Questions for 2019 BOE Candidates from Madison Partnership for Advanced Learning
TJ Mertz, Seat 5 (Incumbent)
1. Every MMSD plan (AL, ELL, Special Ed, BEP) seems to have specific challenges with implementation at the school level. What will you as a board member do to better understand these issues and get the information you need to assess these situations? How will you ensure that issues with implementation and unmet student needs get addressed?
There are three main ways. The first are the information, reports, and evaluations provided by the administration, along with discussions of these in Board meetings. Second is communicating with families and staff. Last are my own analyzes of internal data. None of these alone is sufficient.
2. In a February Madison365 article, Superintendent Jen Cheatham wrote: “A superintendent, no matter how determined or talented or passionate simply cannot succeed without a Board that clears the path for success.” How do you interpret this statement from a board member’s perspective?
I think there should be a creative tension between the Board and the administration, with the best decisions coming after there has been a full, open, and public consideration of the choices to be made (not only the recommendations of the administration). In this manner, the Board should chart the path; clearing is a shared responsibility. The statement does not appear to support this view.
3. In 2018-19, 5,661 MMSD students (21% of all students) were identified as advanced learners in one of the five domains: specific academic areas, general intellectual, visual/performing arts, leadership or creativity. This included 8,503 AL designations as some students are identified in multiple areas. Disparities by race, income and language have improved slightly but still need significant work. Providing consistent and systematic advanced instruction (beyond math) to advanced learners continues to be a challenge at most schools. Please explain your thoughts on how schools can address both the critical work of helping students reach proficiency while allowing students to move beyond that level when they are ready.
We need to do better, and we need to begin by defining the priorities of our AL department and staff, as well as those they share with other departments. Failing to do this leaves our AL IRTs pulled in too many directions. Deciding these priorities should be done in an open and inclusive manner, but I would start with those students with the highest needs for support. To me that would be both those who are most advanced, and talent development for historically under-represented students. Beyond these, all our departments and staff should be working to improve differentiation (including curriculum development) and flexible grouping practices in our classrooms.
4. How can MMSD effectively measure success for its advanced learners?
I think the inclusion of advanced learners as a category in all monitoring and evaluation reports has helped keep the experiences of advanced learners before the Board. In the academic categories, growth measures (maybe more than one) based on appropriate assessments can help with both short and long term monitoring. In the longer term, success in advanced classes and AP work should be included. Success in visual/performing arts, creativity, and leadership are much more difficult to measure, especially at the district level. On these, I am open to suggestions. With all advanced learners, access to opportunities and services, climate and other surveys, formal and informal feedback, are helpful.
5. The current 2019-20 proposed budget includes Strategic Equity Projects. One proposal addresses a recommendation made by the Advanced Learning Advisory Committee through the Office of Civil Rights resolution process to address racial disparities in access to and preparation for advanced coursework. This recommendation includes increasing the Advanced Learning staff to 1.0 FTE (from current 0.5 FTE levels) for every K-8 school in order to provide a talent development program for underrepresented students and a systematic structure for advanced learning in every school. If elected, will you support funding this recommendation?
No. Our 2019-20 budget will be extremely difficult to balance without adding over 20 positions, With so many students not achieving at the most basic levels, I cannot prioritize this.
6. How can MMSD increase genuine engagement by stakeholders (students, families, staff and community members) in processes both at the district and school levels?
Starting from the top down, I believe that more formal groups such as the Advanced Learning Advisory need to be given more autonomy in their work, and direct access to the Board. Instead of recommendations coming to the Board via administrators, Advisories should be given opportunities to present and interact on Board agendas (this was done with the ERO Ad Hoc). At the school level, School Based Leadership teams need to include families, some staff chosen via democratic processes, and where appropriate students. The entire school improvement process must invite meaningful participation, and be seen as an opportunity for community building. For wider input, it is inevitable that surveys, and feedback structures will to some degree reflect the biases and preferences of those who create them, but in design, implementation, and reporting of findings there needs to be flexibility and opportunities for unanticipated topics and ideas to be explored. Transparency, public processes, shared decision-making and accountability have been central to my work on the Board, and my campaign. This is because I believe that our district cannot meet the challenges we face without bringing together the knowledge, skills, and experiences of our entire community.
