A LONG MESSAGE FROM JOHN

Many of you are interested in our schools and have supported the idea of reform. You surely know I am in favor of reform, but the current efforts have created more problems than solutions. Because of that I would like to review some of the things that have happened during the past 4 years. You will know me better if you read it all.

Choosing our Superintendent in 1998
I was on the board when Alan Bersin was selected, and I was one of the four votes that supported his selection. I had favored Peter Negroni, an experienced east coast school superintendent, but changed my position to vote for Alan. The reason I supported him was I thought he would use consensus and the advice of experienced educators to build a solid base for reform. From the first, I gave him the benefit of the doubt on some actions I would not usually support.

My first mistake
I made a mistake supporting his early decision to remove 15 administrators. I voted for that and sincerely regret it because of how it was done. The use of police escorts and the public humiliation these individuals faced violated my core values. I didn't know that was going to happen when I voted as I did. Later on I talk more about core values!

After that I became more careful in my blanket support. And I said I would not participate in that type of activity again.

Fear Motivation
But the evidence since then shows that many experienced principals have elected to leave the district in fear of that form of humiliation. Nearby school districts have eagerly snapped up these competent principals, and other high-level district personnel. To this day I am asked to write recommendations and I also get pleas to intercede from people with long histories of success in the district. I am not voting to dismiss these people now because I believe in due process instead of coercion.

Social Promotion
When Alan was appointed the board had in place a new policy to prevent social promotion. It was simple to understand and was designed to send the message we intended and it was passed 5-0. Students were expected to read at grade level in the 3rd grade, and 8th graders were to have a "C" or better in all core classes. But Alan and Tony Alvarado ignored the policy and when time came to implement it we had a major disaster. About 800 kids in the 8th grade that should have been retained were promoted, and a similar number with the same grades were retained! That catastrophe resulted in the announcement for the Blueprint for Success that legitimizes social promotion from the 8th to the 9th grade...now almost all kids move on to high school ready or not...more about the Blueprint later.

School Construction Problems
In the arena of school construction, Alan came on board as we launched the proposition MM campaign. And due to a lot of people's efforts it passed, even though Alan's advocacy cost us considerable legal fees because of a letter he wrote in support of the measure.

So then we started on MM. The first issue was Alan's insistence on Job Order Contracting instead of regular bidding. That decision was challenged in court and cost us one full year for the beginning work. I voted against the JOC plan because I wanted to move ahead without that controversy. I was right!

In another case, Alan insisted we could build portable classrooms without paying prevailing wages. I disagreed and stated we would have delays and lose in court. I was right again and we had added court costs and some delays because of that decision.

Then we came to the summer of 99 when Alan brought forward a recommendation to approve MM maintenance cost overruns in excess of 40%! That was done because change orders were approved BEFORE either the Board of Education or the MM Independent Oversight Committee were informed. The vote required by law was 5-0, but I voted no! An emergency requires unanimous vote of the board according to the Education Code. The contractors were paid nearly $8 million extra even though full board approval never was achieved. Alan flaunted public contract law! (Amazing behavior for a lawyer!)

All of this can be documented, and occurred under the superintendent's administration and before we hired Lou Smith, who has finally brought Alan's disastrous management of Prop MM under control.

Educational Reform Problems
So back to the reform issues and my version of the Blueprint's approach to education...

The major problem with any reform is building consensus and support for the plan. I differ considerably with Alan and Tony Alvarado on this. My view, based on over 40 years in San Diego City Schools, is that the high quality teaching staff has an eagerness to learn new ideas, and to try them out in their classrooms. They want training, they want to exchange ideas, and they want to be part of the validation of what works and what doesn't. And they all have pride and believe that they have been doing better with diversity than many other urban school districts in the country. That view is supported by data from Tom Payzant's superintendency.

Teacher Training
Because of this belief, teachers expected to get inservice training before being asked to do different things in the classroom. They wanted to test new ideas! But what happened from the get go was that the plan was given to them and they were told to just do what they were told. They got their inservice after the edict to make the changes. That single act put them on notice that they were going to have to give up what they had found worked for them without any tryout and evaluation period at all!

Public Input
When one traces the timing and presentation of the Blueprint to the community and staff, one finds that this $150 million dollar sweeping reform was presented to the board in December and passed 3/2 in March with only three community hearings! All of these community meetings had testimony of massive opposition to the plan, but comments by parents, teachers and others were mostly ignored. Those comments still are being ignored. But many of these concerns ....like increased drop out rates, crowded advanced classes and reduction in access to electives and continued support of social promotion have been substantiated!

The measure passed 3/2 without significant change except those caused by financial necessity.

Top Down or Else
To put all of this simply...Alan and Tony became the Czars of reform. Alan the lawyer reverted to his prosecutorial mode...instead of acting as a counselor. (Really good lawyers can do both) He had a client, Tony ...and he was charged to make what Tony decided happen. Alan simply didn't have the educational background to decide the issues for himself. And as an enforcer he is highly efficient... beware those who stand in his way! And the pressure on experienced principals and teachers is being felt throughout the district as you read this.

No one questions that this duo wants to improve education, but everyone I represent agrees that they are in a top-down, inflexible, take-it or leave-it mode. And they spend their three sure votes for anything they bring forward instead of seeking compromise. I have worked with three previous superintendents that worked to get 5-0 consensus.

Know-it-alls from elsewhere
Another issue is the constant importation of consultants (at high per diem cost) to lecture teachers on instruction. The best staff development is observation, followed by hands on practice, not lectures! The staff could surely use the money to support teachers' observations of effective instruction instead. I regularly vote no on excessive use of consultants. We have enough local success stories and expert teachers whose talents and accomplishments are being ignored.

