonable (money, demographics, learning conditions). They are also interested in French Immersion. So far, arguments on both sides have lacked solid evidence that convinces me of what should happen next.

7. Why are iPads a banned purchase by schools for use with staff and students? How are we actually supporting site-based management and innovation?

My understanding is that Pads were banned along with other tablet purchases (other than one pilot project) because of the potential cost. This was a decision by senior administration and not schools or the board. Perhaps they are worried that if one or two schools can use iPads in their classes then the whole district will want them, so to solve this problem they've banned them all. There is no actual policy about this, just practice. I have heard plenty from teachers and principals that they would like to make their own technology decisions and use their own technology budgets in a way that will benefit students and teachers the most. It is possible that tablet technology will come and go before our district sorts out what to do with this issue. This is too bad because many innovative teachers and principals have just given up using technology with students when it is not supported by the district. I'm quite sure we even lost a principal to another district because of this. It is wishful thinking that "bringing your own device" will solve this problem. We need to remove restrictions on technology that everyone in the educational world is already using.

8. How come new programs come and go without any data being collected about how they work and whether they are worth it? Do we have accountable spending?

I think is easier to come up with a creative idea than it is to see it through with a real plan that has parameters in place. Examples from the past include some of the 2010 school closures, the attempt to wipe out dual-track French Immersion, the rushed creation of a Northern Learning Centre choice program (which did not last two years), the choice of Student Information Systems, the AMS pilot (a new assessment system), the Essential 8 (tied to our achievement contract), and the upcoming Strategic Plan. Each one has its own issues but they all relate to data and accountability. Of course there are lots of programs that work great but the ones that  have serious problems show us the areas we should focus on to do a better job. Not trying to be a party-pooper, but trustees should spend less time being cheerleaders for the district and more time focusing on problems that won't go away. When we solve those problems then we have something to cheer about. Actually we should cheer more for basic work of staff and students, and show more of it on our websites.

9. What has been done to give rural schools the same learning opportunities as urban schools? How are we engaging their parents, students, staff, communities and the regional district?

Rural schools would benefit from more site-based management, more control over budget and direction. There has been a "conversation on rural education" going on 10 years, what we need is more action. For example, are we putting the creativity and resources into better distributed learning? Have we looked into better use of itinerant teachers or alternative schedules? I would like to know that rural communities (not just schools) are developing long-term site plans and that our school district is supporting them. I would like to know that when the regional district wants to meet with the board that it doesn't take months to make it happen.

10. What are we doing to speed up diagnosis of special needs students and the added funding that comes with it? Do we have enough support staff such as occupational therapists, psychologists, and speech pathologists to deal with the needs in our schools?

This was an important issue for me because we don't have enough support staff. I tried unsuccessfully to put aside surplus funds for more of these positions (psychologists, occupational therapists, speech language pathologists). Although most of the partner groups agreed, and this was part of the "ECOW" (extended budget committee) recommendations, it did not happen. Again I found myself alone in this request. I think this should be a much bigger priority for our board and district because we are talking about our most vulnerable students.

11. The new teacher contract has an Education Fund to hire more specialist teachers, will this meet the needs of students? How will we find out if we need more counsellors, learning assistance teachers, teacher-librarians and so on?

Specialist teachers on their own won't meet all of our student's needs, but having more rather than less is definitely going to make a difference. I think the critical part is whether each school has access to basic supports. For example if the formula determines that an elementary school is too small for a teacher-librarian position, that school has lost opportunities compared with other schools.  I think that senior staff, principals, teacher reps, other partner group reps, and specialist teachers should sit down together to come up with our own targets and ratios separate from the provincial bargaining table. Maybe even two sets, what we can afford by using the Education Fund, and what we think we'd need to meet all the "specialist" needs of our students. I'd like to see this backed by evidence (data from our schools now) and not just past contract language or wishlists.

12. Does our school district website do enough to celebrate the good work that happens in our school district especially with the focus of the Canada Winter Games coming to Prince George?

