CFT Questionnaire

Here is the questionnaire, and my answers, for the Cincinnati Federation of Teachers.

1.  CPS has lost $69 million to non-CPS charter schools in the 2008-09 school year alone.  What do you think should be done regarding this situation?  Do you support charter schools?  Please explain your rationale.  What should be done if charter schools are not showing significant positive results in student achievement?  Should CPS create more district-sponsored charter schools?

First, let me emphasize that I am currently a public school teacher and a union member, but in the past I’ve worked in parochial, and charter schools—and my time at an area charter school gave me unique insights.  For example, on more than one occasion, I stood near the front desk when parents showed up with students—saying their public school sent them due to behavior problems.  We always found this strange, wondering why CPS would send unwanted students.  This charter school had a number of students who claimed to have been kicked out of CPS, and if true I think it important for motivated students to have a second chance.

Therefore, CPS schools with students facing expulsion or other severe discipline issues should be able to send them to a CPS sponsored alternative school, and this workflow should be clearly explained to faculty and staff in all the buildings.  It doesn’t make sense to oppose charter schools when sometimes the district’s own teachers or administrators send students to them.  In any case, charter school legislation is outside the scope of School Board, but I do support in-district options for at-risk kids.  Naturally, the magnet school programs provide the kind of “school choice” at the heart of the charter movement, so I think more effective marketing towards families of kindergarten aged kids is needed. 

2.  What is your position on student based budgeting?  Should the district allocate a specific amount of revenue based upon a school’s enrollment, factoring in various weighted amounts for special needs students, gifted students, students on free and reduced lunch, etc., and then allow the schools to determine the staffing needs?  Please explain the pros and cons of such a system.

I support student based budgeting, and I think it provides the kind of flexibility necessary for a school to meet its own needs in terms of service provision relative to finances.  I think CPS did good work pioneering this program, and I think it should continue. I am not aware of any negative aspects with this system, but I suppose appropriate oversight is always necessary to insure the most effective allocation of funds. 

I especially like the autonomy the system gives schools through structures like LSDMCs.  Local leaders best know how to use dollars effectively.

3.  What is your position regarding contracting out for instruction and other services provided by state certified/licensed professionals?  What about lunchroom and custodial services?  Under the No Child Left Behind legislation, schools listed in the “School Improvement” category must offer after-school remediation.  Do you support CPS becoming a service provider to compete with other privately-owned service providers?

I think it’s important for the district to put its own employees first.  CPS faculty and staff constitute a team of people building relationships with our students, and building positive relationships is key to ongoing success, at all levels—including the custodial and lunchroom staff.  I would only support contracting out work like this it were the only way to provide needed services for kids.

I think CPS faculty should be able to compete with private service providers for after-school remediation programs for the same reasons listed above.  The more opportunities our students have to build relationships with faculty, the better their chances of improved success.

4.  Have you worked to support school levies and bond issues placed on the ballot by majority vote of the School Board?  Under what circumstances would you oppose a school levy?

I can’t really think of a reason I would oppose a school levy. I do know that sometimes there’s debate about what the best timing for a school levy would be, but once that timing is decided it is important to get the community on board.
As a teacher, I know it is important that teachers are represented well by the school board. I want to be a representative not just of my community, but of the teachers in our school system. I therefore pledge to have a close working relationship with the CFT so that I can learn what your concerns and goals are.

5.  CPS and CFT have used both a problem-solving approach to collective bargaining negotiations called principled negotiations, as well as a traditional, adversarial style of bargaining.  Which approach to collective bargaining would you support and why?

I would always opt for collaborative environment over adversarial ones when possible, so would choose principled negotiations if given the option.  Ultimately, the board and the teachers should share a similar goal:  How can we best serve kids?  Principled negotiations provides a framework for working to address such a question mutually.

6.  ACPSOP represented employees have the contractual right to request job studies of their current assignments.  One of the biggest problems that we are experiencing is the amount of work being placed on school-based employees.  When jobs are studied, volume is not considered.  Would you support ACPSOP in our efforts to convince Administration that a job work load analysis is critical, especially at the elementary school level?

I am not familiar with the details of these job studies, but I can’t imagine how one can study a job without considering volume and work load.  So, yes, I would absolutely support that—as the alternative does not make sense.