Angry troops
Turmoil and unrest in this district during the implementation of the Blueprint exceeds that we experienced during the last teacher strike. (It was bad enough then!)

False claims
And as I have said, the turmoil is about false claims made during the Blueprint debate that electives would not be affected (they were) and that high achieving students would not be affected (they were).

Biliteracy?
We lost language support for English learners. The Blueprint increased class sizes for many advanced classes. Despite the claims to the contrary, social promotion of 8th graders increased within the blueprint! In elementary schools the Blueprint managed to squeeze out a lot of important parts of the curriculum as well. Only the teachers and some informed parents are aware of the liberal arts content losses throughout the Blueprint, but even elementary math achievement has been one immediate casualty.

Moving administrators?
A highly trumpeted part of the Blueprint eliminated administration from the Ed Center to move personnel to the schools, but unfortunately the switch created more people looking over the shoulders of teachers instead of more people teaching! I could have supported the latter! In fact if the plan was to shift these personnel to reduce class size in upper grades I would have been eager to support it. If we did that, we would have class sizes of 20 throughout all crucial elementary grades! And all these experts would be in the classroom where they would be able to demonstrate rather than preach!

Bad karma and taking on the world?
The best evidence of all of my criticism is the current state of support for the program.

• Over 93% of the teachers voted no confidence for the superintendent and his program!

• The Hispanic Coalition (All significant hispanic organizations) has voted no confidence for the Blueprint. Similar views are being expressed in the African American community!

• The Superintendent is using technicalities to disenfranchise the District Advisory Committee for Compensatory Education (Title 1) rather than assisting them in meeting provisions of the law. In fact he is attempting to bypass their role in approving waivers by establishing a different sort of advisory committee to approve the diversion of compensatory funds to the Blueprint.

• Test score data is in dispute!

Unsteady progress?
District claims of test progress can be clearly countered by their own data, and the Superintendent has not been forthright in test reporting as evidenced by his misleading "Steady Progress" mailing that only included a single disingenuous piece of information. Class size reduction throughout the state for Alan's first two years resulted in improved scores everywhere, but the last two years of data in San Diego have shown no significant progress. The Blueprint has been in place for the last two years.

A new independent report to interpret test data ... made at my request ... may clear up this argument. The report is scheduled for late January--check the district agenda on my home page.

Motherhood and apple pie?
The fight for the minds of San Diegans is not being waged on the merit of current reform, but rather on the emotional level. It has been reform for reform's sake. In fact, ill-informed national foundations reportedly have been willing to prop up Alan Bersin and his hard-to-find cohort Anthony Alvarado based on an unsubstantiated business plan. Even local colleges and universities have been co-opted by becoming partners in the administration of grants that are isolated from the decision making by your elected school board. Only once before in San Diego was a board left out of this important role...that was when the SD Community College Foundation was established outside that board's control.

This is tricky business! In fact, we now have administrative training under the control of outside forces as well. If you want to control the school board, just bypass them by putting programs outside of their scrutiny and in the hands of other agencies. I oppose this strategy! The board can't be accountable if they can be bypassed this way! It has the possibility of becoming the superintendent's (or chancellor's) slush fund!

Tony who?
Every deputy to a San Diego Superintendent in the past 50 years has been present at board meetings for questioning! But now Alan has given Tony Alvarado permission to be anywhere he wants any time he wants, and Mr. Alvarado has taken full advantage of the freedom. He started with perks like free housing in Coronado, and cross-country first class travel, and he continues his good fortune.

And Alvarado and his staff continue to make important curriculum errors. The mandatory switch (3/2) away from a challenging high school Physics program to a watered-down general education science requirement for all 9th graders with the same course title is another. We currently have two approved classes with the same name ... no wonder kids are confused!

What now!
I think Alan Bersin has some important decisions to make. So does the community... And so does the newly elected School Board on which I will serve.

An important decision
San Diego has to decide what kind of a superintendent San Diego wants. I think the city wants one who is knowledgeable about education and who is fiscally responsible. San Diego wants someone who can gain broad-based staff and community support for consensus-driven educational improvements. We need honest and straightforward reporting of progress and less of the drum-beating, half-true public relations efforts that are currently the practice. We need a board that partners with parents, teachers and other stakeholders in the planning and executing of reform.

Reestablish Caring for people
Under Alan Bersin the district has abandoned 50 years or more of values. The board needs to reestablish them. I can state what I believe we have lost as follows: "This district must believe and respect everyone...children, teachers, parents and administrators...and we must strive to help each of them achieve to their highest potential!"

New style of motivation
We must stop using fear as motivation! We must encourage all students, we must support teachers in developing better skills, and we must assist principals and parents in their support for teachers and children in their search for high performance!

Change the change agents
Without a board majority, Alan might be encouraged to make the effort required to restore confidence in the San Diego City Schools. He might decide that he needs advice and support from the caring, talented educators who worked hard for children long before he arrived. In fact, he might find out that their support is more important than edicts from Tony Alvarado, who publicly admitted that his success in New York resulted from dealing with "clock punchers" in his former elementary school district! San Diego teachers are, and have always been more professional than that! I know because I worked side-by-side with them for 36 years in the classrooms of this district.

I believe I will be there to help if Alan agrees to face this challenge. The choice will be his to change.

On to the future
In any case, I hope you will support me in my continuing efforts to improve education in a district I have served for nearly 50 years. The work is important, and the hard questions must be asked. I chose to continue asking them, so that we can get the best results for our children. Whether or not we have a 3/2 board is less important than the debate. Like tempered steel and good government... good education is forged out of debate...not unthinking cheers from a 5-0 board!

As you know, this is an expensive new campaign environment with big money being spent by people who don't even live in the community. Please consider giving me your support... Now! You know I won't let you down!

My sincere thanks for reading all this! Perhaps you know me better now!