APS Board Member David Peercy said the right thing, but for the wrong reason.

On the table for discussion/action in the APS Policy Committee meeting;

Conflict of Interest for APS Administration, Staff, Board Members.

Peercy announced several times that he would not allow discussion of anything other than his narrow agenda, and even then, discussion would be limited to 15 minutes.






Before he could stop her, Board member Delores Griego slipped a little turd in his punch bowl, and brought up the subject of Peercy's intention to vote on a contract that applies to his wife.







Peercy claimed there was no problem, in that he had a "legal" opinion from the district's lawyer Art Melendrez, that gave him permission.

It is "legal" to create the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Two points that I expect are not given much attention in Melendrez' opinion;

1. "legal" is the lowest acceptable standard of conduct among civilized human beings, and
2. "creating the appearance of impropriety" is specifically and explicitly prohibited according to the board's own recently adopted code of "ethics", link.

Robert "the weasel" Lucero
immediately insisted that the
legal opinion must be hidden
from public knowledge, and
the board agreed.








"Open government" lawyer Marty Esquivel voiced no objection to hiding the opinion from the public record.



Remember also please, he also voiced no objection, when Delores Griego told the board that the NM School Board Association's lawyers, suggested that the board write a policy that would allow them to destroy records of board meetings upon approval of the board's own minutes.

I have tried to think of a reason that this guy is still on the Board of Directors of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government; without success.


Peercy tried to limit the discussion to the incident where an APS vendor bought dinner and drinks for a bunch of APS employees, employees who at some point would be asked to evaluate the vendor, their services, and/or their product, link.

Peercy pointed out that, no one had done anything "wrong".

Robert Lucero reported that any thing the law allows him to accept, works for him. Two points;

1. "legal" is the lowest acceptable standard of conduct, and
2. he holds students accountable to a standard of conduct that requires;

doing more than the law requires, and
less than the law allows.

David Robbins offered his two cents; he would like to see some limits set. He would like to be able to accept gratuities up to, let's say, $25.00.

Although he claims that he is still pushing the role modeling issue, he did not take the opportunity to point out that as role models of the Student Standards of Conduct, standards were already in place.

Peercy replied that he didn't want to see a "deuteronomy" of rules, in which every possible situation would be addressed in policy.

Then he asked the administration to tell him what his "principle" was. Like an actor asking a director for his "motivation" in a scene, Peercy wants someone to tell him what his principles are in this situation.

He informed the board that, his personal policy was not to accept anything; but for the wrong reason. He accepts nothing, for pragmatic reasons, and not because he recognizes his responsibility to role model the APS Student Standards of Conduct. If he were role modeling the Pillars of Character Counts!, or even recognized them, he would know that his guiding principle is that in any given situation, you pick the most ethical option.

Superintendent Winston Brooks accepted the board's charge. He reported that it will take him a month to figure out what their guiding principle might be.

The school board has three primary responsibilities.
One of those is to write district policy; to establish for the
administration, the guiding principles of their administration
of the APS.

Why is the school board is asking the good ol' boys, to tell them
what the guiding principles are ?

Winston Brooks steadfastly refuses
to hold himself honestly accountable
as a role model of the Pillars of
Character Counts!; the APS
Student Standards of Conduct;
a nationally recognized, accepted, and
respected code of ethical conduct.

Why is anyone asking him, of all people, for ethical advice?

During the discussion, Marty Esquivel reported that he is quite familiar with state law, and very little of it applies to school boards. Apparently they are able to hide behind some NMAG ruling that excepts them from accountability to Conduct in Government laws.

If you look up the word disingenuous, you will find as an example, what Esquivel did next.

He asked Delores Griego, who is the board's representative to the NM School Board Association, to communicate to the association, that they needed to do something to bring themselves under the law.

Remember, it is the NMSBA that hires lawyers to offer training entitled; the "Open Meetings Act, your greatest enemy".

They are also the ones who have told school boards to destroy any public records that they can, lest they become "a problem at some later date".

And, they are advising them that they can get away with limiting the topics allowed to anyone wishing to petition their government during a public forum.

Yeah, they're going to get right on it; holding themselves
honestly accountable to the law.




photos Mark Bralley

Journal coverage of Bode allegations, falls short.

Forgive the Journal for printing some other guy's picture in their article about the allegations that John Bode has made against Mayor Marty Chavez, et al.

Don't forgive them their shallow coverage, link.

Coverage is much better at NMI link.

This is a huge scandal. If Bode's allegations are substantiated, is it a career ender for an ethically challenged mayor.

The Journal ran the story under a headline that read; Shakedown Claims May Affect Campaign.

Newsflash for the Journal; the "allegations" aren't the game ender, the truth about the allegations is.

And it is the Journal's responsibility to investigate and publish the truth about whether the allegations have merit.

The Journal needs to dig deeper. They are after all,
"a newspaper of record."

They need to interview a few other business people. Ask them
if they felt pressure to "buy tickets to the Mayor's Ball"
before they could do business with the city.

A great place to start their interviews
would be State Senator Diane Snyder,
who was a lobbyist for a group of local
business people, and who spoke in front
of the Senate Rules Committee.
She relayed to the committee, that
city hall shakedowns of her clients,
were routine.

Does anyone really suppose that pay to play is not "the way politics work in New Mexico"?

Come on Journal, dig a little. Make sure voters know what they need to know before voting begins.




photos Mark Bralley

Susie Rayos Marmon E. S., and now you know the rest of the story.

APS is pleased to announce the new construction at Susie Rayos Marmon E.S. link

There are parts of the story that APS is still not telling the truth about.

Susie Rayos Marmon E.S. was last in the public eye a couple of years ago, when parents were up in arms about the fact that their children were attending school in dilapidated portable classrooms that were being used for three times their life expectancy. At the time, the district didn't have the money to begin the construction that is now underway.

One of the reasons that they didn't have any money to spend on the Susie Rayos Marmon E.S. is because it was being spent on building a fancy new boardroom instead. The board room likely cost taxpayers a million dollars. The true cost is still unknown.

