Dr. Kelly Kent, a candidate in the Nov. 3 School Board election, exudes intelligence, ingenuity and integrity. She is an incredibly positive force of nature, brimming with creative ideas and love for our community. One can’t help but adore and be in awe of this woman.
Hands-on mom of two, Dr. Kelly holds a Ph.D. in neuroscience, is founder and director of a reputable educational firm, lecturer at two local colleges, and as if that is not already enough, she is a city commissioner and dedicated school community volunteer.
Kelly and I became instant friends as active parent volunteers at Lin Howe Elementary, where I co-led the green team over the past several years.
I can attest that she is a pure delight to collaborate with on any project. A great listener, leader and problem solver, Kelly has been integral to greening up our campus, including supporting the edible garden and bringing zero period Spanish language classes to our children.
As for Sustainability
As co-chair of our District’s Environmental Sustainability Committee, I am heartened by Kelly’s commitment to forwarding sustainability in the School District. She understands the gravity of climate change. She realizes the pressing importance of having our community be part of the solution, for the health and well-being of our children.
It is clear to Kelly that a systemic, enduring commitment to sustainability will provide our children opportunities to become eco-literate and build lifelong environmental leadership skills that will serve them well in the 21st century.
The School District already is on the path toward becoming an inspiring beacon of sustainability. Over the past several years, the District has made commendable strides in developing and implementing sustainability-oriented projects and programs. Among them are the
School Board-appointed “Whole Child” and “Inspired Living” programs, the solar project, Green5, Walk and Rollers, and a new partnership with Power Save Alliance.
However, we have yet to implement a comprehensive and integrative approach. Kelly is just the person to help lead this effort.
Especially dear to her heart, she has expressed interest in supporting healthier options in our school cafeterias, moving from less processed and packaged foods to more whole and nutritious foods. Moreover, she is interested in exploring ways the District can create partnerships with local organic farms. This has been done in numerous school districts across the country. We should do it for our children.
Kelly shares my sustainability vision:
To reduce our collective carbon footprint and to create an award-wining energy and water-efficient District, complete with more renewable energy, and native,drought-tolerant learning gardens.
Furthermore, she supports the integration of sustainability principles and guidelines into new construction, renovations, operations and maintenance, procurement and transportation.
Compassionate, creative, and on the cutting-edge, Kelly is beyond qualified for this position. A perfect fit.
Join me in supporting Dr. “Kelly Green” Kent for School Board. Our children’s future will be brighter, and greener, for it.
Ms. Cunningham, MA, a chief sustainability strategist, may be contacted at shea@balancedapproach.net
It is true that all three candidates are educated, sincere and well meaning. Ms. Cunningham, you are missing the most important and virtually only issue in this campaign and that is, the 1/4 billion dollar taxpayer-paid, BOND. The deadline for decision making on the spending of Bond money is fast approaching. Choosing contractors, architects, making District-wide construction standards, issuing competitive contracts are examples of informed Board decisions. Major work must be done in June, July and August of 2016 while the schools are closed.
Kelly Kent:
• Never supported our bond measure,
• Did not endorse our bond measure,
• Did not vote for our bond measure,
• Never went or participated in any Bond Sub-committee meetings, Bond Advisory meetings or Bond Oversight meetings.
None of her campaign literature even mentions the Bond!
She needs to have the requisite knowledge and experience NOW in order to make informed decisions for the Bond. Kelly Kent is not ready to be on the School Board.
Mr. Ehrlich,
You and your wife apparently represent one group of voters in this community that are “bond centric.” It is far from true that the most important issue our district faces is the bond. You have lost sight of what SHOULD be the most important issue of this campaign and that is STUDENT SUCCESS. And this will obviously be achieved through avenues that have nothing whatsoever to do with the bond.
It’s the issue that Kelly Kent seems to understand the best because it is clearly her area of expertise. How children learn and how we can deliver curriculum in a way that our children will understand it needs to be THE critical focus of this district now…NOT how fast we are spending the bond money.
