Engaged members of the EPS community submitted candidate questions to the Everett PTSA Council. These submissions were reviewed, combined, and edited to create a comprehensive questionnaire, which was then shared with all the candidates running for the Everett School Board. They were instructed to avoid using AI in order to make their responses as authentic as possible. Following are their responses:
*Note: Candidate responses are printed as submitted and have not been edited.
Everett PTSA Council would like to thank all the candidates for their participation in this Written Candidate Forum.
If you would like to see a pdf of all of the answers, click here!
You can also see a video of the candidates answering additional questions from the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County here!
*Note: Candidate responses are printed as submitted and have not been edited.
Everett PTSA Council would like to thank all the candidates for their participation in this Written Candidate Forum.
If you would like to see a pdf of all of the answers, click here!
You can also see a video of the candidates answering additional questions from the League of Women Voters of Snohomish County here!
Question #1: Why are you running for school board? What are your qualifications?
Position 1: Shaina Langley / Roman Rewolinski
Shaina Langley
I’m running for the Everett School Board because I’m ready to bring the classroom to the boardroom. As an educator, with over a decade of classroom experience, I’ve seen firsthand what happens when students, staff, and families are supported. I’ve also seen what happens when they’re not. My students have always inspired me to be better, lead with passion, and fight for the future. And that means fighting for every child’s access to gain knowledge and find personal success.
In addition to spending my entire career as a classroom teacher, I’ve dedicated my personal time to advocating for public education as a dedicated community volunteer and union leader. Over the years, I’ve worked with experienced educators, parents, school administration, PTA’s, local non-profits, businesses, and elected leaders to help improve educational outcomes for students. Most importantly, I understand every decision the school board makes, from curriculum and technology needs to staffing, safety, and family engagement, impacts what happens in the classroom. That’s the voice that needs to be on the school board, and that’s my daily reality. Vertical Divider
|
Roman Rewolinski
I’m running because I believe public education is the foundation of opportunity. It’s what gives every child, no matter their background, the chance to succeed. Good governance matters, and stable, well-run schools don’t happen by accident. They take consistent, serious effort and collaboration across the district and community.
Since joining the board, I’ve focused on doing the work with integrity. I want to keep building a culture of transparency, fiscal integrity, and keep focusing on students. As a parent with kids in our schools and as a PTA leader, I see how decisions play out in schools. My perspective helps me stay grounded in what families and staff experience every day. Professionally, I’m a finance expert with deep experience in budgeting, forecasting, and long-term financial planning. I know how to develop complex budgets based on reasonable assumptions and make decisions that protect both people and programs. I believe in public service, equity, and standing up for our students and our future. I want to keep our schools strong, stable, and improving for each and every student. |
Position 2: Janelle Burke / Jen Hirman
Janelle Burke
I’m running for school board because public education has strayed too far from its foundational purpose which is to educate the whole child for life - not to groom them for systems of control, ideological obedience, or bureaucratic compliance. I’ve witnessed firsthand how our schools, under the banner of “equity” or “data-driven policy,” have failed Black, Brown, and disabled youth. I’m running to fight that failure and reclaim “a free, appropriate, and constitutionally grounded education for all students.
I am not a bureaucrat; I am a mother of seven, a grandmother, a citizen and a community advocate. I am also a woman with grit and tenacity who refuses to be silent when children are harmed, or families are ignored. These lived experiences, combined with my background in advocacy, education justice, and systems navigation, qualify me to serve with clarity, heart, and integrity. Vertical Divider
|
Jen Hirman
I am running to retain my position on the Everett School Board to continue working to support our students and schools. Having strong public schools provides every child with the opportunity to learn and grow, helping prepare them for their future. High-quality schools benefit the entire community and are essential to a well-functioning democracy.
My own formal background in education and policy gives me a broad view of our education system. With a Masters Degree in Education (Stanford University, 1996) and PhD in Educational Leadership and Policy Studies (Arizona State University, 2004), I have received formal training around teaching methods and curriculum development, as well as conducted research on school effectiveness and K-12 policy. My experience as a classroom teacher, both in the U.S. and abroad, has given me a deep appreciation for the work that teachers do on a daily basis and the challenges that they face. Additionally, for the past 16 years, I have been an engaged parent in our Everett Public Schools, with my two children attending Cedar Wood Elementary, Heatherwood Middle, and Jackson High School. Working in PTA roles at each level, I have worked with staff, parents and community members to bring programs and activities into the schools and support PTAs in their work of enriching the school environments for their own children. My years serving in the Everett PTSA Council, including serving as Council President from 2019-2021, helped me learn more about all of our Everett schools and their parent communities. |
Position 3: Thomas Clarke / Anna Marie Laurence
Thomas Clarke
I am an Everett Public Schools parent, and I believe in the power of high-quality public education to transform the lives of our students. I also believe that a parental perspective is important on board because as parents we are heavily invested in the success of our schools and the culture of our school community. I am running for School Board because I believe every student deserves to feel supported, safe, and celebrated so they are positioned to thrive. I have met so many amazing teachers, administrators, and District officials who are passionate about seeing our students have a good day at school every day and they have inspired me to run.
Qualifications I am a past volunteer at Jackson Elementary PTA, and I am currently volunteer/member with North Middle School PTA. My wife of 15 years (Jeannette) is the Co-President of North Middle School PTA, and we are active and involved in the school community. I also have experience volunteering at legal clinics in Viriginia and Washington, advising parents on school law including student rights issues and discrimination/school safety cases. I am an active practicing attorney, and I advocate for my clients in Court rooms across the State. I am running to be an advocate for every student, teacher, parent, and taxpayer who is associated with the District. I am actively licensed to practice in Washington and Virginia I currently practice family law and civil litigation and I understand the challenges facing our students, parents, teachers, and community. I am the only active practicing attorney in the race, and I believe my practice has exposed me to a lot of the issues our students and teachers face inside and outside the classroom. I am also adept at finding creative solutions to difficult problems which will serve me well on the School Board Vertical Divider
|
Anna Marie Laurence
I am running for Everett School Board Director because I am passionate about supporting our students and their families for future success. I am engaged in my community and I value service above self. As a member of the Rotary Club of Everett and co-chair of the scholarship committee for the past six years, we partnered with the Everett Public Schools to interview, select, and provide scholarship monies for students attending college or trade school. As a trustee for the Gertrude Jackson Memorial Scholarship, which was named after my aunt who taught in the Everett Public Schools as a 3rd grade teacher for over 40 years, the trustees and I grant scholarships to aspiring students in the Everett and Mukilteo school districts. As a member of the Assistance League of Everett, Kitty Young Auxiliary, I help raise funds to provide clothing for students in need and graduation costs. It is my mission to continue to help students as a School Board Director by guiding policy and financial decisions that directly affect student learning.
