You asked, they answered: Trish Spencer, School Board candidate

1. Turnover of principals at Wood, Lincoln, Encinal and other schools has been high. How important do you think stable leadership is for I schools?

The most recent research provides:

http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/Main-Menu/Staffingstudents/The-Principal-Perspective-at-a-glance/The-principal-perspective-full-report.html

Principal turnover adversely impacts schools. Although gains in student achievement temporarily slow whenever there is a new principal, the impact is felt more at the most challenging schools. In these schools, the new principal is more likely to have less experience and be less effective than a new principal at a less challenging school, often resulting in a longer, more pronounced slowdown of achievement gains. The reason for the staffing difference is that many principals gain their initial experience at challenging schools, then transfer to easier-to-manage schools as those positions open up. A study of one large urban district found that principals’ second or third schools typically enrolled 89 percent fewer poor and minority students than their first position (Beteille, Kalogrides and Loeb 2011, Miller 2009

Principals become more effective as they gain more experience. Just as teachers become more effective with experience, so do principals, especially in their first three years (Clark, Martorell and Rockoff 2009). Furthermore, no matter how effective a principal was at his or her previous school, when he or she transfers to a new school it takes approximately five years to fully stabilize and improve the teaching staff as well as fully implement policies and practices to positively impact the school’s performance (Seashore-Louis, et al. 2010). Effective principals still make significant improvements in their first few years; however, their effectiveness definitely increases over time. Unfortunately, schools that serve the most challenging students are more likely to be led by less experienced principals than more advantaged schools (Loeb, Kalogrides and Horng 2010). Even so, although both effective and ineffective principals typically transfer to less challenging schools within a district, effective principals are more likely to stay at challenging schools longer than their ineffective colleagues (Branch, Hanushek and Rivkin 2012). [Italics added.]

I, like every parent, want good/great, stable leadership at all of our schools. I’ve raised four girls in AUSD, at schools across the island: Woodstock Child Development Center, Head Start, Otis, Earhart, Lincoln, Arthur Anderson (now ACLC), Alameda High, Encinal, and ACLC. We’ve experienced some incredible, over the top, teachers/”facilitators” and principals, and, unfortunately, we’ve also had some bad experiences.

During the four years that I’ve been on the Board, and that we’ve had our current Superintendent, I think we’ve had turnover of principals in at least ten (10) of our schools, some more than once. Lincoln currently doesn’t have a permanent principal. Encinal has a new principal this year, after having a new team of co-principals for two years. This is a problem. Not only does research indicate that “gains in student achievement temporarily slow whenever there is a new principal,” and that “impact is felt more at the most challenging schools,” “no matter how effective a principal was at his or her previous school, when he or she transfers to a new school it takes approximately five years to fully stabilize and improve the teaching staff as well as fully implement policies and practices to positively impact the school’s performance.”

Thus, all of our schools that have had principal turnover in the past five years, and some have had more than one principal in the past five years, are in the period of trying to stabilize after experiencing a change in leadership. It is important to hire strong principals and then support them so that they stay at least five years. However, the criteria used to hire and fire (i.e., “let go,” reassign” to another school to be principal, or Vice-Principal), needs to be based on reason, logic, etc. We all know that sometimes students/parents/staff have different experiences with the same teacher/principal, such that there’s disagreement amongst us. It is important that these decisions be clearly based on logic and reason, so that it’s clear that they’re not based on personal preferences. Unfortunately, too many people believe that decisions made in the past four years under this Superintendent, with this Board, are questionable.

Another issue with principal turnover is the time to build relationships for effective leadership is 3+ years (Penn Center for Ed Leadership 2008). Thus, once the District hires a principal, they have to support and mentor that person, and recognize that the process takes time. We know that it can be a difficult transition for a new principal to come to Alameda, be assigned to a new school and be successful immediately. It has to be much more of a collaborative relationship at every level to make it work, from the beginning (i.e., starting with the hiring).

By the way, I’d love to have our District do more work to encourage teachers to consider going into administration, i.e., becoming principals, so that we promote from within. I truly want a collaborative, supportive relationship with our teachers.

As a Board member, I have had serious concerns about the turnover of principals our schools. Some resign and some have been “reassigned” by the Superintendent. For clarification, the Board hires the Superintendent and the Superintendent hires everyone else, however, the personnel changes are brought to the Board for approval where we vote. I have had such great concerns with some of the Superintendent’s decisions that I have voted twice voted against approving the change (the first with reassigning Mr. Cooper from Encinal and the second recently with again changing leadership at Encinal).

