STATE COLLEGE AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD

State College school board candidates tackle renovations, 'Investigations'

The Centre Daily Times asked the six candidates for State College Area school board to respond in writing to an identical set of three questions. The first set of questions and answers was printed Saturday.

Leous

View larger

There are five candidates for four four-year seats. They are challengers Penni Fishbaine, Jim Leous and Brian Kaleita and incumbents David Hutchinson and Gowen Roper. Kaleita is on the Republican ballot, Roper and Leous are on the Democratic ballot and Fishbaine and Hutchinson won enough votes in the primary to appear on both.

Incumbent Jim Pawelczyk is unopposed in his bid to complete the remaining two years of his term. He was appointed to the board in March 2008.

Q: The school board approved the facilities master plan in June, and has moved ahead with three elementary school construction projects expected to cost $26.4 million. Given several economic challenges, when should construction on a new high school project begin? And with costs projected to exceed $100 million for the high school project, what specific sacrifices will the district have to make in other areas?

Penni Fishbaine

The construction of the high school project should begin when we can afford it. Phase 1 of the districtwide master plan has begun. Three elementary schools and the high school remain in need of adequate heating and electrical systems and structural improvements.

The district’s finances are in flux. With the state-mandated Public School Employees’ Retirement System account due in 2013, the interest-rate swap termination fee unknown, the state’s erratic funding, and the current condition of our facilities, the district must be prudent with spending.

Quality education must remain a priority, and decreasing the operational budget will have consequences. On www.scasd.org, there is a link to offer cost control suggestions. By controlling spending and being proactive (“saving” for PSERS), our district may be able to face our overwhelming financial situation without considerably raising taxes. With Act I, taxes cannot be raised above a set index without a referendum. Our community values education, and I believe a reasonable high school project would be supported. With the impending cost control results, the budget should decrease. Specific sacrifices will be determined by the board, will affect the overall budget, and hopefully, improve our financial position to allow for planning the high school renovation.

David Hutchinson

The district has instituted several cost-cutting initiatives, beginning with a task force that is seeking input and ideas from the entire school community. We are also evaluating our existing programs, in order to eliminate anything that has outlived its usefulness, prior to considering anything new.

Having said that, no amount of cost savings will provide enough to finance the districtwide facilities plan. We are also constrained by rising health care costs and substantial projected increases in mandated retirement expenses. But we are fortunate to live in a community that recognizes the value of quality public schools, and who will support them, as long as they are managed efficiently and effectively. As was the case with our current elementary school projects, community input will be essential as the options for each project are carefully weighed.

The high school continues to be a high priority. Unnecessarily delay will divert resources into the repair of an aging infrastructure. It is important, however, that we take the time to “get it right,” in order to provide long-term value to the community. Thoughtful planning will allow these projects to be environmentally responsible and support modern educational requirements, while being cost-effective.

Brian Kaleita

Several of our elementary schools are in considerably more deteriorated condition than either of our high school buildings, so it is clearly appropriate to address those needs first. No major work should

commence on either the North or South buildings however, until more public input and a more accurate cost analysis are obtained. A serious flaw in the recent steering committee process was the failure to distinguish needs from wants as to the high school. Our two high school buildings are only about 50 years old and in my opinion are far from the end of their useful lives as secondary school buildings. Many classroom buildings on the Penn State campus are far older and still functioning quite adequately.

As to the cost, it is my belief that these two buildings can be renovated and upgraded for far less than $100 million. I have personally inspected both buildings and, while I concur that work is needed, I do not agree with the trendy recommendations of our out-of-town consultant that would require the virtual gutting and costly reconfiguration of the basic building architecture.

Jim Leous

I think given the economic situation, we should allow the elementary school projects to proceed and hope that this will help the local economy, builders and their employees. A new or heavily renovated high school will no doubt be further down the road because of the economy.

