SCHOOL BOARD CANDIDATES: LWV ASKS BAD QUESTIONS, GETS BAD ANSWERS

I know that the people, men as well as women, in the League of Women Voters of Southern New Mexico mean well.  They always mean well.  They do not always do well.  Exhibit one and only: the “2021 Voters Guide” in the 8 October issue of The Bulletin.  The questions which they asked of this year’s School Board candidates make that point.

Their four questions show them ill-prepared to elicit critical information from the candidates.  The questions are:

1. What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of the Las Cruces Public Schools?
2. Do you thinking funding should be expanded for multicultural education in public schools?  Explain.
3. How would you change the priorities of the school district as reflected in the district’s budget?
4. What changes, if any, would you propose to support online learning?

The questions are poor ones for a variety of reasons.

Question one enables paeans of praise to everyone—administrators, staff, teachers, students, parents, community—and personally favored or popular programs.  Did the LWV expect anything significantly different from the candidates?  What information would this question elicit to inform a decision to support one candidate rather than another?

Question two successfully distinguished two candidates—Abelardo Balcazar and Henry A. Young—who had the courage not to give the reflexive “yes” or “absolutely” answers from the celebrators of an inclusive multiculturalism regardless of literary merit or historical contribution in America or even just New Mexico.  Both provided education-oriented, not crowd-pleasing, answers.  The other four—Raymond M. Jaramillo, Pamela M. Cort, Robert C. Wofford, and Eloy Francisco Macha Camborda—should show that an increase in cultural inclusiveness and personal worth ensures a demonstrable increase in academic performance justifying the actual and the opportunity costs.

Question three should precede, not follow, question two.  Aside from answers which avoided the questions were answers which added money for some budget items without subtracting money from others.  In short, they promised everyone more and nothing less for the same budgeted money.  Advice to voters: hold on to your wallets or watch out for a midnight heist.

Question four is, of course, a loaded one.  It forces the candidates to support online learning.  Mr. Balcazar handled it reasonably; the rest booted it.  The question should ask about online instruction, which is what computers can provide, not online learning which students may or may not do.  At present, research does not show that on-line learning matches in-class learning or is good enough anyhow.  Mr. Balcazar’s circumspection beats everyone else’s acquiescence to computer/internet razzle-dazzle.

The more serious criticism of these four questions is that they pretend that the School Board need not identify and address the persistent problems which plague public education in Las Cruces as well, of course, as the rest of New Mexico; and which school board policies can address.

The problems are suggested by one fact otherwise glaring but for everyone’s efforts to cover it up with a thick veneer of undeserved praise for the perpetrators.  The fact: for decades, 4^th-grade and 8^th-grade proficiency scores in reading and mathematics have hovered around 50 percent.  The students assumed to benefit most from more emphasis on multiculturalism are those least proficient (and whose ability to pass relies heavily on subjectively assessed work products.  So my challenge above to Mr. Jaramillo, Ms. Cort, Mr. Wofford, and Mr. Camborda becomes more pertinent; how more multicultural instruction ensure academic improvement?

One critical implication: teachers K-4 have been only 50 percent effective, and teachers 5-8 are no better.  Are the candidates OK with mediocre teachers?  Are they content with the results of current hiring and retention policies and practices?  Can they not enact policies directing the superintendent to raise hiring standards and to use the means necessary to ensure that prospective teachers meet them before they are hired?

In the end, I am appalled that the League of Woman Voters is so ill-informed about public education or so timid about asking important questions about problems and solutions.  And I am more appalled by the candidates, especially those offering their incumbency or experience in education as a qualification, for not taking the initiative to address the issues which matter to the quality of a Las Cruces public school education.