by David Safier
Wednesday night I moderated a forum with seven of the twelve candidates for the TUSD board — in alphabetical order, Don Cotton, Miguel Cuevas, Ralph Ellinwood, Kristel Foster, Cam Juarez, “Betts” Putnam-Hidalgo and Mark Stegeman. I did my best to ask substantive questions without any "gotchas" attached and to give every candidate equal time and opportunity. Now that it's over, I'm putting back on my blogger's cap and stating my opinions about the candidates. The five who weren't present aren't people I would consider supporting, so these seven candidates are the ones I needed to see and hear to decide who I think should fill the three slots up for grabs.
In my opinion, two candidates definitely deserve your vote: Cam Juarez and Kristel Foster.
- Cam Juarez: Cam is a unique individual in the best sense of the term. He combines a Hispanic upbringing in the Yuma farming community, a physical disability, an education which led to a recent Masters Degree in Urban Planning, a Pima County job where he works with the Supervisors and makes financial decisons, a sharp intellect, strong analytical skills and an emotional understanding of what makes people tick. If he were only as good as the other candidates, I think I would support him just because of his ability to be a role model for TUSD students due to his story and his accomplishments. But for my money, he's simply the best candidate running. [Note: Cam is a strong supporter of the Mexican American Studies program, but his opinions are nuanced enough that some of MAS's most ardent supporters are often upset with him. He's staked out a position on the issue that's uniquely his own.]
- Kristel Foster: Kristel is a public school teacher, which is worth a whole lot in my book. Everything I write about education is filtered through my 30 years of classroom experience, which give me a much needed reality check. Kristel will bring that kind of rubber-meets-the-road perspective to the Board that none of the other members share. She will add a much needed dimension to the Board's discussions and decisions. It's also important that I agree with her basic stands on educational issues, which means I trust her to make good decisions based on the situations and the facts at hand.
Among the five remaining, I would like to see the two incumbents, Miguel Cuevas and Mark Stegeman, voted off the Board, and I don't think Don Cotton has the intellectual or personal qualifications to become a good Board member.
- Mark Stegeman: Mark is a very smart, knowledgeable guy, but he lacks the necessary emotive, empathetic side to be a complete school board member. If he were aware of his area of weakness, he could compensate for it, but unfortunately he lacks the humility to admit others might have a better perspective on classroom-related issues. So far as I can tell, Mark makes reasonable decisions on nuts and bolts District issues, but he seems to think his experience as a college Economics Professor gives him all the information it takes to understand how K-12 classrooms work. When he talks about what should happen in the classroom — and especially when he explains his antipathy toward the Mexican American Studies program — his lack of understanding of what it takes to encourage young, often unmotivated, often discouraged students to care about their own educations is on full display. If Mark were willing to take a back seat to others on these issues, his decisions wouldn't be so harmful, but he charges forward, believing his style of mathematically logical analysis yields all the answers he needs. He gives the impression he thinks he's the smartest guy in the room, no matter what the issue.
- Miguel Cuevas: My problem with Miguel is that I disagree with him on so many Board-related issues. During the forum, he indicated an anti-union bias which I find very troubling. As a Board member, he was one of the forces that lined up against the continuation of the Mexican American Studies program. And he gives more credence to standardized test scores in evaluating students and teachers than the tests deserve.
- Don Cotton: Don simply doesn't display a grasp of the issues or the analytic skills necessary to be an effective school board member. I had trouble figuring out his stands on the issues from his answers, which were unfocused and disorganized. He doesn't have the chops for the job.
That leaves either Ralph Ellinwood or “Betts” Putnam-Hidalgo for the third position. Both of them came off well in the forum, and I could see myself supporting either of them as the person to vote for after Cam Juarez and Kristel Foster. I'm going to reserve judgement about which would be the better Board member until I learn more.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I agree on Betts and Ralph Ellingwood has my vote as well. Kristal’s very misguided statement stating she would “dismantle MAS”, although retracted has already caused a great deal of damage among the MAS supporters I know. We need independent and critical thinkers. I’m voting Betts, Ellingwood, and am leaning towards Juarez.
“I always use data and information as a large part of my analysis, but I also put my own sensibilities into the mix, things which don’t break down into discrete bits of data. I will repeat, because you think that’s the way brains work..”
