Soto merits seat on SBOE

Express-News Editorial Board

Monday, May 14, 2012

The State Board of Education has a high public profile for all the wrong reasons.

Political antics by some members and the ideologically motivated debates over the science and history curricula and other issues have made national headlines and embarrassed the state.

The SBOE needs members focused on education and not on partisan or religious agendas.

The lives of nearly 5 million public schoolchildren and the state's economic future are at stake. The SBOE is responsible for overseeing the textbook adoption process and supervising investments of the $26 billion Permanent School Fund.

We recommend the re-election of District 3 SBOE member Michael Soto. He went to Texas public schools and has earned degrees from Stanford and Harvard universities.

Soto, a Trinity University associate professor, has a son enrolled in an inner-city school district and understands the struggles and needs of our public schools. He asks the right questions, does his homework and is an independent voice. The SBOE could use more members of his caliber.

Watch January 27, 2012 | STAAR vs. TAKS on PBS. See more from Texas Week.

SAN ANTONIO – Public school parent and college professor Michael Soto (D-San Antonio) today announced his candidacy for re-election to the State Board of Education in District 3, which spans San Antonio and deep South Texas. With his wife and two sons at his side, Soto made the announcement before a crowd of supporters gathered at the San Antonio Children's Museum.

"In recent years, the State Board routinely generated negative headlines for its short-sighted ways, for decisions that placed narrow-minded politics ahead of what's best for our state," Soto said. "Texas kids and Texas schools deserve better."

He continued: "That's why I'm proud of what we've accomplished since I took office in early 2011. We've made important gains in how the State Board conducts its business. We've adopted academically rigorous science instructional materials that have won the praise of scientists throughout the United States. We've brought much-needed attention to how the Permanent School Fund is managed and to charter school oversight. And we've raised the profile of important public education issues."

Joining Soto for his announcement were State Representative Mike Villarreal; local public school teacher and (Soto's former college student) Domale Dube; and biology professor Dr. Sara Volk. The kickoff reception was hosted by former State Senator Dr. Joe Bernal and Mary Esther Bernal, Charles Butt, Dr. Antonia Castañeda, former San Antonio Mayor Henry Cisneros and former San Antonio Councilmember Mary Alice Cisneros, Alamo Colleges Board Member Blakely Fernandez, Jorge Herrera and Victoria Moreno-Herrera, Dr. Arturo Madrid, Debra Salge, Susan Smith and Tommy Smith, and José Villarreal and Maria Villarreal.

Also on hand in the audience were current and former state and local officials, community leaders, numerous public school parents and advocates, and several children.

"There are too many characters on the State Board," said Villarreal, "and not enough people with true character. That's why we need to keep Michael there, working on behalf of Texas schools."

After attending public schools in Brownsville ISD throughout his childhood, Soto received a B.A. degree from Stanford University and a Ph.D. degree from Harvard University. He is presently associate professor of English and director of the McNair Scholars Program at Trinity University. He is married to Celina Peña; their sons are Alejo, a third grade student in San Antonio ISD, and Américo, SAISD class of 2028.

The counties in the newly-redrawn SBOE District 3 are Bee, Bexar, Brooks, Duval, Gonzales, Hidalgo, Jim Hogg, Jim Wells, Karnes, Lavaca, Live Oak, McMullen, Starr, and Wilson.

I was one of the lucky ones.

If my grades weren't good enough, I knew that I was in deep trouble. The few times that I was sent to the principal's office felt like the end of the world to me: My mom and dad would find out before too long, and then there'd be heck to pay. There always was.

Succeeding in school was my first and last duty. The television stayed off until the day's homework and chores were done. Friends were always welcome to come to the house — if they showed proper respect to my family and to their studies.

We weren't rich — not even close — but my parents wouldn't let me find regular part-time work during the school year because they worried about distractions. We lived frugally, embarrassingly so sometimes, because, I later learned, my parents were methodically saving money to send their kids to college. My second- and third-hand blue jeans, the ones with patched knees, were my ticket to a different life than what was available to mom and dad. What was an inconceivable luxury in their youth — a college education — was simply expected of me. Not once did they ask whether I wanted to go to college; instead, it was always, “Where?”

