BOE Hopefuls Spar Over Testing
Three of four candidates support FCSP Superintendent
Mandated testing in FCPS schools—especially Common Core State Standards and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)—remains an area of contention among school board candidates.
For the most part, Board of Education candidates at a Frederick News Post education forum at Frederick Community College last week agreed that testing every child, every year was excessive. Retired FCPS administrator Michael Bunitsky characterized the assessments as “too time-consuming.”
“But we’re working within the law,” said incumbent Joy Schaefer, adding she didn’t think having standards is bad.
Ken Kerr, a Frederick Community College professor, proposed trying to change the law, but in an interview last week he said he believes testing is one issue that gets too much attention during this election race. “I’m surprised people are still talking about it,” he said. The current board has addressed the issue to the best of its ability under the current law and “has forced discussion at the state level,” Kerr said.
The board recently asked the state to clarify state law regarding testing. The law says the tests must be created and administered, but it doesn’t state students must actually take the tests, Rose said. In response, the board implemented a policy that recognizes a student’s right to refuse to take the state assessment when it is administered. Parents and students, however, may not opt out of testing. [Right to refuse, but may not opt out? What am I missing?]
For Cindy Rose, the strongest testing opponent, the board’s adoption of the policy was its greatest success, but it is an issue that needs more attention. At the forum, she said the board has not pushed back hard enough against federal- and state-mandated assessments.
In an interview, Rose said the school system should refuse to participate in the assessments. She estimates the amount of money lost at the federal level at about $4 million. “Compared with the overall school budget, it’s very little,” she said. “We can stop stressing our teachers and students, and start teaching to our needs.”
Schaefer said federal funding in the fiscal 2017 budget totals $19.3 million, and this year 10 schools are designated as Title 1 schools, which have high percentages of students from families with low incomes. The funding is supposed to help those students meet state academic standards. That number changes from year to year, she said. Kerr does not believe the board should risk losing the money. “I don’t want a board that puts funding at risk,” he said.
Given the divergent figures on federal funding, Rose said: "I'm perplexed by the number Ms. Schaefer reported and the number reported on last year’s budget. Title I funds come from determining the number of students who qualify for Free and Reduce Meals (FARM),” Rose said in an email. “Those numbers are determined by family income. Inasmuch as FCPS neither requires nor asks for proof of income, I can only assume we have more people meeting the self-reported financial FARM requirements. I don't know how to explain, nor do I understand a 500% increase in Title I funding. By all media reports, the recovery is in full swing, incomes are up, we are creating more jobs and FCPS PARCC scores are great. How you reconcile these two sets of facts requires a comprehensive report and accounting from FCPS."
Rose, however, views mandated testing as the school system’s biggest problem. Her platform advocates for local control of education by the school board and system. “We don’t need to do the PARCC assessments,” Rose said. “There are many ways out of it.”
The four candidates answered several rounds of questions that went beyond testing to the school superintendent’s performance.
Everyone except Rose would renew Superintendent Terry Alban’s contract. Alban is in direct conflict with the board, Rose said. “I think it’s time for her to go.” Schaefer’s response countered that sentiment. “I think she’s delivered on what the board has asked.”
Three of the candidates identified teachers’ new salary scale as the current board’s greatest success, which they also viewed as sustainable. The board would have not made the commitment, otherwise, Schaefer said. She acknowledged, however, that it could lead to other budget cuts next year.
Each candidate, however, had different opinions about the seated board’s greatest failure. Although Schaefer said she found it difficult to grade herself, she pointed to an increase in class size to balance the budget. Low teacher morale due to larger classes, lack of professional training and shifting teachers into positions for which they weren’t trained concerned Bunitsky. Not including staff in the new salary scale is an issue, Kerr said.
Board candidates were asked to comment on the role that the private and corporate sector should have in funding public education. Corporate donations is one way the school system could fund a Frederick High School program, Linking Youth to New Experiences (LYNX), after it was turned down for a $10 million grant.
Bunitsky supported the idea. “We need to try and think outside the box,” he said. It has worked to fund capital projects, he added. Kerr agreed as long as the funding was not used to balance the school budget. Meanwhile, Schaefer and Rose stressed that the funding had to come without expectations of anything in return.
While Rose said she believes the important issues are being discussed, Kerr said he believes there should be more discussion about school overcrowding and construction needs. Schaefer would like more discussion about equity across schools. “We have a growing number of students who qualify for free and reduced meals—not just in the school system but countywide,” she said. Schaefer would also like a greater focus on state education policies so that they reflect what “we want at the local level,” she added.
Early voting runs Oct. 27 to Nov. 3, and the general election is Nov. 8.
© 2016 The Frederick Extra. All Rights Reserved.
