2008 Commencement Remarks

The following are remarks I delivered at the graduation ceremony of Mount Carmel School's Class of 2008.

-

Tonight, my heart breaks into 36 fragile pieces, all of them dressed in blue, sitting right here in these front row pews.

Tonight, my dear Seniors, I face the moment that I’ve feared for so long: the moment that we must say goodbye.

You know, during all my years in education, I’ve been warned so many times by so any people that I shouldn’t get too close to students. And throughout the past year, I’ve been criticized so many times by so many people that I’ve gotten too close to you.

But you know what? Despite all those warnings and all that criticism, I don’t regret a thing.

I am so glad that I had the chance to get to know each and everyone of you. You have enriched my life more than you’ll ever know. Whether in the classroom, on the stage, in court, or on the court, you have given my life meaning and purpose.

I know it is expected that these commencement speeches should inform, persuade, or even inspire students with words of advice and wisdom.

But, tonight, I choose to do neither of these things, because all I want to do is express how I feel about you, the Class of 2008.

I also know that our public speakers have been chastised for being too emotional. But I don’t care. In fact, I believe that the main problem we all have today is a lack of emotion. We make cold decisions without considering our emotions and the emotions of others. If anything, we need to inject more compassion and empathy and love into our public discourse. In other words, we need emotion.

Besides, any decent scholar of rhetoric knows that Aristotle argued that every good speech must have logos, ethos, and pathos: logic, credibility, and emotional appeal.

So, tonight, I make an emotional appeal to you, my dear Seniors, to listen to these last words I share with you. And I ask you to forgive me if I do, in fact, get a little emotional.

While tonight’s commencement speaker, Janet King, was preparing for her speech, she asked me what makes this class special.

That’s a hard question.

Is it that this class has succeeded at so much: Drama, Basketball, NFL, Mock Trial, and AG Cup? Is it that this class has a bright future: Prestigious colleges, the military, even flight school? Is it that this class always McGyver’s a win: Pep Rallies, Christmas Shows, and even your own graduation? Is it that this class brings a smile to your face with funny jokes about molasses, games like Jeopardy, and movies like Pedro’s Anthem, The Great Ratzby, The Vicente Code, and Richardstein? Is it that this class is so diverse yet so unified: nerds, geeks, jocks, and even “trouble-makers” who come together to support each other in everything from soccer to basketball to mock trial to AG Cup?

Or is it that this class takes great pride in being Mount Carmel knights?

Which one of these characteristics makes this class special?

Probably all of them.

But for me, what makes you special, and the reason I love you so much is this: You opened your hearts to me and let me in. In turn, I opened my heart to you and let you in. And there is no greater gift in the world than that trusting act of love.

For that, I thank you.

And I thank you, the parents, guardians, and families for trusting us with your children. It has been an honor and a privilege to serve them.

Now graduates, as your principal and your teacher, I have one last lesson to share with you. It is a truth that you don’t want to hear, but you know me: I have always shared the truth with you, even when it hurts.

So here it is: You will never be this close as a class again. And, no matter what you’re feeling right now, we will never be this close again either.

I love you guys so much, and it hurts me to admit this, but I’ve seen hundreds of students graduate over the years, and I know this for certain: it’s never the same after tonight.

It’s sad that only when things end, only when we realize that we are losing someone, do we truly appreciate them for all that they are: funny classmates, supportive cheerleader, sympathetic listeners, loyal friends.

I tell you this not to depress you, but to encourage you to cherish this moment, and cherish each other.

You are more beautiful and amazing than you will ever realize. And even after all the you’ve accomplished, the world has yet to see the greatness that is to come from you.
I truly wish I could be there with you when that happens. But it is time for you to set off on your own.

At times, the road ahead will get lonely. And at times, you may want to come crawling back home. But believe me when I tell you that you are ready. You’ve been ready.

And even though it breaks my heart to see you go, I feel so blessed to have been a part of your lives. I honestly hope that I have helped, in some small way, to make your lives better, more meaningful, and worth living. I hope that I have given you as much as you have given me.

And while we will never be this close again, I hope you will come by and visit sometime.I’ll be here, ready to welcome you home.