Getting money from my parents was a Herculean effort, but if I asked to buy a book they rarely said no. I didn't have a car until I left home for college, but if I had to go to the public library to complete a research project, my parents made sure that, somehow, I got there. We didn't have access to grand museums or to lavish cultural centers in the town I grew up in, but my parents made sure that I experienced what little cultural enrichment there was.

Because I was lucky, I now have a career that I can't imagine giving up: As an educator, I get paid to introduce others to a life of the mind.

It's as an educator that I ask anyone reading this column to consider an important question: What are you doing to foster a college-going culture in your community?

Put another way: On what terms do you interact with school-age youth? Do you approach them as present-day burdens on society or as tomorrow's leadership class? Are you modeling college-readiness for them?

Most kids today aren't as lucky as I once was. As a member of the State Board of Education, I have the privilege of visiting with concerned parents and teachers and other educational advocates throughout South Texas. It's clear that everyone wants their kids to go to college. (In most surveys, over 95 percent of parents expect their children to pursue an education beyond high school.) It's also clear that too often kids simply aren't given the opportunities that blessed my early life.

I now realize that my parents were preparing me for college in countless ways, some obvious, some less so. They insisted on quiet study time. They held me accountable for my educational effort. They exposed me to cultural institutions. They revealed to me that sharing ideas is a normal part of life.

Even if you don't have children of your own, know that it's well within your power to expose today's youth to life beyond the near horizon. These future leaders are no further than your neighborhood school or the nearby public library.

And take it from me: They relish the prospect of being one of the lucky ones.

Michael Soto is an associate professor at Trinity University and represents San Antonio and deep South Texas on the State Board of Education.

Public should participate in science material review.

Express-News Editorial Board

Whenever the Texas State Board of Education is at work, there's a potential for harm to public education. As currently composed, a hard-right faction on the board has the ability to adopt policies and materials that may suit its ideological interests but that don't serve educationalinterests.

In 2008, an SBOE majority rejected the recommendations of experts and scholars from a two-year process to rewrite the English and reading curriculum. Instead, at the last minute this faction adopted a document that had never been publicly reviewed, one that established new language arts standards in Texas for the next decade.

In 2009, the SBOE adopted new science standards that ignored the recommendations of leading scientists and educators. Last year, the board adopted politically-charged social studies standards that even a conservative educational think tank panned as “historically misleading and potentially damaging to our shared values as a nation.”

Now the SBOE is preparing to adopt supplemental instructional materials in science. With school district budgets strapped by cuts in education funding, it is essential that science teachers have the materials they need to prepare students to meet state-mandated benchmarks and, more important, to be successful in a competitive, knowledge-based economy.

Ideologically monkeying with educational standards and materials should never be acceptable. The only check on the SBOE's actions is an informed public that scrutinizes the work of SBOE members and holds them accountable at the ballotbox.

District 3 board member Michael Soto, D-San Antonio, has links to the instructional materials under consideration on his website, www.michael-soto.org. Soto also has useful information on how to participate in the review process either by commenting about the proposed materials online or by testifying in Austin on July21.

We encourage individuals to get involved and make their voices heard. The decisions made by the SBOE next month will begin to affect science education in Texas classrooms this fall.

By Michael Soto, Special Contributor

"A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools."

Many Texas leaders wisely look to our nation's and state's founders for guidance on important contemporary issues. For instance, Gov. Rick Perry, in his book "Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington," refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as "the glorious fulfillment of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and, ultimately, the intent behind the passage of the Reconstruction Era amendments."

Let me suggest, then, a not-so-novel idea with regard to Texas public schools: Let's look to the past to learn about the present. Let's ask, what would our founders do?

The state Constitution of 1876, after all these years, remains the bedrock on which the Texas public school system is built. The constitutional requirement that Texas support and maintain "an efficient system of public free schools" derives almost verbatim from the first state Constitution of 1845, which stated: "A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature of this State to make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of public schools." The key difference between the two constitutions, obviously, is the latter notion of efficiency. What, then, did our founders intend with the word?

