Separating the Process and the Decision
The Process: In case you didn't already get the idea, I think the superintendent recruitment and selection process fell apart during the last week. The rushed, poorly planned presentation of the offer to Dr. Goodloe-Johnson as the new superintendent during spring break, the denial that Dr. Thornton's withdrawal affected the decision, the abrupt end to an opportunity for public feedback that had been invited until April 17th, the fact that the school district web site still does not have (as of 6:24 this evening) any news of the decision, all contribute to a less than optimal way to bring in a new superintendent. The main reason given by School Board members for the rush was that they were worried they would lose both candidates to other jobs. I say, if the candidates were insufficiently committed to Seattle to take another job if offered first, then let them go elsewhere.
The Decision: But, that is now all in the past. The decision has been made. The way things happened during the past week may affect my decision about who to vote for in School Board elections this fall, but it will not affect my willingness to work with and support our new superintendent. As one School Board member said to me, this decision comes 4 years too late. The School Board stuck with Raj Manhas for way too long. And I have no doubt that Dr. Goodloe-Johnson will be a big improvement over Raj.
I believe that the "Superintendent Entry Plan" Dr. Goodloe-Johnson presented to the Board during her visit to Seattle (which for some reason was not shared with the public at the time, was shared with the press today at the announcement, but is not yet available on the district website) looks quite positive.
She has a clear idea of what to do the first 100 days as superintendent. A few highlights as I see them are:
District and City Tour
- Arrange to meet the Mayor and City Council. Arrange community opportunities for introduction and to meet the broader Seattle community.
Political Leadership
- Meet with Union Representatives to understand structure, work and concerns and current agreements.
- Meet with all the college presidents to discuss teacher recruitment, retention and partnership.
Community Leadership
- Attend community meetings and share my vision and goals to improve student achievement and close the gap.
- Establish relationships with [a long list of community organizations including] Center on Reinventing Public Education and the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle.
District Senior Staff
- Review student success plan.
- Request briefing papers from the staff on critical issue areas.
- Establish a leadership team to include principals.
- Attend instructional level principal meetings.
School Board
- Determine a schedule for regular off-site planning sessions with the board (at least three in first year).
- Hold a board retreat within the first week to discuss communication processes, policy governance goals and potential work with the Broad Foundation.
Media
- Meet with local newspaper editorial boards. Target trade press (i.e. Education Week) for early interviews.
- Revise, adjust 5-year strategic plan as needed.
National Leadership
- "Strategic Support Teams" (spend a closed-door working weekend with highly regarded urban superintendents from across the country --- Arlene Ackerman, Mark Roosevelt and Tom Payzant)
- Ask the Broad Foundation for assistance to fund policy governance training for board members, fund project management training for the district, development of a leadership institute and provide assistance in facilitating the superintendent's evaluation and additional leadership retreats as needed and agreed upon by the board.
- Make connections with national foundations that support urban education and reform.
Strategic Priorities for the District
- Accountability of the entire system
- Assessment of staff performance
- Determine what programs need to be evaluated for effectiveness and ROI
Rebuild Public Confidence in Seattle Public Schools
- Clarify and widely communicate expectations for accountability and improvement
- Analyze all data from the 100-day entry plan; share outcomes and plans for improvement
As I said during the school closure and consolidation process, I'd really like to fight for something in our district rather than against something. So now is the time for me to begin fighting to support our new superintendent in accomplishing what she has promised, working with other people around our community to hold her, the district staff, and the Board accountable.
The Decision: But, that is now all in the past. The decision has been made. The way things happened during the past week may affect my decision about who to vote for in School Board elections this fall, but it will not affect my willingness to work with and support our new superintendent. As one School Board member said to me, this decision comes 4 years too late. The School Board stuck with Raj Manhas for way too long. And I have no doubt that Dr. Goodloe-Johnson will be a big improvement over Raj.
I believe that the "Superintendent Entry Plan" Dr. Goodloe-Johnson presented to the Board during her visit to Seattle (which for some reason was not shared with the public at the time, was shared with the press today at the announcement, but is not yet available on the district website) looks quite positive.
She has a clear idea of what to do the first 100 days as superintendent. A few highlights as I see them are:
District and City Tour
- Arrange to meet the Mayor and City Council. Arrange community opportunities for introduction and to meet the broader Seattle community.
Political Leadership
- Meet with Union Representatives to understand structure, work and concerns and current agreements.
- Meet with all the college presidents to discuss teacher recruitment, retention and partnership.
Community Leadership
- Attend community meetings and share my vision and goals to improve student achievement and close the gap.
