DPS Chalkboard School Board Candidate Endorsements
Well, four of the five candidates responded to our questions. Not bad, but we’d like to do better, so we’re going to include some self-reflection in Section III. In Section II we’ve provided the highlights from the responders, and since we’ve edited the answers to keep our analysis concise enough for most readers, we encourage those of you that want to read the full answers to follow the links at the end of our analysis (in Section IV) and read each candidates’ entire response.
Before we jump in, we’d like to thank the four candidates for answering our questions and all five candidates for their willingness to serve the community and the children of DPS 61!
This document has 4 parts, and the candidates in each section are listed in ballot order…
I. Endorsements
II. Our summary of the candidates’ responses
III. Self-reflection (or what we could have done better).
IV. Links to the candidates’ full responses
I. Endorsements – The quick and dirty
Mark Reynolds – We strongly endorse! Mark gave quick, concise answers that struck the right chord with us. Additionally, Mark gave a decisive answer to the cell phone question that we love! If you want a no-nonsense board member that cares about results, vote for Mark.
Bill Clevenger – We strongly endorse! Please follow the link in Section IV to read Bill’s entire answers – they were hard for us to summarize because he had a lot of great ideas flowing and we didn’t want to leave anything out. He is, and will be, an excellent board member. Vote for Bill!
Will Wetzel – Gosh, this is tough. Will took the time to write a lot in each of his answers, but he didn’t say enough to let us know how he would vote, or even react, to the issues. He did a good job of reframing our questions and he quoted several interesting facts about each problem, but we could only pull one or two actionable solutions from his answers. Follow the link to Will’s questionnaire if you want to read his full response, and tell us if you think we’re wrong, but we could not find enough to go on to give our readers a thumbs up, even though we really wanted to (since he took the time to respond). Will may be an excellent politician, but we’re not sure what he brings to the school board, so we abstain.
Hannah Wolfe – DPS Chalkboard believes there is one and only one single vote issue the school board can address to increase learning and reduce violence in the schools, which districts around the country and even some states have already addressed, and that is a ban on cell phones in classrooms. Hannah clearly would be a vote against this proposal. While she did provide one or two solutions to other questions that we liked it’s hard to overlook this huge chasm between our philosophies on education and Hannah’s. Combine the cell phone lapse with her comment about making DPS a destination district without providing any pathway to this idealistic expectation, and her lack of actionable solutions in her answers we cannot endorse Ms. Wolfe.
II. Our summary of the candidates’ responses
Mark Reynolds
1. Oversight of the Superintendent
Mark mentioned the “Carver Model” of board management where the board should hold the Superintendent accountable for clearly defined objectives with no day-to-day board involvement.
2. Regarding what the candidate is looking for in future budget proposals
Mark is willing to explore school closures, outsourcing, and reducing district administration if it’s necessary for a balanced budget.
3. Regarding declining low academic performance and declining test scores
Mark is still sorting through this difficult topic here, but strongly believes in raising our level of expectations. He also is currently comfortable with a teach to the test philosophy if it’s implemented correctly.
4. Regarding banning cell phones from the classroom, Mark is…
for some type of cell phone ban in classrooms!
5. Regarding allocating more money to hire qualified teachers, Mark believes
we need to do better and says the board should work with the Superintendent to increase our efforts in this area.
6. Regarding actions you are in favor of to provide better transparency, Marks complete response…
State law requires a board to be involved in some disciplinary actions. I don’t like this responsibility for the board, but because it’s state mandated, there are personnel issues we must be involved in (in closed sessions). I don’t believe it is the best use of board time, but it doesn’t seem like we have much flexibility there.
7. Regarding other concerns, Mark mentions:
Student achievement in reading, math, and sciences needs to be job #1 in our school district and needs board involvement…
Bill Clevenger
1. Regarding oversight of the Superintendent, Bill’s edited answer:
The Board has one employee and as such should establish a collaborative working relationship with the Superintendent. The Board should set strategic direction and goals, focus on student achievement and associated curriculum, monitor district climate and culture, ensure a safe education setting for students, faculty, staff and community, engage the community, ensure fiscal accountability and evaluate district/superintendent results.
2. Regarding what the candidate is looking for in future budget proposals, Bill’s very edited answer…
…in my estimation all viable options are on the table when addressing such issue of community importance…
3. Regarding declining low academic performance and declining test scores, here’s part of what Bill had to say…
I would offer the perspective that we are continually trying new curriculum solutions but getting much less that acceptable results. In light of most recent measurable results, I would suggest that we hit the pause button and immediately embark on a path that focuses on K-3/4 reading & math results. And…
We should employ good teachers, principals and administrators then allow them to be creative and do their job.
4. Regarding banning cell phones from the classroom, Bill states
A thorough review of current District #61 classroom cell phone policy and its enforcement as well as national trends and research should be made part of a community information process. As a note, my initial observation questions the need for cell phones in the classroom since students have access to tablets for learning. Also, Bill would like… our newly appointed Security Administrator should actively weigh in on the Cell phone question.