TJ Mertz, Seat 5 (Incumbent)
1. Every MMSD plan (AL, ELL, Special Ed, BEP) seems to have specific challenges with implementation at the school level. What will you as a board member do to better understand these issues and get the information you need to assess these situations? How will you ensure that issues with implementation and unmet student needs get addressed?
There are three main ways. The first are the information, reports, and evaluations provided by the administration, along with discussions of these in Board meetings. Second is communicating with families and staff. Last are my own analyzes of internal data. None of these alone is sufficient.
2. In a February Madison365 article, Superintendent Jen Cheatham wrote: “A superintendent, no matter how determined or talented or passionate simply cannot succeed without a Board that clears the path for success.” How do you interpret this statement from a board member’s perspective?
I think there should be a creative tension between the Board and the administration, with the best decisions coming after there has been a full, open, and public consideration of the choices to be made (not only the recommendations of the administration). In this manner, the Board should chart the path; clearing is a shared responsibility. The statement does not appear to support this view.
3. In 2018-19, 5,661 MMSD students (21% of all students) were identified as advanced learners in one of the five domains: specific academic areas, general intellectual, visual/performing arts, leadership or creativity. This included 8,503 AL designations as some students are identified in multiple areas. Disparities by race, income and language have improved slightly but still need significant work. Providing consistent and systematic advanced instruction (beyond math) to advanced learners continues to be a challenge at most schools. Please explain your thoughts on how schools can address both the critical work of helping students reach proficiency while allowing students to move beyond that level when they are ready.
We need to do better, and we need to begin by defining the priorities of our AL department and staff, as well as those they share with other departments. Failing to do this leaves our AL IRTs pulled in too many directions. Deciding these priorities should be done in an open and inclusive manner, but I would start with those students with the highest needs for support. To me that would be both those who are most advanced, and talent development for historically under-represented students. Beyond these, all our departments and staff should be working to improve differentiation (including curriculum development) and flexible grouping practices in our classrooms.
4. How can MMSD effectively measure success for its advanced learners?
I think the inclusion of advanced learners as a category in all monitoring and evaluation reports has helped keep the experiences of advanced learners before the Board. In the academic categories, growth measures (maybe more than one) based on appropriate assessments can help with both short and long term monitoring. In the longer term, success in advanced classes and AP work should be included. Success in visual/performing arts, creativity, and leadership are much more difficult to measure, especially at the district level. On these, I am open to suggestions. With all advanced learners, access to opportunities and services, climate and other surveys, formal and informal feedback, are helpful.
5. The current 2019-20 proposed budget includes Strategic Equity Projects. One proposal addresses a recommendation made by the Advanced Learning Advisory Committee through the Office of Civil Rights resolution process to address racial disparities in access to and preparation for advanced coursework. This recommendation includes increasing the Advanced Learning staff to 1.0 FTE (from current 0.5 FTE levels) for every K-8 school in order to provide a talent development program for underrepresented students and a systematic structure for advanced learning in every school. If elected, will you support funding this recommendation?
No. Our 2019-20 budget will be extremely difficult to balance without adding over 20 positions, With so many students not achieving at the most basic levels, I cannot prioritize this.
6. How can MMSD increase genuine engagement by stakeholders (students, families, staff and community members) in processes both at the district and school levels?
Starting from the top down, I believe that more formal groups such as the Advanced Learning Advisory need to be given more autonomy in their work, and direct access to the Board. Instead of recommendations coming to the Board via administrators, Advisories should be given opportunities to present and interact on Board agendas (this was done with the ERO Ad Hoc). At the school level, School Based Leadership teams need to include families, some staff chosen via democratic processes, and where appropriate students. The entire school improvement process must invite meaningful participation, and be seen as an opportunity for community building. For wider input, it is inevitable that surveys, and feedback structures will to some degree reflect the biases and preferences of those who create them, but in design, implementation, and reporting of findings there needs to be flexibility and opportunities for unanticipated topics and ideas to be explored. Transparency, public processes, shared decision-making and accountability have been central to my work on the Board, and my campaign. This is because I believe that our district cannot meet the challenges we face without bringing together the knowledge, skills, and experiences of our entire community.