This much is clear: The Texans who crafted our Constitution certainly didn't envision a miserly or cheap system of public schools, one with just enough resources to scrape by. This notion of efficiency — as in my Ford F-150 pickup is more efficient than your F-350 — emerged with the advent of modern economics in the 20th century, specifically with the rise of mass production in factories.

Those familiar with the words of William B. Travis or Sam Houston understand that when they wrote "efficient," they meant "effective." (Both were military men, and they often referred to powerful and accurate artillery as "efficient weapons.") When our founders called for "an efficient system of public free schools," they intended that the Legislature provide for schools that worked, and worked well. Our founders had children in mind, not mass-produced widgets. Our founders understood that a powerful democracy requires more than cheap public schools; it requires prudent investment in all children — including the children of immigrants from distant lands, like Travis and Houston, and newly enfranchised former slaves — using the best available resources.

The Texas Supreme Court understood this in its Edgewood v. Kirby decision in 1989. The court wrote that " ‘Efficient' conveys the meaning of effective or productive of results." The court understood that our Founders cared enough about our democracy to compel a top-notch education for all Texas children no matter who their parents may be.

Regrettably, the court may once again be forced to remind the Legislature of its duty to our children and our democracy. The Legislature has shown far too little interest in the future of Texas, and far too little regard for its past.

Soto, a Democrat from San Antonio, is the District 3 State Board of Education member and an associate professor of English at Trinity University.

 By Michael Soto

Lately the State Board of Education has been caught in the culture wars crossfire. Take the example of last year’s revision of the social studies curriculum. From one side, liberal comedian Jon Stewart mocks the reasoning behind SBOE decisions. From the other side, the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute assigns a “D” grade to the outcome of the process.

Usually when a group takes heat from the left and from the right, it’s setting a course somewhere in the moderate middle. Not so the SBOE when it revised the social studies curriculum. Or when it revised the science curriculum the year before. Or when it revised the language arts curriculum the year before that.

In each of these cases, ideology trumped reasoned decision-making. The result is a curriculum that’s too often bloated with trivia, that favors political posturing over sound scholarship, that’s sometimes incoherent and hopelessly vague. In the case of the social studies curriculum, there are even standards cribbed word-for-word from Wikipedia and other dubious sources. Surely we Texans can do better than this.

There’s still time to fix the social studies standards: Funds won’t be appropriated for new social studies textbooks before 2013. But it’s also important that we learn from the recent hullabaloo and put in place safeguards to keep us off The Daily Show.

The SBOE needs to make it more difficult for individual members to amend the curriculum at the 11th hour. Some of my colleagues boast that there are now “more minorities than ever before” in the curriculum, but the political card-trading behind the boasting (“I’ll give you César Chávez if you give me Jefferson Davis and Phyllis Schlafly”) results in standards that make a mockery of diversity and common sense.

Concerned Texans from a wide range of backgrounds — teachers and parents and academics and business leaders and others — spend many months drafting, reviewing and offering insight into the public school curriculum. The revised standards are reviewed in successive SBOE meetings over a two- or three-month period. Tacking on changes at the last possible moment doesn’t allow for thoughtful debate and typically results in lousy policy. If we need to do a better job reaching out to the public to solicit their input or if we need to revamp the way the SBOE meets to weigh public testimony more thoughtfully, then so be it. Calling an audible works if you’re playing football and if your name is Peyton Manning — and even he throws an interception now and then. We’re playing a higher-stakes game and, with all due respect to my colleagues, we’re no Peyton Manning. (We’re not even Tony Romo.)

The SBOE doesn’t need to “stand up to the experts” when they offer their subject-area advice — we need to listen to and trust them, as well as classroom teachers and other front-line educators. As someone with a day job researching and teaching American literature and cultural history, I’ve developed enough expertise in one area to know better than to presume expertise in others. I’m lucky enough to work with some of the nation’s leading authorities in the humanities, the sciences and the social sciences, and I seek out their advice and the advice of others around the state and across the nation when (for example) I need to consider the merits of instructional products now being considered for use in Texas science classrooms. When the supplemental science materials come before the SBOE next month, I’ll take great comfort knowing that I’ve been advised by some outstanding scientists and science educators.

