Archives for category: Administrators, superintendents

David Kirp writes that the frequent firing and turnover of coaches in the National Basketball Association is destabilizing, and the same is true in the superintendency of school districts. Of course, bad superintendents should be removed, but when the superintendent is doing a good job, they should have time to get something accomplished. The bottom line is that school districts need stability, not churn or upheaval. The same is true for schools, where stability promotes a strong culture and good working relationships. Just as coaches need time, so do principals and teachers.

Kirp is the author of “Improbable Scholars” and is a professor of public policy at Berkeley.

Rudy Crew left his job as czar of education for the state of Oregon after one year. He is the former chancellor of public schools in New York City and Miami. Crew will return to NYC to become president of Medger Evers College, part of the City University of New York.

As he left Oregon, officials there complained about his travel expenses and vacation time. As czar, he had some good ideas, but the legislature refused to fund them.

This comment just arrived in response to the post about California having the nerve to defy all-wise, all-powerful Arne Duncan:

“State Superintendent Tom Torlakson is a former teacher. When he gathered a group of educators to hammer out the blueprint for the future of CA schools, he wisely selected classroom teachers to be on the task force. I was honored to be co-chair of the Teacher Evaluation committee.

“We believed then and do now that evaluating a teacher via an algorithm is a poor and cheap way to do the hard and time-consuming work of evaluating a teacher effectively. Students deserve more.

“I am proud to call Tom Torlakson my leader.

Martha Infante
Teacher
Los Angeles

Received this morning:

Short: http://j.mp/12nVmuG

http://www.laschoolsmatter.info/2013/07/venceremos-join-community-search-for.html

¡Venceremos! Join the community search for a new LAUSD superintendent!

An open letter and call to action to our LAUSD community and national education experts regarding the urgent search for a new LAUSD Superintendent

If the union is sound and the teachers voted of their own free will, then the relationship between the school superintendent and the teachers is not simply bad, but dysfunctional of historic proportions. — Professor Bill Tierney

When John Deasy was proffered by Eli Broad and Mayor Villaraigosa as the sole candidate to replace the retiring Ramon C. Cortines, there was no attempt to consider the appropriate superintendent for the community. Even the typically equivocating Los Angeles School District (LAUSD) Board Member Steve Zimmer voiced serious concerns:

“We didn’t have a process — internal or external — for the most important job in public education in the United States right now,” he tells the Weekly. “It has nothing to do with John Deasy. I’m a big fan. … But I can’t be sure that I got the best person for the job if I didn’t get to even talk to anybody else.”

Democracies depend on processes. There was no process with Deasy. No vetting. No considering the pro and cons of multiple candidates. The only words that could begin to describe his installment are coronation and ordination.

Far more corporate executive than educator, Deasy’s reign as LAUSD Superintendent been an abject exercise in neoliberalism. Marked first by a rash of school closures, reconstitutions, and new school giveaways to private institutions, Deasy made it clear to Los Angeles that he would indeed put his ideology derived from his stints at at the Broad Superintendents Academy and the Gates Foundation before the needs of students and community. There’s a litany of complaints against Deasy, most of which are related to callous cuts to vital programs, wasteful and inappropriate spending priorities, adoption of discredited and unproven policies, defiance towards our publicly elected schoolboard, and open hostility towards the very educators tasked with teaching our community’s children.

However, this isn’t the space to discuss Deasy’s glaring shortcomings and myriad failures as superintendent. Given that his only supporters are billionaires, nonprofits that are funded by those selfsame billionaires, and the disgraced former Mayor, there is no longer any reason for this individual to continue his neoliberal project of dismantling our public commons. Instead we are commencing the search for a new superintendent now so that we don’t end up in the same situation as we did when Deasy was crowned.

To that end, we are soliciting a list of viable superintendent candidates we feel will best serve the students of Los Angeles. We are also soliciting a list of attributes the community wants our next superintendent to have. Some starter items are here, but it’s important that this is a community project, so we want people to email their suggestions. Both of these lists will be continually updated here. Join us. We can identify the next superintendent candidates who will serve our community. ¡Venceremos!

Candidates for LAUSD Superintendent

James Morris
Currently superintendent of The Fremont Unified School District. Several well respected community leaders, administrators, and teachers have suggested Mr. Morris, who worked in LAUSD for many years.
Qualities we want in our next superintendent

Believes in educating the whole child
Bilingual or multilingual
Willing to listen to the community
Social media campaign

We intend to launch a social media campaign in support of this historic community project to find the right superintendent for our community. Stay tuned for details.

