Seems like nearly all of the 17 fit that description so now all we have to do is figure out other ways to distinguish between them! Or we could just throw some darts.
Seems like nearly all of the 17 fit that description so now all we have to do is figure out other ways to distinguish between them! Or we could just throw some darts.
There is at least one "diversity consultant" running and I would also stay away from the two professors running given the nature of their scholarship.
It would be helpful to see an explicit reform slate of four candidates where they run on:
1) Educational improvement and pre-college readiness
2) Fiscal responsibility
3) Transparency in governance and decision-making
4) Retention and recruitment of high quality educators.
Given the vacuousness of the term and the way it has been leveraged to run the district into fiscal crisis, any candidate who highlights "equity" should be viewed with suspicion.
Seems like nearly all of the 17 fit that description so now all we have to do is figure out other ways to distinguish between them! Or we could just throw some darts.
There is at least one "diversity consultant" running and I would also stay away from the two professors running given the nature of their scholarship.
It would be helpful to see an explicit reform slate of four candidates where they run on:
1) Educational improvement and pre-college readiness
2) Fiscal responsibility
3) Transparency in governance and decision-making
4) Retention and recruitment of high quality educators.
Given the vacuousness of the term and the way it has been leveraged to run the district into fiscal crisis, any candidate who highlights "equity" should be viewed with suspicion.