No, our website does not yet do this. This was another point I tried to drive home over the last three years. There is no place to showcase board office staff, to celebrate cool student projects or teacher work or principal pride in their schools. Some of the school websites do this, some do not. The school website has new colours and design, but the content is still about the same. We should see some of the amazing things being done by our staff and students. All of Canada will be turning their attention to Prince George in a few months and one of the places they'll look is at our school district and our website (our schools will be used by the Games). We need better maps, stories, pictures, videos, and simpler navigation, following the three-click rule.

Rocky Mountain Goat News

The Rocky Mountain Goat Newspaper asked trustee candidates to respond to four questions. I thought I'd publish my responses here as well as to the paper.

Here are their questions:

1. What makes you a good candidate?
2. What are the big issues facing the school board and Robson Valley?
3. What is your vision for rural schools?
4. Anything else you want to add?

Here are my responses:

1. I have high expectations. For the last three years I have tried to raise the game for everyone involved in student success. I have worked for healthy caring schools and good relationships between all partner groups. I talk regularly with teachers, principals, other staff, and parents about what it going on in the district, especially where there is dysfunction. I have fought for transparent governance, asked tough questions of management and others, and refused to simply rubber stamp motions. Although I respect my fellow trustees, this usually puts me in the minority, often 1 out of 7.
2. Main issues: A) inclusive decision making - a Strategic Plan is coming up, I would like to see this be an open-ended consultation about the future, not a confirmation of what has already been decided. B) high expectation for leadership - the board needs to assert its right to set more directions in the district: budgets, programs, and hiring of management. Both the board and senior administration need to do more to follow-up on problems and opportunities. C) infrastructure improvements - many of our schools are in need of big repairs, environmental upgrades, and playground renewal. We should invest in geothermal heating, solar power panels, and planting more trees. Technology infrastructure needs attention, too, including the many restrictions that schools face on purchasing.
3. For rural schools, I would prioritize site-based management. Too many aspects of budgets and program direction are controlled centrally, with the result that rural school needs are sometimes put on the back burner and the "conversation on rural education" takes forever. My impression is that we use temporary measures to equalize opportunities for rural vs urban students. What we need is for rural communities to develop a more long-term site plans including better distributed learning and for the school district to support them.
4. Trustees are expected to be advocates. I am in favour of a more aggressive yet still respectful stance towards the government, more than just strongly worded letters. We should be building a restoration budget to be submitted along with our balanced budget to show the province what sustainable funding looks like. Our district and region is an awesome place to live and go to school. School boards need high expectations, strong voices, good listeners, blunt honesty, and caring leadership to ensure that we meet student needs in the future. That's what I offer.

Re-election Press Release

I have great expectations for our school district. I want more transparency and accountability from senior management. I want more follow-through and boldness from trustees. I want more celebration and voice for the work of teachers. I want more awareness of what our support staff do to improve schools and learning. I want more engagement of parents and students as stakeholders in public education. I want the provincial government to acknowledge that we have unmet needs in our students due to underfunding, understaffing, and aging infrastructure that needs investment. I do not believe that these expectations are out of reach for the Board of Education. I do believe these are goals that we can achieve if we work together.

My record:

• Asked for a Restoration Budget to be submitted along with our balanced budget in order to show the provincial government and the public what a fully-funded education system looks like.
• Supported a stand-alone LGBTQ anti-bullying policy from the start of my term. While initially alone, thankfully other trustees came around to this position when it came up last year.
• Challenged each and every budget and district report when it did not meet high standards for inclusion of partner group input, unanswered questions about money or direction, slippery statistics, or clearness of expression.
• Successfully won the release of information from our district that should be public such as enrollment and demographic data, class composition reports, and school transfer information.
• Pushed for more of our committee meetings to lift partner group gag orders and for stakeholders to be part of budget consultations.
• Advocated for less restrictions on technology and innovation, and for paying attention to the impact that new technology has on the time and work of staff, like new student information systems.