- Establish relationships with [a long list of community organizations including] Center on Reinventing Public Education and the Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle.
District Senior Staff
- Review student success plan.
- Request briefing papers from the staff on critical issue areas.
- Establish a leadership team to include principals.
- Attend instructional level principal meetings.
School Board
- Determine a schedule for regular off-site planning sessions with the board (at least three in first year).
- Hold a board retreat within the first week to discuss communication processes, policy governance goals and potential work with the Broad Foundation.
Media
- Meet with local newspaper editorial boards. Target trade press (i.e. Education Week) for early interviews.
- Revise, adjust 5-year strategic plan as needed.
National Leadership
- "Strategic Support Teams" (spend a closed-door working weekend with highly regarded urban superintendents from across the country --- Arlene Ackerman, Mark Roosevelt and Tom Payzant)
- Ask the Broad Foundation for assistance to fund policy governance training for board members, fund project management training for the district, development of a leadership institute and provide assistance in facilitating the superintendent's evaluation and additional leadership retreats as needed and agreed upon by the board.
- Make connections with national foundations that support urban education and reform.
Strategic Priorities for the District
- Accountability of the entire system
- Assessment of staff performance
- Determine what programs need to be evaluated for effectiveness and ROI
Rebuild Public Confidence in Seattle Public Schools
- Clarify and widely communicate expectations for accountability and improvement
- Analyze all data from the 100-day entry plan; share outcomes and plans for improvement
As I said during the school closure and consolidation process, I'd really like to fight for something in our district rather than against something. So now is the time for me to begin fighting to support our new superintendent in accomplishing what she has promised, working with other people around our community to hold her, the district staff, and the Board accountable.
Comments
I am slightly concerned with your tone around the unanimous decision made by the board today.
It seems to me that you and Melissa would quite possibly never be satisfied. These 7 volunteer board members united in their decision and moved quickly to not lose the candidate.
I am wondering if you and more importantly Melissa would be super concerned with the events of the week if in-fact the candidate you had wanted (not Dr Johnson) had been the one picked. Would you still be upset? The move to vote a week or so early was done to secure the candidate. If the board members had their minds made up, how much more time did they need?
So I guess this is my response to people who seem so visibly upset as you two were today..... below is the link to the King County site for candidate filing. Representative Democracies are always looking for people to walk their talk.
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/pdf/Filing_for_Elective_Office.pdf
I suggest we be PLEASED with the fact our board has come together...it wasn't so long ago when people thought that was impossible. I suggest we be PLEASED that when people cried out that "NO ONE" would want to work here in fact 39 people did... I am certainly glad they were wrong.
Why don't we use our engery being positive. Why don't we move forward and support this obviously qualified woman in raising achievement for ALL KIDS.
It's very difficult to conduct a process like this in public, and I don't envy the board, but then, know that going in and don't make promises you can't keep - it looks like lip service when it's not born out by authentic action.
And if this were the first time any of these things happened, one would be understanding - but they're far more the rule than the exception with both the board and the district.
And please - their decision wasn't affected by the withdrawal of Dr Thornton? That's about as plausible as his assertion that he withdrew because the job would be too far from his family.
In my opinion, Beth and Melissa are far more positive and engaged than the board or district staff's actions merit, but I'm thankful that they are.
As to the candidate I preferred, it was "none of the above." But, between Goodloe-Johnson and Thornton, I preferred Goodloe-Johnson.
So, no, this is not sour grapes on my part. What I am upset with is how the Board conducted themselves this week, how poorly everything was communicated, the message all of that communicates to the community members the Board claimed they wanted to involve and hear from, and what that does to Goodloe-Johnson's chances to be successful when she arrives in July.
I'm reposting the link that I think you were trying to post. It got cut off in your comment:
Filing for Elective Office.
And I will run for School Board when it becomes a paid position. Until then, as a mother of 3 children who has a full-time job (and needs it to make ends meet), and is currently going to graduate school, there is no way I could do the School Board job justice.
It's the only thing that made today's meeting remotely "public".
Lose the candidate? Her own Board voted to keep her on but NOT give her a raise. Speaks volumes. I have own theories on what happened but I'll keep them to myself since now, in the space of a couple of hours, it's all history.
Yes, I would feel the exact same way if it were Dr. Thorton. If you honestly believe the Board listened to and read all imput,were fully debriefed by Chow and DeBell and then set aside time to make a considered and thoughtful decision, then you have a lot shorter thought process than I do. You asked the key question, "If they already made their minds up...? then why would they care what the public might tell them?
And the "our board has come together"? Well, again, you don't know the Board like I do. You think because it was a unamimous vote it was a united vote? You'd be wrong.