APS senior administrator Brad Winter
once promised a candid, forthright
and honest accounting of the
spending on the board room.
He reneged on the commitment.
Neither will he provide a candid,
forthright and honest accounting of
any of the other spending at
6400 Upyours Blvd.

No one in the entire leadership of the APS has ever defended the building of an entirely unnecessary and completely unjustifiable new boardroom.

Stakeholders don't know the truth about another scandal that was going on at the same time.

KRQE crack investigative reporter Larry Barker had exposed another scandal wherein, the leadership of the APS had just canceled the arrangement under which fire safety inspections were being done in schools and classrooms.

The move saved the district tens of thousands of dollars that would otherwise have been spent correcting fire code violations.


Which were then spent on a sprucing up the APS twin towers,
the edifice of corruption and incompetence.



photos Mark Bralley

He didn't say, I didn't do it.

According to the Journal, link, and NMI link, businessman John Bode said the guy that actually shook him down was Fred Mondragón.

"Bode's most-detailed shakedown allegations are leveled primarily at Fred Mondragón, who was the city's economic development director before moving to a similar position as a Cabinet secretary under Gov. Bill Richardson."

According to the Journal,
Mondragón's denial was limited;

"These allegations are completely untrue."

Bode says Mondragón said.

"...this is the way that, you know, politics worked in New Mexico ..."

Mayor Marty Chavez denial read;

"They are false allegations."

Neither one of them actually said,

I promise you, I have done nothing to betray the trust
that has been placed in me by the people of Albuquerque.

The other thing that occurred to me; if this guy actually did
what Bode says he did, he is probably still shaking people down,
but at the state level

because this is the way that politics works in New Mexico

photos Mark Bralley

Will voters know the truth about John Bode's suit against Marty Chavez before the election?

It occurs to me that there is only one reason not to settle the complaint filed by businessman, John Bode, against Mayor Marty Chavez, Journal link, NMI link, before voting begins.

That reason would be to keep the truth from voters.

John Bode would like to settle his case at
the earliest opportunity. I don't know that
for a fact, but why would he not?



Complainants with a legitimate complaint,
always want to avoid delay. Respondents,
in particular, those with no other defense,
always want to create it.



Surely, Chavez would like to settle the case as early as possible; and definitely before the election.


The cloud hanging over him is costing him votes.





His opponent, Senator Richard Romero is tearing him a new asshole over the allegations. According to the Journal article;

"Voters can expect to hear more about the case in the run-up to the Oct. 6 election. Mayoral candidate Richard Romero has highlighted the case in messages to supporters and says combating cronyism is one of his signature issues."

I would never vote for him, based on the entirely credible complaint lodged by Bode, alone.

Chavez should be fighting for the earliest possible settlement. Providing of course that the settlement would prove that he has not betrayed the public trust in a major way, again.

Otherwise settlement might take awhile.




photos Mark Bralley

Cemetery seating.

When I write about the current model for public school education, I have referred to five rows of six students.
A reader tells me that is called cemetery seating.

S/he is right; on at least two levels.

The belief that cemetery seating is the way to go,
is based on the acceptance of two faulty premises.

The first, that thirty individual human beings can be moved in exactly the same direction, at exactly the same speed, effectively and efficiently, for twelve years.

The second, that any individual student is equally capable in
every aspect of their lives, academic or developmental.
When in truth, the interest level, and therefore the level of
engagement, and therefore the level of learning, varies
even within the same student over the course of the day.

The fastest students are held back, out of necessity. Educational leaders justify that situation, by explaining that slow students will be motivated to keep up. The quick learners are often used as teaching assistants, helping slower students catch on.

I have always argued that faster learners should not be held
back, even for the benefit of slower learners.

I am fairly certain that I remember being scolded as a student, for reading ahead.

The slowest students are moving too slowly to keep up.
They find themselves further behind every day.
In so far as much learning is dependent on prior learning,
the achievement gap widens on every day that they given
no choice but to perform the impossible.

I have always argued that students can only do their best.
And if their best isn't good enough to keep up, then things must
be slowed down down.

If the standard becomes nearly mastery level learning,
then we know that the student is as ready as they will ever be,
before they take another step.

A third grader entering the fourth grade with 70% of the skills they need to flourish, will leave the fourth grade with less than 70% of the skills they will need in fifth grade. And the achievement gap will widen.

Why not end the madness?

We cannot because, students lack the self discipline and learning skills that they need to be independent learners; which is the whole idea, is it not?

They can become individual learners. It's simple.
You teach them how to learn, and you teach them to behave.

An argument that I hear often, when I advocate for ethical standards of conduct and competence, is that you can't make people be ethical. Although correct, the argument is specious. The object of enforcing ethical standards is to make people behave ethically, not to make them become ethical.

The object of enforcing laws is not be make people law abiding. It is to hold them accountable when they are not.

Accountability to the law, or a higher standard of conduct than the law, does not have to come from within the individual, in order for the community to see the difference. A child who does not bully other children because he is not allowed to, is otherwise indistinguishable from a child who is not a bully because he has chosen not to be. Either way, the community "sees" a child who does not bully other children, or disrupt class, or what ever.

Imagine with students in them because they want to be there,
because they want to learn about whatever it is that is being offered in that room.
Some classrooms, where students know how to learn and have
the self discipline to do so, will have a lot of students working at a lot of workstations.

Some classrooms, out of necessity, may have 1 student and one adult.

Students are learning from the internet, because there simply is no better resource, and there likely will never be a better resource.

When they experience some difficultly, they will summon the attention of an adult who will come give them individual attention until their boggle is resolved. That adult doesn't necessarily have to be a "teacher" it needs only to be a person with authority over all of the students, knowledge of the material, and a personality that is not off putting for students.

Teachers with advanced skill sets, might be held in reserve to help children with genuine learning disabilities.

The classroom will be in a school where every child has an adult paying close attention to them. If a child needs someone to talk to, there will be someone there to talk to, about anything.

