Hiring Committee for Chief Communications Officer
There was some question about who was on the hiring committee for the Chief Communications Officer job. The job went to Lesley Rogers of Strategies 360, a firm that worked for the Alliance, laid down the Our Schools Coalition astroturf, and provided services to the District between Communications Directors.
The press release announcing Ms Rogers' hiring said that "parents" (not very inclusive language) were part of the hiring committee. Some of us wondered who they were.
Here, from Ann Chan, Chief Talent Officer, are the names of those who served on that committee:
The press release announcing Ms Rogers' hiring said that "parents" (not very inclusive language) were part of the hiring committee. Some of us wondered who they were.
Here, from Ann Chan, Chief Talent Officer, are the names of those who served on that committee:
Participants for final interview were:
Seattle Public Schools
----------------------
Marni Campbell, Special Education
Holly Ferguson, Policy & Government Relations
Bree Dusseault, Executive Director
Patti Spencer, Communications
Bernardo Ruiz, Family Partnerships
Paige Hatcher, Communications
Robert Teodosio, Communications
Teresa Wippel, Communications
Cathy Thompson, Curriculum & Instruction
Scott Whitbeck, SIG
Ann Chan, HR
Noel Treat, Legal
Gregory King, Principal
SEA: Jonathan Knapp (Glenn Bafia and Olga Addae were invited to participate but were unable to do so)
PASS: Bi Hoa Caldwell
PTSA and family group leaders:
----------------------
Lauren McGuire, President, SCPTSA
Vernette Stowers, co-chair, Family Partnership Advisory Committee
Sharon Rodgers, PTSA
Barbara Kelley, PTSA
Jerry Hardin, SCPTSA
External Organizations:
----------------------
Kimberly Mitchell, GATES Foundation
Sara Morris, Alliance for Education
George Griffin, G3 and past chair, Alliance for Education board
Marc Frazer, Education First
Comments
So where were the parent representatives that were NOT in favor of continued "District Domination" by Ed Reform Groups?
Examine the reasons put forth by OSPI at a recent hearing NOT to delay the adoption of the CCSSI. See Alan Burke's seven reasons here. The railroading of the public schools by powerful forces is continuing and the WEA and PTSA are collaborators as both favor CCSSI adoption by WA State.
The SPS choice for communications officer is hardly a surprise. I guess a Broad Intern was unavailable for the position.
Although the budget guy (Harmon, also a member) claims members "know the district top to bottom", most are relative new comers and truly reflect the axiom that you can't make leaders of professional followers just by throwing money at them or showing them how to find the loopholes in anything.
Silas, we hardly knew ya.........but we will. There's more to come. Keep pulling the thread, people.
What's so "not very inclusive language" about using the word "parents"? Did I miss something here?
What I can’t figure out is what will make many of you on this blog happy about anything the district does? The district formed a committee for a position they really didn't have to do that for--that's a huge step. Now you don't like the parent portion of the committee? Does anyone here think they can pick a single set of parents that represents every parent of our 46K students in this district? Are you upset because you weren’t asked to participate?
This committee had a large number of people on it, which included parents. Are you saying that PTSA representatives are not worthy or wanted for these committees? Didn't I just read earlier on this blog that somebody was complaining that the PTSA has been silent? Now you don't like that they're on the committee.
We have a new superintendent. Literally from day one Susan Enfield took the position there have been complaints and criticisms on this blog. Give the woman a minute to get a lay of the land in her new role. She sets up coffee hours and many of you complain about the 15 minute block and there aren’t enough days, yada yada yada. When she puts out a list of her priorities there are complaints about that. At least we have a list—that’s a step in the right direction.
Look, she took over a district with the same staff minus two people. If anything, things are worse at the Stanford center because of leadership change. I’m sure someone on this blog has worked for an organization where there was turmoil because of staffing changes. It’s not easy and it takes some time. So don’t expect her to reverse all the MGJ initiatives you don’t like and don’t expect things to instantly change because there’s a new superintendent. The sure way to make her fail is to breathe down her neck about every little thing. If you want her to fail, then you’re off to a good start in expediting it.
Why do two Alliance representatives, a Gates representative, an Ed First representative, get seats at the committee table?
Why was someone hired from Strategies 360?
THIS is what I am most concerned about - You write that we should give the superintendent a chance, but the above tells me it's the same ol', same ol'.