A bit over a year ago, I wrote about the arrival of a new superintendent in Dallas. Mike Miles is a man with a military background who is a graduate of the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy. What could go wrong?

He had a long list of goals, for example:

“By 2020, he says, the graduation rate will be up to 90% from the 2010 rate of 75%.

By 2020, SAT scores will jump by 30%, and 60% of students will achieve at least a 21 on the ACT.

80% of students will be workplace ready, as determined by assessments created by the business and nonprofit communities.

He will create a new leadership academy to train principals in one year, based on what sounds like NYC’s unsuccessful one.

Teachers will be observed up to ten times a year, and these observations will factor into a pay-for-performance plan.

All classroom doors must be open all the times. so that teachers may be observed at any time, without warning.

Principals will have one year “to demonstrate that they have the capacity and what it takes to lead change and to improve the quality of instruction.”

Miles did not say how he intends to measure whether principals have this capacity.

By August 2015:

“At least 75 percent of the staff and 70 percent of community members agree or strongly agree with the direction of the district.

At least 80 percent of all classroom teachers and 100 percent of principals are placed on a pay-for-performance evaluation system.At least 60 percent of teachers on the pay-for-performance evaluation system and 75 percent of principals agree that the system is “fair, accurate and rigorous.”

But things did go wrong.

A reader sent this commentary. If you live in Dallas and you have a different perspective, let me know.

The reader writes:

A year later, and what has Dallas seen?

1. Bloodletting has extended to principals. Board formally fired two principals, both popular with teachers and students.

2. Board no longer supports Miles. Budget meetings last week were nasty. Board was very unhappy with $4 million spent for a “principals academy.” Board members realize that their favorite principals are in Miles’s crosshairs, and they realize there is probably no good reason for that.

3. Miles’s staff has been wracked with dissent. His hand-picked “cabinet” of seven or eight top aides has fallen apart, with some positions turning over three times in a year, with experienced and respected pro administrators leaving abruptly, and with one indicted in the Atlanta cheating scandals. The TFA hire hasn’t worked out.

4. Texas has turned on teachers AND administrators.

5. Dallas ISD has what looks like zero swat in Austin, with the legislature refusing to restore death-dealing cuts to education from a year ago.

6. Test results and fair measures of student performance seem to have stalled.

7. Summer school had to scale back. Teachers refused to work for extra money because they fear arbitrary evaluations, which continue during summer school classes.

If there is a single, clear educational advance in Dallas, can someone point it out to us?

Alas, our wishes of good luck were all the teachers got.

This is a surprise.

Rudy Crew, former chancellor of the New York City public schools, former superintendent of the Miami Dade schools, currently chief education officer of the state of Oregon, will return to New York City to assume the presidency of Medger Evers College in Brooklyn, which is part of the City University of New York system.

New York State Commissioner of Education will speak at the graduation ceremonies of a charter school in Syracuse affiliated with the Gulen network. King himself came out of the charter sector, so his favoritism towards charters is not surprising.

The Gulen network is the largest charter chain in the nation. It is allied with a reclusive Turkish imam who lives in the Poconos in Pennsylvania yet wields political power in Turkey.

Critics were quick to question King’s decision. Gulen charters are usually distinguished by an all-male, all-Turkish board of directors. Many of their teachers are imported from Turkey. Some Gulen charters exclude students with special needs.

In some states that are besotted with accountability, the policy leaders are convinced that students will do better if the tests get harder every year.

Florida and Texas immediately come to mind.

Would basketball players get better if the basket were raised 6″ every year? Would football players score more points if the goal posts got moved back 5 yards every year?

But that is what is happening in Florida right now.

The state announced that it was changing the scoring. If a school performed better on the FCAT, the state test, it might get a lower grade because the cut scores were going to be moved up.

The state superintendents complained, and said this was not fair.

But Jeb Bush’s organization, the Foundation for Educational Excellence, quickly responded with a letter saying that it was necessary to keep raising the bar.

Imagine how discouraging that is for students and teachers, when their successes quickly turn to failure because of a political decision.