I have been a really positive person for this district. Critic yes, but always a cheerleader (something that Dr. G-J declined, publicly at the interview forum, to be for this district.) I always wish the best for this district, always. My last child is in his final school (a great one) so, for me, I don't have as much vested. I could just walk away and not put my time and energy towards these efforts. Maybe I should just let the Board and the new superintendent take the reins. But then, we might just have a runaway horse. There is a thing called public oversight and it can really be useful.
Last thing, Beth, you left out one of the things Dr. G-J put on her list of things to do. She wants to "create a database list of all the central office staff and principals and celebrate!" (Yes, her list really does reflect that and if that falls on her list of to-dos, good luck.)
I think that when we got Dr. Goodloe-Johnson, we got the Charleston Plan, and I'll be curious to see how closely her plan for Seattle aligns with what she did there.
By the way, regarding the "walk your talk," where I grew up in the Midwest, I always heard a similar remark, "love it or leave it." I'm willing to withhold judgment for now, maintain a healthy skepticism, and give Goodloe-Johnson a year to gain our family's trust and confidence (after all, wasn't that one of the traits they were looking for in the new superintendent - the ability to build trust and confidence in the district?). But if the district, especially the central administration and school board, has not noticeably improved, we'll be leaving it. I think that might be the ultimate measure of Goodloe-Johnson's success/failure, to see where enrollment stands three years from now, in addition to the test scores.
We appreciate the last 10 years that you have put into advocating for kids and schools in Seattle. In your own words you could "just walk away and not put my time and energy towards these efforts".
We are entering an opportunity for a fresh start with a new Superintendent, an opportunity to democratically elect a majority board, we have a strong Chief Academic Officer in Carla Santorno, and a Superintendent who wants to be the Seattle Superintendent (rather than the fall back after a failed search). In my mind these are all positive opportunities to re-engage the community to focus on improving Seattle schools.
I have a totally different take on the Superintendent search timeline changes:
- Nationally tenures for urban district Superintendents is just over three years (in otherwords we are competing with 1/3 of the other urban schools for a qualified candidate each time we conduct a search)
- The Superintendent of Philadelphia made his announcement this week trying to retain Dr. Thorton for his region (because of our public process)
- The 35+ candidates that Seattle was able to entice into applying is an amazingly high number. Look at other urban districts and many are able to choose from less than 10 applicants.
- The fact that Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and Dr. Thorton were made publicly announced as candidates signals for other districts that these individuals have been considered quality candidates and interested in making a move. How much easier the courting would be for another district with the vetting already done by us.
- I admire the board in moving forward to making a decision and not losing quality candidates with a failed search.
It's time to let the past go and move forward.
Tammie
So the next time something like this comes up, we just need to keep this experience in mind, have less confidence in timelines when they are presented, and ask more probing questions about announced timelines.
All of the reasons that Tammie offered for the expedited process were true or predictable BEFORE the timeline was announced. So why weren't they reckoned into the timeline when it was announced?
Why announce a timeline if you're not going to keep to it? And, if you're going to break from it, then apologize - don't brush it off.
The board's press conference was a preemptive, save-face effort that turned out to be more show than substance, as 2 members quickly bailed and the rest barely held on to a least-common-denominator finish.
I wish Dr Maria nothing but the best, for all our sakes - and if she can get the district staff to snap to, holy miracles, Batman! more power to her!
As Tammie says, we have "an opportunity to democratically elect a majority board" - we should make the most of it.
She did leave off one very huge and important thing off her to-do list.
She left off the need to create a kind and hopeful plan for those communities who are going to face closure and consolidation this fall. It is going to be sad and difficult for those communities and it will take real sensitivity and leadership.
While closing the achievement gap is very important, and we should make every effort to eliminate it, so should we make every effort to challenge every other student in the district. We can not let under achievers set the bar, the ceiling. We have to celebrate all students at all levels, including the advanced/gifted. We have to challenge each and every student, whatever their level of achievement or color. We need a cohesive board that has the best interest of ALL children at heart. Vote wisely.
Were the invitation-only meetings with the candidates subject to the Open Meetings Act, and were they in violation of it?
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/311681_goodloe14.html
There seems to be some suggestion from remarks Dr. G-J has made both in Charleston and here that she is very loyal to her community. What that would mean to other families I'm not sure.
Charlie, good question. I got a sheet from Chris Jackins (a long-time watchdog over district finances and issues) that he sent to, I think, Mike Kriedler asking if the Board violated the Open Meetings Act. So stay tuned.
