As near as I can tell, 14 folks participated in my recent survey on the primary process. While certainly not a scientific sampling, here are the results:
It was nice, but not really surprising, that visitors were almost all aware of the issue. I suspect the general population is less so. The legislation is still pending in Harrisburg, so we’ll all have to watch and see how this goes. PSBA held a similar survey of it’s membership, too. If they publish anything, I’ll pass it along.
Depending upon one’s perspective, it can either be good or bad to have to define one’s views on national issues when being evaluated for directing local school matters, though I admit there is probably some correlation between the two on some matters. The resolution may have cost and time implications related to effectively running two campaigns, especially given the considerable time it takes to campaign while also sitting on an active board, though it is easy to argue that being visible to the community on a regular basis in an authoritative position has its unfair advantages, too. And finally, there is the obvious benefit of having two votes on the decision, especially if it’s a close race on some key issues.
In the end, as I’ve already stated, board members and prospective board members have an obligation to be in contact with the community. Whether it’s forced through campaigning or as a matter of responsible boardsmanship, getting and staying in touch with the community is part of the job.
What do you think?
I’ve posted a new survey and welcome any help to get input. It’s rather timely.