Repost: BSD Board Election Candidate: Cheryl Siskin’s Reply to my questions repost
In an effort to give the BSD candidates more exposure for the answers I am reposting both
Cheryl Responded to me yesterday around 6pm and I waited to post the answers until this am. Both candidates answers will be reposted Monday. So if you aren’t reading this now you will read it later, which will be now to you and not now right now.
1. Why are you running for school board, and what are the top three things you’d like to accomplish during your term?
I am running for school board because I genuinely care about education and believe that we can do better than we have been doing. Brandywine has many great teachers and administrators who have many challenges ahead. As a Board member I believe that I have already helped to elevate the dialogue, and believe that the Board should insure that we maximize academic achievement for all children. I believe that we should all give back to the community to the extent that each of us can. I believe that I have and can continue to make a valuable contribution to the Board and the District.
Three things I would like the Board to adopt as goals during my term are:
- to have every child in the District reading by the end of 1st grade.
- to create programs that integrate the core subjects and provide children with a more real world appreciation for what they are learning and what they might be interested in.
- for teachers and other professionals to have the tools they need to maximize academic achievement for all students in the District.
2. What are your views on school vouchers? Do you feel that we should have a voucher program in BSD?
I believe in a public school system that works for all children – not a voucher system.
3. Realizing that this is not in BSD I would still like your perspective on this issue: Due you feel that the Charter School of Wilmington should pay rent? Why, or why not.
As this is not a Brandywine school, I do not have a lot of information on this issue. I do not feel comfortable expressing opinions about matters that I do not feel adequately informed about.
4. What is your view on full financial transparency in BSD?
I believe that if we have a system that balances financial accountability with appropriate flexibility, it will be readily transparent.
5. Which party do you belong to?
As this is a non-partisan election, I am not sure of the relevance of this question. I am a registered Democrat.
6. Do you believe in Evolution?
Yes, however, I do not believe that my personal beliefs are relevant to my candidacy — my personal views on evolution are not relevant to my suitability for school board.
7. Do you feel Creationism has a place in BSD?
I do not believe that public schools should teach religious theories and creationism is a religious theory.
I would like to add that I have really appreciated the opportunity to serve on the Board these past 10 months and promise to bring even more enthusiam and care to a full five year term. We need to advance education in this country — one district, one school, one classroom, one child at a time. I believe that I have the energy, spirit and skills to help guide Brandywine to that next level.
www.cherylsiskin.org
my personal views on evolution are not relevant to my suitability for school board
Funny how she decides what is relevant or not relative to a voter’s question. Why not just answer it?
Hard to imagine a school board candidate not having an opinion on Charter’s not paying rent for its advantageous premises.
Safe to assume that Siskin favors the added public subsidy to CSW, which drains Brandywine schools.
Ramsuer’s reply can be read here, http://delawareliberal.net//2009/05/08/bsd-board-election-candidate-dr-aletha-ramsuers-reply-to-my-questions/
I will be reposting both replies Monday FYI. both candidates that way get equal primetime vis
My first Red Clay post is scheduled for noon today.
“Safe to assume that Siskin favors the added public subsidy to CSW, which drains Brandywine schools.”
She was part of Brandywine board this past year while they stood up to Odyssey Charter’s attempts to bully Brandywine into giving them the Darley Road building. CSW is a Red Clay charter, Brandywine takes the position that a local board should not be creating charters, leave it to ther Satate. Siskin was a voice in this direction, so I don’t think JM’s point is all that valid. DV—will you do follow-ups with the candidates ?
I can. fire away. good idea
I know, respect and personally like both candidates, but am not fond of the pattern that is emerging. Among the questions at a forum moderated by the PTA president, reported in this weekend’s Community News, the candidates were asked about closing the achievement gap.
Ramseur, who spent much of her career teaching science to middle-class and working-class kids [remember De La Warr High?] said there has been progress, but it may be hard to notice since both white and black kids’ scores have risen.
“Siskin said she dislikes the term, which ‘implied bringing the top down and the bottom up’.”
Unless Siskin’s comments were ripped out of context – and her two-year career on the board suggests they were not – they indicate indifference possibly the biggest contemporary issue in education: the achievement gap between white and minority students. It’s certainly a huge issue in Brandywine – unless your entire reason for serving on the school board is to make sure your kids have the shortest possible bus ride. Goodness, to dismiss all the work of Jonathan Kozol, John McWhorter, Rothstein and Haycock, the Pew researchers and the leading thinkers in education – because, to you, the term implies “bringing the top down …”? This is what we get in the post-Evans era?
In this context, Siskin’s indifference to whether CSW pays rent to Red Clay fits a pattern, and it’s not encouraging.
interesting Point John