John Kriekard
What is your education and relevant experience for this office?
B.A., History, Kalamazoo College, 1968 M.A., History, Western Michigan University, 1971 Ed.D., Educational Administration and Supervision, Arizona State University, 1985 I worked in public education for 37 years before retiring in June 2009. I was a teacher, assistant principal, principal of two middle schools and a high school, assistant superintendent in two districts, and retired after serving as superintendent of Paradise Valley Unified School District for six years. Being a legislator is about being a leader. I have served in leadership positions in schools, districts, and civic organizations for more than 30 years. My tenure as a leader has been marked by a vision for the organizations I have led that has helped inspire individuals, departments, and schools to strive to greater achievement. I also have been called pragmatic in that my leadership involved providing practical solutions to daily concerns. I have demonstrated the ability to listen to and work with people of diverse views and backgrounds and having the courage to make tough decisions when necessary. Additionally, I have been a resident of Legislative District 8 since 1995 and know the issues and opportunities of the area as well the state.
If you have children, do you/did you send them to public school? If so, did they graduate from a public school?
Yes, my two children and my stepdaughter all graduated from public schools after spending their entire K-12 experience in public schools. Emily and Peter graduated from Shadow Mountain High School in Paradise Valley Unified School District and Erin graduated from Chaparral High School in Scottsdale Unified School District. Today, Emily and Erin are teachers and Peter is a medical doctor
Do you feel you are an advocate for public education in Arizona? Use specific examples of what you will do or have done to demonstrate your level of support for public education in Arizona.
I worked in public education for 37 years before retiring in June 2009 as superintendent of Paradise Valley Unified School District. I have advocated for public education throughout my entire career. While superintendent I received the Arizona Superintendent of the Year for Large School Districts from the Arizona School Administrators and the Bob Grossman Leadership in Communications Award from the National School Public Relations Association among other awards. Upon my retirement, the Paradise Valley Governing Board named the district’s Science Resource Center after me. I very much appreciate these honors because I believe they recognize that throughout my career I put the interests of students first and communicated well with parents while supporting teachers appropriately. Academic achievement for all students was always the top priority.
Will you work to protect public education from any further budget cuts?
Yes, I truly believe that education represents an investment in our future and needs to be funded appropriately. First and foremost, I want to increase the revenue control limit to move Arizona closer to the national median in per-pupil expenditures. Understanding that the budget deficit would prohibit this for the next year at least, the challenge becomes to stop any further cuts. We also must update the capital outlay formula, which has not changed in more than 10 years. This important source for funding of instructional materials and technology helps districts helps students keep pace with an ever-changing world.
The system for funding public education in Arizona is a maze of laws, rules, regulations, funding sources, etc. Please share specifics on how you would simplify how we fund our public schools here in Arizona to make that funding source more efficient, effective and reliable?
It is important that the funding formula maintain equity across the various school districts and that larger amounts of funding follow students who may cost more to educate (e.g., special education students). This has created a formula that appears to be confusing, but basically is built on the premise of number of students multiplied by a fixed dollar amount, which is of course too low. Over the years, weights were added for students whose situations add to the expense of their education. For example, school administrators supported adding a weight for severely handicapped special education students because their need for aides and special programs or classrooms added tremendous expense to their education. Likewise, more recently, ELL students were given a weight to the formula. Despite its many facets, the formula has proven effective and reliable given the complexity of public education. The problem: the money is not sufficient for any of the categories. To help districts budget more strategically with the limited dollars they receive, one of the changes that I would advocate is to fund the schools over a multi-year period. This would lessen the year-to-year waiting game the districts must play as they cannot approve budgets until the state budget passes, which often is not completed until late in the legislative session. Having an earlier picture of the education allocation would enhance a district’s ability to hire and retain teachers and manage its money more precisely.
Should the education formula be based on seat time and average daily membership or on student academic progress and successful achievement of academic standards?
I believe the latter provides a more relevant criterion for funding. The entire goal of education should be to promote student achievement, not just promote students. We should tie funding to how well students are meeting achievement goals, not to how many days they sit in a classroom. As superintendent of Paradise Valley Unified School District, I worked to get the law regarding online education revised to allow all districts to offer courses and thereby break the mold of seat time. Of course, a student must be registered and making progress toward graduation in order for the district to claim funding.
Knowing that money does not cure all, how do you feel that Arizona ranks dead last in per pupil funding? Are you happy with the status quo or how will you work to change that? Can you share your plan on how Arizona can improve it's school funding to at least a competitive level? Be specific.