In addition to my philanthropic roles, my legal training and professional experience as a former Snohomish County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney in the Civil Division, taught me to analyze situations, gather the facts and look at all sides of an issue. As a board member of the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for 35 years, I have management experience through decision-making regarding mission, staff, finance, and grants. As a Director I will continue to be an excellent liaison between the community and the district, listening to parents, students and community members and sharing feedback with the district. Our community is stronger when we are connected to help our students thrive. |
Question #2: How would you improve on the district's current support of highly capable students in middle and high school? How do you think the international baccalaureate program will impact students at Cascade and across the district? What other challenging programs or supports would you like to see offered by ESD?
Position 2: Jen Hirman / Janelle Burke
Jen Hirman
A good education system will have course options that meet students’ interests and capabilities, including highly capable students. It is important to have ample course offerings at the middle school and high school level so that students are able to take classes that match both their academic aptitude and their individual interests. Each of our high schools offers a wide variety of Advanced Placement (AP) courses, including AP Research and AP Seminar, to provide college-level coursework that will not only challenge students but also offers a chance to start earning college credits. Teachers and counselors can help by ensuring students understand the options available and help navigate those choices.
The International Baccalaureate program at Cascade will expand options for challenging coursework, not only for students attending Cascade, but this will be a choice option for other high school students who want to pursue the IB diploma. (*Note: There is an information night about the IB program on Oct. 23 at 6pm at the Cascade High School library.) As far as other programs, as a school district, I believe we are continually looking for options that offer choices for our students to learn new skills and expand their educational experience. This past year, Sno-Isle Tech Skills Center began offering the Maritime Vessel Operations program, creating an opportunity for high school students to become fully credentialed and professionally trained mariners by the time they graduate. Expanding these opportunities for our students allows all students the flexibility to pursue pathways that match both their academic ability and career interests. |
Janelle Burke
Highly capable students deserve support…BUT so does every child, and I believe the International Baccalaureate (IB) program places prestige over parity. Many of the IB program’s so-called “benefits” such as critical thinking, global awareness, service learning, advanced writing, are things that all students should receive as part of basic education.
Programs like IB often elevate a select few while leaving behind equally capable youth who may just need encouragement, cultural connection, or trauma-informed instruction to thrive. They reinforce class divisions and often neglect Black, Brown, disabled, and working-class students who are already underserved by our public schools. Until every student can read at grade level, write a competent essay, and develop civic identity, we shouldn't be expanding elite pipelines. Instead, we should be remodeling basic education to reflect common sense, equity, and the real needs of all learners. Instead of highly exclusive academic tracks, I’d advocate for:
|
Position 3: Anna Marie Laurence / Thomas Clarke
Anna Marie Laurence
We need to ensure that students and parents are aware of the opportunity to take Advanced Placement (AP) classes or join Cascade’s IB program once it has become accredited. High school students have the option of taking AP classes that allows students to place out of college classes. These courses are a great way to save both time and money. Improvements can be made in getting the word out to students and families about the availability of these courses and how to sign up. There also must be equitable access among the schools to these courses. I would continue to make sure that all high schools in the district have access to these rigorous courses.
The International Baccalaureate (IB) program offers a world-renowned challenging curriculum that is highly valued by top universities. When Cascade has an accredited IB program, their students can choose to do the IB diploma program or take selected classes. This flexibility gives students options making the program inclusive and equitable to all. Cascade has the space to accommodate students throughout the district to be part of the IB Program. The high school will also continue the dual language program which compliments the global IB program that provides an understanding of other cultures and languages. Cascade will be highly sought after with both its IB and dual language program and will provide a strong foundation of learning that will prepare students for college and our global society. AP courses and Cascade’s IB program are a great start in providing a challenging curriculum. The offering of an IB program whether it is the diploma program or selected IB classes gives students opportunities to select what works best for them. The key is communicating the information to students and families, so they are aware of the choices and knowledge to access the information. School counselors and teachers can help guide students to different learning options. Vertical Divider
|
Thomas Clarke
I believe we need more assessment for highly capable students and an assessment that takes into account artistic abilities as part of the process for assessing students’ capabilities. I think Everett Public Schools has made some progress in supporting highly capable students, but there’s still a lot of room for improvement, in middle and high school. Too often, we rely on a narrow definition of what the definition of highly capable student is. I would push for expanding options to add science, arts specific tract, or that allow students the opportunity to explore areas they are passionate about legal/social justice, health careers, or engineering. I believe the IB program at Cascade is a huge opportunity. The program will be academically rigorous but presents an amazing opportunity for students. Hopefully, the program helps set the bar high and helps to drive student achievement. I would like to work with Board colleagues and District staff to improve representation in highly capable programs, and create a highly inclusive program.
|
Position 1: Roman Rewolinski / Shaina Langley
Roman Rewolinski
Questions like this reach deep into instructional design and program delivery, which are developed and managed by educational professionals, not by the board. Education in a district our size involves a network of experts like district and building admin and teachers who work together under a rich tapestry of rules and regulations. Directors need to make sure that the district is working for students, not to rewrite the curriculum from the boardroom.
EPS provides many advanced learning opportunities, from high cap to Advanced Placement and College in the High School. The new International Baccalaureate program at Cascade is a positive addition that will broaden access to rigorous coursework. My focus is on ensuring these programs are equitably available, well communicated to families, and properly supported by district resources. As a board member, I will continue to rely on the expertise of our educators and administrators to design challenging and appropriate instruction. My responsibility is to ask good questions, confirm alignment with district goals, and make sure that all students have the opportunity to reach their full potential. Vertical Divider
|
Shaina Langley
As a Highly Capable teacher for the past six years, I’ve experienced both the strengths and growing pains of an advanced learning program. I would bring that on-the-ground knowledge to the board to advocate for more equitable identification processes, improved educator training, and stronger communication with families. In addition, many community members still misunderstand what “Highly Capable” is and what it isn’t. That means we can do better to improve outreach to students and families and do more to improve access advanced learning.
In addition, the new International Baccalaureate program at Cascade has the potential to expand achievement opportunities for students across Everett Public Schools. However, its success will depend on ensuring that IB doesn’t exist in isolation because the reality is that all schools should have access to challenging, engaging learning opportunities. I also support expanding alternative and flexible learning models, like Sequoia High School, and career-connected pathways including partnerships with local colleges, trades, and community organizations. Student success isn’t one-size-fits-all, and our students will benefit from more opportunities that meet their individual learning needs. |
Question #3: Do you believe RTRI Programs like LifeWise Academy should be allowed to take children out of public school during school hours?
