Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
vote for
Hayward, Calvez & Robinson
My primary goal would be to develop and maintain a clear, long-term plan that preserves Glen Rock’s academic excellence while ensuring that the district remains financially sustainable. This starts with hiring a visionary superintendent.
I look at student achievement and growth, the breadth and quality of our academic programs, staff retention, community satisfaction, and whether we are able to control costs without negatively affecting the classroom.
I bring a combination of educational leadership, technology, budgeting, strategic planning and Board experience to that work. Professionally, I manage large-scale technology initiatives and shared-service programs in public education, and I hold a master’s degree in Educational Leadership. I am accustomed to looking at both the educational and financial sides of a decision and asking a very simple question:
How does this improve education for students, and are we accomplishing it in the most effective way possible?
I strongly support collective purchasing and shared services when they produce real savings without reducing the quality of services provided to students. In my career, I have been involved with sharing services among many school districts, and I have seen how cooperation can reduce costs in areas such as technology, telecommunications, infrastructure and more.
I will advocate for a formal review of every administrative vacancy before it is automatically filled. When someone retires or leaves, we should ask whether the position needs to remain exactly as is, whether responsibilities can be reorganized, whether technology can make the operation more efficient, or whether the service could be shared with another district.
That does not mean eliminating positions simply to say that we reduced headcount. It means taking advantage of vacancies and natural attrition to continually examine how the district operates rather than assuming an organizational structure.
The Board is obligated to listen to the community. Residents are funding the school district, sending their children to our schools and living with the results of the policies we adopt. Their concerns deserve to be heard and taken seriously.
At the same time, listening does not mean that every decision can be made simply by counting how many people speak for or against an issue. A Board has to consider the law, educational research, professional recommendations, financial consequences and, most importantly, the needs of all students.
Before major decisions are made, the community must understand an issue, alternatives being considered and the reasoning behind the decision. When possible, residents should have meaningful opportunities to provide input before a policy is finalized.
The Board must evaluate whether a policy is accomplishing what was intended. Good governance means listening, making an informed decision and being willing to make adjustments when necessary.
One of the most important things we can do for our students is retain excellent teachers. Compensation is part of that discussion, but teacher retention involves much more than salary.
An environment where teachers feel respected, supported and able to concentrate on teaching is imperative. Teachers need Meaningful PD, strong mentoring, access to the resources and technology they need, reasonable administrative expectations and opportunities for teachers to participate in decisions that directly affect instruction.
I would also look closely at unnecessary paperwork, duplicative reporting requirements and other administrative burdens that take teachers away from students. Technology should reduce workload, not create another layer of work.
Finally, we need to provide opportunities for teachers to grow professionally. Teacher leadership, mentoring, curriculum development and other opportunities can allow us to recognize and retain talented educators while benefiting the entire district.
I would not begin with an arbitrary number of administrative positions to be eliminated. I would examine each position and whether responsibilities overlap.
As vacancies occur, review the positions. Some responsibilities may be combined, redistributed or handled through shared services. In other cases, the review may demonstrate that a position is essential and should remain.
I would apply the same analysis to the middle school/high school leadership structure. I would not decide the issue simply because one organizational model is more common than another. If the evidence demonstrates that separate leadership would materially improve the operation of the two schools, I would consider supporting it. But I would also look for opportunities elsewhere in the administrative structure to offset that cost. The goal should not simply be fewer administrators or more administrators—it should be the right administrative structure for Glen Rock.
My first priority is stronger K–12 alignment. Clearly identify what students are expected to know and ensure that transition from K-5 to MS/HS is deliberate and consistent.
I would emphasize technology, computer science, AI and digital literacy. AI is changing higher education and the workplace. Students need to understand how to use AI responsibly, how to evaluate the accuracy and bias of information it produces, and when technology is—and is not—an appropriate tool.
Writing, research, critical thinking, mathematics, science, history and the ability to defend an idea with evidence must remain central to a Glen Rock education.
