Monterey Peninsula College professor shares his views on superintendent candidates

David Clemens, English professor, coordinator of the Monterey Peninsula College Great Books Program, and blogger extraordinaire, attended the presentation of all four candidates for the job of superintendent.

I asked if he would share his impressions with me -- and the readers -- about the candidates, and he wrote a detailed analysis of each. Too good to reduce to a two-sentence quote, I told him, and he graciously agreed to let me share it in my blog.

Astute observations, indeed. Here they are:

The sad part is that all the candidates are in economic survival mode, and that could lead to the extinction of all small classes as well as our nationally renowned Great Books Program and our new Creative Writing Program. Literature classes are already being rationed and eliminated. Losing the traditional curriculum, I believe, is ultimately suicidal but in survival mode, no one looks past the present crisis 

Each candidate was asked to describe where they saw the community college in five years. This question was suggested by Clemens.

As (Larry) Buckley noted, the Board of Governors president doubts Proposition 30 will pass and that will mean possibly 25 colleges closing. And if the BOG provides relief by suspending regulations, that could make it even worse because it will be easier to pink slip full time, tenured faculty and replace them with adjuncts, para-educators, tutors, and software.

Angela Fairchilds
Pros: Personable, used humor, energetic, somewhat connected, some candor
Cons: Often described a problem rather than provided a solution, e.g., “we need to build back FTEs.” How? “We’ll have no money without Prop 30.” And so . . ... ? “We are no longer the institution that we were.” What are we? How do we establish criteria for filling positions? “Set priorities." Lacked experience with program discontinuance.

Kathryn Jeffrey 
Pros: Smart and funny. 
Cons: Too much flattery. (She went on and on about how great MPC is and how well the college functions) Seemed to lose steam halfway through, fuzzy response (on some contracts and financial models), not astute about online—my notes say “getting really confusing.” 

Larry Buckley 
Pros: My choice. Academic Ph.D. He was honest and candid as well as well-connected in Sacramento... He said what I’ve been saying, “what is most important to us with the resources we have?” “We have to have a new deal” (finance model). 
Buckley was straightforward, didn’t mince words, and had cogent ideas. He didn’t seem to be applying in hopes of retiring in Monterey. He was light years ahead of the other candidates in his grasp of the political and educational situation. He seems to have the guts to make the cuts. 
Cons: I doubt I would like all his decisions, especially convening a committee to do curricular triage. We did it before, the Instructional Priorities Committee, and it featured “the usual suspects,” the faculty identified as reliable who are on every important committee. It was very powerful and very political. 

Walter Tribley 
Pros: Academic Ph.D. Good scientific knowledge, apparent support of liberal arts. 
Cons: Nervous. Simply not enough knowledge of California and MPC landscape. Support for liberal arts seemed to evaporate with “funding will play a large and disproportionate role” in prioritizing. Referred to “para-educators.” Maybe too dazzled by educational novelties?