The SBOE needs to think realistically and strategically about whom we serve and how we serve them. Above all, we need to keep Texas children at the center of every last decision, big and small. As a public school dad, I’m privileged to be reminded of my real constituents — students — each and every day. The curriculum and textbooks that we adopt aren’t worth a hill of beans if they don’t prepare kids for college and career success. The public charter schools approved by the SBOE won’t serve their true purpose — laboratories for classroom innovation and community engagement — if they erode support for independent school districts. The fact that Texas students are today mostly poor (59 percent) and mostly Latino (50.2 percent) should be seen not as a steep obstacle but as a magnificent opportunity to build a smart, engaged, upwardly mobile society.
Most of all, the SBOE needs to restore public faith in how we operate. We hold elective office, but the day after Election Day we forget to check the partisan maneuvering at the door. We need to reassure Texans that we’re ready to put sound judgment ahead of politics — that we’re ready to work alongside teachers and others to do right by Texas kids.

When Stewart comes to Texas in search of material, I sincerely hope that he’s able to bypass the SBOE and go where the real laughs are: the Capitol.

Michael Soto, an associate professor of English and the director of the McNair Scholars Program at Trinity University in San Antonio, represents District 3 on the State Board of Education.

By Michael Soto

“A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.” —Texas Constitution

Many Texas leaders wisely look to our nation’s and state’s Founders for guidance on important contemporary issues. For instance, Gov. Rick Perry, in his recent book Fed Up, refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as “the glorious fulfillment of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and, ultimately, the intent behind the passage of the Reconstruction Era amendments.”

Let me suggest, then, a not-so-novel idea with regard to Texas public schools: Let’s look to the past so that we might learn about the present. Let’s ask, what would our Founders do?

The state Constitution of 1876, after all these years, remains the bedrock on which the Texas public school system is built. The constitutional requirement that Texas support and maintain “an efficient system of public free schools” derives almost verbatim from the first state Constitution of 1845, which stated: “A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the rights and liberties of the people, it shall be the duty of the legislature of this State to make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of public schools.” The key difference between the two Constitutions, obviously, is the latter notion of efficiency. What, then, did our Founders intend with the word?

This much is clear: The Texans who crafted our state Constitution certainly didn’t envision a “miserly” or “cheap” system of public schools, one with just enough resources to scrape by. This notion of efficiency—as in, my F150 is more efficient than your F350—emerged with the advent of modern economics in the twentieth century, specifically with the rise of mass production in industrial factories.

Those familiar with the words of William B. Travis or Sam Houston understand that when they wrote “efficient,” they meant “effective.” (Both military men, they often referred to powerful and accurate artillery as “efficient weapons.”) When our Founders called for “an efficient system of public free schools,” they intended that the legislature provide for schools that worked, and worked well. Our Founders had children in mind, not mass-produced widgets. Our Founders understood that a powerful democracy requires more than “cheap” public schools; it requires prudent investment in all children—including the children of immigrants from distant lands (like Travis and Houston) and newly-enfranchised former slaves—using the best available resources.

The Texas Supreme Court understood this in its Edgewood v. Kirby (1989) decision. The Court wrote that “’Efficient’ conveys the meaning of effective or productive of results”; the Court understood that our Founders cared enough about our democracy to compel a top-notch education for all Texas children no matter who their parents may be.

Regrettably, the Court may once again be forced to remind the Texas legislature of its duty to our children and our democracy. This summer the legislature has shown far too little interest in the future of Texas, and far too little regard for its past.

Express-News Editorial Board - Web Posted: 10/07/2010 12:00 AM CDT

Most Texas voters aren't aware who represents them on the State Board of Education, but they should be. The elected 15-member body affects the education of the nearly 5 million public schoolchildren in Texas.

In recent years, an extremist faction on the education board has managed to politicize the curriculum and bring disrepute to the state's educational system. Board members have become more concerned about social and religious issues than ensuring students graduate from high school with the skills they need to be competitive in a global economy.

Some major changes are needed on this influential elected board. It's time to move away from ideological debate and refocus. It's time to stop the micromanaging and put the curriculum back in the hands of the teachers and education experts.