Position 3: Thomas Clarke / Anna Marie Laurence
Thomas Clarke
No, I do not believe LifeWise Academy should be allowed to intrude into our student’s school day and here is why: this is not a parental rights issue this is a separation of Church and State issue. My opponent will no doubt quote Zorach v. Clauson, with all due respect that is a cop-out and a misunderstanding of Zorach and the facts of the current LifeWise program. The difference in Zorach was 1. Parents were picking up their own children 2. There was not an organization whose goal is to turn the public school system into a mission field and de-secularize public schools. Our public schools should be a place where all students whether they adhere to Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and other spiritual beliefs systems at home feel safe, supported, and empowered to learn in our schools.
Here, LifeWise is attempting to turn our public school system into a mission field and erode the separation of church and state. Excerpt from LifeWise homepage: About Our Mission Field – “students in public schools” Our vision to reach students in public schools requires that we engage with groups who may or may not share our gospel-centered objective. Therefore, we will be vigilant to “walk in wisdom” (Col 4:5) as we serve and interact with those who hold different worldviews. All of our public messaging, branding and communication will be intelligible, relatable and compelling to those without a church background or a prior understanding of the intrinsic value of Scripture. Classes themselves will also be designed primarily to engage students without a church background, as opposed to mimicking traditionally Christian gatherings, such as corporate worship services and Sunday school classes. Let me make the lines here clear, I am a Christian, with sincerely held beliefs, and I believe that Parents have the right to personally take their children out of school for any reason (religious, doctor’s appointment, lunch, braces, to catch a Mariners day game). However, that is not what is happening with LifeWise. The students in our district are being released to non-parent LifeWise program workers and being transported off site in vehicles not owned or operated by their parents, to a site not owned or operate by their parents to receive religious instruction during the School day (which as discussed here, is already not compliant in regards to PE, recess, and seated lunch). Most importantly LifeWise is funded by organizations who have advanced hateful positions towards groups that are already marginalized in our communities including: immigrants, religious minorities, same sex couples, and LGBTQ community members. They also plan to teach a misogynistic world view to students which flies in the face for the rights that women have struggled and fought for in our communities, work places, and in regard to making personal health decisions. Allowing this group into our District is counterproductive to the initiatives that the district has advanced in Diversity and Equity for the last 20 + years. Vertical Divider
|
Anna Marie Laurence
I do not support programs that provide off-campus religious instruction during the school day such as Lifewise. I prefer that children stay in school. However, the school district must follow the law that balances the competing interests inherent in the first amendment. In the 1952 US Supreme Court case Zorach v. Clauson, the court ruled that New York’s “released time” program allowed public school students to be excused from school to attend religious instruction off campus. A similar situation is going on in the Everett school district. Students are taking Release Time for Religious Instruction (RTRI) during the non-instructional recess and lunch period to go off-site, without using public funding and with parental approval. While this is legal, there should be parameters. Kids using RTRI should come and go in the least disruptive way possible so as not to bother the student’s educational program. Programs cannot request the release of a student. Only a parent or guardian can make a request to release their child to another individual. In addition, any materials or books from their religious instruction should remain in their backpacks when they return to school. No handouts are allowed to be given out promoting religion on behalf of groups of people, that are not students. Students who participate in RTRI should not discuss their program during school instructional time if doing so interferes with the school’s educational programs, which should be content neutral. The school district does not endorse or support any religious program. Thus, teachers are not expected to answer any questions about the religious instruction.
|
Position 1: Shaina Langley / Roman Rewolinski
Shaina Langley
Third party organizations should never come between families and our schools.
It’s well known that strong, positive relationships between classroom educators and families have a great impact on academic success and attendance. If RTRI programs, like Lifewise, cause conflict between our families and schools, then the school board has an obligation to review what steps can be taken to regain trust with families and strengthen policies on third party organizations moving forward. Families deserve to know that their children’s time in school is spent in safe, inclusive, and educationally sound environments. Our public schools must remain focused on learning that brings our community together. Vertical Divider
|
Roman Rewolinski
This question moves into an area that is covered by state and federal law, not by local school boards. The law allows parents to request that their child be released for religious instruction during the school day, provided it is voluntary, off campus, and does not interfere with academic progress. The law is well established and EPS follows it.
Programs like LifeWise are outside the district’s instructional mission. The responsibility of the board is to maintain focus on public education, to ensure schools remain inclusive, and that instructional time is protected for all students. The administration implements procedures that comply with the legal framework that already exists, and we have to confirm that those procedures are followed consistently and fairly. I respect families’ right to practice their faith, and I also respect the boundary that keeps public education neutral and focused on teaching, not religious activity. That balance is already clearly laid out in law, and there is no need for the board to insert itself into an area that is neither its authority nor its expertise. |
Position 2: Janelle Burke / Jen Hirman
Janelle Burke
Yes, I believe families should have the freedom to choose values and aligned enrichment opportunities for their children even during the school day. Programs like “LifeWise Academy”, which offer spiritual and moral education, serve as important counterbalances to the growing ideological overreach within public education. If the state can mandate sex education and identity development, families should equally have the right to “spiritual formation, religious expression, or cultural education” during non-core instructional time.
Our schools are not spiritual vacuums, and children are not blank slates. Families deserve voice and access, not more barriers when it comes to values. Vertical Divider
|
Jen Hirman
School attendance is important, with a clear link between attendance and achievement. I do not believe programs should take children out of school during school hours, but I recognize that parents have the legal right to have their child released into the care of another adult, and that this may be for non-religious or religious-related reasons. I appreciate that our school district embraces diversity and works with parents as partners in their child’s educational experience, while following existing policy, guidelines and procedures. I encourage people to read through the Attendance information on the district website here: https://www.everettsd.org/domain/1494, for additional information.
|
Question #4: Everett school board directors serve 6 year terms, and four of the five current directors were (originally) appointed rather than elected by voters. Do you support the existing term structure? Are there any changes you would recommend? Please explain.
Position 1: Roman Rewolinski / Shaina Langley
Roman Rewolinski
I support the six-year term structure because it provides stability and continuity for the district. Major decisions like strategic plans, curriculum adoptions, or facility projects often take years to fully implement and evaluate. Longer terms give board members the time to make thoughtful decisions and see them through to completion
Six-year terms also remind candidates of the level of commitment this work requires. Serving on the school board is a serious responsibility, and the term length helps ensure those who step forward are ready to engage deeply and consistently for the long haul. Vertical Divider
|
Shaina Langley
Six-year terms limit voter voice and accountability. While the intention may be stability, the reality is that board members often step down early, which leads to more appointments and less community representation.
Students succeed when leaders listen and families feel heard. That’s difficult to achieve when a majority of board members are appointed rather than elected. I would support exploring shorter terms or staggered cycles that maintain continuity while giving voters more opportunities to choose their representatives. |
Position 2: Jen Hirman / Janelle Burke
Jen Hirman
Research shows that stable and student-focused school boards have a positive impact on student achievement, while turnover and conflict on boards can undermine trust, increase costs and increase staff and leadership turnover.