I do not believe that schools are properly funded today. A state’s expenditure in public education must be seen as an investment in the future, and Arizona’s investment is woefully inadequate for today’s students, teachers, and schools and for future economic growth. Arizona’s per-pupil expenditure ranks us at the bottom of nearly all of the states in the nation and Washington DC. This lowly expenditure places our public education at serious risk of decline in effectiveness. Because schools use the money primarily for teachers and other personnel, they cannot afford to hire more than the minimum. When I was PVUSD superintendent, our business manager noted that with our allocation, we could “pay more people or pay people more.” In Arizona, we do not have the choice to pay teachers well and lower their class size. During the last two legislative sessions, cuts in education funding meant that class sizes increased as salaries remained frozen or dropped. Cuts further reduced districts’ ability to buy supplies, course materials, and more. My first job as a legislator would be to assemble a coalition of lawmakers who truly support public education and, as a group, block any further cuts. It is important for the voters to elect pro-education candidates based on their track record, not their rhetoric. For the longer term, the state should increase revenue by implementing plans to create more jobs and thus create more tax payers. This should be done through aggressive recruitment of new businesses, large and small, and increased tourism. Current Arizona-based businesses should also have incentives to create and sustain new jobs. Another way to increase state revenue is through an improved investment strategy of state funds that both allows greater flexibility and creativity as well as better supports Arizona companies and institutions. Government needs to be as effective and efficient as possible while adhering to a long-term plan that will engender future economic growth for Arizona. That plan must include a greater commitment to public education.
Do you think that class-size affects academic performance? How and at what size?
Research has shown that smaller class size will improve student achievement. Unfortunately these studies are done primarily with classes of approximately 15 students and in high-poverty areas. Beyond that research, we all also have seen the negative effects of higher class size in terms of teacher weariness and students’ inability to get the extra personal attention they sometimes need. Additionally, research clearly demonstrates that the greatest predictor of student success is teacher effectiveness. This makes class size important for the teacher, who also must provide instruction that engages the students and is disciplined in what is now known about how students learn. These factors contribute dramatically to student achievement. Given these multiple issues and especially the key factor of who leads the classroom, it is difficult to specify “perfect” class sizes. I believe our students would benefit from class sizes that top out at 25 in K-3 and 28 in 4-12. With funding what it is, our chances of seeing classes this small in public schools, particularly in secondary schools, are exceedingly thin. However, if Arizona would work to increase the state funding to the median level of the nation, students would benefit immediately.
How do you feel about the unfunded mandate of the AIMS test (or a similar test) when teachers spend a large portion of their school year "teaching to the test"? Be specific.
I believe that education in the nation and in Arizona has become more accountable to parents and students – and voters – by teaching to standards developed by professionals and then testing those standards. It can be debated as to the consistency between the standards and various AIMS issues, but the information that should be gained by teachers to better instruct their students requires some form of assessment. Realistically, teachers teach to a test, even if it has not always been AIMS. Tests tell teachers whether their students have mastered what they taught. Advanced Placement teachers construct week-to-week lesson plans to ensure they have covered all the material that will face their students on the specific subject test. Fine arts teachers likely expect to see performances and portfolios instead of multiple choice answers, but these all provide a means to assess student mastery. However, after working with the AIMS tests in our schools since their inception, I would recommend changes to improve them. A simple but effective modification would be to allow students to use calculators on the math test so they can solve problems in a real-world setting. This would increase the level of difficulty of the questions and provide better assessment data. Another, more substantive change would be to reduce the repeated AIMS (or Terra Nova) test administration throughout all grades to appropriate benchmark grades, as is done with the science test. All districts are required to have their own measures of assessments and these should be used and reported in the intervening years. This would save money and take away some of the testing that is now dominating our classrooms while still putting evaluative information in the hands of the teachers who can then use it to inform their instruction. This plan could also recapture some time so that the subjects such as social studies and the arts are taught more thoroughly again.
Do you believe that the voters approving Prop 301 intended the 2% inflation factor to be applied to the entire M&O budget or just legislatively selected portions of the operating budget?
Yes, I believe the voters were clear in their intent to support public education through a guaranteed increase each year. I disagree with the legislative choice to ignore precedent and redefine the proposition’s provisions.
How do you plan to support districts with textbook adoptions with the decrease/limits on soft capital funding? Do you understand that many districts such as CCUSD operate with textbooks that are ten years old?
First of all, the capital outlay formula needs to be updated as it has not changed in more than 10 years. The cost of instructional materials has increased appreciably in that time. I will work to make that change. Secondly, districts should begin to look at more online opportunities for students to access the information that has been in textbooks. There are a growing number of resources that are inexpensive and constantly updated that provide information to students. This would solve two problems – funding and currency of the information.