What I am not:
A politician, polished public speaker, or someone who only speaks up when the wind is blowing in that direction. I do not vote with the majority just because I am expected to, I treat each motion on its own and vote to represent all stakeholders, not just management recommendation.

What I am: 
Someone who will ask tough questions, follow through on issues, and advocate for well-funded, caring, and effective schools for our staff and students.  I will listen to what all parties say and ensure their voices do not get lost in procedures and closed-door meetings.

What to expect from me next:

I do not ride the fence on issues (I'm sorry to say this has been a bog issue for our current board), and I am not shy about controversy although I am a shy person.  I am hoping that our new board deals with sustainable funding, support for rural education, reducing cost of bussing, condition of school grounds, improvements for special needs students, and more site-based management.

More about me: 

I'm a mother of two kids in SD57 elementary schools, married to teacher, and an employee at Northern Health. I do pottery in my spare time. I was born in Nova Scotia, raised in Saskatchewan and other places (military family), and have lived in Prince George since 1998. I have served one term as a trustee in SD57 from 2011-2014. 

Feel free to contact me by text/phone (7783499119) or email (trusteecooke@gmail.com) if you want more information, would like to share your thoughts about public education, or have concerns that need to be brought forward. 

I would like my next post to be about questions that staff, parents, and students would like answered. Please contact me if you have some good questions.

Running again

It wasn't until late last night that I decided whether or not I should run again for school board trustee in School District 57. I had to work through some serious pros and cons, talk to some friends, and figure out what I valued about being a trustee. The case for saying yes became clearer over the course of the evening. I have big expectations for our school system and believe I can make a difference in my own way.

I am not your typical trustee. I do not want to be a politician, and I don't enjoy being in the spotlight. I struggle with public speaking and even writing in a clear fashion, although this has improved a lot over the last three years. I have a problem with truth, meaning that I stick to it and will not lie or bend the facts when it is convenient. I will always say what is on my mind and do not have the ability to bullshit people. This means I can be very blunt in what I say in both closed and public meetings. I often believe in underdogs and pay attention to what people on the edge of conversations are doing or saying. 

Over the last three years, this means I have asked tough questions at every single meeting I have been at, even to the point of being cut off or "handled." I have pushed for accountability and transparency in our district, especially from senior management, and pushed for the input of partner groups to be taken seriously. We have a secretive district and many issues brought up by staff, so I felt that this was job number one for a trustee.  I started out trying to represent teachers, parents, principals, support staff, PEA (like psychologists), and students first, and did not start out simply accepting that senior management has all the answers. 

This also means I have usually been on the losing end of votes. In 2011, I was 1 out 7 in wanting a stand alone LGBTQ policy for our district. Eventually the other trustees agreed this was necessary. I have twice been 1 out of 7 in looking for a restoration budget. This is a needs-based budget that would be submitted along with the balanced budget in order to show the provincial government what full funding would look like in our school district. The request did not even make it to the board table. I have been 1 out of 7 in challenging the District Achievement Contract and related reports because they did not meet high standards and contained invalid interpretation of statistics. I have been in the minority in voting against three annual budgets because they did not do enough to incorporate partner group input and one of them spent money we were told would not be spent. I was the only one at first to ask for class composition data to be included in the superintendent's report, eventually this passed. I pushed for a closer look at student information systems when it seemed our district was ready to just jump in on the Ministry of Education's suggested choice. I pushed for less restrictions on technology and innovation in our district in response to year of complaints that these areas were being ignored. There were also editing suggestions for letters to the government, many of which were too strong to make it into the final version, and multiple motions related to transparent release of information, some of which passed.

This list could go on for a while, it is part of the hard work that I did and will continue to do if elected. My work is not very flashy and may not seem that exciting to the average voter in an election, but it is important work. Without this kind of work being done by one or more trustees, a board can quickly becomes a rubber stamp and we lose accountability and transparency.