The school will be an educationally efficient environment for all stakeholders.

Learning will not be disrupted by students who deliberately misbehave. Those students will have the individual attention of an adult with authority over students, the skill set necessary to deal with children who are behaviorally disordered, and the courage to do the job.

There will be tests. One of the functions served by schools is to identify for employers, those students who have a skill set necessary for employment. Students will take tests that they are prepared for. Some will take many tests in many subjects and leave school with an impressive portfolio. Some will complete fewer and less challenging tests.

Upon leaving school, there will be students who can show that they have passed tests on the college level in some subjects. There will be students whose testing shows that they could not, or would not, move past the eighth grade in some subjects.

There likely will not be students leaving school with 23 credits in underwater basket weaving and 1 credit in math.

That student will have had to ignore the individual attention of an adult who was paying attention to their class choices. Ideally that will be an engaged parent. If there is no engaged family or community member, the school will provide one.

If there are parents who want to be engaged but lack the skill set or resources, their needs will be met (limited by available resources and common sense).

Students will bear the consequences of their investment in their own education. Any student who is old enough to join the army and kill other human beings, is old enough to choose their own classes and then accept the consequences of stupid choices.

If any one has any better idea, now would be the time to step up.

Because cemetery seating is not working. More than 50 of every 100 students that enter high school drop out entirely.

Finally, which student is a worse position;

• a student who was driven out of school without learning much of anything in the traditional curriculum, and without learning how to learn even if they change their minds later on, or
• a student who knows how to learn, who knows how to behave like a decent human being, is well adjusted and healthy, but chose to specialize in "un-worthwhile" subjects in high school?

Government based on the truth.

Can there be a government

" ...of the people, for the people
and by the people ...",

if the people are ignorant of the facts
upon which their decisions must be made?

Whether by their own sloth, or by the deliberate hiding of the
truth from them, democracy cannot function if the people are
ignorant.

We cannot make people learn the truth.

We can make our government tell the truth.

"Security" at Martin Heinrich's town hall meeting.

It has been reported, link, that "security" will be present at
Rep Martin Heinrich's next town hall meeting.

That's a shame.

Not that there will be "security", but that, there needs to be.

If we can no longer have civil debate on important issues,
how are we not hopelessly screwed?

And shame on anyone of any party, who stands in the way.

If Education Secretary Veronica Garcia were abducted by aliens, would anyone notice?

Education reform inevitably includes hiring and appointing more people at the top of the pyramid.

If you ask the people at the bottom, if any of the people at the top are making their jobs any easier or more successful,
the answer will be, no.

If Veronica Garcia were abducted by aliens, it would not be noticed by the people who struggle at the educational interface.

And when a whole new crop of
Governor Bill Richardson's
cronies are paid to fill an
Office of Hispanic Education,
no teacher will feel that either.

Except they might notice that even fewer resources are available for them to spend in their classrooms in their efforts to solve the problems they face on a daily basis.




photo Mark Bralley

Education reform reform

Expect to hear a lot about education reform for awhile.
Every time a batch of alarming statistics are made public, there
is a wave talking and writing about problem.

I pay close attention.

I look in particular for the changes that I know from my experience, would really make a difference. I never see them.

The one thing that I look for in particular, is a reformer who says, let's ask teachers what they think they need to succeed. I taught for 25 years and I was never once asked that question.

Teachers are not politically powerful enough to sit at the table where the decisions are made. Apparently, they never will be. It is perhaps the worst mistake of all, and it is made in one reform after another, after another, and after another.

Take for example; social promotion. In the Journal this morning, I read that the folks at the top of the educational decision making pyramid are encouraged by the fact that (because of all day kindergarten), 53% of third graders are proficient in math, up 9% over the year before. 62% are proficient readers, up four points.

Ask one of the pyramid top sitters what to do with the kids who are not proficient, and they will tell you to pass them along to the fourth grade where they will catch up.

The truth is that they will not "catch up". The truth is that they will fall further and further behind until they finally drop out.

If the decision making power were at the bottom of the pyramid, where the education, experience, and expertise are, you would be told to hold them at the third grade (in reading, or in math) until they have mastered the skill set that they need to succeed in the fourth grade.

APS spends a million dollars a year gathering and crunching data in its Research, Development and Accountability division. They have never once, not once, surveyed the 70,000 years of current teaching experience in the district, and asked those teachers what they thought was wrong, and what they thought they needed to succeed.

This is typical of good ol' boy oligarchies; if the answer might reflect badly on one or more of the good ol' boys, don't ask the question, and don't allow the question to be asked by anyone else.

Hiding the truth, for no reason other than to cover each others asses, is why good ol' boy oligarchies are ultimately dysfunctional and unsuccessful.


If you ask APS School Board President Marty Esquivel, to point to a time, a day, and a place where he (or someone in his stead) will sit still and answer legitimate questions about the public interests in the public schools, he will not.






If you ask APS Superintendent Winston Brooks, to point to a time, a day, and a place where he (or someone in his stead) will sit still and answer legitimate questions about the public interests in the public schools, he will not.





Ask APS Executive Director of Communications to point to a time, a day, and a place where she (or someone in his stead) will sit still and answer legitimate questions (communicate) about the public interests in the public schools,
she will not.





Ask APS Communications Director, Rigo Chavez to point to a time, a day, and a place where he (or someone in his stead) will sit still and answer legitimate questions about the public interests in the public schools, he will not.






Which illustrates to the single most important reform of all, and the reform that we will never see; being candid, forthright, and honest about the problem.

There is no problem which can be simultaneously hidden from stakeholders and successfully solved.

There will never be meaningful reform in education for as long as those who are most immediately responsible for the failure, are allowed to continue to hide their failures in order to except themselves from the consequences of their failures.




photos Mark Bralley

The Office of Hispanic Education

The Office of Hispanic
Education is the brain child of
Governor Bill Richardson.
It is part of his "renaissance" in education.

Blogger Paul Guessing calls it
politically-correct pandering, link.