PTSA has come under criticism here for following along with the Reform crowd, and not really representing their constituents (who are discovering that PTSA can be a cozy little club, not particularly democratic.
There are groups the District could have asked: Alt Ed Coalition, Special Ed PTA...Heck even an announcement asking for candidates...So why just the Big Three "Reform" groups and the PTSA?
Actually Louise, we didn't want her at all. In fact, we don't expect things to change at all. The lifetime of a superintenent is brief, very brief. Every second counts, much like the classroom time for our kids.
Another Parent
Barbara Kelley = Schools First! rep!
They're everywhere! Privatization has deep roots that grow in cement cracks.
Dismayed Parent
Sara Morris should have disqualified herself because Strategies 360 does the Alliance's communications. I'll have to let the Board know this (if they don't already).
The usual suspects indeed.
Louise, I was told there was going to be a committee and a selection process. That sounds a lot like it would be publicly announced. As well, I asked MONTHS ago and did not receive a reply. Also, there have been a lot of good things said of Dr. Enfield here (and I know because I said some of them). I'm thinking you don't read the posts closely.
Some of the complaints are valid and relevant, and have a place on a community blog, others are a bunch of hot air, and they do more harm than good.
I know you are going to bash me for saying what I just said, but it is true. Most parents that I know don't come near this blog anymore. It's true. Notice that your group of regulars has become smaller and more insular. And almost all of them share the same opinions, which, by the way are NOT representative of most families in this district (IMO).
You even bagged on Dr. Enfield for only offering 15 minute time slots for parent chats. Really? You don't think the parent chats deserve any praise? You don't think they are a step in the right direction? Of course they filled. Isn't that a good thin? And have you thought about what would happpen if Dr Enfield didn't limit the amount of slots? Would you like her to dedicate all of her work hours to parent chats? Don't you think she needs to limit it in some way so she can MANAGE THE DISTRICT? And her coffee hour sponsored by the Alliance. So what? If it wasn't sponsored by some organization, and SPS spent money for the coffee at the "coffee hour", you'd complain about that too.
It is difficult to read lately. And, yes, Melissa, I know I don't have to read. I can do what most of my friends have done and ignore this blog completely. Is that what you want?
I don't think this district could do anything to possibly make most you the bloggers here happy.
I haven't read the press release in question, but I'll hazard a guess that the author feels that the use of the word "parents" does not recognize the families of students that are living in situations where they might not have a biological or legal parent (e.g. living with grandparents, aunts, uncles, foster families, appointed guardians, etc.) At least, that's the way I read it.
Let's hope the next committee contains some new names. And either Sara Morris needs to start drawing a salary downtown or she needs to step back from seemingly putting her fingers in every operational aspect of the leadership team. Dear Alliance: You do not represent me or the majority of taxpayers. You are not staff. Back off.
-skeptical-
That's almost the exact same wording Sara Morris used. Interesting.
It is valid to complain here because Lesley Rogers came from Strategies 360 and the Alliance uses them for their communications. Sara Morris and George Griffin should have said no.
Peon, you don't have access to our stats so how you think you know what our readership is strikes me as odd.
We write this blog for whoever wants up-to-date information and discussion. We also regularly include good news.
Don't like the blog, don't read it.
Nope I don't. But everyone can see who posts here. Same old, same old.
"Don't like the blog, don't read it."
Be careful what you wish for. You've already ran many involved families away. You sure you want to keep doing that?
And what was your Sara Morris comment supposed to mean? More conspiracy? More negativity??? Or, could it be that more than one person share that opinion? Actually, many people that I communicate with share that opinion, and none of them work for the district.
Is that the only way you have to communicate with people with opposing views?
This blog, warts n all, represents viewpoints in addition to and directly counter to that tight little circle's view of things. And the viewpoints are right often enough (not always but often enough) that it is a valid source of info for many in the community.
Don't read it. Don't participate in it. Fine. But go circle the wagons again, as demonstrated in the communications hire, at JSIS' own peril.
And while I'm at it, the Alliance is the worst, the ABSOLUTE WORST, about encouraging JSIS leaders to listen to no one but themselves on school politics. For their leaders to dismiss "a bunch of bloggers" is laughable, especially since most of the business leaders who happily donate dollars and sage advice couldn't pull their heads out of a powerpoint presentation to think critically about ed policies if their lives depended on it.