In aiming for a stable and reliable school board, I feel that utilizing a 2-2-1 election cycle, where there typically wouldn’t be a year when 3 school board seats are up for election, would allow for the most consistency and stability. By having a 6-year term, this allows for a more gradual turnover rate, creating a balance of new and experienced board members. When a vacancy occurs between elections and an appointment is made, voters then have the chance to see school directors in action on the school board prior to the following election. They can make an informed choice on that candidate Vertical Divider
|
Janelle Burke
I do not support the 6-year term structure. It’s too long, creates complacency, and reduces accountability to voters. Shorter terms—perhaps 4 years maximum—would ensure board members remain responsive and reflective of their communities’ changing needs and concerns. We have too many appointed, not elected, board members. That erodes trust. We need term reform and democratic restoration, not long-term seats that disconnect board members from families.
|
Position 3: Anna Marie Laurence / Thomas Clarke
Anna Marie Laurence
I support a 6-year term as it ensures consistency, stability, knowledge, efficiency and ability to work on long-term goals like our Strategic Plan. It takes time and training to learn all the intricacies of district policies, budgets, programs, and laws. It is important to have the institutional knowledge of how things were handled in the past to best serve our students and their families. It is also valuable to the leadership staff and Superintendent to have a stable team of board members.
Vertical Divider
|
Thomas Clarke
I do not support the existing term structure, 6 years is to long and allows the Board to make a lot of bad decisions without being held accountable by the community. I would advocate for a 4-year term with a maximum of 2 consecutive terms. I think this would allow for community oversight over the Board and allow for diverse prospectives on the Board. As Everett grows we should maintain a dynamic board that is engaged with the community in a meaningful way and is accountable to the community. My opponent will say she supports the 6 year term, but I am afraid that the 6 year term is to long and creates a self-serving, country club vibe, which is inappropriate for a school board.
|
Question #5: In an increasingly digital world, what place does technology have in the classroom? Should its use be limited? Feel free to discuss devices at school, the use of AI, and how screens should be utilized most effectively in the classroom.
Position 2: Janelle Burke / Jen Hirman
Janelle Burke
Technology should have a supportive, not central, role in classrooms. It’s a tool, not a teacher. Students must first learn how to read, write, solve problems, and think critically without relying on screens or AI. I support limited, purposeful use of technology for tutoring, research, and creation not for daily instruction, busywork, or behavioral pacification.
AI, especially, should not be used to do thinking for students, only to supplement when appropriate. I believe that our youth should be taught to think before they type. Excessive screen time is a proven health risk, and equity doesn't mean more devices it means better outcomes. Technology should enhance core instruction, not replace it. Vertical Divider
|
Jen Hirman
There are many benefits to incorporating technology into the classroom, and naturally, this needs to be balanced with other instruction methods and learning experiences. Technology has the ability to offer more personalized and adaptive experiences, where learning can be tailored to better meet student needs. An example of this is I-Ready, which allows students to work at their own pace in building reading and mathematics skills, and helps teachers monitor and track progress. Collaboration on projects can also take place in and out of the classroom through the use of shared documents, and even learning games (students will probably be familiar with Kahoot!) can be a fun and educational use of technology in the classroom. There are so many terrific uses of technology in the classroom, and teachers will work to find that balance.
One of the aspects I appreciate the most about Everett School District’s Integrated Technology Plan is the idea that supplying a one-to-one device alone is not beneficial for students, without the thoughtful and intentional use by teachers in the classroom. This includes the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). I feel that students need to learn how to effectively use AI and learn about the risks of over-reliance on AI tools without using critical thinking. |
Position 3: Thomas Clarke / Anna Marie Laurence
Thomas Clarke
Studies show that our students are overusing devices including and Importantly cell phones. I believe that cell phones should be put away during class and that students should not use social media while in class. The psychological impact of over use of cell phones is harmful to developing brains and I believe school should provide a respite from cell phone use/screen time. As for new technology, I believe that we must teach students responsible use of AI while promoting hands on learning opportunities. Many companies now use AI and our students should learn how to use AI ethically and responsibly to prepare them for the workplace, however this should not replace critical thinking or deductive reasoning.
Vertical Divider
|
Anna Marie Laurence
Technology is an important educational tool when used for a directed purpose. An understanding of technology is integral in meeting the Everett Public Schools’ Strategic Plan Mission of “inspiring, educating and preparing each student to achieve high standards, contribute to our community and to thrive in a global society.” Technology also levels the field so all students can access information. For our ESL students, they can use online translation programs to keep pace with the curriculum. Students that have an IEP, 504 Plan or Individual Health Care Plan can use assistive technology such as a cell phone and or a Personal Electronic Device (PED) to help with their classroom learning. While technology is important and helpful there also must be limits on its use. Under school board policy 3246P Elementary and Middle School students can only use cell phones and other PEDs before or after school. High School students may only use their cell phone or PED during transition periods, at lunch and before and after school. Students cannot use a PED that, “poses a threat to academic integrity, disrupts the learning environment or violates the privacy rights of others” (policy 3246). Our schools provide technology that can be used during the school day for learning, teaching, collaborative projects and assessments. While it is important to learn about AI tools like ChatGPT, they cannot be a substitute for learning how to write or research information. With technology constantly evolving, it is important to get feedback from families and the community about technology use at school and at home.
|
Position 1: Shaina Langley / Roman Rewolinski
Shaina Langley
Technology will always be part of the classroom, but school districts must be vigilant about using it to drive student success, not to replace relationships with peers, educators, or instructional time. That includes the use of student-facing devices, district adopted programs, and AI. From experience, I know that schools can benefit from a greater focus on technology curricula that addresses research and media literacy, as well as organization and study skills that increase success in middle and high school. And while the district’s investment in technology is important, it is equally important to invest in student development of real-world knowledge including history, art, and critical thinking.
In addition, the district must remain vigilant about how technology supports learning goals. That means balancing device-use with instruction in digital literacy, organization, and responsible media consumption. I also believe we should invest in teacher training on AI integration and safety. Vertical Divider
|
Roman Rewolinski
I think technology has an important place in our classrooms, but like most things, it’s about balance. Our teachers and instructional technology staff are the experts on how to use it well, and as a board member I see our role as making sure the district uses technology responsibly and supports teachers in finding that balance between innovation and what’s developmentally right for students.