Balance

Kori Seki, an old classmate and good friend of mine who worked in the California housing market, has shared some of his thoughts on how we can revive the economy. In particular, he called for less restrictive building codes, pointing to old buildings that have lasted the test of time despite being built before the current array of strict building codes. He also argued for lowering property taxes to make it more affordable to build, buy, or own a home. These are certainly good points worth exploring in this economy.

One of the perennial challenges of a democracy and capitalism is balancing the need to protect people from unnecessary harms—including harms from themselves—through regulations like building codes, and trusting people—and the market—enough to refrain from overregulation. Similarly, on one hand we need taxes to fund important government spending, but we shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds by overtaxing a dwindling tax base.

At the risk of oversimplifying ideologies, I suppose that’s why there’s this constant tug between pro-regulation Democrats who want to fund health, education, and welfare, and fiscally conservative Republicans who want to deregulate as much as possible.

Let’s not forget, though, that a big cause of the current economic meltdown was the LACK of regulation in the financial markets.

It’s so hard to come up with a definitive answer that strikes the right balance. The new global market is making it incredibly difficult not only to be competitive, but also to understand what’s happening and where things are going. While I’m not a communist, Karl Marx certainly had it right when he predicted that capitalism run amuck would run society amuck.

Furthermore, while this quickly evolving market calls for flexible and adaptive governance, we must balance the need for swift action with the need for prudent deliberation. There’s no sense in rushing into yet another maelstrom. This need for balance between haste and prudence is also difficult to strike. But strike the balance we must.

New Year's Meanderings...

With the arrival of each new year, it seems there is never a lack of people griping about how bad last year was, and how they hope this new year will be better. Save for the occasional positive pop psychologist, who ever unequivocally celebrates the year just passed without caveats, doubt, or sarcasm? After all, despite the economic meltdown of the past year, American voters reaffirmed our faith in America by electing its first black president, we elected our first delegate to the U. S. Congress, and my daughter got hooked on Twilight-phonics.

I guess it’s a matter of perspective. While the cliché goes that “hindsight is 20/20”, usually, we either romanticize the past, or condemn it. Personally, while I don’t want to be a Pollyanna, I’d rather celebrate the blessings of the past year, learn from its mistakes, and romanticize the future.

Here's to a Happy Old Year...and an even Happier New Year!

HQT, HET, HPT

There has been quite a bit of debate about highly qualified teachers (HQT) and I want to share my thoughts on the issue. But, before I do that, some background might help us better understand the HQT debate.

When President George W. Bush entered office in 2001, he launched the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), an education reform initiative influenced by similar initiatives he had introduced as governor of Texas. The basic premise of NCLB is to push for more accountability in education by linking federal funding for school districts to student performance and teacher competence, both of which must be measured by quantifiable data like standardized test scores.

One key requirement of NCLB is that all teachers must be highly qualified teachers by 2010. In the CNMI, the BOE has determined that in order to be HQT, among other things, one must pass the Praxis, a standardized test of content knowledge (i. e. how much teachers know about basic subjects like math and reading). To “motivate” teachers to acquire HQT status, the BOE laid out carrots (i. e. rewards) for teachers that pass the Praxis, and sticks (i. e. penalties) for teachers that fail. In short, if you passed the Praxis, you got a pay raise. If you failed, you got a pay cut.

Critics of HQT and the Praxis have argued that this system of sticks and carrots demoralizes the profession, especially for those who fail the Praxis. These critics point to the Western cultural bias of the Praxis and note that some very smart people are just not good test takers.

Furthermore, some have argued that rather than focus on highly qualified teachers, we should focus on highly effective teachers (HET). The argument goes that just because a teacher knows her subject matter, does not mean that she can teach it well or that students can and will learn it from that teacher. The current Praxis only tests one’s mastery of subject knowledge, but does not test for one’s ability to teach that knowledge.

As one who works closely with my own teachers, I believe that the HQT-HET debate kind of misses the point. Good teaching, and, in turn, good learning, come in many shapes and forms, shapes and forms that cannot and should not be limited to just HQT or HET. Just as good teaching and learning require a multi-faceted assessment that evaluates diverse aspects of student learning, we should use a multi-faceted assessment model of teachers that evaluates the many different aspects of teaching.

To be sure, our teachers should be highly qualified. But we should not limit ourselves to just one measurement instrument, the Praxis. We should consider alternative assessments of a teacher’s qualifications. We could, perhaps, require teachers to maintain current portfolios that reflect the many dimensions of that teacher’s skills, abilities, experience, and education.