That's why I'm
-skeptical-
Call her the head of HR. And make sure she acts like one. So far, I haven't seen much that leads me to believe she has the chutzpah to whip that department into shape.
One thing I've noticed about this blog is the ebb and flow of participants, regular or not. Sure there is a core of regulars that share some points of view, but because you don't see all of the posters participating all of the time, doesn't mean they are not there. People post when there is something that interests them.
It's unreasonable to expect one source to be all things to all people. Whether Melissa, et al are journalists or not is sort of a gray area. I've come to expect that they generally get their facts right, but that they are delivered with big helping of opinion. As with any media, you have to separate the wheat from the chaff. Anyone can offer differing facts or opinions within this blog or, if there is too much chaff for their tastes, they can start their own blog.
They don't get paid to do this. We don't pay to subscribe. You get to decide if you're getting your money's worth.
I think skeptical makes a valid point in that this committee was probably put together well before Enfield took over so she cannot be blamed for its composition.
As far as the family representatives are concerned, I actually think it makes sense to include leaders from parent organizations on such a committee--Any individual community member who applied might have an axe to grind and might not be tied in to any larger family group to give and get feedback. People who post here who object to the SCPTSA leadership probably have had the opportunity to vote on them and even run for the office (I'm guessing they didn't). That said, there are whole groups of schools that don't have a PTSA (I'm thinking of Alts and some of the poorer schools). There should be a way that they can be represented on committees like this. Especially since multiple positions were filled by SCPTSA reps.
I agree with skeptical's more recent post as well. This town needs this two bit Savings and Loan (um, blog) if only so we don't have to go crawling to the Alliance.... (Maybe we should make a movie!). Peon, people come and they go, not everyone cares to hang on as long as you and I have, for whatever reason.
Also the kids want to get new, more current books for their reading groups instead of the dog eared ones we keep duct-taping together. (And no, it's not asking too much. We already fundraised to cover art, music, playground super, crosswalk guard, math and reading tutors, etc.)
I know, more complaints!! Guess what, I am not going away. We are going to keep at it until we see results in the classroom and in the kids.
SPS alumni and parent
CD Family
While I agree there is a definite point of view here, and sometimes it's not one I entirely agree with, I still appreciate the information. I have noticed a time or two when the authors here get more than a wee bit defensive of opposing viewpoints - I attribute that to the sheer frustration of years of battering against the dysfunctional walls of SPS.
No one is perfect - no blog can meet the needs of everyone - there will always be those who see things differently, and I appreciate the opportunity to see divergent viewpoints, as evidenced by this thread
On her watch the previous head of communications left and the new hiring process began.
Michael DeBell said the teacher's no-confidence vote was a BIG thing. I thought that there was beginning to be some recognition of the breach MGJ created toward the largest group of school employees. Although Enfield was not in charge of the process leading up to this hire, it does seem like it will turn out to be an important missed opportunity for healing, rather than irritating, that wound.
grumpy
You're now one of our regulars. I find your posts to be informed and conscientious (even if I might disagree).
mirmac1, Peon has been a regular at least as long as I have, she just changes her name every once in a while (not that there's anything wrong with that--I just think it's funny to see you welcoming her to the fold!). It may be that others with less distinctive voices do that as well, so it's not trivial to figure out who has left and who hasn't. (I do miss posts from some of them--I won't name names because I don't want to leave anyone out!)
"What I can’t figure out is what will make many of you on this blog happy about anything the district does? The district formed a committee for a position they really didn't have to do that for--that's a huge step. Now you don't like the parent portion of the committee?"
What I can't figure out, LouiseM, is how you concluded that "you" (whoever that is) don't like the parent portion of the committee. When LouiseM wrote those words there had not been a single comment written to suggest that the parent portion of the committee wasn't perfectly acceptable. All that had been written were the facts in the original post. There is nothing in the post to suggest any complaint about the folks on the committee.
Do the facts have an anti-District bias, LouiseM?
LouiseM was pretty quick to complain about the complaints. So quick, in fact, that you complained about complaints before any had been made.
And, yes, "parents" is less inclusive language because it doesn't reflect all of the members of a student's family who may have responsibility for the child. I always prefer to write "student families".
As far as the other complaints, I was talking about this blog as a whole.