The last three years wasn't all an uphill battle. Our board has done some good work and there has been great discussions and laughter along the way. Generally the debate has been respectful, although many issues have come and gone without actually dealing with them. The good discussion doesn't always translate into good votes on issues. I am encouraged by the feeling that partner groups have had an increased voice, but we have a long way to go.

I really hope our board can learn from the last three years, and that some new trustees can bring energy to make some needed changes. My goal for the next term is seek high expectations for the board, for senior management, and for partner groups in School District 57.

I guess that can be my campaign slogan: Great Expectations

Report on Achievement

At our last board meeting January 15th, the superintendent delivered his annual Report on Achievement. This document is tied to our District Achievement Contract and requires trustee approval to be accepted as an official Ministry of Education submission on behalf of School District 57. The document has a deadline set at the end of January.

I made a motion to postpone approval of the Report until the Superintendent had a chance to make edits, and (after this failed 6:1), voted against accepting the Report. A couple of people have asked me why I did this so I thought I would write a bit about that.

First, the Report had lots of optimism, which is good, but also some items that deserved a second look. I took some time to review the report on achievement and put some comments, questions, typos, and friendly suggestions together on a version of the Superintendent's Report that you can read here. I think I ended up with 57 comments. Some of my comments are similar to last year's report like the need for more than 2-5 years of data in order to see a trend, and some of them are new. I picked a few of the comments to address at the board meeting, but was only able to bring up two in the time allowed. As I shared with the other trustees beforehand, my goal is that we see a high quality and highly accurate report.

I was a bit surprised that a majority of us would not see the value in postponing a decision on the report until the next meeting on January 29th. In my mind that was why we set up two board meetings in January to begin with. I am also a bit leary about accepting a report that may or may not be altered after the fact. I can guess that the typos at least will be fixed, but I won't find out until it after it goes to the Minister, so my approval would come before seeing the final document. On the one hand the Report goes in unchanged and is not the best report it should be. On the other hand a slightly different Report goes in than the one trustees voted on. That was why I voted no.

As with every decision I've made as a trustee, I need to know that my questions have been addressed before voting in favour of a proposal. I realize that Reports like this are mostly about Ministry requirements, but they also speak on behalf of the employees and partners of our school district and reflects the work they do.

This has happened to me a few times, where I seem to be voting no with some or all of the others voting yes because we each have different criteria for what gets our vote. One example was a bussing contract. For all I know it was the best contract ever but I did not get to see it or have it summarized, so I was not comfortable rubber stamping it without knowing what was in it. That's democracy I guess, and I don't mind being a trustee that holds out on principle. I can see why being positive all the time, accepting reports and proposals as they are leads to less grief as a trustee, but that is not why I became one. Each of us has an important role to play, some are good communicators, some are good at meetings and Robert's Rules, some are good at attending school functions and celebrating what's going on, and so on. I'd like to think my role is to ask lots of questions and keep coming back to transparency and openess, high quality work at the board office, and improved communications including the reports that speak for our district.

Educational Leadership Conference

I was one of the SD#57 trustees that went to the 2012 Educational Leadership Conference in Vancouver (Nov 15, 16). The participants were educational staff from Ministry to senior administration to trustees to principals and some teachers and students (1200 Participants).

There were 4 Plenary speakers and many breakout sessions. The theme of the conference was ‘Partnerships for Personalization: Leading and Transforming together’.  Most of the presentations are posted at http://www.bcssa.org/fallconference.html.

My plan is to blog about what I have taken from the conference and bring this to the district as a trustee, hopefully influence some change.

I observed collaboration as a predominant theme. Collaboration as a small school district seemed to be more successful district-wide than in larger districts who had more school-wide and some joint-school success. School-wide change was most successful when collaboration was a true co-creation process.

