Thursday, May 10, 2007

A Blog from Charleston about the Superintendent

This is a link to a blog that appears in the Post-Courier in Charleston.

9 comments:

classof75 said...

When I saw that we only had two candidates for the board to choose from & then that one dropped from consideration- I was worried that the board wouldn't say- we need more choices.
I haven't seen or heard anything that hasn't made me feel like we haven't jumped from the frying pan to the fire.

Another superintendent given an expensive contract by an outgoing board?


from your link
Just catching up on the amazing number of posts on this blog. I have to say about Dr. G-J, as a person who lived in Corpus Christi, Texas AND Charleston, SC during her tenures in BOTH cities...

Seattle: My heart weeps for thee.

Anonymous said...

Be sure to look at the rest of the Newsless Courier blog. The latest postings may cause even more heartburn. When Dr.G-J is in town for the meet & greet on the 17th, watch to see if her clip Q/A style has changed or if she shows any humility at all. BTW she is so vain; she reads all the reports (& blogs?) if they name her but then says she hasn't. Just like she blew off the annual report from a large Charleston teachers' group last week. She said she hadn't read it, but added by saying they were just a small minority suffering from a "disconnect".

Anonymous said...

I thought this was interesting, is it true G-J hasnt fully negoitated her contract? maybe it wont happen, it certainly sounds like this women isnt the most personable.

from the Charlestong blog.


Are we counting our chickens too soon? The meeting to discuss Goodloe-Johnson's replacement today was canceled. It seems contract negotiations with her future employers in Seattle have stalled over details. Nancy Cook as CCSD board chairman reported in today's P&C that Goodloe-Johnson hasn't even submitted a formal resignation letter yet! Oh, crap!

Charlie Mas said...

The blog post is old and out of date. The contract is final.

I only hope there's something in it that allows the Board to actually manage the Superintendent. I doubt it, but I can hope.

Anonymous said...

This is a link to a mid-April entry from the Courier Critic blog. It also uses the name Newsless Courier. This was probably posted just before Dr.G-J's contract was made final here. Charleston later appointed her deputy to be her replacement. You have to read the later entries on their blog for a better idea of what's happening there. Hit the blog title to be directed to the main page.

classof75 said...

I wont be able to ask this question- but I hope that Ms G-J can clarify this statement made to a King5 reporter.

There's no shortage of opinion or criticism about her style and performance. Goodloe-Johnson says she's more concerned about kids and not about adults and their "adult" problems.

What does it mean to be more concerned about kids- than adults?
Does this mean that she is going wangle with the union?

Does this mean she is going to limit parent choice and participation in schools?

Anonymous said...

I keep reading quote after quote from Dr. G-J and they all make me so nervous. I don't know if she is just so not your typical polished politician type that her comments can easily be misinterpreted or what.

I just find it hard to believe she can be so standoffish/not a good team player with parents and get this far in her career. Something just doesn't add up.

Charlie Mas said...

It's very easy for administrators who don't communicate well with the public to advance.

First, it isn't recognized as a valuable skill.

Second, it is misinterpreted as resolve, when it is often just pigheadedness.

Third, Boards and other administrators like people who "stand up to the public" as if the public were some special interest. They are regarded as decisive.

Melissa Westbrook said...

During the interview forum, Dr. Goodloe-Johnson was asked about conflicts with a couple of board members. She said that they were more concerned with personality issues than focusing on kids. And, she added, they got voted out anyway.

What I read from that (and her other comments) is that whenever she wants to get out of sticky situation she references working for the kids rather than addressing the issue at hand. (You might remember that this "it's for the kids" attitude is what, according to the Moss-Adams report, got us into financial trouble as staff used it as a excuse to not follow rules and protocol for spending.)

Also, Dr. Goodloe-Johnson can't count on people going away just because she doesn't agree with them. I thought that an odd statement for someone who is going to have to deal with many types of people with differing interests, some of which she might not share but would need to acknowledge as valid issues.