A couple of questions;

If an Office of Hispanic Education will actually do anything
to help, why not also have an Office of Vietnamese Education,
and an Office of Native American Education, and an Office
of African American Education, and how about an Office for
Germans, Japanese, and Canadians?

How about an Office for Individual Education?

If we can address the educational needs of individuals,
the color of their skin no longer plays.

The idea that you can treat individual students in groups
is the problem, not the solution.

"Oh thank God, a task force. Now we are getting somewhere."

"However, we may be getting ahead of ourselves. Shouldn't we
first perform a feasibility study to see if a task force will work?"

wrote a commenter on a Topix Forum thread, link, on
Governor Bill Richardson's plan to address an absolutely
disgraceful high school drop out rate in New Mexico.

How is this task force any different than the drop out task force
we just finished? or the one before it, or the one before that?

If you google "drop out task force" you get 43,700 hits.
If you search the Albuquerque Journal website, you get 133.

Every one of these task forces has the same charge;

How do we make the existing model work,
without changing the model?

How do we arrange 30 kids with widely disparate needs and
interests, in five rows of six, and move them through identical
curricula at exactly the same speed for twelve years?

The task force that considers that question will be a model
task force. It will be, according to the model, made up of
politicians, bureaucrats, administrators, and political cronies
looking for task forces to put on their resumes.

The task force will be populated with the same people who
were on the last task force, and on the task force before that.

There will be no real representation on the task force of anyone
with any first hand experience. Thousands and thousands of
years of real teaching experience will have no seat at the table.

Their testimony will of course be taken.

The task force will be given the charge;

Make the NCLB work,
despite the fact that it is unworkable on its face.

Their nonsensical conclusion is always the same;

The traditional education model can be made to work.
We can homogenize a heterogeneous group by simply
refusing to recognize their heterogeneity.

It can be made to work, as long as you are willing to hire
enough administrators and bureaucrats.

So let's hire more administrators and bureaucrats, by all means.

An illustrative example of a legitimate question that the leadership of the APS will not answer.

What would be the effect on students if the leadership of the APS actually expected students to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts! according to school board policy?

What would be the effect on test scores, graduation rates,
bullying, truancy, and chronic disruption, if students were
taught that their character counts?

If they were actually required to be;

caring, and
fair, and
respectful, and
responsible, and
a good citizen, and
trustworthy as well?

Would students be better or worse for it?




photos Mark Bralley

Do standards really affect performance?

Whether or not you buy into the whole AYP, NCLB business,
by any reasonable measure, APS is under performing.

The simple question is;

if there were meaningful standards of competence at every level in the APS, from kindergarten to the superintendents office, and if there was honest accountability to those standards, from kindergarten to the superintendent's office, would we be better or worse off?

And what about standards of conduct, which are not measured at all?

If there were meaningful standards of conduct from kindergarten to the superintendent's office, and if there were honest accountability to those standards, from kindergarten to the superintendent's office, would we be better or worse for it?

The leadership of the APS will talk, and talk, and talk about
academic standards; in no small part because they have no choice.

They will not talk about standards of conduct.
Standards of conduct affect the atmosphere in classrooms and
on school campuses. If conduct is poor, it affects every other
aspect of school life; for teachers as well as for students.

There is a student standard of conduct in the APS.
The standard requires students to be caring and fair,
respectful and responsible, good citizens, and trustworthy.

What would be the effect, do you think, on classroom discipline,
on test scores, truancy, and bullying, if meaningful standards of
conduct were expected and enforced? What do you think would
be the effect on graduation rates if students were actually
required to be caring and fair, respectful and responsible, good citizens and trustworthy?

We will never find out.

The leadership of the APS steadfastly refuses to discuss student standards of conduct.

They cannot. If they did, the conversation must at some point come to their responsibilities as role models of those standards.

At which point they would have to admit that they have no intention of holding themselves honestly accountable to standards of conduct any higher than the law; the lowest accepted standard of conduct.

Stakeholders would find out that there is not a single senior administrator or board member, with the character and courage to step up as a role model of a nationally recognized, accepted, and respected code of ethics; even for the few hours a day that they hold students accountable to those standards.

There is not one of them with character and courage enough
to even talk openly and honestly about administrative and
executive role modeling of the student standards of conduct.

They would rather see the system fail 89,000 students, than
hold themselves honestly accountable for their conduct and
for their competence.

If you want to fix the APS, you will have to fix that first.

The one room school house worked.

I have found a reference for those who would like to brush up
on the NCLB. I found it in the wikipedia; which makes it both
readable and informative, yet unofficial, link.

There was a time when students with widely disparate needs sat together in a single classroom with a single teacher and it worked well. Obviously I wasn't there, and this is conjecture, but apparently students learned on their own, and teachers were there to help individual students with their individual issues.

The model has changed. Now, students are grouped by chronological age, arbitrary but easily measured, arranged in five rows of six, and marched lockstep through 12 years of education despite a myriad of issues that specifically contraindicate the approach.

As a direct result of the Standards Based Assessment that is the bedrock of the No Child Left Behind Act, this nonfunctional model will never change. If it is conceded that on any given day, all children who are of the same chronological age will be tested over precisely the same material, it leaves no choice except to move them all together in a group. Any child who loses step with the group, for the most, is forever screwed.

Children by their very nature are inquisitive and eager to learn, like kittens. If we allowed them to follow their noses (while keeping them safe) they would become engaged and adept learners. Instead, we completely ignore their inherent interests and force upon them, our ideas about what they should be learning.

Clearly there are some things that children should learn.
There is information and skill sets that high school graduates
must reasonably possess. That specific information and those
specific skill sets are less important when they are juniors in
high school, less important still as sophomores, and least
important at all in kindergarten.

Granted, there is a progression in some skills. One cannot
tackle algebra as a senior in high school, without having gained
certain knowledge and skills in previous years.

Clearly there must be some blending. At the beginning of the
continuum allow children to follow their noses. Teach them
how to learn as independently as possible, and to be decent
human beings who contribute positively to their communities.