In the districtwide facilities master plan, we recommended: Even buildings which are recommended for renovation or replacement may require interim improvements until such time that the building project is implemented. As soon as possible, I suggest that we should replace the windows in the high school with much more energy efficient ones. Given the higher energy rates, we should reap considerable energy savings before we are ready for the renovation.

As we prepare to move forward with other recommendations in the facilities plan, we need to trim some of the operational expenses in the budget. Sacrifices will be necessary, but we will also see benefits by doing things differently, more efficiently, and smarter. A district cost control task force has been established to identify savings. I have already contributed some ideas, and I look forward to continued participation with this group.

Jim Pawelczyk

The economy, unfunded liabilities and unsustainable growth in the early 2000s have produced a financial tsunami for the district. Without fiscal restraint, building renewals (more than half exceed 50 years of age), state-required

retirement contributions (estimated to jump by $6 million to $7 million annually), and “assumed” annual operating budget growth (4 percent historically), coupled with the weakening tax base, would boost taxes more than 40 percent over the next five years. This is not acceptable. Major renovation projects are unavoidable; the high school must be coordinated with the budget challenges. A comprehensive long-term financial plan (now being discussed) is needed immediately to define a realistic time-line for the high school.

Our commitment to educate future generations requires more community investment than most; local taxes provide 82 percent of the district’s revenue. We must rebalance education and finances. If some tax increase is inevitable, the following changes could lower it by 25 percent or more: 1) Streamline operations, retaining “neighborhood” schools when practical; 2) Modernize facilities “without frills,” but stand firm on educational quality; 3) Expand partnerships to increase revenue and the value of career, technical and alternative education; and 4) Implement recommendations from the district’s cost control task force, reducing budget growth below 2 percent annually.

Gowen Roper

It is impossible to give a precise date, but the high school should be part of the next phase of our district’s building plan. Through the districtwide facilities master plan, the community made it clear that it wants the high school to stay on the Westerly Parkway site.

The next step should be to develop the educational specifications for the high school program further so that we can be sure that the facility that we build meets the needs of our students and teachers now and is flexible for future program changes. I hope that community involvement in this process will insure that the community understands the scope of the project and will support it in a referendum.

Given its size and complexity, the high school project will require a longer planning phase than the current elementary projects. The need is clear, so we should not put off the planning process. The board has created a cost-cutting committee to review district expenditures, but it is not realistic to expect that sacrifices from our existing budget can fund a building project the size of the high school. The high school will need to be funded by issuing long-term bonds.

Q:This spring, more than 700 parents and community members signed a petition calling for the removal of “Investigations in Number, Data and Space” as the primary elementary math curriculum. What would be your role as a school board member when parents and district educators or administrators disagree over what’s best for students, and should the district continue using “Investigations” as its primary math curriculum?

Fishbaine

A school director should listen to the public, teachers and the administration, ask questions, and request empirical data/evidence to examine an issue. A curriculum must be evaluated objectively.

According to www.scasd.org, a 2002 goal for adopting Investigations was “to find a consistent approach to teaching mathematics across the district that best met the Pennsylvania state testing standards that were being developed and implemented.” State College students’ PSSA math rankings in the state have decreased significantly since the district started using Investigations. In addition, consistency among classrooms remains an issue because individual teachers must select which Investigations lessons (and how much of it) to teach along with traditional math supplements. Given the declining rankings, along with 700 citizens signing a petition to request the discontinuation of “Investigations,” I would support the search for a comprehensive, cohesive and more consistent core math curriculum.

Students learn in different ways, and different approaches work for different students. Teachers are professionals. In order to have consistency throughout the district and our students learning with proven methods, the teachers need to have access to multiple resources, but also have one comprehensive and cohesive math program that is strong in traditional math and incorporates conceptual learning.

Hutchinson

“Investigations” math was implemented based on the recognition that every student in today’s world needs an understanding of core mathematical concepts. We cannot afford another generation divided between those who are “good at math” and those who are not. Recently, the nation’s high school math teachers called for a similar change in curricular focus.