I would strengthen practical learning opportunities—including financial literacy, career exploration, internships and exposure to technical and professional careers—while continuing to support the arts, humanities, athletics and the broad academic opportunities that define an excellent school system.
Finally, curriculum decisions should be driven by evidence.
My overarching goal is to put Glen Rock on a sustainable long-term path through a strategic plan we can actually execute. Academic excellence and financial sustainability are not competing priorities. Our budget should reflect what we value educationally and guide where we invest limited resources. Success means establishing measurable goals for student achievement, programming, staffing, facilities and finances, then reviewing our progress annually and looking beyond a single budget cycle. I bring six years of Board experience, including service as President and Vice President, along with experience as a military officer, nurse anesthesiologist and healthcare leader. These roles have taught me to navigate complex systems, build consensus, evaluate evidence, manage limited resources and remain focused on outcomes. A strategic plan cannot sit on a shelf; it must guide our decisions.
I strongly support shared services and collective procurement when they save money without compromising student services. During my six years on the Board, we have pursued partnerships with the municipality and other districts, shared services and salaries where appropriate, and cooperative purchasing agreements. We must continue tightening our resources by critically evaluating programs, contracts, staffing and services to determine what is effective, what can be delivered more efficiently and where savings are possible. Our largest cost drivers include salaries and benefits, special education and out-of-district placements, and transportation. There are no easy solutions. My priority is to manage these pressures responsibly while having as little impact as possible on student education. Our strategic plan should help us identify community priorities and direct limited resources where they have the greatest impact on students.
The Board should listen carefully to residents, seek community input and explain decisions as openly as possible. But listening does not mean governing by whichever position generates the most emails or fills the most seats at a meeting. We must consider public feedback alongside student needs, professional expertise, finances, law and policy. Transparency also does not mean the public can have every piece of information available to the Board. We receive confidential personnel information, legal advice and collective bargaining information that we are obligated to protect. That can make public decision-making frustrating. Throughout my tenure, I have tried to bridge that gap by explaining, to the greatest extent appropriate, why I make the decisions I make. Residents deserve to be heard and respected, while each Board member must ultimately exercise independent judgment on behalf of every student.
Stability matters. Glen Rock experienced a revolving door of superintendent leadership for years, and when I joined the Board in 2020, that instability was already a longstanding concern. Supporting teachers means creating an environment where excellent educators want to build careers. Compensation and benefits matter, but so do professional respect, strong leadership, meaningful professional development, mentoring and manageable administrative demands. Most importantly, I want teachers at the table when developing initiatives. The people doing the work every day understand problems and potential solutions in ways that cannot be replicated from a conference table. We have fostered a positive relationship with our teachers’ association, and I want to continue that partnership, listen to feedback, build consensus and involve educators in developing innovative solutions that improve education.
I would not begin with a predetermined number of administrators to eliminate. As we develop our strategic plan, we should evaluate positions against student needs, educational goals, enrollment and workload, while benchmarking ourselves against comparable high-achieving districts. The same principle applies to separating the middle and high school principal positions. I am open to reconsidering the structure, but first we must answer: What problem are we trying to solve? If separate leadership addresses an identifiable need with measurable outcomes, it deserves serious consideration. Decisions should not be driven by speculation, assumptions or simply what is more common elsewhere. Define the problem, establish SMART goals, evaluate alternatives and costs, and determine whether the change is the best solution. We should be able to articulate what any additional taxpayer investment will accomplish.
Glen Rock is a high-achieving district, and I am confident in our educators’ ability to teach state standards and our students’ ability to exceed them. Excellence, however, cannot mean remaining stagnant. I want to focus on the middle/high school transition and preparing students for an evolving world. Most graduates pursue college, but we must also prepare students for nontraditional pathways and the future workforce. That means strong foundations in math, science, literacy and critical thinking alongside financial, technology and AI literacy, communication and adaptable problem-solving. We should also evaluate existing initiatives before continually adding new ones. I want to assess the Math Lab begun last year: Is it reaching the students it was designed to serve, and what outcomes are we seeing? Identify needs, implement thoughtfully, measure results and improve.