The budget cuts have eliminated the funding for the Gifted Students Educational Program. With the passing of Prop 100 what legislative measures will you take to restore this funding to meet the many critical needs for our brightest minds and high acheivers in AZ?
The funding that was passed a few years ago by the legislature for gifted education should be restored, and as a legislator, I will support a bill to return these funds to districts and educate fellow legislators about this vital need. Public education must have appropriate resources to serve the needs of all students and that includes our gifted students, who otherwise often grow bored with school without additional challenges provided and needs met with appropriate programs.
Where and what grade level classrooms have you observed in the last 12 months? What specifics can you share about class size and per pupil expenditure in those classrooms?
In the past 37 years I worked in public education, I have been in classrooms of every grade level throughout Paradise Valley, Scottsdale, and other school districts, but in the immediate past 12 months since my retirement as superintendent, I have observed elementary classrooms in the Fowler and Cartwright districts as a liaison for the Rodel Foundation MAC-Ro program. I also read regularly to classes at Sonoran Sky Elementary in Paradise Valley and this spring I spoke to government classes at Chaparral High School in Scottsdale. In the schools in high-poverty areas of west Phoenix, it was clear that the students did not have the technology and other resources that I was accustomed to seeing. This is because the soft capital funds have been cut over the past two years and the districts were not able to pass a capital override. The class sizes differed greatly because of the implementation rules for the ELL grouping in the four-hour block as these west Phoenix schools have high concentrations of English language learners.
Due to our district's low poverty, or "free and reduced lunch" level, do you understand the disparity that places CCUSD at a disadvantage for federal and grant application-based funding, and would you be willing to support legislation that would allow districts such as CCUSD in low-poverty areas to secure supplemental funding to reach curriculum or achievement standards that may be desired by the governing board? If so, what might those funding sources be? (please cite examples such as local prop tax, program fees, etc.)
I understand the issue that is facing Cave Creek Schools as I served as an administrator in Scottsdale for 23 years. Most of that time there were few supplemental grants available and certainly not in the schools where I served. Although there are other sources of revenue for these schools, none of them are state funded. I have proposed that the legislature establish grants of a competitive nature for which districts and schools could apply. My initial focus would be on schools reforming to adopt curricula that reflect 21st century skills such as STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) and upgrading instruction for high schools students in order to reduce the dropout rate. These grants would be similar to the federal Race to the Top grants. I believe these could be funded by an aggressive partnership involving the state, businesses, and nonprofit foundations such as Rodel and Helios.
Do you support performance pay programs like Career Ladders and Prop 301 for teachers?
I have always been a supporter of Career Ladder when it is implemented correctly. I served on Scottsdale’s Career Ladder committee for six years and also served on the state’s committee for two years. There is no need for legislators to reinvent a performance pay plan if they would understand and fund Career Ladder. Classroom Site Fund (Prop 301) funding for performance pay for teachers was a good start, but unfortunately I have observed too wide a variety of implementation plans. I would like to see stricter guidelines for these funds.
In constructing new schools, do you believe that bonding or direct general fund support is the most efficient and cost effective?
I believe that bonding provides a more efficient way to finance construction. If construction funds were to come from the general fund, there would be competition within the overall education budget for those funds to be dedicated to class size reduction or curriculum materials or salary increases rather than new buildings. When buildings need to be built or remodeled or technology needs to be purchased, it is preferable to have a dedicated funding source.
Would you support a requirement that all new education policy initiatives proposed by the legislature contain a fiscal note and be required to include all necessary funding prior to adoption?
Yes. We already face too many unfunded mandates.
Do you think the Constitutional requirement to fund a general and uniform public education system should take precedence over programs supporting private schools?
Yes. Our constitution is clear on that issue.
Please describe your level of support for school vouchers and private school tax credits, how should they be used (if at all), to whom should they be given/used for, and how would you change the current system in place? Be specific.
I do not support the use of state funds for private education. Personal and corporate tax credits for private schools should not be allowed. I have written about my solution to the tax credit issue and that blog can be accessed via www.electkriekard.com.
Do you feel that the use of Vouchers and private school tax credits is appropriate considering the struggle that our public education system has recently faced and continues to face? Be specific.
I do not feel that private school vouchers are appropriate. These are state funds designated for public education and should not be spent on private schools. This is a constitutional issue, but if the issue driving vouchers is school choice, then realistically, Arizona’s system of open enrollment means funding for a student already follows that student no matter where he or she enrolls in a public or charter school. Certainly the fact that K-12 public education has taken funding cuts in the last two years makes any expenditure for vouchers doubly inappropriate.