Daniel Wilson was a Plenary Speaker of the conference speaking on collaboration in learning communities. Through graphs and examples obtained from his work in the field of social-psychology, he showed how collaboration between team members of a extreme sport competition were the most successful in navigating their tensions when language, behavior and leadership roles were flexible. When language (body or words) was aggressive or authoritative then those teams were always the losers. The most successful teams were those that had true collaboration with the use of questioning statements Success also came from sharing of leadership when new leaders were recognized for their skill, performance at a task, or ability to fill in the regular leader was exhausted and couldn’t maintain the leadership role.

He also stated that 70% of true collaboration happens from informal conversations with colleagues and the other 30% is formal. So, water cooler conversations or beers after work do make a difference.

I have often sat in meetings thinking that we are being unproductive because we are following rules and structure and if we all stood up in a group and dropped the pretense then perhaps true conversations would ensue. I think those statistics affirm that my intuition is right.

A breakout session that I went to was the "Village of Attachment: Developing the Whole Child." This came from SD#41 Burnaby (see their presentation here)  The vision is that every child be in a nurturing relationship with an adult. They have expanded the word family to include a network of adults that work to bring out and guide children so that they have a purpose. Through finding commonalities they engage children to begin conversations and eventually relationships. Through these relationships the adult pulls out the child's reasons for purpose in life or their ‘spark’ to quote Peter Benson. A spark is a characteristic that gives them a purpose to life or motivation to do something. Their spark does not have to be what they eventually become or do for a profession, but it is developed in them.

This process is also transfered to adult to adult relationships. Whether within schools or districts it is about recognizing what we (individually or collectively) are good at and utilizing it to help improve us. This is where collaboration can be effective in openly recognizing our strengths and weaknesses and collaborating with someone who can help us where we want to improve. David Hargreaves (plenary speaker) spoke of this form of collaboration being practiced in Britain with teachers but it failed where it was mandatory. The key was to survey and see where our educators felt they wanted to collaborate and improve. Because making yourself vulnerable is part of the process, it needs to be kept transparent to avoid implying that any individual is incompetent.

It is my perspective that the 2010 school closure process had gaps in collaboration that has resulted in leftover tension that I hope will be addressed as the board starts conversations around strategic planning and an extended management and finance committee to discuss the budget. In order to collaborate there will be social tensions, but how we navigate the language, roles, vulnerabilities and competencies will result in co-creations that will result in a new placed trust and district wide visions. A village of collaboration and attachment is my optimistic vision.

busy month

Talk about lifestyle change! In a couple of months I've gone from stay-at-home mom to having two demanding jobs. In addition to my new role as school trustee, I've also been hired on to Canada Post as a mail carrier. Both jobs require training, so I've been burning the candle at both ends for a while, hopefully it slows down soon. The hardest part was realizing I won't often get the chance to drop off and pick up my daughter from school, and spend most days with my son.  He'll be in kindergarten next year, so this transition came a just a bit earlier than expected. The trustee orientation has gone well. We spent last weekend at the BC School Trustees Association academy. There were 418 trustees elected province-wide, 175 of them were new. That was the most ever turnaround, and the conference the best attended they've had. We discussed 21st century learning, team-building, the Ministry's agenda, and innovation. I tried to ask as many questions as would be tolerated, both to the PG team and other delegates. I'm still left with questions about 21st century learning, as it is not clear what it will look like when implemented, and there seems to be blind faith that technology will solve many problems. I think it can create new problems, too, and would not like to lose the human connection we have between students and teachers. I was expecting more government agenda and general brainwashing, but it was actually quite fair and delegates were able to ask tough questions. I wish I would have heard more about teacher contract bargaining, this was not discussed at all.

Citizen Bio

Yikes! The PG Citizen 5 of the trustee candidate 500-word bios, including mine.  The other 9 were published but I guess there was a mix up on the others.  Most of them made it to the Citizen's website, though.  For those who are interested, here is what I sent to the Citizen:

I'm 41, a mother of two children, a girl in Grade 2 at Ecole College Heights and a boy in preschool. My most recent full-time work was as a computer mapper for an archaeological consultant.