Yet, you and Mrs. Ehrlich, and indeed, the candidates you are supporting, can only focus on that one issue. It has become your mantra, but you must understand that the challenges facing our district are broader and much more complex than that one issue.
I am not sure how you and Mrs. Ehrlich know about what Kelly’s alleged record is regarding the bond, but I will repeat what I told your wife in response to her letter in this same newspaper:
Who supported the bond, who didn’t, who voted for it, who didn’t, who went to meetings, who didn’t, who endorsed it, who didn’t, who has it in their campaign literature, who doesn’t, is a foolish criteria to use when you’re standing in the voting booth.
The fact that we are seeing children at the elementary level and beyond that are having difficulty mastering basic concepts should be our primary concern. With all of the changes in curriculum this year, supporting our teachers and students while they venture into these new ways of delivering and learning curriculum is of greater importance than the bond issue.
Dr. Kent specializes in how the brain works, how it processes and retains information, how we learn! How could anyone NOT want to vote for someone with this incredible educational background?
Sincerely,
Debbie Hamme
“Dr. Kent specializes in how the brain works, how it processes and retains information, how we learn! How could anyone NOT want to vote for someone with this incredible educational background?”
One very important someone comes to mind: Our own superintendent! Mr La Rose might be hesitant to vote for her. I doubt that he really wants a neural scientist on the board who seems quite anxious to start tinkering with his Whole Child concept.
An old saying comes to mind: Too many cooks spoil the broth.
Would Ms Kent support Mr La Rose’s “Whole Child” concept if she were elected. Or would she want to incorporate the latest scientific data, tinkering with the Super’s concept on how to teach our children? Does she want to turn our classrooms into experimental laboratories to see if the latest findings work here?
If Superintendent La Rose wanted to incorporate such cutting-edge data into his own educational concept, he could have hired a neural scientist, such as Dr Kent, as a district learning consultant. But, since he hasn’t felt the need to do so, would it be appropriate for the lay community to put such a person on the board to stir up the educational pot?
I feel compelled to write a note about what a School Board member actually does, because, I work for one.
It seems that we are having a conversation about what a School Board member does and what their qualifications should be.
Does a School Board member have to know every detail about how facilities constructions projects are managed? Is it enough to have volunteered in the schools? Or to be a lawyer so you can understand detailed contracts?
Gladly, no. School Districts hire facilities management professional to take charge of construction projects from concept to ribbon cutting. Districts hire legal firms who provide legal advice to Board members and staff. Districts hire instructional leaders at every school in the District to provide direction and support and to manage the instructional and operations staff. Board members don’t have to have these skills.
We elect School Board members to represent us in developing a vision and goals for our schools. We elect them to oversee our budget, because our priorities are best expressed through how we spend our tax dollars.
Let me repeat it, because it’s important. We elect School Board members to represent us. So, when you are listening to candidates speak – the most important questions you have to ask are – do they understand the challenges our schools face, in their complexity, and do they have ideas for solving these challenges?
Do they believe in the goals of public education to make sure ALL children are educated so when they graduate they are ready to attend college or go on to a career, whatever is their choice?
When you listen to School Board candidates you have to listen carefully, to see if they are people who believe in the dreams of every child, who you can trust with our public dollars.
Let’s not get lost. That is why we elect through a democratic process.
George,
I think you have misunderstood what the concept of the Whole Child actually is. The concept of the Whole Child is to make sure that all of the needs of the child are met–it is not specifically about how curriculum is delivered. It is about understanding that there are other factors in a child’s life that must be taken into consideration when assessing a child’s success.
For instance, is the child living in poverty, is the child often hungry, is the child being bullied, is the child being neglected or abused, has the child suffered a profound loss in their life that they are having trouble coping with, are there emotional issues that must be taken into consideration, are they suffering from low self-esteem, etc., etc. But, the most important part of this equation is what we do with the information we are privy to….how can we, as educators and community members, provide support and encouragement for those children? How can we help them overcome their disadvantages. In short, how can we help them be successful in life?