Likewise, our teachers should be highly effective. However, we must move beyond standardized tests and use a variety of measurements to determine the effectiveness of a teacher. For example, how many of a teacher’s students participate in an extra-curricular activity? Or how many of a teacher’s students graduate, go off to college, or acquire meaningful employment after graduation? Standardized tests are just one reflection of a teacher’s effectiveness. We must consider all the ways in which a teacher is effective.

Furthermore, how we measure HQT and HET is as important as what we measure. In this regard, perhaps we should balance the end-product—student learning—with the growth process—teacher learning. While I am a big proponent of student learning, I also know that unless a teacher is growing personally and professionally, student learning will not happen. To grow, though, a teacher needs coaching and feedback from supervisors, mentors, peers, and students. For that to happen, we need to make time for principals and master teachers to conduct meaningful classroom observations, and encourage constructive student evaluations of teachers. Just as good assessment is not a penalty but a tool for student learning, good assessment of a teacher should not penalize her. It should help that teacher grow.

Beyond HQT and HET, though, lies the more important benchmark of a great teacher: HPT: Highly Performing Teachers. These are teachers that go above and beyond their lessons to advise extra-curricular activities, tutor students after school, and volunteer to help the school in other ways needed. These are the teachers that honestly assess themselves and are constantly looking for ways to grow and improve in their craft. These are the teachers that make great schools. These are the teachers that we need.

(For more information, check out this great article by Bess Keller for Education Week that reports on a teacher evaluation instrument that's helping teachers improve their craft.)

A New Era of Expectations

Now that the fanfare of campaigning, elections, and inaugurations are over, it’s time to get to work. Still, I recall that late Saturday night and early Sunday morning following November 3rd. I’ll admit that I stayed up all night, glued to my T. V., watching all the results come in. To be honest, I was truly surprised by the results, and not just for me. Across the board, the candidates that had the most votes were younger candidates and fresh new faces, which was our community’s way of telling us that it’s high time for meaningful change.

However, while I was (and am) excited, I was (and am) also very scared by the expectations that our community had invested in this “new” generation of elected leaders, including myself.
Expectations can be a curse, especially when they’re too high for anyone to realistically achieve. We are not disappointed by those from whom not much is expected. Those who disappoint us the most are those from whom we expect the most.

For my part, I am humbled by the expectations that this community has invested in me, and I will do everything I can to meet those expectations. I certainly do not want to disappoint anyone.

But perhaps it’s time for a new era of expectations. Rather than expecting so much from government, we should expect more from ourselves.

To be sure, we should expect much from government. We should expect our government to pass legislation that serves the general welfare of our community in a just manner for all--citizens and non-citizens alike. We should expect our government to spend its limited resources on those things that really matter, like education, rather than on things that don’t really matter, like tents and picnic tables.

And you, the public, should expect your public school system to provide the best possible education that it can. You should expect your education officials to lobby more aggressively and effectively for the funding and resources our educators need to do their jobs. You should expect your board of education to do more with less, making the most of our limited resources. And you should expect your board to rise above the fray of petty politics and stay focused on our children’s education.

That said, we, as a community, should expect more from ourselves. In the business sector, I applaud the efforts of organizations like the Saipan Chamber of Commerce, which sponsors annual scholarships and holds an annual Career Exploration Day. However, I call on the business sector to do more for education and get more involved with our schools. Scholarships and career days only scratch the surface. We need to consider internship and mentorship programs that allow students to earn high school credit while learning from valuable, real-world experience. We should revive Junior Achievement so that our students can rediscover the value of entrepreneurship by running their own companies. And we should bring business leaders to the education round table to help inform and transform our education policy and goals.

In the parent community, I applaud the efforts of our parent-teacher associations, which provide much needed financial assistance and policy input to our schools. But PTA officers can not do everything on their own. All parents need to take an active interest and an active role, not only in their schools, but most especially in their children’s education. Sadly, schools have become surrogate parents for much of our community, and it is all too common to hear of report card nights where less than 10% of parents show up. Parents must always remember that they are the primary educators of their children. Our schools cannot and should not ever take the place of parents. And research shows that when parents work hand-in-hand with schools, students succeed. It is time for all our students to succeed. It is time for all our parents to fulfill their roles as primary educators.