Melissa W. (having troubling logging in again)
I will check with Legal to see if we have violated OPMA in any way. At the stakeholder presentation and Q/A with the 2 finalists, the board did not discuss or take any action but was simply in the room as observers so I do not believe that violated the law.
This format was used when the district hired the CAO and we thought it was very successful. In fact, I received no complaints from anyone in the public about being shut out of that process. With the Superintendent finalist presentations, we decided to go further and televise the meeting so that anyone who wished could view it.
For some reason, Chris Jackins' group was left off the list of those invited and I have asked to have this rectified. If anyone knows of other organizations in Seattle with any tie to public education, please let me know and I'll make sure they get added to the list I created a couple of years ago. We use this list to try to make sure every group is included. Each group chooses their own reps to send. We have about 50 groups on the list, including CEASE, Seattle Council PTSA, NAACP, City Council, League of Education Voters, CPPS, etc.
Leslie here -
Good on you for being someone who tracks this blog and steps up to have a DIALOGUE ! How I wish more of your colleagues and current campaigners would do the same - truly communication is a good thing and I am truly stymied by the lack of a coherent communication plan/process - e.g., the dozens of comments about the website and lack of public information readily and easily accessible or the attitude if you want information or god forbid use information as a research educational tool as a parent, taxpayer, community activist, or for whatever reason, one must "ask through the public records disclosure" process - - how absurd and insulting - - at what point will we have committee meeting minutes posted? Space on the web is cheap, cheap, cheap and the spreading the word - both good, bad or otherwise should be embraced not to be afraid of -
Is there a Communications action plan? Which Committee handles? Is there a Work Plan for staff on communication? Have there been any reviews done and shared with the Board as regards whether or not its communication policy/strategy or whatever word is the current bon mot is working.
Again - Good on you - and thank you. Please encouarge your colleagues and staff to contribute as well. I well appreciate that fear and time drive decisions not to participate and that Emails and the written word may be taken out of context but the effort is worth it.
The CFO asked at the recent community conversation whether "office hours" made sense - thought I would fall off my chair - Heck yes and why aren't we using the website as the tool it is - the survey re snow closure days was brought up as a resounding success so there is proof that if there is a will to communicate it can happen.
Leslie's question about a communications plan is one the board has been asking for for several years. We have a new communications director, Bridgett Chandler, and I'll ask for an update on her workplan. At board direction, the staff has greatly increased access to information via the web, email announcements, literature available at board meetings, televised board meetings, etc. but there is a long way to go.
One way parents can help is to sign up to be a 'key communicator' (call the board office at 252-0040). The communications office sends you updates in hopes that you will help spread the word through your own formal and informal networks.
Getting the word out is always a challenge, and we can use your help.
Leslie here again -
Thank you for the response -
several comments/questions -
Perhaps the legal analysis is correct - but what about the appearance issue and msg. that sends? Much like being told to do a "public records request" when asking for basic information . . . perhaps entirely legitmately legal but the msg. sent is horrendous and far-reaching.
When will committee meeting minutes be uploaded to the website as a matter of policy of transparent communication style?
Key communicator sign-up - a valuable tool indeed - is it uploaded to the web and archived for those who wish to learn more?
Perhaps a press release could go out to the local papers, the PTSAs, the schools themselves to increase its readership. Perhaps a handout at the meetings alerting to this mode of communicating and on the Front page of the difficult to use/diffuse website in a boxed advertisement "Learn More About Us". It is advertisement after all.
Perhaps we could use advertising/sales marketing principles. I am no fan of corporate bureaucracy but in corporate America, but in any of our nationally renowned companies here in Seattle - heads would have rolled long ago for this blindness to communication strategy - perhaps a lent Executive in marketing/advertising from an Alliance Group member company for 6 months would be a way to kick-start and be a win/win - e.g., the comments recently that "we've no way to track why folks have opted for private schools?", the spectrum of opinions addressing enrollment/choice that could provide real insight for the board and staff in the upcoming hugely important choice/budget discussions and next round of school closures. If we can poll to address ways to make up school days - then why can't information be gleaned in that way towards hugely important policy issues?
We don't even know our market's opinions and the board without staff and time could get more input.
Perhaps with the change of Supt this could be a driving initiative - really working on communication and dialogue menus as opposed to the pejorative scenario presently - nattering negativity single issue comments directed to the board who has no real way to respond at mtgs. given the current set-up.
You reference a work plan - Is there a Communication Action Plan and which committee(s) are tracking it? Is it posted to the website?
Truly appreciate the thousands of hours boardmembers and staff contribute, but these are truly basic basic issues that drive so many others - perception is reality.
Thanks again for participating - truly hope more boardmembers, current campaigners and staff will do so.