As they mature, and as they gain self discipline, then start
pushing the necessary albeit less intrinsically motivating
curriculum.

If we ever hope to meet students individual needs and wants,
we have to leave the NCLB model which by its very definition
completely ignores the individuality of learners, and virtually
guarantees their eventual disengagement from the process.

We have to concede that there in no such thing as a disengaged learner.

We have to concede that we can lead children to education,
but we cannot make them learn. They have to want to.

On fixing the APS

The release of AYP and graduation rate statistics has prompted a number of newspaper articles and blog posts on what is wrong and how to fix it. Brace yourself for one more.

• The fundamental paradigm is flawed.

It is based on the assumption that cats can be herded. It is based on the assumption that you can take thirty kids, arrange them in five rows of six, or if you want to explore new ground; six rows of five, and move them in exactly the same direction, at exactly the same speed for 12 years.

The solution;
teach children to be independent learners, and allow them to move at their own pace, and to the maximum practical extent, in their own direction.

• There is social promotion.

The solution;
end social promotion, require nearly mastery level proficiency before moving students into situations where in the lack of proficiency eliminates the possibility of success. Social promotion is a scheme to avoid having to deal with the truth which is; some groups of students are not succeeding at the same rate as other students; minority students, for example, do not succeed at the same rate as rich white students succeed.

• Success in public schools is dependent upon success in one learning style, a style that requires the ability to read well.

The solution;
allow students to learn by whatever method suits their interests and skill sets. Consider a typical history class; students will read about an event in a history book, perhaps listen to a lecture about that event, and then take a standardized test to measure their proficiency. The same event has been the subject of a 45 minute long, very professionally done video presentation that in all likelihood is available from the History Channel archives. We need to get past the idea that all knowledge comes from textbooks and teachers mouths.

• Success in public schools is dependent upon daily attendance. A child who misses a day, a week, a month or a year, is behind and will remain behind.

The solution;
students who are learning independently come back where they left off, no lost ground, no missed skill set development, no lack of foundation for further learning.

• Student discipline, or more accurately the lack of student discipline, is a major deterrent to learning, not only for the student who is misbehaving, but for students whose learning is disrupted by the commotion, and who will not have the attention of an otherwise engaged teacher.

The solution;
stop tolerating and enabling chronically disruptive behavior. Teachers have a responsibility to end disruptive behavior. They have a responsibility to ask a student who is misbehaving to stop. If the student's response means, no, then the problem is no longer the teachers'. The problem belongs to the administration, for more reasons even than the fact that the negotiated agreement between teachers and the APS, specifically and explicitly places the responsibility for enforcing school and district discipline policies upon the administration.

• Teachers have no seat at the table where decisions are made.

The solution;
empower teachers, at the very least give teachers a seat at the table where decisions are made. APS has a division called Research, Development and Accountability. APS spends a million dollars a year doing surveys, gathering data, and producing reports. (A million dollars is an estimate, the director of the Division, Tom Genne, when asked about the actual budget, did not respond.)

That division has never, not once, surveyed teachers, who between them share well over 70,000 years of teaching experience, to ask them what is keeping them from succeeding in their endeavors. They have not gathered hard data, because teachers would invariably report that chronically disruptive students are standing in the way of their success, and, the administration is not doing enough to end it.

• The system is lead by people who are not necessarily qualified to lead. They are promoted according to an evaluation system that is "subjective and unrelated to promotion or step placement" (according to a recent Council of the Great City Schools audit). Is is a good ol' boy oligarchy.

The solution is two fold;
first, give those with the education, training, experience and expertise, a seat at the table where decisions are made. Second, establish meaningful standards of conduct and competence for administrators, and then provide for honest accountability to those standards.

The main reason that the APS, and likely other districts, is so unsuccessful is that they keep trying to make the same failed model work. This model does not work. It has never worked. It never will work.

It has been observed that doing the same thing over and over, while expecting a different result is a definition of crazy. It is also a definition of a lack of imagination and vision, and a lack of courage.

If I had to point one single aspect of the paradigm that guarantees that the system will never succeed, it is that the leadership cannot summon the character and the courage to engage in open and honest discussion of the issues that confront educators.

The first step in solving any problem is to acknowledge that there is a problem; candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.

For as long as the leadership of the APS continues to hide problems in order to escape accountability for creating and enabling them to continue, the problems will never be solved.

It is as simple as that.

Has Marty Esquivel met his match?

A reader has suggested the School Board President Marty Esquivel is all that his resume implies that he is, but has simply run into people too powerful to buck.


That would be the part where character and moral courage
come into play.


Is David Peercy a good guy who will not allow role modeling to be discussed in his policy committee meeting, because he has met his match?




That would be the part where character
and moral courage come into play.




Is David Robbins a good guy

• who will not allow his Audit Committee to review and approve whistleblower complaints, and
• who will not demand the impartial standards and accountability audit that he promised to voters, and
• who will not insist that his Role Modeling motion be discussed openly, honestly, and in public,

because he has met is match?

That would be the part where character and moral courage
come into play.

Is Winston Brooks a good guy who refuses step up as a role model of the student standards of conduct, because he has met his match?





That would be the part where character
and moral courage come into play.

Is there no one in the entire leadership of the APS willing to be held honestly accountable to meaningful standards of conduct and competence, simple because they have all met their match?

Are the good ol' boys simply too powerful to put out of business?

The good ol' boy oligarchy will never be brought down if no one is willing to stand up to it.

David has to stand up to Goliath.

There is no equivalent gesture.




photos Mark Bralley

Sherrif Greg Solano puts up another plan.

His previous plan had to do with transparently accountable government.

This plan is for education, link.

Whether or not, you agree with his plan, you've got to give the guy credit for submitting his plan to public criticism.

How many other candidates are showing us their plans for anything, much less for two of the most important problems that we expect these people to solve?

This speaks to his character and courage; arguably the two most important qualities that any candidate could have.




photo Mark Bralley

Will the real Marty Esquivel please stand up?