5. Regarding allocating more money to hire qualified teachers:
Attraction and retention should be a regular agenda item in the biweekly board meeting, and/or it will be included in my evaluation of the Superintendent... I would suggest that a comprehensive recruitment and retention plan be developed (quickly)... Superintendent should work with Staff to develop this plan and implementation strategies.
6. Regarding actions you are in favor of to provide better transparency, Bill has a long and thoughtful response, where (again) I encourage you to follow the link to his entire answer, but here is an edited version:
…there should be a robust on-going public information flow that provides interested parties the opportunity that engages staff and Board in a productive manner. With regard to issues surrounding past “open meetings act” violations, the Board, staff and community need to be assured that we are acutely aware of the Attorney General ruling and will diligently to be certain that we are not putting the District in any similar position.
7. Regarding other concerns, Bill mentions:
The issue of safety, security, and violence should be one of our highest priorities and a plan of action with consequences must be developed in the immediate future…
Will Wetzel
1. Regarding oversight of the Superintendent, Will’s edited answer:
The board must strike a balance between holding the superintendent accountable while at the same time making sure that they have the tools to do their job…
2. Regarding what the candidate is looking for in future budget proposals, Will’s edited answer…
I am concerned that the Decatur Public School district is heading towards a financial cliff for which we are not prepared. And… This represents a 28% reduction in the student body. If we stay on the same path, the assumption would be that we would need 28% fewer schools, teachers, staff, and administration.
3. Regarding declining low academic performance and declining test scores, Will encourage us to remember this is a problem...
that will take a generation of solutions to remedy. And that we must develop a strategic plan focused on student learning and academic achievement. He goes on to say that this new (not our existing) strategic plan must be developed with the input of administration, staff, teachers, and the community.
4. Regarding banning cell phones from the classroom, Will states…
I do not have enough information on the legality of banning cell phones from schools…
5. Regarding allocating more money from the budget to hire qualified teachers, Will says…
Even with limited CARES funding remaining we need to focus on staff recruiting. And our district must focus on retaining the teachers and staff they already have.
6. Regarding actions you are in favor of to provide better transparency, Will had a lengthy answer to this, so I encourage you to read his entire text in the link below, but here is a summary…
Ensuring that public participation is welcomed at each meeting,
…every year after the election the first 18 meetings take place within the school buildings
Ensuring I, as a board member, actively engage in my community by participating in public and community events
7. Will did not list any additional concerns.
Hannah Wolfe
1. Oversight of the Superintendent. Hannah highlights that strategic objectives and accountability are the important thing and goes on to say…
I do think there is a middleground to micro-managing and being completely hands-off.
2. Regarding what the candidate is looking for in future budget proposals Hannah believes…
One key to increasing our tax-base is by focusing on the reputation of the district. We must make DPS a destination district and that starts with our reputation.
3. Regarding declining low academic performance and declining test scores Hannah highlights the need for a transition to more homogeneous learning opportunities and that we need to raise expectations. She goes on to say…
Will a new school improve test scores? Probably not. But would it help with recruitment and retention of teachers and families? Probably.
4. Regarding banning cell phones from the classroom, Hannah is NOT in favor of any type of cell phone ban. She emphasizes…
Not only is there a safety concern with banning possession of cell phones across the board, but a global ban would fail to prepare our students for the real world. I think it is important that we encourage teaching students when cell phone use is appropriate and when it’s not.
5. Regarding allocating more money to hire qualified teachers, Hannah highlights that we need to do better and will work with the Sup to increase our efforts. She also says…
Recruitment should always be a priority. The current job market is highly competitive and that means allocating resources to have a constant stream of new candidates.
6. Regarding actions you are in favor of to provide better transparency, Hannah’s complete response…
I think we must get ahead of our own messages. Sometimes we focus too much time on crafting exactly the right message, that the masses have already developed their own version of the story. Open communication is key.
7. Regarding other concerns, Hannah’s response was:
This community cannot succeed unless our kids and our schools do. The success of this district has long-term impacts on every part of our economy, and it will take all of us working together to right the ship.
III. Self-reflection (or what we could have done better).
We could have handled this questionnaire better. Here’s what we may have got wrong…
1. We used the email addresses that were given to us and (at least) had four addresses correct. We aren’t sure about the fifth because we didn’t get a response. We should have called or done more to find out if the other candidate wanted to respond.
2. The questions were framed in a way that some of the candidates may not have agreed with and so they were perhaps turned off from the beginning. You might say we were “leading the witness” too much with our questions. But in our defense, we feel these questions are the major issues (minus violence – more on that in point 3 below) for our district.
3. We left out a question on violence mostly because we couldn’t figure out a great way to ask the question (are you against violence in schools is a simple question to ask) and were hoping the candidates might mention it in the additional comments section (Bill Clevenger did do this). We shouldn’t have expected the candidates to think of that and should have come up with a question.
4. A final reason why someone may not have responded is the questionnaire forced candidates to take a stand on the issues (example: Cell phones – ban or don’t ban.) And in some cases, answering honestly may (perhaps) not help in their electability. I don’t have a solution to this problem – we certainly don’t want to NOT ask the hard questions.
IV. Links to the candidates’ full responses
Mark Reynolds –
Bill Clevenger –
Will Wetzel –
Hannah Wolfe –