When used well, technology can make learning more engaging and help students build the digital skills they’ll need in the future. But it can’t replace hands-on learning, collaboration, or personal connection—those are just as important. At a past board retreat we’ve had great discussions with students about AI and technology in school, and it’s been really valuable to hear their perspective. Students are thoughtful about both the potential and the risks, and that helps guide our decisions. We should keep supporting teachers with training on new tools, promote digital citizenship and online safety, and make sure all students have equitable access to technology. AI and other new technologies are exciting, but we need to bring them into classrooms carefully, always focused on what truly helps students learn and grow. |
Question #6: What should ESD change in order to better support and include our students who receive special education services, especially those in Life Skills classes? What procedural changes would you suggest to make special education evaluations and services more accessible to families?
Position 3: Anna Marie Laurence / Thomas Clark
Anna Marie Laurence
Our biggest challenge is choosing which supports best meet the needs of our special students and the district. We are making progress by eliminating exclusionary practices and instead working on rigorous instruction for all students. Research shows that the most effective educational environment for students with extensive supports is interacting with their peers in the general education classrooms. Some ways that we are supporting and including students who receive special education are: formation of a special purpose committee of teachers on elementary inclusionary practices that looks at instructional practices of all programs and create spaces where students can be recognized for their strengths and thrive. For students in the Life Skills program, we need to ensure that these students have the opportunity to actively participate and learn with their peers and thus create a sense of belonging in their community. When inclusionary practices are in place, the school community is caring and appreciative of each student’s strengths. For students that are in the secondary level, classrooms are co-taught and planned by Resource and general education teachers where they receive grade-level instruction.
Families need to be included in developing the IEP for their child and the IEP should incorporate inclusionary opportunities. We need to listen to families as they know their child the best. Teachers can learn from families how their student works and interacts in their home environment and then use those insights to apply in the classroom. Vertical Divider
|
Thomas Clarke
As the parent of two students who have IEP’s this is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. I believe that the first for EPS is to listen to special education parents and help to formulate special education services that provide the least restrictive learning environment for all of our students who receive special education services. I believe that LifeSkills classes are important and necessary but just as importantly we need to make sure that students with disabilities are truly included in the social fabric of the school. That is why I have advocated for an inclusive culture of belonging where every student is valued and appreciated.
We can improve procedure by ensuring that parents and guardians are highly valued members of the IEP team (as was the intention of the policies and law in this area). We need to make sure that we have interpreters available if necessary, and professionals who can explain and simplify the terminology of the documents, and that all parents are aware of their legal rights in the IEP process. If there is a way we can provide continuity in the IEP process we should so, so our parents and students will become comfortable with the process and their role in it. We need to do everything we can to empower our students who need some extra help to thrive and that starts with making sure we have accessible IEP processes and comprehensive support. |
Position 1: Roman Rewolinski / Shaina Langley
Roman Rewolinski
Special education services are shaped by state and federal law, and our trained staff handle evaluations and supports within those rules. The board’s job is to make sure resources, staffing, and policies not only meet those requirements but also reflect our commitment to equity—so every student has what they need to learn and feel part of their school community.
When I’ve visited programs like GOAL, Project SEARCH, and ACHIEVE classrooms, I’ve seen how hard our staff work and how much students can accomplish when they have the right supports. One area we can keep improving is communication with families. That means clearer information about timelines and evaluations, and making sure parents know their rights and feel heard through the process. We can also keep building more inclusive opportunities so Life Skills students are part of everyday school life whenever possible. Vertical Divider
|
Shaina Langley
Every student deserves a supportive and academically rich environment. That means ensuring that Life Skills and special education programs are included in each learning community.
We can improve access by expanding training and co-teaching opportunities for general education staff, ensuring smoother communication between families and special services, and strengthening early identification and intervention practices so that no students slip through the cracks. Evaluations should be transparent, timely, and family-centered. Families also deserve clear, consistent information about rights, services, and transition planning. Programs like GOAL and STRIVE, operated through the Volunteers of America in partnership with Everett Public Schools, are great examples of how schools can connect students with life skills, job training, and community mentorship to prepare them for independence and success after graduation. Expanding and strengthening these kinds of partnerships ensures that all students have meaningful pathways to continue learning, growing, and contributing to their communities. |
Position 2: Jen Hirman / Janelle Burke
Jen Hirman
Students receiving special education services, including students in Life Skills classes, should receive educational services that match their needs. Our special education teachers are extremely caring and devoted educators, wanting their students to succeed to their highest ability. In order for that to happen, educators and families need to work as a team, sharing information and communicating effectively, and setting goals for students that stretch them.
The district continues to grow in this area by working on expanding inclusionary practices throughout all of our schools and programs. Currently in EPS, leadership in special services is facilitating a committee with teachers on inclusionary practices to identify best practices across all programs that serve students with disabilities. Additionally, the district is expanding “co-taught” classrooms where a classroom includes a resource room teacher and a general education teacher, thus allowing students with different abilities to learn alongside their peers. The IEP (Individualized Education Plan) meeting is an important opportunity for this teamwork to happen on a collaborative and regular basis. The policy and procedure around Special Education and Related Services for Eligible Students (Policy 2210) describes the development of an individualized education program (IEP) including placement, least restrictive environment (LRE), procedural safeguards, and parent participation. IEPs work best when they are developed together, as a team, with the student's success and well-being at the center of decision-making. I believe continuing this work and continuing to build partnerships and relationships within IEP teams will help make sure students are receiving the services and evaluations they need. Vertical Divider
|
Janelle Burke
This is personal for me. I’ve navigated the broken maze of special education as a parent and advocate. Too often, families are gaslit, delayed, and dismissed while their children are warehoused or pathologized. We need a total overhaul in how we conduct evaluations, implement services, and center family voice.
I would advocate for: Parent-driven evaluations with transparent timelines Removal of gatekeeping via subjective data Restoring dignity to Life Skills and functional education Respecting IEP and 504 planning as collaborative, not administrative Ensuring procedural safeguards don’t become parental silencing tools |
Question #7: What is your view of adjusting school schedules to allow a later start for high schoolers?
Position 1: Shaina Langley / Roman Rewolinski
Shaina Langley
Research shows that later start times can improve attendance, mental health, and academic outcomes for teens. However, any schedule change must balance transportation logistics, after-school activities, and family schedules.
Before making adjustments, I would urge the board to gather input from students, families, and staff to fully understand the benefits and potential disruptions. Student wellbeing and learning outcomes should remain the top priority in any decision. Vertical Divider
|
Roman Rewolinski
Changing school start times sounds simple, but there are a lot of moving parts like transportation, staffing, athletics, childcare, and family obligations. The board should support the Superintendent in looking at all the various inputs, listen to families and staff, and make sure any change truly fits our community.