Fortunately for Texas, the defeat of board members Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, and Geraldine “Tincy” Miller, R-Dallas, one of the longest serving members of the board, in the Republican primary means the state board will have a different look and tone in January. But more change is needed....

District 3 includes Atascosa, Bee, Brooks, Duval, Jim Wells, Karnes, Live Oak, McMullen, Medina and Wilson counties and includes part of Bexar and Hidalgo.

We recommend the election of Democrat Michael Soto, a Harvard-educated Trinity University professor who has a young son attending an urban, inner-city school. Soto, a product of the Brownsville public school system, is well-versed in the education problems facing our state.

Soto would bring a breath of fresh air to this dysfunctional board.

The Republican contender in this race is Tony Cunningham, who is unemployed and has received Supplemental Security Income for more than 20 years. On his candidate filing form he lists his occupation as a politician. His previous jobs have been at a bicycle shop, in security and sales.

In an interview with the Express-News four years ago — the first time he sought election to the SBOE — Cunningham was disappointed to learn the job did not pay.

Cunningham has no concept what the SBOE does and is not versed in the issues facing the state education board. Anyone who has a conversation with him will quickly realize he is an unfit candidate for this seat and it would be a terrible injustice to the public schoolchildren in this state to elect him to this post.

The voters would be best served by electing Soto.

Originally posted at http://www.tpr.org/programs/texasmatters.html

Segment 1: On a 7-6 vote the State Board of Education approved a plan to spend $100 million from the Permanent School Fund to buy real estate for the charter schools. The charter schools would pay rent back to the state. State Board of Education candidate Michael Soto calls the program a bad idea.

Listen to the interview here.

Originally posted at http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=29859

Jul 26th, 2010 by Charles Kuffner.

It’s time to start up the interview machine again, as election season will be on us before you know it. (Fun fact: We’re less than 90 days out from the start of early voting.) I’ve got a trio of SBOE candidates to get things started, beginning with Michael Soto, the Democratic candidate for SBOE in District 3, which is primarily San Antonio and points south. Soto is a professor of English at my alma mater and is running to replace the unreliable Democratic incumbent, Rick Agosto. Here's the interview.

Originally posted at http://www.americanindependent.com/tx-november-voters-will-choose-two-or-three-new-sboe-members/

By Mary Tuma | 07.20.10 | 2:54 pm

Comments Share The greater Austin and San Antonio regions play host to three contested races in November for the 15-member State Board of Education. Going into the general, the ultra-conservative bloc on the board has lost two of seven members, plus a pivotal Democratic swing vote.

In north Austin, a tea party Republican takes on a Democrat (both are educators) to replace a retiring incumbent. In south Austin/north San Antonio, a Democratic professor is challenging a socially conservative GOP incumbent. In south San Antonio, a Democrat and Republican vie to replace the board’s wild-card voter.

...

District 3

The conservative Republican bloc routinely counted on Democrat Rick Agosto of San Antonio to act as a swing vote on religiously charged issues. His exit from the board is an opportunity for Democrats to further dilute the bloc’s power.

In the running for Agosto’s seat are Democrat Michael Soto, who has about $11,400 in cash, and Republican Tony Cunningham, whose campaign has no money. Since the district (which includes southern Bexar County and stretches south toward the boarder) typically trends Democratic, Soto, a university professor, is likely to replace Agosto.

Soto put to rest any speculation that he will follow Agosto’s unpredictable voting pattern.

“I will certainly not be a vote that the right-wing radicals can count on,” he said. “They have hijacked the state board and put their partisan political interests in front and center. If it had been up to me, I would have voted very differently when it came to language arts standards and pressed for a different approach to science. If elected, I hope to have a positive impact on the disastrous social studies standards and do everything in my power to fix the problems."

Originally posted at http://blogs.chron.com/texaspolitics/archives/2010/04/professor_says.html

Some of the proposed social studies standards were plagiarized, Trinity University Professor Michael Soto told Texas lawmakers.

Soto gave a detailed report on the standards that propose to teach Texas children about "American exceptionalism" - the concept that American values are different and unique from those of other nations.

It's an important concept in American intellectual history but one that's mishandled by the proposed standards, said Soto, who is the Democrat candidate for the State Board of Education seat of retiring member Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio.