Now that I think about it, did you even read my post or did you just jump into defensive mode?
Are you telling me now that your beef is with Dan Dempsey, and not with the post?
Perhaps the misunderstanding comes from the use of the pronoun "you" without a clear antecedent. Perhaps I reached the wrong conclusion about who is meant by "you" in the questions:
"Now you don't like the parent portion of the committee?"
"Are you upset because you weren’t asked to participate?"
"Are you saying that PTSA representatives are not worthy or wanted for these committees?"
"Now you don't like that they're on the committee."
Was it Dan? Probably not, since he doesn't have a student in the district and isn't eligible to have been selected. Was it "many of you on this blog"? Could many of us have been selected for the committee? Was it me, as the author of the original post?
I thought it was me. In that case, the complaint is unwarratned because I had expressed no dissatisfaction (and still have not) about the selection of "parent representatives" on the committee. If it wasn't me, then I reached the wrong conclusion and I am in error. Who did LouiseM mean by "you" in these lines?
For what it's worth, I don't think I have been unduly critical of Dr. Enfield. I think my post on her priorities document (Dr. Enfield's Priorities for the Next Three Months) was pretty even-handed. Where I disagreed with her I also allowed for the possibility that I was wrong to do so.
For what its worth the interim superintendent got a lot of praise on this blog for her office hours (Superintendent to Create Time to Talk with Parents and Community). And when they were revealed to be something different from what was expected (Most Popular Girl in SPS), the seven comments were pretty mild and understanding. I don't see what LousieM sees as complaints.
In each of these cases, the folks who comment on this blog are responding to things the interim superintendent did, not while she was just getting the lay of the land, but after she had started to take a direction. Many of the Program Placement decisions, for example, were hers - not Dr. Goodloe-Johnson's.
Maybe I shouldn't take the complaint personally. Maybe it wasn't intended for me. Maybe LouiseM is right and I owe her an apology. After all, there had been dissatisfaction expressed by Dan about the choice of parent representatives on the committee that LousieM could legitimately be responding to. I mostly saw Dan's comment as a dissatisfaction with the Common Core Standards, but it does include a dig at the choice of parent representatives.
Was LouiseM's complaint about Dan's attitude, my attitude, or the attitude of "many of you on this blog"?
Just remember, G-J is gone. Sue and I are getting accolades everyday that we, as in everyone, managed to oust Broad. That was quite an accomplishment on the part of all of us.
My suggestion is that we watch this new "Communications Officer" like a hawk, her and Jessica DeBarros who is out last Broadie and is in charge, of all things, of teacher evaluations.
MC
(I can't seem to log-on as myself. I posted this earlier yesterday, but it disappeared. So here it is again.)
Vivent the Blogs!
Peon, why exactly do you care so much how many readers this blog has? How does it affect you? What exactly does it mean to “run families away” (entire families, no less!) from a blog? How can you possibly know who does or doesn’t read this or any of the blogs? This strikes me as an attempt to try and scare or shame Melissa and Charlie into some kind of censorship of this blog. Why would you want that, I wonder?
I have very different observations from yours. I see a lot of new names posting here, which I think is a healthy sign. It seems that parents and teachers, former School Board Members and even District insiders have joined the discussions. These are also good signs. The old-timers are still here, trust me. Some of us may not post as often, but we certainly read this blog. Daily. We also know that SPS employees monitor this blog.
As someone else pointed out, only Melissa, Charlie and Beth would know how many views their blog actually gets each day. But even outside observers can see that posts here regularly inspire long strings of comments – as many as 100 on a good thread. That would indicate that this is in fact a very active blog with a healthy readership.
If the blogs are so flawed and unpopular, as you indicate, why are they getting mentioned more and more frequently by School Board members and other District Staff? Why did the mainstream media contact various writers and editors of local blogs for information and comment during the Pottergate and Goodloe-Johnson firing scandal? How is it that did Melissa and Dorothy sniffed out the Pottergate scandal long before the MSM did?
I have also noticed that those who disparage the blogs move in the same circles: Sara Morris of the pro ed reform, Gates-backed Alliance for Education recently tried to dismiss them (wonder why…), and who can forget ed reform, Broad & Gates-backed Goodloe-Johnson’s comment at that TOPS meeting she crashed in 2009: “I don’t read the blogs.” (Echoing George W. Bush, another person with an estranged relationship with the truth and public opinion, who once said: “I don’t read the papers.”)