APS School Board President,
Marty Esquivel is scheduled to
give an address to the
League of Women Voters.

His address is entitled; The State of
the Albuquerque Public Schools.

The League offers up a list of
Esquivel's accomplishments;

In June 2008, he received the Excellence in Education Award from the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce.

He now serves as President of the Board and has encouraged APS to identify and achieve several academic achievement goals while also pushing for more transparency in the operation of the entire School District.

In his professional life;

Marty Esquivel has had a wide variety of litigation and trial experience in 19 years of practice after graduating from the University of New Mexico School of Law after a brief career in journalism.

He practices in the areas of civil rights, employment law, school law, media law, personal injury and corporate law matters.

Mr. Esquivel has tried cases in state court as well as the United States District Court and successfully argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

He has been an active member of the State Bar of New Mexico serving in a number of different sections.

He is widely known for his work in the area of the First Amendment where he has represented numerous newspapers and television stations in matters ranging from defamation to rights of access to public records and government proceedings.

He played a major role in preparing a judicial reference guide on Media Law for the State District Court and Metropolitan Court in Bernalillo County.

In addition, he has taught media law at the University of New Mexico Communications and Journalism Department and has prepared an annual Survey of New Mexico Libel Law and Employment Libel Law for the national Media Law Resource Center.

In October 2006, Mr. Esquivel received the prestigious William S. Dixon First Amendment Freedom Award for his outstanding legal work in open government.

In September 2007, he was named to the 25th Anniversary edition of the "Best Lawyers in America" in the specialty of First Amendment law.

Mr. Esquivel has been actively involved in the community serving on the boards of numerous governmental and non-profit organizations, including serving for several years on the Foundation for Open Government.

On the other hand, if you ask Marty Esquivel any legitimate question about standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS,


you will see a different
Marty Esquivel.

He will pretend not to hear
the question.

He cannot summon the character and
the courage to answer candidly,
forthrightly, and honestly;

according to the standard of conduct

of which, he is the senior most (non) role model in the entire leadership of the APS.




photos Mark Bralley

A closer look at Marty Esquivel good points.

In the previous piece I pointed to the list of Marty Esquivel's achievements according to the League of Women Voters.

The list begs for scrutiny.

• In June 2008, he received the Excellence in Education Award from the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce.

While at the same time refusing to conduct a sorely needed impartial audit of the administration of the APS, and while refusing to accept or even acknowledge his responsibilities as a role model of the student standards of conduct, the Pillars of Character Counts!

• He now serves as President of the Board and has encouraged APS to identify and achieve several academic achievement goals while also pushing for more transparency in the operation of the entire School District.

Except for the transparency that would be provided by an impartial standards and accountability audit of the administration of the APS, that reported to the public record.

In his professional life;

• He is widely known for his work in the area of the First Amendment where he has represented numerous newspapers and television stations in matters ranging from defamation to rights of access to public records and government proceedings.

While APS has a record of nothing but obfuscation when it comes to the surrender of public records. The public record of corruption in the leadership of the APS (Police Department) has still not be surrendered to the public record, even after the expiration of statutes of limitation on felony criminal misconduct involving senior APS administrators.

• In October 2006, Mr. Esquivel received the prestigious William S. Dixon First Amendment Freedom Award for his outstanding legal work in open government.

Which is not manifest in his service on the APS School Board. There is nothing "open" about the government of the APS. He will not even agree to acknowledge legitimate questions.

• In September 2007, he was named to the 25th Anniversary edition of the "Best Lawyers in America" in the specialty of First Amendment law.

And did nothing about my illegal arrest for wearing an elephant mask to a school board meeting. Except that he claimed that I had not really been "arrested".

• Mr. Esquivel has been actively involved in the community serving on the boards of numerous governmental and non-profit organizations, including serving for several years on the Foundation for Open Government.

There is nothing "open" about the government of the APS. Esquivel and the rest of the leadership of the APS steadfastly refuse to allow and impartial audit of the public interests in their public schools.
Paula Maes also sits on the Foundation for Open Government, and she has admitted on the record, that she will never agree to an audit that names the names of the corrupt and the incompetent in the leadership of the APS.

There is a wide gulf between who Mr. Esquivel claims to be,
and who he really is; as wide as the Grand Canyon.

89,001 agendas in the APS.

There are 89,000 students in the APS, give or take.

Which means that at any given moment there are 89,000
personal agendas drawing students away from the the district's
agenda; yearly progress on standards based assessments.

APS designs strategies to help groups of students do well on
these tests. There are strategies for black students, hispanic
students, homeless students, college bound students, ...

There is no strategy to engage individual students. Every
student is expected to take their place in the five rows of six
students that move lock step through 12 years of education.

Which brings us to the most telling statistic of all that are
offered to us in the Journal this morning, link, and link,
a drop out rate near 50%.

The greatest, most important, and most incontrovertible truth
about education, is that it is a buyers market. Completely aside
from our arguments about which specific curricula are in
students' best overall interests; if we don't start paying some
attention to what they want to learn, half of them will leave
school without any kind of education at all.

APS Communications Director and Custodian of Public Records, Rigo Chavez; or is he?

According to the APS website,
Rigo Chavez is the Director of
"Communications" and the
Community Relations Office
Director.



Rigo Chavez also claims to be APS'
Custodian of Public Records.


School Board Policy reads,

The official Custodian of Public Records for the District
will be the Student, School & Community Service Center.

My email to him, asking that he explain the apparent discrepancy, like many legitimate emails to him before, went without a response.

For as long as I can remember, it has been Chavez' job to take the truth and spin it for the community. Since spinning usually means mouthing something that stakeholders find deceptive and misleading, isn't long before a PIO of Chavez' ilk, loses credibility.

Well known local news reader, and Paula Maes close associate, Monica Armenta was brought in to shore up the works. Unfortunately, her first few attempts to spin the truth to stakeholders, were abysmal failures. Since, she has been relegated to producing very expensive calendars, link, and harassing members of the free press, link.