I'm an active parent at my daughter's school, and I volunteer with the potter's guild. There are many educators and students in my extended family, and I have  a solid understanding of the issues facing our schools. I have pursued fairness and common sense policy in every job and situation I've encountered. I am willing to ask tough questions and challenge the ideas of others, including the government as it seeks to reform the education system. I dislike the use of buzzwords, and will speak plainly about issues in our school district.

As a parent who participated in the school closure meetings in 2010, it became clear that the processes used by our school board were dysfunctional. Trustees were put in a position of listening but not responding, and had to work with a plan that had little flexibility. The input was stored up for use at single “right-sizing” public board meeting - it was a recipe for conflict and exclusion. Students, parents, teachers, the Regional District, even principals felt left out or stonewalled during the planning process, and were told that “bigger is better.” Choice programs were slated for disintegration, previous sustainability plans were ignored, and prior district spending was not under scrutiny. Rural communities were told there was no plan now but they would look at solutions down the road. Other districts like Kamloops managed to make agreeable cuts by changing their plan during consultation. It is not every year that this district will make those kinds of cuts to schools and programs, but we need a new culture at the board office if we don't want a repeat.  An inclusive climate will help address the issues and begin to heal the rift between teachers and management on technology, goal-setting, and professional development.

Over two short weeks in 2010 I was part of a group of teachers and parents that put together the "More with Less Report" suggesting 45 ways the school district could save money, improve delivery of programs, and green up to reduce carbon taxes. This report received some press and commendation from the minister of education, but very few of the recommendations received follow-up. Imagine what a creative, dedicated board could do in two months or two years with the help of its partner groups? Two key challenges will be pushing for a better funding formula for rural schools and ensuring that special needs funding does not get lost in the system.

There are many issues facing our school board, I've explained some on my website http://trusteecooke.blogspot.com. If I had to pick just one it would be the need for a more open and accountable relationship between the school board office and the teachers, students, parents, and community.

Talking Points

Here were the notes I had in front of me at the PG all-candidates meeting... I don't think I got around to many of them...

• mother, 41, married to a teacher, my kids are here, I’m locked in for 13 years or more
• I’ve got a lot of hope for what will happen to them, for what we can do as trustees, and a lot of frustration over what has happened over the last few years
• participated in the 2010 process, saw trustees forced into a corner where it seemed like they had to follow the path of least resistance
• more with less report - we wrote this because the District Sustainability Committee’s big plan was to close schools first and look for other savings later
• just when we thought french immersion was stable the board pulls out an end to sibling priority that caused parents another 5 months of pain
• other parent groups has similar frustration - rural schools, the traditional school, crowding at Heather Park and Glenview, Malaspina, courtesy bussing issues, the list is almost endless and goes back to the brutal process used in 2010
• teachers have ongoing frustrations over technology and classroom composition, and uncertainty about how our board will interpret the gov’t agenda once the job action is over
• I’ll ask tough questions, I’ve been involved in past debates, I love to debate and pursue fairness
• tired of double-speak, message management
• I’m not doing this to add to my resume or because I want to be a politician
• some of my big issues include safer schools, rural school support like getting MAC1 open again, protecting elective programs, stopping the diversion of special ed funding, getting the board office to wake up on technology issues, improving the plans in our district for learning, facilities, and greening up our schools
• I really look forward to working with you and the new trustees and thank you for this opportunity.
• I don’t want to sit and grumble in the playground, I want to pursue fairness for everyone in the district, bring more fairness to board policy
• Jack Layton talked about the need to build a new community on higher ground, I think we need a new more open approach to solving problems in the school district

jitters

Well, that was fun. We had the PGDTA/DPAC sponsored all-candidates forum tonight. Good questions and some interesting responses. Nice not to have any hecklers. It seemed that each person, in their own way, was focused on students. I'm really going to have to get used to the public speaking part of being trustee if I'm elected - I tend to think of what I want to say about things after while, after some time to sort it out. It was nice to meet the other candidates, and get a sense of what they would bring to the board. I kind of wish I could redo the rural schools question as I wanted to talk about the Dunster experience and the need to reopen Mackenzie Elementary. Oh well, part of the learning curve I guess.