Lastly, I appeal to the student community. I applaud those students who work hard and achieve great things. But I call on all students to do the same. Students must remember that education is not a passive, spectator sport where your teacher does all the work to “teach” you. In fact, I would argue that it’s not about teaching but about learning, and that requires that you do your part as well.

I also call on your student leaders to step up. For example, I honestly wish that the CNMI Youth Congress would do more. Critics have every right to question the legitimacy of funding a Youth Congress that does nothing. I challenge the current Youth Congress to prove those critics wrong. Can you imagine, come budget time, how powerful it would be for Youth Congress Senators to storm the hallways of the CNMI Legislature, lobbying for education?

The youth have power. It’s time to make good use of it.

This is a time of change that carries the heavy burden of high expectations. Indeed, we have many problems that need fixing. However, government should not be the solution to our problems. We should be the solution to our problems.

The bottom line is that education is everyone’s business. It’s definitely my business, and it’s definitely the business of the Board of Education. But, most importantly, speaking to our entire community, it’s your business. And believe me when I say that it’s time to get down to business.

Budget Shortfalls and Teacher Salary Reclassifications

The Public School System’s Commissioner for Education, David M. Borja, has said recently that due to budget shortfalls, the Board of Education must take action and PSS will have to reclassify teachers’ salary schedules. To put it simply, what he’s saying is that PSS cannot pay teachers what it’s supposed to pay them.

Before I share my opinion on this, it helps to understand the history behind this issue.

In compliance with the No Child Left Behind Act, the BOE and PSS adopted a new salary schedule that is commensurate to a teacher’s education, experience, and performance on the Praxis. PSS had to take this approach to ensure compliance with NCLB’s requirement for highly qualified teachers (HQTs). Otherwise, PSS would not have been able to continue receiving federal funding from NCLB.

Many of you will recall the controversy that emerged when the BOE and PSS implemented these new standards for teachers. Many teachers suffered a pay cut and some teachers even lost their jobs. However, overall, the drive to have highly qualified teachers in classrooms has been good for our schools and good for our students.

Now, because the governor’s office is proposing only 75% of the original budget request from PSS, and because the entire government remains on a continuing resolution budget, PSS does not have enough money to pay teachers who have acquired HQT status. This budget quagmire is exacerbated by the overcrowding and understaffing in public schools.

So, what’s my opinion on this? I think it is unprofessional, unethical, and unfair to have encouraged teachers to spend money and time in acquiring HQT status, and then deprive them of the very incentive you promised they would get. It also strikes me as rather irresponsible for the commissioner to discuss this possibility openly with the public without first discussing it with the board. The media is the wrong venue to bring such matters before the board.

What, then, should be done? First, the governor’s office should return the money it “borrowed” from PSS. Second, the governor’s office should reinstate the original budget and budget request of PSS. If the governor’s office refuses to do either, then it should reimburse the federal government for NCLB funds that PSS has received because refusing to pay for highly qualified teachers is equivalent to reneging on NCLB.

Third, assuming that the governor’s office will do nothing, the board should work with the legislature to reinstate its original budget request and to secure an emergency appropriation. However, this will be difficult to do with a lame duck legislature. Hopefully, members of that lame duck legislature will have enough of a commitment to the public that they will use their remaining time to help PSS. After all, without reelection worries looming over their heads, perhaps now they can make some bold decisions that may be politically unpopular.

Fourth and last (for now), assuming both the governor’s office AND the legislature do nothing, PSS has no choice but to look internally at what its options are. PSS and the BOE made a commitment to have highly qualified teachers and pay them as such. Now it’s time to live up to that commitment. I know that there may be nothing left to cut, but something must be done now before we lose good teachers or before a lawsuit is laid against the school system, a lawsuit that would sap even more cash from a cash-strapped system. And as I’ve said before, mitigation is so much more affordable, and preferred, than litigation.

Why AM I running anyway?

Picture above: My dad, Ben "Rai", who used to always say, "If you can do it, do it."

Warning: The following commentary is long, but I hope you will bear with me because what follows is an open and honest discussion that any candidate for public office should have with her/himself and the public.

Given that elections are tomorrow, it seems rather late of me to explain why I am running for the Board of Education. However, up to this point, I thought it was more important to share my thoughts and insights on education with the public than to explain why I’m running because voters should know my approach to education before they know my approach to campaigning.