2. Describe your understanding of how Measure A funds have been allocated and what steps will you take to restore confidence in the voters who are angry about the way the funds generated by Measure A have been used?

Measure A funds have been allocated to support The Master Plan, however, that is a broad Plan. The Master Plan was dependent upon the passage of a parcel tax, thus Measure A. Measure A included an oversight committee. The oversight committee that we have and was approved by the current board, (4:1, with me opposing) is comprised of members hand-picked by the Superintendent, not the Board. It does not have individual representatives from each school site. I believe the Board should be responsible for selecting the committee members. Unfortunately, members of the committee have complained that Staff limits their role to essentially “rubber-stamping” what staff/the Board has done. Thus, I would have representatives from each school, the members would be selected by Board members, not the Superintendent, the meetings be public (with an effort to include the public), recorded, etc. Berkeley Unified has taken the time to be extremely inclusive in their Oversight Committee and I would look to their work as a model. The public’s confidence in the expenditure of the Measure A funds must be restored. Obviously, parcel tax revenues free up other District monies, thus, the Superintendent’s raise and now this move to new District Offices, (both of which I voted against) would not have been possible without the passage of Measure A. The point is not simply whether or not Measure A funds have been properly allocated. The answer to that question can be “Yes” and yet voters can still be rightfully concerned, if not angry, about how the District is spending it’s money.

3. What criteria would you use to determine if a teacher was effective or ineffective, and based on that criteria, what should be done to ensure that the district only employs effective teachers.

There needs to be a variety of measures. Not just one measure such as STAR but multiple measures that show that the student is growing academically as well as socially and emotionally. For example, my daughter had to retake Algebra 1. She did it with the same teacher. Just because it took her awhile to get it, didn’t mean that it was a poor reflection on the teacher. For some reason, the concept of numbers took a long time for her to get. But the teacher did a great job of building her self-esteem, keeping her focused and trying, and not feeling bad for having to repeat the subject. And now, she’s at Harvard taking Calculus as a freshman and she’s enjoying math more than ever.

Again, I think in a collaborative environment, which unfortunately I don’t think we have now, this has the best chance of coming together and serving our students. We need leadership that works collaboratively with our employees and parents, values them for their input, and then we can take it to the next level.

4. What criteria would you use to determine if AUSD administration staff was effective or ineffective, and based on that criteria, what should be done to ensure that the district only employs effective administrators.

The School Board is responsible for hiring one employee in the District: the Superintendent. The Board, by a vote of 3:2 (Members Ron Mooney, Niel Tam, and Margie Sherratt supporting and Member McMahon and myself opposing) on August 23, 2011, before school had resumed when the District knew many parents would be out of town, not focused on school board meetings, etc., at the Alameda High School Little Theater (i.e, an alternative venue then the regular City Hall) approved a new four year contract for the period of July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2015 for the Superintendent. This contract provided for a salary of $204,225 per year, with an annual 3% increase, performance pay of an additional $15,000 (for goals that would be achieved primarily by teachers and staff with no performance pay to them), “full premium rate for the medical plan and level of the Superintendent’s choice” (which I tried unsuccessfully to get the three that were going to support this contract to cap, as no one knows what the cost will be for this in the subsequent years), and “necessary technology and communication equipment.”
http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/images/stories/pdfs/boemtg/2011_2012/boe_082311_f6.pdf

The Superintendent was actually hired initially, four years ago, as a consent item by Board members Bill Schaff, David Forbes, Janet Gibson, Tracy Jensen and Mike McMahon on the same night that the first public item on the agenda was to swear in three new Board members, Ron Mooney, Niel Tam and myself (replacing Bill Schaff, David Forbes, and Janet Gibson, who had either not run for re-election, or lost their bid for re-election). Thus, a majority of the Board was changing, and yet the Board at that time still proceeded with the hiring of a new Superintendent as a consent item. Consent items are approved before public items. By law, the first public item had to be the swearing in of the new Board members, who had been elected in November. In my opinion, that was wrong.

First and foremost, it has to be a public process, such that the public does not feel that it’s being excluded from the process, thus avoiding any appearance of impropriety and building a collaborative, healthy relationship. Unfortunately, after decisions like this, it is next to impossible to establish a healthy organization, which public education needs to be successful.

5. If elected, what will you do to be proactive about securing adequate funding for our children? What outside-of-the-box ideas do you have to force the politicians to adequately fund our schools now?

While I was Alameda PTA Council President, overseeing all of the PTAs in Alameda, we were successful at funding kindergarten music in our elementary schools by throwing an event, Save Our Music. We also applied for garden grants from the State of CA for all of our schools and attended regional rallies in Sacramento with other PTAs. Trying to float parcel taxes and bonds are not outside-of-the-box ideas.

