Disqus

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Strategic Plan Refresh

I attended the first half-hour of the Strategic Plan Refresh work session yesterday before I had to leave.

I don't think I missed anything. The meeting was an utter waste. The staff trotted out a bunch of meaningless jargon and the Board acted like bobbleheads. There was nothing to decide and damn little to even talk about. There was no serious discussion of what is in the Strategic Plan, how it is working, what it costs, or whether we should continue it.

The District staff still refuses to provide a comprehensive list of the projects and initiatives in the Strategic Plan.

The list of projects and initiatives continues to be in flux. New efforts magically appear while others sink out of sight. The Audit Response, for example, is now a Strategic Plan project, but STEM and capacity management have slipped off the list.

This is really frustrating. I don't understand how the Board tolerates it.

I want to see what I was promised:

The final words of the Strategic Plan, say:
With the School Board’s adoption of this plan on June 4, 2008, the work will begin. During summer 2008, we will develop more detailed work plans for each of the foundational strategies, seeking community input as we do so, and being careful to link our work to overall District needs and goals.

Each strategy will be developed with a detailed timeline that will include milestones and performance measurements so that we can assess our success.

We will schedule regular School Board reviews of our progress.

To honor our commitment to transparency, all materials will be posted on the SPS Web site.
All I want is what they promised.

I want to see a table with every project and initiative that has ever been part of the Plan with the date that it was added or removed.

I want to see the detailed timelines with milestones and performance measures for each project.

I want to see the budget for each project.

I want to see all of this posted on the District web site.

Supposedly all of these documents already exist. Supposedly Mr. Teoh has them all. It would only be a matter of mouse clicks for him to post them online. He should do it within the coming week. He should have done it already.

6 comments:

Melissa Westbrook said...

Charlie's right.

It's hard to think what I think about the Strategic Plan because it is such a nebulous and moving target. Why did it get so badly reviewed at the Seattle Channel Town Hall meeting? It did for precisely the reasons Charlie outlines.

What about all the budget talk from the Board about slowing down, delaying or cutting?

No one really knows what it is, what it is doing, how it is working and what outcomes they are looking for.

This is not a point in the pro side of Dr. Enfield's column. I believe they don't want to be clear because they don't want (1) for people to debate if part or any of it is worth it especially if we have cuts coming to our classrooms and (2) they don't want to reveal how much money it is costing.

If you have a chance, write Dr. Enfield and the Board and link Charlie's thread. These are basic questions about an initiative that dominants our district, both in resources and impact, and yet no one can adequately explain it.

KG said...

I blieve that the May 4 school board meeting is Sundquist Bobblehead doll night. The first 50 that enter get an autographed one.

mirmac1 said...

Lots of talk about red, yellow, green light. Felt like I was at recess again.

One thing that just about gave me a coronary was; there's money for MAP but Level 1 and 2 schools get less money for resources and supports. HUH!? WTF is the whole stated purpose of the strategic plan?! Ensure Excellence in Every Classroom (unless you are poor or live in the wrong part of town)!

mirmac1 said...

Seattle Times opining on "Districts balancing their budgets on the backs of students"?!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2014755657_edit13kent.html

dan dempsey said...

Getting Clearer by the day Why Betty Patu voted against Enfield as interim Superintendent.

This is a continuation of the MGJ-Enfield poorly defined murky confusion.

So what is the Plan?
The Strategic Plan looks like falling jello from here...
How much farther to fall before the board finally recognizes the SPLAT?

We have run out of money.... Someone had best try actual thinking and damn soon.

To improve a system requires the intelligent application of relevant data.


Clearly nothing like that will be happening from the board until members of the elected class of 2007 ... hopefully leave in November.

dan dempsey said...

Hey how about a reset on the MAP testing for a Strategic plan spending revision.

Check out the Times questions how Randy Dorn proposes to Spend Money HERE.

So where was the Times when MGJ and the Board were spending money in equally is not even more ridiculous ways than Mr. Dorn.

Remember Cleveland STEM was only happening if it could be afforded..... but then the NSAP required it ... even when the funding was not there.

NSAP was all about making every school a quality school..... how is that going?

NOT only does the Strategic Plan need a Refresh.... so does the Seattle Times.