So, to the question at hand: Why have I chosen to run for public office? Before I answer that question, I want to explain why I, or anyone else for that matter, should NOT run for office. For now, I have six reasons.

Reason one: It’s expensive and time-consuming. It doesn’t have to be, but it usually is. On the campaign trail, you spend money and time publicizing yourself. If elected to office, you spend time in meetings, community gatherings, and all sorts of other engagements. Once in office you also spend money on donations to this or that charity, helping someone with their CUC bill, or giving chenchule to the family that invited you to their Christening, wedding, or funeral. Contrary to conventional wisdom, I have seen too many politicians lose money both in and out of office. Therefore, it doesn’t surprise that some politicians take bribes or kickbacks of some kind. They’re simply trying to recoup their losses. Why would I want to sacrifice all that time and money only to put myself in a position where I might be tempted to compromise my integrity and convictions? It would be wiser to invest my time and money into my family.

Reason two: People often expect too much from government, especially here in the Commonwealth. We live in the aftermath of the Trust Territory welfare state and the boom economy of the 1980s and 1990s where government doled out jobs and money and favors left and right. We, the people of the Commonwealth have been trained to believe that the government is the answer to all our problems, which is a far cry from my grandparent’s generation, for whom hard work over a long period of time was the key to a successful life. Today, we want instant gratification and magic solutions from a government whose benefits we feel entitled to. Such inflated expectations are virtually impossible for anyone to fulfill.

Reason three: While people expect too much from government, it is very difficult to achieve anything in democratic government. Democracy is meant to be slow and prudent because you have to work with other people. As I’ve said before, getting a group of opinionated people with ideas and interests of their own to agree upon a single course of action is very, very hard. Add to that democratic process the red tape of a bureaucratic government and you get a recipe for paralysis. You get a situation where nothing changes easily or quickly, if anything changes at all.

Reason four: Jumping into the public arena subjects me to the scrutiny of an often unforgiving and overly critical public eye. As a private citizen, I can pretty much just be myself and make decisions that I think are right, without having to worry about too many critics and snide remarks. If I make a mistake, I deal with manageable consequences and work to fix what’s wrong. However, campaigners and public servants have to deal with all sorts of people who have anything and everything to say about anything and everything that you do. And if you make a mistake, even if you’re humble enough to admit it, you must face a firing squad of critics, pundits, angry voters, and opponents who are all too willing to take advantage of your blunders.

Reason five: I am busy as it is. I am a full-time principal, full-time father, and full-time husband, who also teaches two classes and advises some extra-curricular activities. The last thing I need is another heavy load on my plate. For my own personal sanity, it would be better to avoid additional commitments, like public office.

Reason six: Am I truly qualified for the position? Who am I to think that I can or should be in a position to make important decisions about thousands of students, hundreds of teachers, and a system that has a profound impact on the welfare and future of our Commonwealth? The burden of that responsibility alone scares me. While I do have over a decade of varied experience in education, it would be arrogant of me to say that I definitely have what it takes to take on this position.

I bring up all these reasons against running because I believe that anyone who decides to run for public office should have reasons compelling enough to outweigh those reasons listed above.

In my case, I am running because of something my dad taught me a long time ago. My dad used to wake me and my brother up every Saturday morning to work on the yard. I hate yard work, so it was a constant struggle with me. However, when I finally got behind that lawnmower, my dad would always say, “If you can do it, do it.” That has always stuck with me.

Despite all the reasons above, I believe that I can and should make a difference. I’m tired of helping my students understand what our community’s problems are, without doing anything to change things for the better. It is hypocritical of me to point the finger at what’s wrong, without lifting a finger to fix what’s wrong.

I may lose money and time—but I will not do so inappropriately or unethically. People may expect too much, I may not accomplish much, and I will probably be criticized much no matter what I do or don’t do—but it’s still worth a shot. And I may be busy as it is and I may not be qualified enough—but I am committed enough to make time and make a good effort.

I am very passionate about education and I sincerely believe that a good education system can make a positive difference in our community. The Public School System has accomplished a lot so far, and I want to help it accomplish even more.

In short, I am running because I want to do my part to help our community.

And as my dad used to say, “If you can do it, do it.”