Issue #9 Building Bridges

Problems:

Management and teachers are not often working towards the same goals, especially during the current job action. It has become increasingly difficult to get the trustees and board office to listen to what their teachers are telling them (& vice versa). If there is some return to local contract bargaining, this adversarial relationship needs to soften. Long ago when teachers and administrators were part of the same professional association, it was fairly easy matter for “degrees” of leadership; teachers could take board office positions for a period of time and then return to teaching. Principals taught more classes, and there was a sense of partnership on creating positive learning conditions. Talk to any retired teacher or principal and they’ll describe this era. This team approach took a long time to fade. Even recently, many opportunities for teachers and management to sit down existed. Regular district-wide professional development opportunities with both groups, leadership teams, and district committees that existed from 2000-2009 have all disappeared. To be fair, many of these connections required expensive release time and during times of constraint have been replaced with learning team grants that gives teachers some time out of the classroom for study questions and experiments about teaching and learning. The teacher - administration gap has resulted in many teachers simply doing their own thing in their classrooms and trying to ignore everything else, a classic defense mechanism. The gap is different at every school and seems most dramatic between schools and the board office, so there is a strong role for trustees to play in modeling a better relationship.

The silver lining on the current job action is that everyone in the school system is getting a break from the their regular routines. This has not been easy for all, but it gives everyone a chance to start some new patterns when the job action eventually ends. This will be the perfect opportunity for the school board trustees and board office administration to being a new relationship with their teachers. This will only happen if the board office is willing to examine some of the dysfunction in their past relationship.

Solutions:

Connect the dots between the management gap and the other issues (like #6, #7, #8). Building bridges requires providing opportunities for teachers and specialists to lead change at the district level and for principals and district staff to be involved in learning, even at the classroom level. Design meaningful opportunities for all groups to meet and work together on mutually shared goals.

Lobby both the BCTF and the BCPSEA to agree on some kind of designation that will allow employees from either groups to exchange roles periodically without compromising their professional association.

Encourage trustees and management to spend some time in classrooms to realize the differences between the board office version of what’s going on with other perspectives, including the student perspective.

Be proactive in the research and discussion phase of any future negotiations on local contract issues.  Some items in the teacher contract will undoubtedly return to local bargaining, and the trustees need to be engaged in the process from the outset, and not just reacting or waiting for other districts to set precedents. Why not be a leader?

Lift the gag order (real or perceived) on teachers and principals getting involved in defending public education and giving critique alongside praise to district decisions and policies. This will speed up the rate at which problems with draft policies come to light and make the final outcome more inclusive and powerful. Article E.28 of the PGDTA collective agreement and SD#57 Policy 1170.3 provide starting points for these discussions.

PG Free Press spot

...and now she wants to see it from another side.  The Prince George Free Press published my interview with Allan Wishart online today.  I'm quite pleased with how it turned out... I've never really done that sort of thing before.

Issue #2 Improving Say for Parents

Problems:

The government, as part of its 21st Learning Agenda, wants more distance education courses pushed on secondary students. While the plans are still fuzzy, the only detailed report published by the government on the topic up until last week shows a gradual shift from near-total class-based learning in Kindergarten up to near-total self-directed or blended learning by Grade 12, which relies on distance/distributed learning. There is now a new government report, but the Agenda is still vague and open to interpretation. Having a choice is great, but forcing the choice by restricting access to real school with real teachers is not productive and should alarm parents. While there are some interesting distributed learning models in our province at the secondary and post-secondary levels, our local distance education system is not up to the task of delivering the same quality of education as our “brick-and-mortar” schools. The distance education school has the lowest pass rate in our district and is designed to provide education at the edges: rural students, homebound, remedial, accelerated coursework. Students may be born learners, curious and creative, but very few possess the self-motivation and independent learning skills to succeed outside of an environment that has an active teacher, mentor, or parent. The government has made many statements about learning outside regular schools - looks great on paper but parents and teachers are worried that this is designed to reduce the number of schools and privatize educational services. The internet is wonderful, but is not a replacement for a committed teacher.