The goal which I both prioritize and for which success can be readily measured is that of reducing technology dependence in our classrooms. I have the somewhat unusual perspective of a STEM doctorate holder who is also a skeptic of STEM-centered education, particularly technology-focused approaches. I have extensive experience in higher education classrooms, and from that have an understanding of what skills graduating high school students truly need in college and in the workforce, and how those skills are being eroded by our current approaches. I will use my expertise to drive action towards this goal. I would consider it a success if all general middle-school classes used pen-and-paper classwork and assignments as a default, with exceptions for specific "computer" classes and for necessary individualized accommodations.
I am absolutely in favor of both of those tools. When you zoom out, New Jersey (due to long-standing factors) has relatively few students per school district, and more districts per county than any other state. While hyperlocal control of education may have some advantages, it is well known that New Jersey has one of the highest rates of administrative spending per student, and (not coincidentally) the highest effective property taxes in the country. Both the state senate (S-4861) and assembly (A-4584) have bills related to consolidation. While that is naturally out of the purview of the BoE, at our scale we should be taking every opportunity to work with neighboring towns and public institutions to collectively lower our costs. I believe spending money on education is critical, but as public servants it is equally critical to ensure that every dollar is spent in a way that maximizes impact. These efficiencies are a way to reduce costs without actually changing services or programs.
The BoE are democratically-elected representatives, and therefore should be balancing their own knowledge and expertise with faithfully responding to the concerns of residents. However, it is always important to first ascertain what those really are. A comparatively small number of people are able to physically participate in public meetings, but that does not mean that others hold uninformed views, or are unaffected. The Board therefore has an obligation to keep its finger on the community pulse through frequent interactions with community members, along with HSAs and other school groups, to fully understand what the majority desires. This can then be considered alongside any non-public information the BoE is privy to before making decisions. When a decision looks to be controversial, it is best greeted by transparency - voting one way or another will by definition not satisfy everyone, but a good-faith explanation may satisfy more people.
This starts with a very simple question, into which unfortunately we do not have great insight as members of the public - what do teachers that have departed say might have caused them to stay instead? Sometimes, departures are inevitable due to personal circumstance, and in other cases general dissatisfaction with the previous administrative regime might have been a factor. However, we simply do not know the answer.
In the absence of definitive information, I would propose increasing teacher salaries, providing more pathways to advancement outside of an administrative track (e.g. reviving "department head" positions), and ensuring prompt corrective measures are taken when teachers leave our district for seemingly avoidable reasons. Keeping experienced, successful teachers who understand our district in the classroom is the best way to ensure the continued success of the district.
I approach fiscal questions with the starting principle that education is the best use of public money, but that people spending public money have a duty to do so effectively. In my mind, the concern isn’t about administrative costs themselves, but about the benefit students are deriving from them - and whether they would benefit more by restructuring that would free up money for other purposes. There is no current evidence based on academic performance that the district’s switch to a supervisor system over department heads has been a positive one. In the case of the middle/high school principal, there is actual evidence to suggest that increasing administrative costs by introducing a leadership position will benefit students. We need to look at the specifics, rather than bucketing “administrative spending” as a single thing.
Glen Rock curriculum needs to become less dependent on technology, with a focus on screen-free classrooms as the default through at least middle school. ELA and math achievement scores easily exceed state averages, but there is no good reason for fully a quarter of students to be performing below grade level in either of these disciplines - acceleration programs in elementary school are a useful tool, allowing teachers to focus more attention on those who need more help. There are also early gender gaps in both ELA (boys underachieve) and math (girls underachieve). Finally, our district has a poor track record of producing bilingual students - public records indicate that very few of our graduates receive the NJ State Seal of Biliteracy, awarded to over 11% of graduates statewide. Multilingualism is well known to benefit cognition and learning in other subjects, and requiring more rigor in second (and third) language achievement will benefit academic achievement across the board.
