LETTER: Nevada’s new superintendent must put students first
Summary
The letter, written by Len Marciano of North Las Vegas, urges Gov. Joe Lombardo to appoint a Nevada superintendent of public instruction who is an active advocate for children and a driver of reform — not someone who simply maintains the status quo. The writer criticises the State Board of Education for presenting three candidates from a body ‘not known for shaking up things’ and says the governor can accept one of the three or request new candidates. The central point: Nevada’s students lag behind national norms in reading and maths and need a superintendent who will revamp the system.
Key Points
- Governor Lombardo must select a superintendent who prioritises students and champions change.
- The State Board of Education provided three candidates, but the governor may reject them and seek other options.
- The author argues involvement in education isn’t enough — the new superintendent must be an activist for children.
- Nevada’s students are falling below grade level in reading and maths and have trailed national norms for decades.
- The governor should clarify how the chosen superintendent will act as an agent of change to improve educational outcomes.
Content Summary
Len Marciano writes that Nevada needs a superintendent who will actively push for meaningful reforms in public education. He highlights long-standing problems — poor reading and maths performance and underperformance against national averages — and argues the next superintendent must be committed to turning those trends around. The State Board sent three candidates to the governor; Marciano urges Lombardo to pick a reformer or ask for different nominees and to explain how that person will improve students’ futures.
Context and Relevance
This letter matters because the superintendent sets priorities for statewide education policy, funding direction and accountability — all of which affect test scores, classroom resources and long-term opportunities for Nevada children. The piece connects to broader debates about school reform, leadership accountability and how states address persistent underachievement. For readers interested in local politics, education policy or how leadership choices translate into classroom results, the topic is directly relevant.
Why should I read this?
Short answer: because if you care about kids in Nevada — or how state leaders actually fix long-term problems — this cuts to the chase. It tells you who the writer thinks should be fighting for students (and why the usual ‘carry on’ approach won’t do).
Author style
Punchy — the letter is direct and insistent. It presses the governor to be explicit about picking a reform-minded superintendent and makes clear this choice will shape students’ futures.
