School Committee member Geoff Epstein has issued a long statement explaining why he’s decided not to seek another term on the committee next fall.
This particular excerpt caught my attention:
A further influence on my decision has been the fact that my youngest son is a senior and graduating from Newton North in 2013. He has been a vital connection to NPS reality. I would not want to operate on the school committee without that. It has been my observation that school committee members perform better if they have children in the school system and although that is not an iron clad rule, I think it is a wise practice for school committee members to exit when their children graduate.
What do you think? Do you believe school committee members perform better if they have children in the school system?
I personally don’t think that is true, but I recognize why Geoff would say it and it is a sentiment I have actually heard from a good number of people over the past few years.
I think that the idea is, ‘how can you know what is important to the school system if you don’t have any skin in the game’? Again, I see why there are people who would think like that, but I think it excludes a huge part of the population from lending their voice to this very important part of municipal government.
I went through the Newton school system, from Williams school to Newton North. Could it be argued that I don’t know or cannot understand the intricacies and needs of the school system like a parent can?
I think that anyone in Newton who cares about our community and our schools should be able to run without prejudice — people without children in the school system, but who have good, innovative ideas about how the schools can be improved, should be given equal consideration in SC elections. Having a child, or not having a child, should not be a factor for serving in public office.
I think it’s useful for School Committee members to have personal experience of the NPS, whether as parents or alumni. While there are positives to having SC members have kids currently in the system, there are also positives to having SC members who don’t have to worry about fall-out from voicing their positions affecting their kids.
Your kid is one kid. Their experience is one experience in the school system. You could make the case that not having a kid in the system is better in that you aren’t biased by one student’s experience.
No, it doesn’t matter if you have kids in the system.
I actually think one can make as many solid arguments for not having kids in the system.
Why limit the possible pool of qualified candidates by this measure? In a campaign, one would think the vetting process would help sort out the wheat from the chaff.
We’ve had times where there’s no competition for slots: that can’t be all that good.
I don’t think having kids in the system should have any bearing at how a SC member performs at all. School Committee members shouldn’t be influenced by their own children’s experiences any more than they are influenced by any other child’s experience. Like Kim said, their child is one data point only.
I’m not sure how I feel about someone not being familiar with the schools at all though. It seems to me that some degree of understanding of how the schools work would make for a much better connection with parents.
Personally, I am grounded by the perspective that being a parent gives me as a school committee member. Could I be an effective member if I did not have a child in the system? I strongly believe Yes, but I also believe that I would be a different member than I am now.
Our school committee currently has members with elementary and middle students, middle and high, high, and graduates of NPS. From my view a range of contact points with our schools, including those from parents of graduates, is valuable. This view is actually implied in the structure of our school councils, where one member seat is held for a community member without a student at that school. In my children’s schools, these seats have been filled effectively with non-parents of school-age children.
Gail once wrote in a column something to the effect that you really don’t understand Newton’s school system until you have gone through the whole of the experience. I think that she was right. And if you agree with that, then what value can place on someone’s perspective of this system if they have not experienced it at all?
I think that someone who has already experienced the system would have more insight — not less — than someone still going through it. And maybe a bit of pragmatic detachment, to boot.
@Bill: What about someone who has never had kids? Wouldn’t that be the ultimate pragmatic detachment?
@Anyone: Are aldermen who own homes better qualified for that job than aldermen who rent?
Then what place do elementary school parents have on the School Committee? If not in position to influence decisions, then are they relegated to begging for their children’s needs via emails or Mike Time at SC meetings? Parents at every level (elementary, middle, HS, and postgrad) have something to offer and should have representation on the SC.
A pragmatic detachment can diminish the importance of the elementary school experience and that’s not good for the system. The insight of former NPS parents in a system with a dramatically different curriculum, instructional model, overcrowded elementary schools, etc. may be helpful, but may also be just plain old dated.
A good elected official is a good elected official. A parent might have a better perspective in one area pertaining to his/her kid, but thats it. No one can be at all places at
the sametime and needs the eyes of the citizenry.
Greg: Is ultimate pragmatic detachment the goal? Is that preferable to some measure of it? I don’t think so.
No, my point is that someone who has had kids go through the system has insight and perspective that others lack. It does not disqualify everyone else, but I think it is valuable.
Last two words should have read “out dated”.
I think there are a number of good points being floated here pro and con.
What I object to, though, is any knee jerk reaction that no experience with the schools is a kiss of death. When that is the view, we are excluding 80% of adults in the city. It’s not like citizens are beating down the doors to run for SC.
Why wouldn’t we want a broader talent pool to draw from? Then it’s up to the candidate(s) to demonstrate [or not] that they have the capability to do the job.
I have kids in the system and I’m pretty sure I would be horrible on the school committee. LOL
@Kim: It’s true that School Committee members who are always, what’s the word you used, “traveling“? when we have blog parties will never have a deep understanding of our community!