7.  Since the last CAAS assignment, elementary school secretaries are required by contract to work 48 weeks per year.  These employees are provided an “in lieu of vacation” stipend.  This stipend, however, is not equal to the amount of pay given 52 week employees who are eligible for vacation.  Would you support ACPSOP in our efforts to change the elementary secretaries to full-time 52 week employees with vacation rights?

Certainly, as long as secretaries who actually prefer the current method have the option to keep it.  (I do not know, for example, if the 52 week employees qualify for four weeks vacation—so for all I know some secretaries like that time off.)

8.  What is your position on shared decision-making at the local school level (through Instructional Leadership Teams) and at the district-wide level through joint committees, such as the Educational Initiative Panel, which “monitors the progress of current initiatives, plans new programs, supports and encourages local school improvement and restructuring efforts?”  Do you support the continuation of ILTs, the EIP, LSDMCs and other shared decision making efforts?  How important is practitioner input into planning educational initiatives and other decision-making efforts?

Yes, I do support the continuation of those programs.  Good administration recognizes how to capitalize on the strength, passion, and expertise of its teachers—so the only sensible option in a school environment is shared-decision making.

9.  Once a collective bargaining agreement has been ratified by CFT and CPS Board of Education, what is your belief about honoring the terms of this legal agreement?  How should violations, as well as areas of interpretation, of the contract be handled after ratification by both sides?

The terms must be followed.  That is the entire point of the contract process.  Violations are just an invitation to waste resources over complaints, which is unnecessary and a breeding ground for mistrust.

10.  Many of our newly built and renovated school buildings are already too small for their student populations.  What do you propose to do to add more “seats” to alleviate this problem?

This is an unfortunate and complicated issue.  We cannot overburden teachers with too large of class loads (that is bad for both the teachers and the students).  We should not cram classrooms into spaces never designed to be used in that manner.  And at the same time, it is unfortunate that the district cannot serve everyone who wishes to attend.

In my platform, I do express an interest in more pilot programs.  At the same time, I understand the importance of serving the neighborhood schools.  I don’t have a solution here, but think this precisely the kind of issue that can only really be solved through open communication when teams of people who meet to solve a shared concern.  What’s best for our kids, and how can we better serve them?

This reminds me of question #5, specifically how principled negotiations provide a framework for addressing questions involving mutual interest.  Perhaps a similar model can drive discussions between teachers, administration, and the community in addressing a solution involving all stake-holders.

11.  How do you view the role of the CBC in the future of CPS?

I’d prefer to take that question in the other direction:  how does the CBC envisions itself with regard to the future of the district?  I’d rather take their self-articulated interests as a starting point, brainstorming strategies to match their interests and resources with a shared philosophy that benefits kids.

12.  As a CPS Board Member, what would you do differently to strengthen the public trust in CPS?

We need strategies to inspire more public interest in the district.  The more people who are interested in our work, the more they will pay attention—and the more we can engage traits like openness and transparency to redevelop a relationship centered on trust.

As part of my campaign, I am working to raise the profile of the school board race—as a strategy to raise awareness of the campaign, the issues, and the district leadership as a whole.  When I speak to groups, I emphasize this theme. 

Also, I have started working to advocate for policies that can help more kids.  I worked with groups like GLSEN to revise the board’s “anti-harassment” policy to include provisions for students harassed due to “sexual orientation.”  No matter one’s position on gay rights, no child deserves to be harassed.  I mention this because I am trying to draw an awareness of how the school board relates directly to an environment that can help and serve kids, and more advocacy on that front, I think, can restore the public trust.  Above all else, serving the kids comes first.

13.  Do you support the right to a living wage and responsible bidding?

Yes.  And I think these traits fit with other parts of my platform articulated here.  I believe in a platform for social justice, and in putting kids first.  When a district values things like a “living wage,” then I think these concepts enter the community’s consciousness, and at some level the minds of the students.  Our kids need to understand the value of being paid a respectable wage for good work, and they need those opportunities available when they graduate.

Additionally, I have communicated with some union workers about issues with alleged poor workmanship by non-union contractors.  I have heard on the campaign trail about shoddy workmanship complaints, too.  I am currently seeking to investigate and document this in an effort to reveal the truth.  Any information you have on such a matter would be greatly appreciated.