PI editorial: Changing Leaders

Another rational editorial from the PI, this time about finding a superintendent. Changing Leaders talks about this issue in the context of how Board members are elected. They also have a poll about how good a superintendent people think the Board will find. As of 11 AM Friday, it stands:
9.9 %- excellent
6.1% - good
34.1%-adequate, more or less
25%- poor
12.2%-disasterous
12.2%-don't know

An admittedly unscientific poll but at least the majority believe in adequate and above.

I wrote to another group this morning saying that if anyone has any suggestions for the Board on what is important in a Superintendent or how to help the process, now is the time to e-mail them. Also, if you know any candidates (Mike Rielly in Bellevue comes to mind), e-mail them as well. It is important to be help the process and not be a naysayer or obstructionist. I do worry about a lot of PC needling. My main suggestion to the Board is to talk through their entire plan before they outline it to the public (pros, cons, what could people say against it and what should the Board's response be) and Google candidates BEFORE you release their names to the media. You can learn a lot from what you read especially if you keep hearing the same phases over and over (like fights with teachers' union, arrogant, aloof). None of those things in and of themselves should eliminate a candidate (I don't care if the super is touch-feely) but if you get two or more of those lined up, beware.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Why the Majority of the Board Needs to be Filled with New Faces

Who Is A. J. Crabill (and why should you care)?