John Wright positions

By John D. Wright

The following are my answers to a series of questions that were recently posed to all of the board candidates by high school district teachers.

I live in San Anselmo and have three children (now 7th grade, 10th grade, and a college freshman) who all attended local public schools and are or will be Drake graduates. I was a trustee of the Ross Valley School District board (San Anselmo-Fairfax) from 1994 to 1999; I was appointed to that board in 1994 and elected in 1995. I served as board president in 1997. I was named Marin County Trustee of the Year in 1998. While on the Ross Valley board, the primary issues the board dealt with included planning and implementing the facilities bond, starting an alternative education program, selecting a new superintendent, and dealing with the introduction of new state curriculum and assessment requirements. I have also been very involved with working on school parcel tax and bond campaigns, including serving as chair of Ross Valley's successful 1993 parcel tax campaign. I served as chair of Ross Valley's foundation (Ross Valley Community for Schools, now the Yes foundation) in 1993-94, and helped organize last year and now chair The Drake Fund, a foundation supporting academic programs at Drake.

2. What are the main issues you would like the board to address? What do you want the board to do about those issues?

I believe that the main issues facing the board are (1) maintaining the district's outstanding programs and high standards, while ensuring support for all students to help them meet those standards, (2) attracting and retaining qualified teachers and administrators, and (3) implementation of the facilities bond. With regard to the first issue, ensuring resources and support to help students meet state-imposed exit examination requirements as well as district-level requirements will be particularly important. The board will need to continue to look at the adequacy of existing plans in this area. On the second issue, the board and the district need to do everything possible within the financial means of the district to maintain competitive levels of teacher compensation, and to ensure that administrators and other support staff are not overwhelmed with too many tasks - particularly in light of the additional tasks created by bond implementation. On the third issue, the board needs to ensure that there are adequate mechanisms in place for fiscal oversight of bond expenditures, and for staff and community input into the specifics of the bond work.

3. What is your take on the district outcomes and graduation requirements? What is your take on statewide assessments?

I generally support the district's outcomes and graduation course requirements. These were developed over a period of many years with much community and staff input. In light of increased state-imposed assessment requirements, the board needs to take a look at whether the goals of some of the district-level requirements may now be addressed by new state-level measures. I support the current district objective to review the district's requirements to ensure that the level of assessment is appropriate and to avoid duplication. I support the concept of state-level assessments as one diagnostic tool to assist student learning, although I have concerns about the way the state has implemented and administered the STAR tests.

4. What are your priorities in the process of modernization?

The top priority for facilities modernization should be improvements to classrooms and other facilities that directly support teaching. In addition to structural work, attention should be paid to improving telephone and computer connections in classrooms to facilitate student work and teacher-student-parent communications. I also attach considerable importance to improving playing fields that are used by community and school programs. The modernization planning process must include meaningful input from the actual users of the facilities (teachers, staff, students and the community) regarding the specifics of the work.

5. What are your priorities in the area of curriculum and instruction?

Although I generally support the district's graduation requirements, I also believe that the district should offer as many options as possible within financial and facilities limitations for students to meet those requirements. For example, students should be able to choose from many courses to meet specific subject matter requirements. I also strongly support the concept of clusters, academies and other "school within a school" structures that allow more personalized learning environments. I believe that the district generally does a good job in providing these alternative approaches; I would support more such programs within fiscal and facilities constraints.

6. What ideas do you have for improving working conditions at schools?

With the passage of the facilities bond, the district has a unique opportunity to significantly improve the physical conditions of the schools, and to provide a better workplace for teaching. It is very important that teachers and other staff have significant input into the facilities work that will be done. As a community, we need to demonstrate that education is valued by providing teachers and students with the proper physical environment.

7. Is there anything else you would like people to know?

I do not seek a board position to promote any particular agenda or philosophical point of view. My record on the Ross Valley board was one of pragmatism, diplomacy and moderation. I believe that board members are elected to represent the entire community, most of whom do not have children in the schools, but are asked to support them through parcel taxes and bonds. I recognize that there are undercurrents of concern in the district about the level of assessment and graduation requirements, and student stress. I believe the way to deal with these concerns is through community dialog, not a radical change in direction at the board level that risks polarizing the community and threatening community support. Public education remains under considerable scrutiny by the voting public and increasingly demanding parents; the Tam district is not immune from this scrutiny. It is in the best interest of the district, and of teachers, to elect candidates with board experience and knowledge of the broad range of district issues, and who are able to work effectively as part of the district governance team.