The school board is preparing to create a new policy, which will erase all public records of previous meetings, except for the "official" minutes (which are demonstrably inaccurate and untruthful, link).

They want to destroy the video and audio record of a policy committee meeting where in; Marty Esquivel built a compelling argument for the need for a full scale audit of the leadership of the APS, and after which, Paula Maes said, no swingin' way.

I have been trying for some time to get a copy of the recording of that meeting for some time. I am entitled to it, under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act.

In response to those requests, Rigo Chavez has furnished;

1. a blank disc,
2. a disc with audio but no video,
3. a disc with video but no audio, and
4. a disc that was apparently created by video taping a television playing the original disc.

The copying of a copy is standard fare when it comes to APS surrendering public records. Everyone has seen a copy of something that was made from a copy, which was made from a copy, which was made from a copy, which was made from a copy, ...
The end result is barely intelligible, and hence, readied for surrender.

Not because I expect to be given a clean copy of the record of that meeting, but because I want to document one last time, APS' efforts to hide that meeting from public knowledge until they can arrange the opportunity to "legally" destroy the original,

I will make yet one more public records request of Rigo Chavez,
an APS senior administrator who may or may not be
APS' real Custodian of Public Records.

It will read;

To: Custodian of Public Records, Albuquerque Public Schools

From: Charles MacQuigg, ...

This constitutes a request for all recordings of the Policy Committee Meeting
of August 16, 2007

I believe that you have responded to this specific request previously;

1. once with a blank disc,
2. once with a disc with audio but no video,
3. once with a disc with video but no audio, and
4. once with what appears to be a recording of a TV playing the actual record.

I would appreciate it if you would quit fooling around and just surrender a clean record.

I would also insist that this particular record be preserved, even if the board votes to destroy all public records of meetings except the "official" minutes, just in case there is some problem with surrendering a useful copy of this meeting, as it is a record whose surrender is under ongoing dispute.

photos Mark Bralley

APS' continued disregard for the OMA

A visit to the APS website reveals that there will be a meeting
of the District Relations Committee at 5pm today.

According to past practice, the agenda should have been posted online one business day in advance of the meeting; it was not. Again, if you believe in the binding nature of past practice, the minutes of the last meeting, which will be voted on tonight, should also be on line for stakeholder perusal, and they are not.

How big a deal are these two "violations"? In the overall scheme of things, maybe not all that big. Except that the overall scheme of things for the leadership of the APS is, a casual, sometimes blatant disregard for both the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, and the Inspection of Public Records Act.

If one wanted to make a bigger deal of APS' disregard for open government laws, one could sue them in District court. One will be opposed by one of the largest, most powerful, most influential law firms in the state, the Modrall, whose litigation costs would be underwritten by a large bore pipeline of financial support provided by unwitting taxpayers and their support for the "education" of the 98,000 of their sons and daughters who are APS students.

They will be the same lawyers who defend the leadership of the APS when they erase the public records of all of the previous meetings of the board, link, lest they "become problems later on". The result of that litigation will be the finding that the leadership of the APS should not have destroyed all those records, the leadership of the APS will claim to have learned from their past, and will move toward the future.

The records of course, will remain erased.

And any stakeholders who would like to watch and listen to Marty Esquivel outline the need for an administrative accountability audit, only to be shut down by Paula Maes' announcement that she will "never agree" to any audit that individually identifies the corrupt and the incompetent in the leadership of the APS, will be shit out of luck.

"The screeners decided which questions would be answered ..."

This from the a letter to the editor about a Rep Martin Heinrich town hall meeting.

It happened this time to be a Heinrich meeting; it could have been most any meeting, for most any candidate or sitting public servant.

It would be the same if Governor Bill Richardson had a town hall meeting.

It would be the same if Mayor Marty Chavez had a town hall meeting.

It would be the same if APS School Board President Marty Esquivel had a town hall meeting.

It would be the same if APS Superintendent Winston Brooks had a town hall meeting.

At the "town hall" meeting where APS stakeholders were supposed to be allowed to ask questions of the candidates for superintendent, they were invited instead to submit their questions to "screeners" who decided that even one question about administrative role modeling of the APS student standards of conduct, would be one question too many.

"Screeners" will decide which questions will be answered.
Which is to say, politicians decide which questions they will
and will not answer.

They decide whether or not they will answer or not,
legitimate questions about the public interests.

And they have decided to not answer hard questions.

There is not one of them who will point to a time, a day and
a place where they will stand on the record and answer
legitimate questions about their public service, and
about their spending of the public trust and treasure.

It is nonsensical.

How is it that a government of the people, by the people, and
for the people, does not have to answer questions from the people?

Even small questions? yes.

Winston Churchill said; in matters of principle,

"Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing
great or small, large or petty, never give in except to
convictions of honour and good sense."

This is not an unimportant principle. I would argue that
it may be the most important principle of all;

we are entitled to know the truth about the spending of
our power and our resources.

Our constitutionally protected human right to petition our government, includes the opportunity to look them in the face, and ask them legitimate questions about our interests.

It is their every obligation to acknowledge legitimate questions with candid, forthright, and honest responses.

Their failure to step up to legitimate questions is a manifestation of their lack of character and courage, and nothing else.

It is as unacceptable as it is, indefensible.

If Martin Heinrich told you a "little" lie, would that be ok?

I think that when Rep Martin Heinrich was asked about the constituent input on health care legislation, he should have simply answered the question; candidly, forthrightly, and honestly.

Anonymous wrote to tell me that mine was a ridiculous complaint. The implication being, it is too small a dishonesty to take note of.

Anonymous apparently believes that, there is no correlation, a person who tells small lies is not more likely tell larger lies. The premise flies in the face of reason, and of experience.

Moral courage is about resisting temptation.

When people note that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, they are acknowledging the fact that temptation (to abuse power without consequence) corrupts, and if the temptation is large enough, no one has the moral strength and courage to resist.

My mother told me a million times when I was growing up; If you're going to steal, don't steal small. It took me awhile to grasp the meaning; if you are going to surrender your integrity, don't sell it cheap. Her real hope was that I would not sell it at all.