The creation of the Alliance and LEV’s own blogs indicates that they in fact realize the power of the blogosphere and are trying to get a piece of the action, despite their comments to the contrary. (They close their comments, though, when people post opinions they don’t like.)
As has been said many times before, no one is forcing you or anyone to read the blogs. Whenever a reader makes a comment like yours, it makes me presume the blogs must be ruffling some feathers in the echelons of power – you know, afflicting the powerful, and hopefully comforting the afflicted. To my view, that means the blogs are doing something right.
Keep up the good work, Charlie and Melissa.
gavroche
Vivent the Blogs!
Peon, why exactly do you care so much how many readers this blog has? How does it affect you? What exactly does it mean to “run families away” (entire families, no less!) from a blog? How can you possibly know who does or doesn’t read this or any of the blogs? This strikes me as an attempt to try and scare or shame Melissa and Charlie into some kind of censorship of this blog. Why would you want that, I wonder?
I have very different observations from yours. I see a lot of new names posting here, which I think is a healthy sign. It seems that parents and teachers, former School Board Members and even District insiders have joined the discussions. These are also good signs. The old-timers are still here, trust me. Some of us may not post as often, but we certainly read this blog. Daily. We also know that SPS employees monitor this blog.
As someone else pointed out, only Melissa, Charlie and Beth would know how many views their blog actually gets each day. But even outside observers can see that posts here regularly inspire long strings of comments – as many as 100 on a good thread. That would indicate that this is in fact a very active blog with a healthy readership.
If the blogs are so flawed and unpopular, as you indicate, why are they getting mentioned more and more frequently by School Board members and other District Staff? Why did the mainstream media contact various writers and editors of local blogs for information and comment during the Pottergate and Goodloe-Johnson firing scandal? How is it that did Melissa and Dorothy sniffed out the Pottergate scandal long before the MSM did?
I have also noticed that those who disparage the blogs move in the same circles: Sara Morris of the pro ed reform, Gates-backed Alliance for Education recently tried to dismiss them (wonder why…), and who can forget ed reform, Broad & Gates-backed Goodloe-Johnson’s comment at that TOPS meeting she crashed in 2009: “I don’t read the blogs.” (Echoing George W. Bush, another person with an estranged relationship with the truth and public opinion, who once said: “I don’t read the papers.”)
The creation of the Alliance and LEV’s own blogs indicates that they in fact realize the power of the blogosphere and are trying to get a piece of the action, despite their comments to the contrary. (They close their comments, though, when people post opinions they don’t like.)
As has been said many times before, no one is forcing you or anyone to read the blogs. Whenever a reader makes a comment like yours, it makes me presume the blogs must be ruffling some feathers in the echelons of power – you know, afflicting the powerful, and hopefully comforting the afflicted. To my view, that means the blogs are doing something right.
Keep up the good work, Charlie and Melissa.
gavroche
The myth that Cordell Carter will come true at the end of August.
For now, his office is right where it was before MGJ left and unless he's off today, he's sitting in there.
What's funny is that no one could tell the difference! Ha!
Now, THAT'S WHY BIG CUTS SHOULD BE MADE TO CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION! Because afterwords, you can't tell a difference even when watching the place like hawks as we all do.
I love you all.
Anonymous post:
"we really need a different blog in general that supports the work the district is doing. stay tuned. this blog makes me sick every time I read it- and I'm sure this comment will be deleted."
I, for one, would welcome such a blog, although there would have been slim pickings to write about for the past few years.
But of course your post will be deleted. You couldn't even be bothered to follow the one and only rule to post comments here!
Sadly, there's a joke here somewhere, something about the diligence level of people who hate this blog.
School Beat
"Dr. Susan Enfield appointed interim Superintendent" - To upbeatedly change course from a less-promising direction;
"Seattle Public Schools to partner with City Ethics Commission" - to upbeatedly provide some ethical oversight, due to certain, uh, lapses;
"Updated college readiness measurements released" - to upbeatedly correct reported college readiness figures that were one-third the new ones...
Very upbeat!
I wonder if any of this upbeatedness would have occured if it weren't for a couple of people who particpate in this blog, people who noted BS and called attention to it? All three of these upbeat changes occured long after the reasons for them were reported here.