As a parent of two high schoolers, I know there is research showing benefits to a later start, but I also know it is not easy for everyone. From an equity standpoint, we need to make sure any schedule change works for all families, not just some. If there is real community interest in exploring later start times, I would want us to take a careful, inclusive look at it so we understand who it helps, who it might hurt, and what it would take to make it work equitably. |
Position 2: Janelle Burke / Jen Hirman
Janelle Burke
This issue is layered. While science supports later start times for teens, implementation must be realistic for working-class families, bus schedules, and community safety. I support reviewing this issue with robust family input, equity in mind, and transparency on all downstream effects. If we do move forward, schools must not treat families as afterthoughts in logistics.
Vertical Divider
|
Jen Hirman
Having my own high school student, I understand that high school starting at 7:30am can be a challenge for students who are not early risers. Additionally, I have read research around later school start times and the health benefits for adolescents. California became the first state to legislatively mandate later school start times for middle and high schools several years ago. While well-intentioned, some early studies show negative impacts for lower socioeconomic communities. These include impacting students’ ability to work after school, as well as creating inequitable access to after-school extracurricular activities.
Many of our students rely on our buses for transportation for school and extracurricular programs. Having buses and drivers available to support these transportation needs for all of our grade levels at the same time would have meaningful budget impacts that are not covered by our state funding formula. So while I see the possible benefits, I think we would need to be cautious about making changes and look at how those adjustments would impact all aspects of our students’ school and life experiences. |
Position 3: Thomas Clarke / Anna Marie Laurence
Thomas Clarke
I believe that we should explore a later start for high schoolers, and I would support pushing the start time back by 1 hour. Here is why studies indicate that moving the start time for High schoolers back by 1 hour aligns better with natural sleep cycles and leads to improved academic performance. Using Everett HS as an example if a student has to be at school by 7:30 they have to wake up between 6:00-6:15 to have enough time to complete their morning routine and get to school. Most high school kids go to sleep between 10:30- 12:00 midnight, this gives them less than 8 hours of sleep per night. Based on the research out there this is a no brainer to me.
Vertical Divider
|
Anna Marie Laurence
I am not in favor of adjusting school schedules to allow for a later start time for high schoolers. It is important to look at other states that have enacted a late time start. In 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law the first late start schedules in the nation. A late start time aligns better with teenagers sleep cycles. However, there are compelling challenges to consider if a late time schedule were implemented: 1) Increase loss of instructional time when students participate in extracurricular activities or sports. California districts were not able to adjust sports schedules, resulting in early dismissal and make up work for missed classroom time; 2) Transportation logistics for bus routes impacting elementary school students who share the same buses as high school students which has led to increased costs; 3) Staffing issues where additional staff are needed before school when working families need to drop off their children; 4). Inequitable effects on students disproportionately impacting lower socioeconomic families the most with increased childcare costs and decreased ability for students to work after school.
|
Question #8: As of June 2024, there were 124 portables in use in the district. This is the equivalent of four elementary schools. In the long-term, how would you address persistent overcrowding and use of portables across the district?
Position 2: Jen Hirman / Janelle Burke
Jen Hirman
Portables are an effective short-term solution to overcrowding in our schools, but long-term enrollment projections need to inform our district’s capital facilities plan so that schools have adequate permanent building space to accommodate enrollment. Funding for school buildings comes from voter-approved bonds and levies, and so the school district needs the support of voters in order to address this.
Last spring, a Bond Planning Committee was formed to identify the highest needs in our district and develop a capital bond that is planned to go before voters in February 2026. The decision then will be up to voters to invest in buildings for our students that can relieve overcrowding and help reduce the reliance of portable classrooms. When portables are used, it allows for classroom space but does not address other school features like the capacity of the lunch room, library, or bathrooms. Please look out for the bond and levy measure and help our schools have the permanent building space for all of our students. Vertical Divider
|
Janelle Burke
Portables are a practical necessity, not a long-term solution. While not ideal, they provide space amidst fluctuating population growth and limited capital funds. Permanent infrastructure is expensive and slow, and we must match solutions to realities. I support using portables while developing a community-informed, fiscally responsible facilities plan that respects both student needs and taxpayer constraints.
|
Position 3: Anna Marie Laurence / Thomas Clarke
Anna Marie Laurence
To reduce the number of portables and overcrowding in our schools, we will need the support of voters to pass both a capital levy and a capital bond in the coming new year. A $396 million bond would pay for a new elementary school and complete replacement of Lowell Elementary school and 12 new elementary classrooms throughout the district. These projects are critical to solving our overcrowding. In addition, I would advocate to the legislature that instead of requiring a 60% supermajority, which is required by state law to pass a bond, that it be a simple majority. Outreach to the community through open forums explaining the importance of the capital bond and levy, the projects it will cover, the cost per assessed value and the input from the public are important factors for understanding and transparency.
Vertical Divider
|
Thomas Clarke
We need to put more money into capital improvement projects, and we need to plan for future growth of Everett Public Schools. Snohomish County is predicted to grow drastically over the next 20 years which means an increase in enrollment by thousands of additional schools. We need to make sure our schools have the capacity to keep up with that growth. We need to build new schools and improve existing infrastructure to ensure we address overcrowding and future growth. All of the new schools we build should be built for double the average enrollment for a school of that level , and all remodeled schools should be built to double current capacity or more to accommodate growth. We also need to be aware of the environmental and social impact of the capital improvement projects we undertake to ensure we are enhancing and preserving the communities were our students live and play.
|
Position 1: Roman Rewolinski / Shaina Langley
Roman Rewolinski
The question points to a real challenge that many districts face. There are, in my mind, too many portables in use across Everett Public Schools. But solving overcrowding and replacing portables is not something the board or any one board member can do alone.
Capital projects depend on voter approved bonds and levies. The board can recognize the need, plan responsibly, and communicate clearly with the public, but it cannot force outcomes. This is a community decision. My job is to make sure the district presents accurate information, builds public trust, and earns support through transparency and good planning. I also support statewide advocacy to change the bond approval threshold from sixty percent to a simple majority. School construction is one of the only areas in Washington that still requires a supermajority to pass, and that leaves too many communities stuck with overcrowded and aging buildings even when a clear majority of voters say yes. It is a fairness issue and a student learning issue. Portables are not ideal, but they are safe and functional classrooms that help us manage enrollment until permanent construction can be funded. The long term solution is continued investment in our facilities, and that only happens when our community is willing to make that investment together. Ultimately, these community decisions are more likely to be approved when the district has a strong reputation and well-earned public trust. I work hard to contribute to that credibility in public, and to help make sure the district earns it in private. Vertical Divider
|
Shaina Langley
Having taught in a portable myself, I know how isolating they can feel and how they impact student safety and sense of belonging. Portables can be a necessary short-term solution, but they’re not sustainable long-term learning environments.