The proposed standard on "American exceptionalism" was plagiarized from a UCLA graduate school of education website and other parts were lifted "almost verbatim from Wikipedia," he said.

"If one of my Trinity University students handed in this work, he or she would receive a 'D' for the quality of ideas and an 'F' for academic dishonesty," Soto told lawmakers. "Let me be absolutely clear for the public record: The social studies TEKS are plagiarized work. Can we all agree that Texas kids deserve better than this? Shouldn't the State Board of Education be held to a higher standard?"

Posted by Gary Scharrer at April 28, 2010 11:37 AM

Perhaps because I grew up an awkwardly lanky Little League pitcher, one of my childhood heroes was J.R. Richard, the improbably tall Houston Astros ace who was close to unhittable during his prime. Nothing could convince me to trade my J.R. Richard baseball card.

Not a championship season Willie Stargell card.

Not a mint condition Pete Rose rookie card.

Not even an autographed Roger Staubach card. (The Cowboys legend was another hero, so mixing baseball with football doesn't tarnish my logic too much.)

Would I part with J.R. Richard for Stargell, Rose, and Staubach? It's just a card, right?

Wrong.

Anyone who grew up loving baseball knows that a card isn't just a card. And what's true of recent sports history is truer still of America's intricate and splendid past.

The ongoing debate surrounding social studies standards in Texas public schools too often sounds like an unfunny parody of baseball card trading done by bratty kids who never really played the game.

When, for example, so-called social studies expert Peter Marshall declared last spring that "to have César Chávez listed next to Ben Franklin is ludicrous," he revealed the simplistic give-and-take mentality that too often passes for historical reflection: I'll give you César Chávez if you give me Benjamin Franklin and Jefferson Davis.

How dare anyone tell my son and his fellow Texas public schoolmates that César Chávez doesn't deserve their rapt attention?

Just as important: How dare anyone cheapen history by mistaking a list of names for unforgettable encounters between great persons and challenging times?

This week, the State Board of Education will revise the Texas social studies standards (the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Social Studies) that will define learning in Texas public schools for the next decade. This occasion presents the perfect opportunity for clearheaded leaders to rise above the shortsighted politicization of the Texas public school curriculum. I hope that all participants keep in sharp focus the real needs of Texas schoolchildren, including the priceless gift of wonder that waits in store when history unfolds in all its vexed glory, rather than mount their political hobby horses.

No matter what the State Board decides, my son will learn about Chávez's legendary courage in the face of great danger and even greater odds. He'll learn about the rich tradition of non-violent resistance to tyranny that animated Chávez's actions, a lineage that stretches back in time from Chávez to Gandhi to Thoreau to Christ. He'll also learn about Chávez's shortcomings, the intellectual roadblocks that sometimes stood in the way of lasting workplace reform.

My son will learn about the spirit and wisdom and even about the humanizing folly of Benjamin Franklin.

My son will learn that, just as it is appropriate to look up to Chávez and Franklin, it is also right to view the example of Jefferson Davis with deep suspicion.

Most of all, he'll learn that history is far more exciting, and infinitely more rewarding, than a list of names.

He'll learn all of these things at home and, I sincerely hope, at his public school. After all, doesn't every Texas public schoolchild deserve the gift of wonder?

Michael Soto, associate professor of English at Trinity University, is the Democratic Party candidate for the State Board of Education in District 3.

Public school parent and college professor Michael Soto announced his candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination to represent Bexar County and deep South Texas on the State Board of Education in District 3. With his family at his side, Soto made the announcement before a crowd of supporters.

“I’m deeply troubled by the direction taken by the State Board in recent years, but I’m also quite optimistic about what’s possible in Texas public education,” said Soto. “There are exciting things going on at all levels of governance and the State Board can and must be a part of this larger movement to transform public education. I envision a State Board that creates exciting opportunities for students and school districts and that restores public trust in how our schools are run.”