Solutions: 

Give parents a choice about distance learning, do not force the choice by removing options. As a trustee, I will pursue policy that states this.

Pilot “blended learning” programs at many schools, not just the distance education school.  This combines classroom based instruction with some independent, accountable community-based or online learning.  This has good potential for our small and rural schools, but should be an option at every high school. Give parents simple and effective tools for seeing how well these models work.

Listen to parents: use PACs and School Planning Councils to gather input on plans and programs as they are being designed instead of simply approving them after they have been made. Develop more face-to-face and digital opportunities for parents to be involved in the evolution of the school system.

Listen to educators: local professor Andrew Kitchenham has just published two guides to blended learning. A district-sponsored teacher focus group (“Quality Learning Globally”) met for a year and in 2004 reported a series of recommendations on how distributed learning could best be used in the district.  Engage these professionals and follow up or respond to their recommendations, which were ignored at the time.

Other trustee candidates, such as Don Sabo, have suggested that the board use less in-camera meetings and privatge commitee meetings to conduct business.  I think this is a great idea - public institution, should be public processes. Obviously certain personnel matters can be kept in-camera, and the trustees do need some time to talk with each other and the district adminsitration when they aren't performing for the public, but more public meetings would allow more transparency and access for parents.

Issue #1 Safe Schools

Problem: 

I met with a group of parents and teachers from four different high schools on Oct. 15th and one of the topics that came up was drugs in the secondary schools. Their students and kids tell them that everyone knows where to find drugs, and most of them could find it in/during school. At the same time, and despite a desire for zero tolerance of bullies and drugs, teachers are encouraged to get more of the students through to graduation regardless of the hurdles, and administration face pressure to give second chances to abusers of the most serious rules. Our struggling students do need support programs, tolerance and understanding, but this is much different than allowing assaults and drug violations to end with a five-day suspension. It is a sad comment when the easiest place for dealers and drugs users to practice is in school where the consequences are small. The drugs that kids have access to are not the joints from their parents’ time, they are stronger, nastier substances that ruin lives and steal childhood.

Solutions:

Give full support and resources to vice principals who take a hard line on drugs and bullies. Send the message that drugs and violence are a short-cut to expulsion, and that parents at EVERY school in the district can have a reasonable expectation that their child will be safe from dealers and bullies. This means as a trustee I will pursue a more aggressive policy in dealing with student conduct referrals for drugs and violence.

Celebrate schools that go above and beyond in making their schools healthy, safe, and tolerant. Advertise their programs, and reproduce their strategies. Trustees, if they get to know their schools, are in a good position to do this.

Involve the police more often, both in prevention and in consequences. Community policing and liaison officers are already in place, but the mindset has to change that drugs and violence are not just school violations - they are criminal acts.

Platform

I've set down my ideas and reasons why I'll work on behalf of students, schools, and communities in My Election Platform.  The document has more detail, but here is a quick version of my top ten issues:
1. Safe Schools - drug users, dealers, & bullies need not be given multiple chances
2. Improving role for parents - they need a say on programs forced on students
3. Improving communication with trustees - more interaction, less passive listening
4. Support for rural schools - important for food security and resource stability
5. The student experience - protect elective programs and special needs funding
6. Effective technology - the district is saying and doing two different things
7. Honesty in Education - more open talk, less politics and message-management
8. Long-term planning - current key plans are inconsistent or non-existent
9. Building Bridges - management and teachers are far apart on important goals
10. Real Sustainability - green schools, reduce/recover carbon taxes

I will ask the tough questions to get these issues on the table and I will use my ideas and your ideas to get results.