The district currently relies on over 100 portables as temporary classrooms for students and staff, and we must continue to invest in modernizing aging buildings, improve safety and comfort in existing portables, and strengthen communication with stakeholders and partners to coordinate long-term facilities planning and future growth. Maintaining clear communication with families about project timelines and funding will be essential to maintaining trust as we continue to address overcrowding. |
Question #9: What are your priorities for funding in the district? What changes in our budget would you advocate for, and how would you pay for those changes?
Position 3: Thomas Clarke / Anna Marie Laurence
Thomas Clarke
My priorities for funding in the district include well-funded classrooms, programs, and activities where students have environments conducive to learning and the tools they need to thrive.
Well-Funded Classrooms We must make sure that any cuts fall as far from the classroom as possible. We need to continue to make sure that we are recruiting amazing teachers, and not cut teaching positions and not cut materials that our students need to learn, and our teachers need to teach. The 2025-26 EPS Budget, approved by the current School Board (including my opponent) called for 1.66 million dollars in cuts to materials funding. Where is that going to be made up? Will teachers need to start fund me crowd funding campaigns? Will teachers have to go into their own pockets? Will science class be a little lamer with less (minor) explosions and cool chemical reactions. This is an example of a cut that could directly impact the learning and teaching experience in our classrooms, I would vote against million-dollar cuts to materials funding. Well-Funded Arts and Sports Programs I would not cut sports or the arts to save money (as my opponent indicated she would in a recent forum “ “We could cut sports” when discussing cost saving). I would increase funding for sports and the arts and partner with local organizations to make sure our athletes and artists have all the materials, equipment, and space they need to thrive and perform. Sports and the arts have an impact that goes beyond the class room, stage, or field and into the community enriching the lives of students, teachers, parents, and community members. Community Involvement in The Budget Process Prior to approval the budget for 2025-26, there were zero budget related public comments. We need to make sure that the community is informed on how they can provide budgetary feedback, so we prioritize the needs of the community in budget decisions. This includes holding interactive town halls where the community can directly ask questions to the School Board and District financial officials. How do we pay for it? I believe we take some of the money we use to pay bonuses and provided expense accounts to the Superintendent and Executive Staff and put it back into the classroom. The top 10 paid employees of EPS make over $3,000,000 in salary and bonuses. This needs to be scrutinized and executve positions should be eliminated before we ever think of cutting teachers or materials. I don’t believe in cuts to teacher salaries because our district has high quality teachers, and I believe we recruit and keep high quality teachers by paying them well. So we need to make sure our teachers continue to be well compensated and have benefits that provide health, wellness, and security to them and their families. I am also against to on-campus administrators and believe every school should have a principle and vice principle at a minimum. Vertical Divider
|
Anna Marie Laurence
My funding priorities are to have consistent state funding that aligns with growth in the state budget to provide K-12 programs that directly affect student academic learning and success. This includes teachers, paraeducators, curriculum and resources for the classrooms and professional development for teachers who work with ESL students and other special programs. We need to make sure teachers are supported with ample substitute teachers when needed. In addition, I would advocate for greater funding for Special Education, and Materials, Supplies and Operating Costs (MSOC) because insurance and utilities costs have increased dramatically. The state needs to step up and do more to fully cover educational costs, so districts don’t have to rely on levies to fill the gaps.
|
Position 1: Shaina Langley / Roman Rewolinski
Shaina Langley
Fully funding our public schools is our paramount duty under the Washington State Constitution, and a moral obligation to the next generation. Education is the foundation of a free and fair society, and the key to success in life.
My funding priorities center on classrooms first. That means investing in student-facing programs, educator training and support, and safe, well-maintained schools. I will fight for budgets that protect classroom instruction, enrichment, and the arts while scrutinizing every dollar we spend to ensure it leads to student success. And because about three quarters of district funding comes from the state, I will continue to be a strong advocate for equitable, sustainable funding sources for Everett Public Schools. As a public education advocate, I’ve fought alongside fellow educators to protect critical revenue sources like Washington’s Capital Gains Tax, which now contributes nearly $900 million annually to building revitalization and early learning. This highlights my firsthand knowledge of how advocacy at the state level directly impacts student opportunity here in Everett. To fund our local priorities, I will ensure the district makes full use of state resources and continues to fight for federal dollars, while also strengthening communication with community partners, and improving operational excellence through clarity and long-term planning to make sure every dollar we spend reflects our values and directly benefits students. Vertical Divider
|
Roman Rewolinski
My priorities are straightforward. Keep resources closest to students and protect the programs that make a direct difference in the classroom. That means funding teachers, paraeducators, special education services, and student supports before expanding administration or overhead.
The reality is that the state’s funding model does not keep pace with what it actually costs to run a school district. Special education, utilities, insurance, and transporation and other costs are underfunded. Districts end up using local levy dollars to fill gaps that the state should be covering. That is not sustainable, and it puts districts like ours in a constant position of asking voters to do more. I support continued advocacy for a stronger, more predictable state funding model and for legislative fixes to the outdated prototypical school funding model. Districts need flexibility to meet student needs without being penalized by rigid categories and unrealistic assumptions. At the local level, my job is to make sure the budget is responsible, based on reasonable assumptions, transparent, and aligned with student learning. And just as with capital funding, we need state leaders to address inequities in the system, including how levy limits and local effort assistance are structured, so that districts are not forced to rely on one-time fixes to fund ongoing needs. Everett has strong financial integrity now, and I intend to keep it that way. But responsible budgeting also means standing up and saying clearly when the structure itself is broken. Advocacy is part of good stewardship. |
Position 2: Janelle Burke / Jen Hirman
Janelle Burke
My priority is simple, Fund the basics. Defund the bloat. Spend within your means.
Right now, our district budget reflects an evolving definition of “basic education” that includes every political and ideological trend but fails to teach kids to read or graduate without remedial college courses. I would:
Vertical Divider
|
Jen Hirman
Funding priorities should be those that directly impact student academic achievement and well-being. This includes curriculum for classroom teachers that matches state learning standards, technology, professional development to support effective teaching, and programs that support students' health and well-being. As a current school director, I advocate for additional funding from the state to reduce our reliance on local levies to support required programs and services such as special education, materials, supplies and operating costs. I would like to see additional funds provided through IDEA at the federal level, but given current conditions, I feel holding our current levels steady is a main goal for advocating at the federal level this upcoming year.
|
Question #10: The state mandates an average of 100 minutes of PE per week, 20 minutes of seated lunch per day, and 30 daily minutes of recess. None of the elementary schools in ESD are in compliance with this legislation. How do you suggest we fix this to better comply with state law and do better for our kids?
Position 1: Roman Rewolinski / Shaina Langley
Roman Rewolinski
This question combines three different issues: physical education, recess, and lunch. Each is governed by separate rules, timelines, and day to day operations. It also assumes that school boards decide how daily schedules work, which is not the case.