I understand the frustration of parents who were taught the old “algorithmic” way and struggle to help with their children’s homework. However, with the efforts of our teachers, many parents have discovered that they can learn math in a new way.

As our teachers continue to adapt the program to meet the needs of individual students — allowing students to learn in the way that works best for them — they tell us, enthusiastically, about the progress that their students have made. The board is responsible for making sure that we have adequate ways to measure that progress. There may be other good math programs, but changing the entire curriculum every few years is the surest way to impede the academic progress of our students. We need to listen to the education professionals who spend every day in the classroom.

Kaleita

It is my belief that parents are and should be the primary educators of their children. In the case of the “Investigations” math curriculum, not only did hundreds of parents object to its use, but the parental concerns are corroborated by PSSA results showing that district math scores are lower than those of other school districts throughout the state that do not use the “Investigations” curriculum.

I believe it was a mistake to adopt “Investigations” as the core math curriculum and I favor the establishment of a joint parent-staff group to initiate a search for a replacement curriculum, not only in the case of the math program, but whenever such a dispute arises.

To learn more about my views on this and other aspects of the operation of the school district, I invite you to take a look at my Web site at briankaleita.blogspot.com.

Leous

We are blessed in this district to have both a highly educated community and one which cares about our children and the school curriculum. When our parents and our curriculum professionals don’t agree on what’s best for our students, the school board should help facilitate the situation.

In the case of the “Investigations” elementary math curriculum, concerned parents met with curriculum specialists and an action plan was drawn up by the district to help address the parents’ concerns for a more traditional mathematics education while still moving forward with the more conceptual “Investigations 2” curriculum. Included in that plan is better teacher, parent and district communication. Both the publisher and the district have provided information which assists me as a parent to help my children with their homework.

The elementary math parents’ night was also a step in the right direction. Attendance was low because of the weather (and the Phillies), so I hope we can have at least one more of these. In addition, I’ve recommended to the board that the district make YouTube or similar online videos available to provide homework help to students and their parents.

Pawelczyk

Parents, administrators and educators agree that mathematical fluency is essential for students. They disagree over the mix of resources that best achieve this goal. Decisions based on evidence, not rhetoric, provide the best solutions.

Analysis of PSSA scores verifies that students in the district do not learn math as quickly as many of their peers across the state. Perhaps it’s a problem with the “Investigations” curriculum; or, perhaps it’s a problem with implementation rather than the curriculum itself. District administration must determine the nature of the current problem, and, working with the board, implement affordable corrective action(s) with definable outcomes. Education should improve continuously, not just when parents demand it.

The school board invests your taxes to ensure that educators have the right resources to help students learn, to make certain that education is contemporary and appropriate, and to analyze performance with validated assessment tools.

If high levels of math achievement and growth will occur with the current curriculum and action plan, then why should its continuation be disputed? However, if these expectations are not met (which seems to be the case), then a curriculum change, designed by a coalition of education professionals and discipline experts, should be considered.

Roper

The role of the board is to set policy, to establish clear goals for the district, to provide the administration with the resources necessary to achieve these goals and to assess progress toward these goals on a regular basis to ensure accountability. As elected representatives the board also needs to listen to and be open and responsive to the concerns of all members of the community.

I believe that the board, the administration, teachers and parents all have the same goal: To have a rigorous, comprehensive math curriculum that ensures that every child has the math and problem solving skills they will need to succeed in their future. We will always need to improve our curriculum and how we deliver it. We know we need to improve the fact fluency and the conceptual understanding of all our children.

I believe that the administration’s math action plan recognizes the need for continuous improvement and represents a step in the right direction. We need to assess progress toward our goal using a number of different achievement indices, not just the PSSA. I trust that our teachers and administration will continue to develop the curriculum changes necessary to reach our common goal.