Joining Soto for his announcement were State Representative Trey Martinez Fischer; newly appointed Alamo Colleges Board Member Blakely Fernandez; and Soto’s campaign treasurer, Colleen Casey. The kick-off reception was hosted by Dr. Joe Bernal and Mary Esther Bernal, Charles Butt, Dr. Antonia Castañeda, Blakely Fernandez, Dr. Arturo Madrid, John Montford, Debra Salge, Susan Smith and Tommy Smith, and José Villarreal and Maria Villarreal.

Also on hand in the audience were current and former state and local officials, community leaders, and numerous public school parents and advocates.

“As a college professor, Michael has the right tools to get the job done, and get it done well,” stated Martinez Fischer. “And he’s got the right heart to put aside politics in favor of what’s in the best interests of Texas kids and schools.”

After attending public schools in Brownsville ISD throughout his childhood, Soto received a B.A. degree from Stanford University and a Ph.D. degree from Harvard University. He is presently associate professor of English and director of the McNair Scholars Program at Trinity University. He is married to Celina Peña and their son is a first grade student in San Antonio ISD.

The counties in SBOE District 3 are Atascosa, Bee, Bexar, Brooks, Duval, Frio, Hidalgo, Jim Wells, Karnes, Live Oak, McMullen, Medina, and Wilson.

Michael Soto, the willowy, curly-haired candidate for the State Board of Education District 3, officially launched his campaign the night of December 1 with a high-caliber host committee that included grocery magnate Charles Butt, a supporter of the Texas Freedom Foundation and a financial factor a few years back in the surprise win of former State Representative Juan Garcia; former State Senator John Montford, whose resume reads like any three overachievers’ CVs combined; and the Honorables Mary Esther and Joe Bernal.

Soto, whose run last spring for the San Antonio Independent School District’s board was derailed by a certain former SA mayor, says he was reluctant at first to jump into another race so soon. “But the more thought I gave to it, the more upset I became with the current state of affairs,” he said. “For too long the [SBOE] has been out of touch with the population of public-school students.” He mentioned the heated battle over the language-arts curriculum (“they disregarded three years of expert work and decided to play politics”), although he might as well have mentioned the recent wrangling over opening the door to intelligent design in the science curriculum, or diversity in the social-studies curriculum’s cast of historical characters. Of intelligent design, Soto says, “I suppose it makes sense to talk about it in a civics class, but it doesn’t belong in a science classroom.”

A native of the Valley, Soto has been a professor at Trinity University for more than a decade (he specializes in 20th Century American Lit), and is the father of a first grader. Perhaps a lesser-known achievement: For a short period during the George W. Bush administration, he channeled the spirit of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s inner Chicano activist for a series of Current Last Words memos. If Soto takes the SBOE seat, the QueQue will compile a special edition of his pieces in his honor.

District 3 represents the lower half of Bexar County on the 15-member elected board. Outgoing incumbent Rick Agosto characterizes the job as “Strap yourself onto a lightning rod and go into an electrical storm.

“Elected officials are basically writing a curriculum for Texas, which can influence much of what’s being read and studied in most of the United States for the next 10 years.”

But, Agosto says, “The most important job we have is protecting the investment of the Permanent School Fund,” the 150-year-old land bank that pays for those controversial textbooks.

The filing deadline is January 5. Soto he says he hopes to use the campaign “to inform people about the SBOE and how important it is to be involved in the process.”

Trinity professor to run for Education Board seat Agosto will leave

By Kate Alexander
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, November 06, 2009

State Board of Education member Rick Agosto will not seek re-election next year, he said.

Trinity University literature professor Michael Soto, 39, announced Thursday that he will seek the Democratic Party nomination for District 3, which stretches south from San Antonio to the border.

Several top Democratic Party leaders from San Antonio, including state Sen. Leticia Van de Putte and former State Board of Education member Joe Bernal, are backing Soto.

Agosto, who was first elected in 2006, said he needs to spend more time with his family and investment business.

"I've enjoyed my time there, but being a state board member basically can be a full-time job," Agosto said.

Agosto has been the subject of several recent newspaper stories about his business relationships with companies vying for contracts with the board. He has denied any wrongdoing and attributes the criticism to political backbiting on the board.

Agosto said his re-election decision is not related to this scrutiny.

Bernal, who backed Agosto in 2006, said Agosto's biggest problem was that he had drawn the ire of teacher groups for his votes on some curriculum issues, and that would have made it difficult for him to compete against Soto.