Superintendents fear A-to-F grades will drop, ask State Board to make changes to formula

Leslie Postal

7:13 p.m. EDT, June 10, 2013
Florida’s school superintendents are worried that despite better scores on some state tests, public schools will see their annual A-to-F grades fall in 2013. They want the State Board of Education to “mitigate” that predicated fallout by altering the tougher school grading formula it adopted last year, according to a letter their association sent last week.
The letter from Wally Cox, the president of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents, detailed several worries about the 2012 grading changes, some of which won’t be fully implemented until this year.
“Even though many of our schools posted substantial increases in their 2013 test scores, their School Performance grades are likely to drop,” wrote Cox, superintendent of Highlands County schools, in a letter to Chairman Gary Chartrand.
The lower grades, he added, will be the results of an “ever-changing” grading system, rather than lower test scores.
“The ever-changing nature of the School Performance Grading formula and its resulting outcomes continue to confuse the public and further erode trust in the state’s accountability system,” the letter said.


The superintendents made several suggestions, including keeping a rule that no school’s grade can drop by more than one letter grade a year. That rule was in effect in 2012 but was adopted as one-year-only regulation meant to give schools time to adust to the tougher grading.
They also suggested that FCAT writing scores not be judged on stricter standard this year, as the formula requires.
The Florida Department of Education could not immediately say late Monday if Chartrand, or Education Commissioner Tony Bennett (who was sent a copy), had responded to the letter.
Bennett has said he expected school grades to drop because of the more rigorous grading formula in place for this year.

Jeb Bush’s group tells State Board to stay the course, stick with tougher school grading

Leslie Postal

7:57 p.m. EDT, June 10, 2013
Jeb Bush‘s influential education foundation, after getting word about the superintendents’ recent request for school-grade relief, sent a letter of its own to the State Board of Education today. The Foundation for Florida’s Future urged the board to stay the course and stick with tougher grading as a way to increase “student learning and success.”
The letter by Patricia Levesque, the foundation’s executive director, said Florida has had success boosting student achievement by repeatedly and “deliberately increasing requirements and expectations.”
The foundation noted Florida has ratcheted up the A-to-F grading formula several times before — and each time, after an initial drop in grades, schools have then earned better marks.
The group expects the same will happen now, if the board keeps the stricter formula in place.
“The Foundation asks you to remain strong and consistent on school accountability by moving forward with the rules that were in place when the school year started — the rules the superintendents knew they needed to play by during this past school year,” Levesque wrote.
A bit to add at 8:08 PM June 10, 2013

It is pretty tough to explain to third graders that their school increased its performance but the grade dropped. It is also difficult to explain to the public that the grades reflect a political curve. Will be interesting to see if Gov. Scott agrees with the Superintendents or the former Governer. OCPS tells the story by noting the highest performing schools and those with the greatest improvement. Never do educators send mixed signals to kids and expect that the following year the students will work as hard. Consistently high expectations and never unattainable moving targets.

 

The Rhode Island state board of education will vote today on whether to renew Deborah Gist’s contract as State Commissioner of Education.

It seems likely she will be reappointed since Governor Lincoln Chafee favors her, as does the new chair of the state board.

Rhode Island teachers don’t like her.

In a poll, 85% said they opposed her reappointment.

Rhode Island students have opposed Gist’s insistence on high-stakes testing, especially her use of a standardized test (NECAP) as a requirement for high school graduation.

A few days ago, Arne Duncan placed a conference call to several journalists to let them know that he supports her.

For the Secretary of Education to inject himself into state or local politics is unusual, though not for Arne Duncan.

When mayoral control in New York City was up for renewal before the state legislature in New York in 2009, Duncan called a major civic group and urged it not to propose that members of the central board serve for a set term, with a measure of independence; he agreed with Mayor Bloomberg that board members appointed by the mayor should serve at the pleasure of the mayor.

Duncan succeeded in stopping that small-gauge effort to create a semblance of checks and balances in New York City.

Curious alliances these days: Gist is a member of Jeb Bush’s ultra-conservative Chiefs for Change, and she has the support of Duncan and charter advocates, but not the teachers she leads or the activist students in the public schools.

 

There are times when reality is zanier than satire.

Read about Douglas County, Colorado, where choice fanatics run the district.

They want students and families to choose schools the way you choose a color for your car or a brand of cereal.

In other words, they don’t believe in public education.

They don’t believe in the democratic ideal of common schooling, where children from many backgrounds learn together. They believe in consumerism.