However, more than just seeking more funding we need to carefully spend all of the money that our community has entrusted us with for the purpose of educating our children. This includes looking at programs that specifically impact students as well as ones that support our teachers in being more effective and support our administrators in being effective leaders. My motto is “kids first” and I don’t think we’ve been doing that. Votes such as the generous package for the Superintendent and the move of District Offices ($550,000/year for six years lease) do not reflect that our first priority is our students (both of which votes I voted against).

6. What single educational program and/or improvement will you push or recommend to better AUSD and describe the program and/or improvement?

As this question requests one program or improvement, my answer will be collaboration with all stakeholders, including parents, students, teachers, classified staff, maintenance staff, etc. In order to have true collaboration, that would include real transparency, real treating each other with respect, listening to their concerns, valuing their input, and trying seriously to resolve problems, concerns. I believe that we, as a community, can only achieve our goal of providing quality education for all of our children by truly working together. Unfortunately, I do not believe that this is currently happening and thus there is too much “noise,” for lack of a better word, and wasted energies and time on posturing, stonewalling, avoiding the reality that we’re not serving every student to the best of our ability, instead of spending our limited funds and time on working together to achieve our goal of serving every student to the best of our ability.

With collaboration, we must begin with a new foundation including structures, common language and specific goals to achieve. DuFour’s work would be a good model to use to build a new foundation for true collaboration that will support student learning and achievement. Alameda is an incredible city with incredible people that truly care about public education and want the best for every child. We can create an incredible public school system, second to none, when we move forward, working together.

7. In 2010, AUSD adopted a Master Plan, explain your understanding of the Master Plan and AUSD’s implementation of the stated goals.

The District’s website has information about the Master Plan. http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/index.php/home/master-plan-moving-foward

I voted against it. It was a 4:1 vote. Unfortunately, the Minutes don’t reflect why I voted against it and I don’t have the tape to review my concerns. However, a review of it shows that it was based on having to float a parcel tax and if the tax didn’t pass, that some extreme measures (“Plan B”) would occur. Plan B begins on page 42 of the Master Plan document. http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/images/stories/pdfs/master_plan/final_master_plan_document.pdf

These different scenarios, in my opinion, failed to offer a true fiscally responsible solution, one that dedicates the hard earned money of our community to education first.

8. As an elected official what is your specific role in promoting civic engagement as opposed to staff’s role?

As a Board Member my role is to:

• reach out to community members
• respond to their emails, phone calls, etc.
• encourage the community’s participation in School board meetings as well as at schools, fundraisers, etc.
• actively listen when members of our public come to our Board meetings
• ask clarifying questions during Board meetings so that everyone can understand what’s being discussed
• request that matters be put on our agendas when members of the public bring areas of concern to my and/or the Board’s attention.

I also express support for and vote regularly to reduce barriers that hinder community members’ participation, such as supporting translators, simple language, clearly written documents, easily accessible documentation, comprehensive websites, have Board packets and documents posted online and shared with the community as early as possible to give them time to review them (when packets were posted on Friday’s for a Tuesday meeting, I advocated for more days between posting and meetings). I also advocate for public documents, especially those that pertain to votes, (such as the warrants) to be posted online with the agenda item so that the public can also review them , can be informed and express concerns. In regards to the Warrants (which means our bills that we pay), we are asked to approve them at every regular Board meeting. After numerous attempts to have the support of a majority of the current Board members to make them available to the public for review, and failing to get a majority of the board to support my request, I now pull them at every meeting, and vote against approving them, as other Districts, such as Pleasanton post their warrants online for the public, whereas our District does not. The warrants are available to Board members in the Superintendent’s office for review, but staff contends that it would take too much staff time to separate public from confidential, and thus Board members cannot speak to any of them publically. This is a serious problem.

9. Who is funding your campaign and which groups and individuals have endorsed your candidacy?

At this point, I am funding my campaign. I will be seeking donations on my website, www.votetrish.com

I am honored to be endorsed by The Alameda Education Association (City of Alameda teachers’ union) and the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee. I am the only incumbent these organizations are endorsing. I am creating a website, http://www.votetrish.com, where I will list my individual endorsers.

Bonus Question: There are multiple seats available in the races for City Council, the School Board and the Hospital Board. Besides yourself, who will you be voting for in your race and why?

I have not yet endorsed any other candidates for school board. As I hope to be serving with whomever else is elected to the School Board, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to endorse other candidates for school board.