Political Philosophy for Tim Hegstrom

Candidate for
Governing Board Member; Campbell Union High School District

The three most important issues facing the Campbell Union High School District are (1) quality of education, (2) the potential division of the district due to unification efforts, and (3) the district's communication with parents.

(1) Quality of education is always the first issue. It has been recently equated with average test scores. This has led to considerable political jockeying about which test to use and confusion about what the test scores mean. Some of my neighbors are determined to move their children out of the district into schools with higher test averages. The fact that everyone needs to keep in mind is that the best predictors of test scores are socio-economic indices. These are largely out of the control of the schools. One should expect higher average scores in wealthier communities like Los Gatos and Saratoga. The advantaged students that they teach make the task of achieving high standardized test scores a lot easier for teachers in these districts. Of course, some Campbell District students have always done as well on these tests as the best students in wealthier surrounding communities. However, due to the fact that socio-economic factors are so important in these tests, average scores are not a very good way to determine the quality of schools.

Gain scores on tests would also be an inadequate way of assessing the quality of schools. Here the advantage would go the other way. For example, most schools in the lowest quartile would find some improvement in test scores by statistical regression alone. They would also have more "room" to improve whereas those schools with many students who are near the highest possible score are brushing against the "ceiling," and the average score in these schools would be very difficult to improve.

How then do you judge high school quality? I would suggest that interested districts and parents should track two very important considerations: teacher quality and program options. These are directly related to student achievement and should be assessed directly. When teacher quality is high and program options are maximized, even schools in poor districts can deliver an outstanding education. Although these two cannot eliminate the influence of socio-economic factors, they can reduce their importance.

Research reported by Kati Haycock, Director of the Education Trust, documents the impact of teachers' depth of content knowledge and strong verbal and math skills on student achievement. They rank the states in terms of classes taught by teachers working out of their major field. The range is from 10% (Minnesota) to 29% (Alaska) of the classes. Of the 51 jurisdictions (50 states plus D.C.), California ranks 50th, just ahead of Alaska, with 27% of its classes taught by teachers teaching outside their major field.

The problem is exacerbated by the statewide teacher shortage. There are approximately 30,000 non-credentialed teachers working with emergency permits. Estimates are that there will be a need for approximately 300,000 new teachers in California in the next few years, making teacher recruitment and quality of education high on the list of issues facing every high school in the state. Thus, the recruitment of quality teachers is the most serious challenge facing the Campbell Union High School District.

It is a particularly vexing problem here because of the housing shortage and pricey real estate market. A thoughtful recruitment plan with teacher and parent collaboration is called for. Expanding the current internship plan and developing partnerships with key university departments can help to give the CUHSD its fair share of new teachers with deep subject matter knowledge.

(2) The second most important issue, an obvious one, is how to prepare for the potential division facing the district due to unification efforts. This is an important issue simply because it has become such a contentious one. Not only is there a significant group of parents in the Moreland District who are disaffected from the high school district, but we now have the spectacle of district administrations and school boards battling one another. Educational programs hang in the balance.

Unlike the first issue discussed above, it is not clear whether unified districts provide significant advantages for students, parents, and other important stakeholders. It is abundantly clear that some groups favor unification and others do not. The main advantage of unification is that the community can start over and build another school district(s). Also, the main disadvantage is that the community would have to start over.

Starting over is a good idea if you believe that the present district cannot be fixed. If it is true that things are so bad in the district high schools that even a change in district administrative personnel would not solve the problem, then an opportunity to start over would be a happy event. It would require a huge investment of time, effort, and money, but a committed community could conceivably construct a better local educational system. This would be a radical change. It would take clear heads that could forge a local consensus and appeal effectively for outside help. Although it would be a formidable undertaking, the result might be worth it. A sense of community and identity might be established that would last for generations.

Starting over would require a massive readjustment. New school boards would have to be elected for new districts. New administrations would have to be hired. The cost of present levels of classified staff, according to the law, would have to be borne for two years. Since high school teachers' salaries are higher, the new district would have this disparity to cope with. Under the current law, it appears that only a unified Union Elementary District would likely qualify for state dollars to make up the difference. They would have a high enough proportion of high school teachers to qualify. Unified Moreland and Campbell districts apparently would not qualify for additional salary dollars. It is not clear whether Cambrian would qualify. They might have to make up the salary adjustment out of current dollars. Under some scenarios that would split the district, most of the high school teachers might try to opt for the district with the higher salary schedule. If the district parents and residents were not solidly behind the change, the ensuing confusion and contention could seriously detract from the task of education.

Planning for possible unification is complicated by the fact that it is difficult to predict how many districts would result. If the Moreland proposal is approved by the state and the voters, the old elementary district would likely gain the two high schools within its borders, Prospect and Blackford. If this unified district were the only one approved, the Campbell Union High School District would need to contract by one- third. However, the Campbell elementary district has also started to push for unification. If their proposal is also approved, it seems likely that the Union and Cambrian elementary districts would follow like dominoes.

Distributing the high school district resources equitably under any of the unification scenarios would be a challenge. Take the district office as one example. That site stands within the borders of the Union Elementary district. Would a unified Union district be entitled to that site and the ensuing revenues if that site were leased or sold? Could the new unified districts cooperate in resolving these issues or would years of litigation eat up precious education dollars? These puzzles must be anticipated in the planning.

As noted above, if unification is to be successful, it will need the committed support of parents and community members. The voters' decision should be expeditiously carried out. Those involved should supply the voters with the best information possible about the legal and financial implications of their choices. The voters will need better estimates of the cost of the various scenarios. The county committee consultant's report is too vague and superficial to be of much help. The voters deserve to see the missing figures that underpin those vague conclusions. The high school board and administration will need to cooperate fully in supplying the data needed to make these calculations.

(3) Communication with parents seems to be an issue in the district. Arguably, if the board and administration had been more forthcoming with information, more willing early on to meet with elementary boards, more capable listeners, more attentive to concerns, there would not be a significant group of parents wanting to start over with a unified district. The district arranged for a communication audit some time ago which advised that the district should bolster its efforts toward better communication. The problem is how to proceed.

At present district communication is being treated primarily as information provided to parents and community members. Leaflets are sent home to parents via students. If the students don't deliver the flyers, the parents are often left in the dark. While this is a serious problem and methods of information diffusion need to be expanded, the most important need is for the district to encourage and systematically process messages FROM parents. The administration and board need to demonstrate that parents have been listened to and that efforts will be made to accommodate them. The highest communication priority is to expand the number of channels and forums through which this might be done. The district needs to ask for feedback. The attitude must be one of "complaints are welcome here." Board members or administrators could hold "office hours" for parents in addition to their regular meetings. A web-site modification permitting the asking of questions and the lodging of complaints could be established. Verbatim transcripts of these could be e- mailed to board members and administrators. Research shows that organizations with multiple opportunities to give this kind of feedback enjoy more satisfied stakeholder groups than organizations with minimal opportunities to do so. If money were not available to free up faculty or staff time for these functions, some of this work might be done by community volunteers.