About 100 people sat in the audience on Monday night listening as seven candidates vying for three seats on the Port Washington-Saukville School Board spoke about why they deserve to be elected.
Five of those candidates — all seeking two city of Port Washington seats on the board — will face a primary election on Feb. 21. Those candidates include: Leo Duffrin IV, Brenda Fritsch, Earl Kelley, Ross Larsson and Michelle Mueller.
The four candidates remaining after the primary will face off again during the general election on April 3, joining candidate John Soper and incumbent Carey Gremminger, who are both running for one spot to represent the village of Saukville.
The candidate forum, held at Lincoln Elementary School, was hosted by the League of Women Voters of Ozaukee County. It ran about one-hour long, allowing for four questions from the audience:
- What experience do you have in educational policy making?
- What are your top priorities in your first year on the board?
- Technology is expensive. How can it be used to reduce the school budget? Can it?
- How could you integrate the natural resource of Lake Michigan into the curriculum of the school district?
Patch covered the event live, and the coverage is still on our site; read the archived blog of the forum.
Answers to questions as well as opening and closing statements made by the candidates made a variety of references to the use of technology by students in the district, and the group had varied takes on the topic.
Duffrin spoke most passionately about the technological improvements for the schools, something he sees as a No. 1 priority.
"I seriously feel we are behind right now and I feel that we need to catch up and keep moving ahead," Duffrin said about the district's technology. He added that he has done some research on the topic, and believes there are grants available that could provide the district with fund needed to add the technology that would offer new learning opportunities and create a more efficient use of resources.
Fritsch agreed with Duffrin, pointing to grants as well as fundraising opportunties to help the district advance. Fritsch listed technology and keeping up with a "futuristic pace" as one of her priorities as a board member.
Gremminger and Larsson took similar stances, explaining that while technological improvements may be helpful, it's important to be careful that technology is introduced in the schools in a safe manner.
"Technology is not something we can just throw in the hands of kids," Larsson said, explaining that careful thought should be put into such decisions.
But some of the candidates just really want to see the improvements in the way of textbooks — switching to devices such as a Kindle e-reader, so that students no longer have to carry the weight of the books nor pay big bucks for a single school book.
As Mueller pointed out, if students used some type of e-reader for purchasing their textbooks, parents would be looking at spending $14.99 a book instead of $60 to $100 — and in a few years, the updated text could downloaded, rather than kids continuing to read outdated materials. Kelley also specifically spoke about the use of e-readers.
Soper said while technological advances are important, it's also important they be researched.
"(The schools should) try and invest in technology that doesn't antiquate quickly," Soper said.
To see what all the candidates had to say about other topics, check out the archived blog from the forum. Patch will also be posting profiles of each of the candidates before the Feb. 21 primary election — sign up for the newsletter to be sure you get all the articles.
If you have specific questions you'd like to see answered by candidates, please e-mail Lyssa.Beyer@patch.com.
C.A.B. (citizens accountability board)
8:48 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Attending the forum last night, it was a great opportunity to hear first hand some of the positions of the candidates. Though there was discussion about the need to upgrade the technology aspect in the schools, the original question remains unanswered as presented. The question was how would technology reduce the district's budget.
Lets establish a fact first. Technology continues to make advances, which could be tapped to further the educational and learning processes. However, the continued need to update and replace antiquated technology is a challenge to anybody's personal budget let alone a school district. Several of the candidates indicated that our school district is behind the times as it relates to technology. Yet, our district has ranked very high in placement and achievements. How was this possible when behind in the technology race? Simple answer, it boils down to the basics. Focus on mastering the basics from the family unit to the teacher and up to the district is what creates the foundation of success. It was interesting the some of the candidates were interested in spending money to bring in technology, but there was no answer on how to really pay for it, or how it may reduce spending. Another case in which we want, want want. Even hints that we are falling behind by not having technology. At least one candidate stated that having the "best new thing" because it is the "best new thing" should cause pause to evaluate the cost and benfits.
Earl
11:02 am on Friday, February 10, 2012
CAB: the success of the PWSSD was the result of a very positive relationship between the community and the school district. When people are treated fairly they will respond in kind and children will excel.
Earl Kelley
3:52 pm on Monday, February 20, 2012
I agree 100%.
Earl