Richard Kouri of the Texas State Teachers Association said Agosto "would not have had friendly-incumbent status," though the organization had not yet made a decision on who to support in the race.

Soto, who has a first-grader in public school and another child due in March, said that as a father he has developed a "profound reservoir of righteous anger" over several state board curriculum decisions.

"I'm simply tired of being angry at the State Board of Education, and I want to do what I can to fix it," said Soto, an expert in 20th-century literary movements.

With Agosto, he said, "there has been a vacuum when it comes to anyone standing up and saying enough is enough."

Van de Putte said she was delighted that someone with Soto's qualifications would run for the board.

Several other sitting board members have drawn serious primary challengers.

Bryan Republican Don McLeroy will have to defend his seat from Thomas Ratliff, a lobbyist and son of former Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff.

Board Members Ken Mercer and Cynthia Dunbar, two Republicans who represent parts of Austin, also have primary challengers.

Dropping off my son at school — he's a first-grader at Hawthorne Academy in the San Antonio ISD, a campus that's served generations since 1923 — transports me to another time: The high ceilings, the heavy sash windows, the small desks, and most of all the beaming teacher take me back to my 1970s youth in Brownsville.

For most San Antonio 5-year-olds, this week marks the beginning of kindergarten and the start of an academic career in the Texas public school system. It's a week of brilliant promise and not a few tears, of trepidation mixed with hopes and dreams.

But if our public schools don't change — dramatically so and quickly — then too many among this fresh-faced bunch of 5-year-olds will be left behind by a system that's well-equipped with rhetoric yet woefully short of results.

Urban, predominantly Latino schools like those found in San Antonio have fared especially poorly of late. According to the Texas Education Agency's misleadingly chipper statistics, only 76 percent of the San Antonio Independent School District Class of 2005 earned a high school diploma.

Last fall, the Harvard University Civil Rights Project — using Christopher B. Swanson's Cumulative Promotion Index, widely viewed as the most accurate measure of real-world graduation rates — reported that the number of SAISD students who completed a high school degree is actually closer to 52 percent.

By either account, we are all failing San Antonio's children and it will take an assiduous, sustained and, most of all, collective effort to address their educational needs as individuals and to address our civic and leadership needs as a society.

No one would begrudge a 5-year-old child the time, energy and financial resources needed to succeed in kindergarten. That's precisely the kind of investment that all of our kids, from five 5 to 15 and well beyond, require.

Teachers and administrators, of course, have much to contribute to our children's educational success, but at the beginning of this school year we'd like to suggest three ways you might get involved.

First, if you are part of a local business (from a mom-and-pop store to a multimillion-dollar enterprise) or a community organization (from a church to a neighborhood crime watch or a political interest group), take some time to explore how you might alter the culture and thinking of low-income neighborhoods, build community vision and engage youths and their families in reconstructing their perspectives regarding education and its value to their future success.

Simple incentives — a free meal for a month's perfect attendance or financial support for a summer enrichment program — can go a long way. The important thing is to get students, families and institutions involved in a community effort, to initiate dialogue and produce trust and momentum.

Second, encourage school administrators and teachers to build strong, positive relations with low-income and immigrant families to address their concerns and creativities. This will require the simultaneous cultivation of students' and parents' organizational abilities — leadership training for the entire family — and a coordinated array of community-based organizations collaborating with schools and families directly. Traditional barriers to educational success must be seen not as excuses, but as challenges to face head-on and opportunities to enrich lives.

Third, be prepared to hold leaders accountable in public forums and at the ballot box. At the same time, recognize that the path to increased educational access and improved educational outcomes is long and sometimes thorny; when leaders speak candidly and make tough decisions, offer your vocal support.

To the proud parents of the newest kindergarten class, we say congratulations and best wishes. Like you, we truly believe that your daughter or son was meant to change the world for the better, and we want you to beam with pride as he or she crosses the stage, high school diploma in hand, in 13 short years. We hope that your child ponders not whether to go to college, but where.

Together let's change the world one school district, one neighborhood, one school, one classroom — one kindergartener — at a time.