If Martin Heinrich, or Jon Barela, or any other candidate for any other office, cannot summon the character and the courage to answer questions when the stakes are small, it is bone crushingly naive to suppose that they will answer questions when the stakes are high.

Take for example, the town hall meeting that Martin Heinrich arranged in Belen, NM on July 25th. I wasn't there. I read about it in a letter to the editor, link.

If the writer is to be believed, Heinrich promised a town hall meeting and then had the questions filtered in order that he not have to answer high stakes questions.

I would offer that as proof of my thesis that he will not become more honest as the stakes increase.

Anonymous will argue that a bait and switch on a town hall meeting, is also too small of a dishonesty to take note of. And again, anonymous will be wrong.

The power and resources that public servants spend, are ours. We have a right to know the truth about how they are being spent, and about the public service of those public servants.

Every bit of corruption and incompetence that exists in government, exists because the public does not know the truth about it. For the most part, when they are discovered, they end. None of this can go on in the light of day.

Every candidate for public office should be able to look voters in the eye and promise to tell them the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, about their public service and about the spending of our power and resources.

And then we must hold them accountable to their promise; no secrets about constituent input, and no stonewalling of legitimate questions.

If they refuse to tell the truth,
that is reason enough to remove them from office.

And if they refuse to tell the truth during their campaign,
that is reason enough to deny them our vote.

... more than reason enough. Especially if they cannot summon
the character and courage to tell the truth, even about the
"small stuff".

Anonymous wrote;

"... this is just a pathetic attempt to fault him for anything
you can think up."

Trust me, being a conservative, there are a lot of things that I can fault a liberal for. It's just that they make so little difference when compared to simple honesty. Further, I have never suggested that Martin Heinrich is the only politician who thinks that stakeholders have no right to the truth. Nor have I ever suggested that there is any difference between democrats and republicans. I am not out to get Martin Heinrich. If he promises to tell us the truth, and Jon Barela does not, I will vote for Martin Heinrich.

I have paid every bit as much attention to Jon Barela's unwillingness to promise to tell the truth, link, as I have to Martin Heinrich's.

The immediate problem is that neither will promise to tell us the truth. In which case, voters might just as well flip a coin, either way they're going to get screwed.




photos Mark Bralley

Is School Board President Marty Esquivel being disingenuous?

Setting the piece; an appearance of impropriety was created.
An APS vendor bought drinks and dinner for public servants who at some point would be asked for their opinion of the vendor, their products, or their services.

Typically, APS released a misleading statement.

"APS spokesman Rigo Chavez said the Garduño's party
did not include any employees who make purchasing decisions."

They imply that because APS senior administrator Tom Ryan wasn't there, there was no one there whose opinion affected the APS vendor relationship. If Tom Ryan was not asking the 250 people who were invited, their opinions on the vendor, he was not doing his job. How could someone who buys $7M worth of product and service not gather and study carefully, the input from people who are actually using the product or service?

If you really want to fully understand the situation, read Mark Bralley's take, link.

For the Cliff's Notes version, watch Larry Barkers report, link.

For the APS spin, read their Albuquerque Journal, link.

At the time of the party, APS senior administrator, Brad Winter, was made aware of the problems that were being created. If he did not read Bralley's post, it was because he made a deliberate decision to ignore the issue.

So in the time between the party and Larry Barker's report, were any changes made that addressed the issues.

If there were, why are they not part of the Journal report?

An outside auditor who looked into the scandal in the APS Police Department, wrote that the leadership of the APS had a history of ignoring audit findings; that they never changed or wrote policies that addressed the issues outlined in the audit findings.

Now comes School Board President Marty Esquivel.
From the Journal;

"Albuquerque school board president Marty Esquivel said he is calling for a change in board policy to prohibit such practices, in light of a recent party."

In truth, he is calling for a policy change in light of being exposed by Larry Barker; who is kidding whom?


The "policy change" that Esquivel is talking about, is the creation of a new standard of conduct.

Which means that the existing standard was inadequate to the need, and/or there was no actual, honest accountability to that standard. In truth it is both; inadequate standards and inadequate accountability. The Meyners auditors said it exactly the same way; inadequate standards and inadequate accountability.

Esquivel will push for a policy statement as limited in scope as it can be. He is on record in opposition to widespread policy reform; opposed in fact, even to an open and honest discussion of the issues.

I asked Marty Esquivel and Jon Barela, to put standards and accountability on the table for an honest and open public discussion. They refused, link.

The leadership of the APS is an oligarchy. It is infected with the usual contagions; cronyism, nepotism, corruption and incompetence.

They can show stakeholders no plan to address them with honest accountability to meaningful standards of conduct and competence.

If they could, they would.

Marty Esquivel is stonewalling legitimate questions about standards and accountability in the leadership of the APS.

Esquivel in the senior most role model, in the entire APS, of a standard of conduct that prohibits stonewalling, because it is unethical, because it is not honest.




photos Mark Bralley

The cost of incompetence in government.

There is a cost associated with the continued presence in state government of the conjoined twins; corruption and incompetence.

It is easy to wrap one's mind around the losses due to corruption. One can see how the corruption in the Courthouse scandal cost taxpayers millions.

The losses due to incompetence are probably far greater, but harder to see. Trip Jennings has a revealing read in the NMI, link, about the incompetence that keeps state computer systems from functioning efficiently, and sometimes, from functioning at all.

It turns out that political appointees don't necessarily know how to design or maintain computer systems.

Now there's a surprise.

DA Susana Martinez begins run under a cloud.

Republican candidate for governor, DA Susana Martinez has come under the watchful eye of blogger Heath Haussamen, link, who raises some interesting questions about her claims of fighting voter "fraud", a claim which itself may be fraudulent.

I went to her website, anxious to put to her my questions;

1. Do you plan to end the culture of corruption and incompetence in state government, and
2. how? what is your plan?

I was disappointed to find that her "website", link, begins and ends with an opportunity to contribute to her campaign.