Today, there is a re-vote in the Fifth Assembly District in Connecticut, where the primary ended up a tie back in October. Leo Canty, a Vice President of the American Federation of Teachers in Connecticut is running against Brandon McGee. I've known Leo for a long time, and he has contributed ten dollars to my campaign.

Recently, the Great New England Public Schools Alliance has spent nearly $32,000 as an independent expenditure on Mr. Canty's opponent. That's more than Mr. Canty can spend as a participant in the Citizens Election Program. To me, this appears to be another example of an outside interest group trying to buy an election.

Education reform has always been a key interest of mine, and I'm always interested in what people, and organizations actions say about their real interests. I'm not sure that the behavior of this organization sets a good example of how people should be involved in the political process.

A while ago, I received their endorsement survey. Given my concerns about the organization, even before their latest actions, I set it aside and didn't complete it. Last night, I returned to the survey and completed it. It may be that the survey has changed over time, or that it is an adaptive survey that didn't ask more probing questions depending on the answers, however, I have to say it was one of the worst constructed surveys I've encountered so far.

It asked three yes or no questions:

Do you support paying teachers substantially more for effectiveness?…
Do you support empowering parents by giving the majority of parents in a failing school the option to effect a turnaround or transformation of that school?…
Do you support the promotion of appropriate reforms to governance structures, such as the newly created Commissioner's Network, which prioritizes the interests of students?

I answered Yes to all three, and added a comment:

I have signed the Common Cause Fair Campaign Pledge:

'I pledge to ask all outside spenders to refrain from outside spending in my race, including all
independent expenditures and issue advocacy advertisements that attack my opponents or
party or support my candidacy or party;'

I've often talked about how we should not judge the success of our students, their teachers, or their schools by how well students fill out multiple choice tests. It is very disappointing that this education reform organization resorts to multiple choice questions for their endorsement.

As an illustration, I think my answer to their second question reveals some of the problems. I believe that GNEPSA and I have very different views of how to empower parents. My view is that the process needs to be very fair with key checks and balances. For example, the best way to empower parents to change schools is to have fair local elections, with no outside money pouring in, for not only State Representatives, but also for local school boards. We need level playing fields in the discussions about how to reform schools, and not just money pouring in from large organizations that have agendas beyond the education of the students in the district. Another way to empower students is to get parents more involved in the schools, through parent teacher organizations. Parents and teachers need to be encouraged to work together to improve the schools, and teachers should not be vilified for conditions beyond their control as many education reform organizations tend to do these days.

Yes, we need education reform. It is tied to electoral reform and promoting fairness and transparency. I don't think the multiple choice questions or the third party expenditures of GNEPSA does anything to achieve this.