Other important components of the Whole Child philosophy are the traits of kindness, patience, fairness and compassion for those that are less fortunate than yourself…traits that Dr. Kent embodies.
I am sure that those traits, coupled with Dr. Kent’s intelligence and expertise in her chosen field, would make her an exemplary board member, so I am unclear as to how you arrived at your conclusion. I would venture to say that Mr. La Rose would welcome anyone with Dr. Kent’s qualifications to the board.
As an employee of this district for 20 years, a member of the district partnership and a member of this community for over 30 years, I know I certainly would!!
Sincerely,
Debbie Hamme
Ms Hamme’s latest comment was a nice, short primer on the Whole Child concept, with a tail end about Dr Kent.
One of today’s “hot topics” in education is later starting times for teenage students. Would Dr Kent advocate changing the starting times for CCMS and even later for CCHS students?
Later starting times may alleviate some of the morning congestion on Elenda, but what a titanic shift it would cause throughout our local community and family life.
Again, if our Superintendent thought his administration needed a neural psychologist’s help in educating our children; he could just hire Dr Kent for her expertise.
“In Staying Positive” Dr Kent praises Asst Superintendent Krumpe for her work. But, we get a glimpse into what kind of board member she envisions herself as, when she says that she “can’t wait to work with her.” To me, it already sounds like Dr Kent sees herself as being a hands-on, micro-managing board member.
George, You speak about an important issue, the need for Board members not to cross boundaries and make the mistake of directing staff. That is why we hire a Superintendent. I didn’t hear in Ms. Kent’s comment her intent to do that. I also hope that you call on all candidates to understand the boundaries between them and District staff.
George,
The concept of students performing better in schools that have later start times is by no means a new one. When I worked at the high school 16 years ago, many members of the staff were already discussing studies which showed this to be true. The studies we were looking at then were done in the late 90’s. Of course, there are more recent studies that support the earlier data. If you Google the benefits of later start times, you will see that there are several pages of studies, articles and documentation to support this theory.
Here are some links that you may want to check out:
http://www.startschoollater.net/wake-up-calls-fast-facts.html
https://sleepfoundation.org/sleep-news/backgrounder-later-school-start-times
http://discover.umn.edu/news/teaching-education/students-grades-and-health-improve-later-high-school-start-times
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sleepless-in-america/201102/do-later-school-start-times-really-help-high-school-students
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/08/why-school-should-start-later/401489/
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/08/start-school-later-11am-students-sleep
Obviously, the question you have posed to Dr. Kent is one that should be realistically posed to all of the candidates. Not only because it is a worthwhile question, but because it is a perspective that all board members should take into consideration when evaluating ways of improving student success.
Yet, I somehow have the feeling that you’re not asking these questions because you are honestly interested in the answers, but because you are trying very hard to embarrass Dr. Kent–and I have no idea why. It is certainly your right to support the candidate(s) of your choosing, but let’s discuss the issues rationally and avoid jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions.
I am not sure why you have made the assumption that Dr. Kent intends to micro-manage anything–much less Dr. Krumpe, but there is a distinction to be made between expressing an eagerness to work with a member of the district administration and having the intent to micro-manage.
That being said, I wonder why you have not expressed your concern over the other candidates stating in forums that as board members they are the “superintendent’s boss” and then go on to express their displeasure over how the bond issue is being handled. Since the superintendent is largely responsible for overseeing the bond issue in conjunction with the board, does that give you just a tiny twinge of fear that the superintendent’s job might be in jeopardy?
When they then promise that, if elected, they will contact the state to get the projects done “by the fast approaching deadline” we’re hearing so much about, you don’t consider that going over the superintendent’s head and you don’t hear in those statements even the smallest hint of an intent to “micro-manage?” Hmmm….
Best to you.
Debbie Hamme