No one who has lived on this planet for more than a week and paid any attention thinks that that is how brains work.
I think you should take a strong look at Betts. I know her as an extremely intelligent, but also compassionate person who is dogged and will take the job on the TUSD board seriously, IE she will devote much time to it as she has devoted MUCH unpaid volunteer time as a parent to championing improvements at schools. She knows the schools at the ground-level, and has been following the board as a parent, and understands the issues. I think we are damn lucky she is running.
Sigh . . . Mark, this makes me wonder if you understand the meaning of “opinion.” Based on knowing you for years, speaking with you individually, reading virtually every public statement you’ve made about TUSD and wading through most of the emails you send to constituents, I have formed an opinion about you as a TUSD Board member. I would even go so far as to call it an informed opinion.
My statements about you in this post aren’t mathematical conclusions based on a regression analysis where I plug information into a complex formula and end up with results to four places to the right of the decimal point. My brain doesn’t work that way. I always use data and information as a large part of my analysis, but I also put my own sensibilities into the mix, things which don’t break down into discrete bits of data. I will repeat, because you think that’s the way brains work and that’s the logical methodology you appear to prefer for decision-making virtually to the exclusion of other ways of arriving at conclusions, you are incapable of understanding pedagogy for students who work on a more emotive level than you do, people who need to be motivated by more than fact-based information or the desire to succeed in school.
Everything I said in this comment is my opinion. You may ask me again to substantiate my opinions with facts, figures and quotations if you wish. But it will continue to sound to my ears like the taunt, “Oh yeah? Prove it!” I believe I understand you well enough — better, I think, than any of the other candidates — to feel that my conclusions about your qualifications as a School Board member are valid, given my views of education.
But David, I may be forgetting something but when have you ever heard me profess on what should happen in the classroom; indeed, how often have you heard me speak on any TUSD topics? You did not come to the other forum, you did not come when I spoke to Drinking Liberally, and I very rarely see you at board meetings. I do not recall discussing pedagogy with you and am not sure what you are assuming about my views on that topic. Indeed, pedagogy is complicated and generally not amenable to sound bites. Also, while I have taught thousands of college students, I am well aware that K-12 pedagogy is different and do not profess to be an expert in it; indeed, even expert consensus opinion on what produces learning in K-12 varies substantially over time.
Please do not assume that every statement is a clever debating move.
I also suspect that few persons would accuse TUSD decision-making to be suffused with an excess of logic, so I hope I may be excused for trying to increase that element.
Separately, I think you did a faultless job moderating the forum and appreciate your taking on that role.
Mark, I don’t think I gave the impression that my recommendations were based solely on what I heard at the forum. Here’s what I said in my opening paragraph:
“Now that it’s over, I’m putting back on my blogger’s cap and stating my opinions about the candidates. The five who weren’t present aren’t people I would consider supporting, so these seven candidates are the ones I needed to see and hear to decide who I think should fill the three slots up for grabs.”
I said I’m stating “my opinions about the candidates,” not that I’m basing my statements and opinions only on their statements at the forum. My opinions about your tenure on the Board are based on what I’ve seen during your tenure — likewise Miguel Cuevas, though since I haven’t focused on him as intently, I learned more about him in the forum. I also know quite a bit about Cam Juarez and Kristel Foster, so my recommendations folded that information into my analysis along with what they said Wednesday night. The three I lacked information on are Ralph Ellinwood, “Betts” Putnam-Hidalgo and Don Cotton, so their comments added most to my understanding of their qualifications.
To analogize: If I write about Romney after the debates Wednesday, I likely won’t confine myself to what he says on stage but will put that into the context of everything I’ve learned about him.
I stand by what I wrote about you and the other candidates in the post. Your comment displays the same kind of limited, hyper-logical thinking that I think leads to some of your problems as a Board member — saying to me, in essence, “If you’re writing a follow-up to the forum, you can only use the information you gathered from the forum.” It’s a somewhat clever debating move, but it has little to do with the decision-making process I used and doesn’t have any bearing on my overall evaluations of the candidates.
At what point did I discuss what should happen in the classroom? Some of these comments seem disconnected from what was said at the forum. Pam Powers has posted some video and will post more; I hope that people watch it and judge for themselves.