State law requires an average of one hundred minutes of PE per week per year in grades one through eight. That average is measured over time, not by school, and Everett meets it when you look across the district as a whole. The thirty minute recess requirement for elementary students is already in effect, and the twenty minute seated lunch requirement does not begin until the 2029 school year. Meeting those standards depends on building administrators, teachers, and support staff who manage bell schedules, supervision, and staffing. These are operational matters, not policy level decisions. The board’s responsibility is to make sure district policy and resources align with state expectations, monitor compliance through regular reporting, and support staff in doing that work well. I share the intent behind the question. Students need time to move, eat, and reset during the school day. Our lunch lines are too long. But the way the question is written mixes up different laws and overlooks how public education works. These are areas managed by the superintendent and building principals within the framework of the law. My role is to ask good questions, confirm compliance, and ensure that the district provides healthy, balanced learning environments, not to design daily schedules from the boardroom. Vertical Divider
|
Shaina Langley
Compliance with state standards is essential for student mental and physical wellbeing. As an educator, I know that proper recess and lunch directly affect students’ behavior and ability to learn. To meet these requirements, the district can re-evaluate elementary schedules with educator input and identify where our current systems create barriers to compliance. In many schools, instructional blocks, staffing issues, limited supervision, substitute coverage, and lunch schedules all create challenges that leave little time for PE, recess, and nutrition. Addressing these challenges requires district-level support for staffing and scheduling, not just site-level adjustments.
|
Position 2: Jen Hirman / Janelle Burke
Jen Hirman
All of these elements of the school day are important for students and their health and well-being. However, there is some confusion around the legislation.
WAC 392-410-135: Physical education—Grade school and high school requirement states that “an average of at least one hundred instructional minutes per week per year in physical education shall be required of all pupils in the common schools in the grade school program (grades 1-8)”. Middle school students take PE every day for their PE credits, while elementary students have other specialist rotations such as art, music, library and technology. The minutes of PE are averaged over grades 1-8, and so taking this into account and classroom-based physical activity at the elementary level (CBPA), the legislation is being met. Increasing the amount of PE at the elementary level could impact the other specialist rotations beyond PE. I believe these other subjects are also important for giving students a well-rounded education. Finally, elementary teachers know that kids need “brain breaks” and often incorporate physical activities into their classroom day. Regarding seated lunch time, this comes from WAC 392-157-125 which requires a minimum of 20 minutes of seated lunchtime for Kindergarten through 5th-grade students starting with the 2029-30 school year. When adopting this as legislation, the State recognized the challenges that many schools face with long lunch lines (increasing students eligible for free and reduced lunch can increase the number of students receiving lunch versus bringing their own.) This is something the district looks at regularly to improve lunch line efficiency and maximize seated lunch time, and note that students are given extra time to finish their meal if needed. Regarding recess, our current district policies reflect the legislation. Policy 3450 and its accompanying Procedure 3405P are the key ones here. It states “By no later than the 2024-25 school year, the district will provide at least thirty (30) minutes of recess for all elementary-school students each school day that exceeds five (5) hours” as well as other guidelines around physical activity in the classroom and during the school day. This is a relatively recent change, but our policies do reflect these important elements of the school day, and teachers, like parents, understand how important it is for kids to have opportunities to move around throughout the day. Vertical Divider
|
Janelle Burke
This isn’t just a scheduling issue; it’s an attitude issue. When schools deny kids lunch time, or take away recess as punishment, they’re treating kids like inmates. That’s school-to-prison logic. Not free and appropriate education unless we have evolved into prison culture unbeknownst to parents.
Yes, we need more volunteers and support staff but more importantly, we need a district culture that respects the legal and developmental needs of children. Eating and moving are not rewards, they’re rights and the district needs to reprioritize our youth. To fix this we must fix the districts culture:
|
Position 3: Anna Marie Laurence / Thomas Clarke
Anna Marie Laurence
The state law, RCW28A.230.040, requires that students in grades 1-8 get an average of 100 instructional minutes per week of P.E. per year. If you take the average of grades 1-8 over time, we do meet the 100 minutes of P.E. per week. If we extend class time for P.E. then we would need to reduce instructional time in other programs like art, music, or library. A creative way to add additional P.E. minutes in grades 1-5 would be through Classroom Based Physical Activity (CBPA). CBPA is a way of adding physical activity to academic instruction which improves student concentration and reduces disruptive behavior. It also follows our board policy 3405P (p.7-8) that encourages teachers to add movement breaks for students throughout the day.
WAC 392-157-125 regarding lunch duration for K-5 states, “Beginning in the 2029-30 school year, schools must provide students…the opportunity to eat lunch for a minimum of 20 minutes, once the students have received their food through the meal service line.” Currently in the EPS students have 20 minutes for lunch which includes standing in line for food followed by 20 minutes for recess. If students do not finish their lunch in the allotted time, they can take some extra time to finish. Food and Nutrition Services are working together to explore options of shortening food lines to meet the statutory requirement by 2029. School Board Policy 3405P (p.6-7) states, “By no later than the 2024-25 school year, the district will provide at least thirty (30) minutes of recess for all elementary-school students each school day that exceeds five (5) hours.” Recess is unstructured play time that is usually divided up with 20 minutes of recess after lunch and then another 10 minutes during the school day. Students in K-5 are meeting this requirement as administrators review master schedules for all the elementary schools to check that schools are in compliance. Vertical Divider
|
Thomas Clarke
First, we stop letting outside organizations remove our kids from school causing logistical issues in a very tight school day schedule. Second, we prioritize wellness and create policies that create a curriculum that allows PE for every student for 50 minutes 2x week and use that time to get our kids active and teach lessons about wellness. We can incorporate yoga, spin classes for older students, and rotate schedule of fun activities (kickball, basketball, pickleball or other sports). Recess is also important for socialization and citizenship, we need to make sure that our students are getting 30 minutes a day, and the board can work with other stakeholders to ensure our District is compliant by creating a curriculum that allows for 30 minutes of recess/day 20 minutes of seated lunch/day and 2- 50 minute PE Sessions every week. We have great PE teachers and students who love to have fun at recess and PE we need to make sure they have the time and space to have the requisite time in PE and Recess.
Thank you to all the parents, administrators, teachers, tax payers, guardians, and executives of our District! You are awesome and it would an honor to serve on your School Board. |
Hosting this candidate forum demonstrates Everett PTSA's commitment to the PTA mission of being a strong advocate for the health, safety, well-being and education of every child. Our district leaders will be making decisions that affect every family in the Everett school district. We want to ensure that all voters can make informed choices in the November election. Everett PTSA is a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit association that prides itself on being a powerful voice for all children, a relevant resource for families and communities, and a strong advocate for public education.