What to Do about the Superintendent Situation?
So I have been hearing a lot of different things over the last couple of days. We are truly in a unique and difficult situation. But there are two things I would like input on from all of you (between now and the end of next week).
First, there seems to be some hope that Dr. Enfield wants to be wooed. Many out there wanted her to stay and still hope that might be the case. She has said she is firm on her decision but who knows? Is there something that could be done to change her mind? I know for certain the Alliance is working on it. There may be others and that's fine. If you feel that way, write the Board and urge them to get on it.
But I am tending to take her at her word so I'm moving on.
I am now wrestling with the superintendent search versus an interim superintendent.
I would like to see an internal interim superintendent. It would have to be a person who knows the district and who is trusted by many in the district, both at schools and at headquarters.
Because one huge issue here is trust. We as parents and community would like to trust our superintendent but it is the people that he/she guides that need to feel they can trust their boss. They need to believe that person has a valid plan, will take input and just as no one wants the superintendent to micromanaged, doesn't want a superintendent micromanaging their professional lives.
The churn we have all felt has been doubly felt by those who work for the district. Imagine what it must of felt from the inside of JSCEE when MGJ swept in and brought her own people (not hired new people, brought new people). She was authoritarian to all and secretive. That did not breed trust.
Many people at JSCEE may have known or heard about Silas Potter but like any good soldier, kept their heads down and did their own work believing/hoping that the leadership would take care of that problem.
I think that happens a lot at JSCEE - keep your head down and do your best work in spite of who works at the top.
I think there are may be a few there who view the Board a major roadblock to what they believe is the right way to get to better outcomes but I think most welcome them as another set of eyes and ears. It's protection for their own work.
So imagine working like this - I think that just as we all hope for the best, those who work there do as well.
That's why we need trust and a knowledge base of this district more than any other qualifications right now. Because we have great people like Pegi McEvoy, Bob Boesche, Noel Treat and Paul Apostle and others who are helping to right this ship. They all need our support.
It must be a lonely time in our district. The failures of management over the last 10 years are continuing to take their toil. Teachers are under attack, we can't seem to get a handle on curriculum, we have mismanaged our facilities, managed to miss signs about growing capacity issues and more.
And yet, we ALL know successes. We are investing our children's education to these schools. We are investing our resources and time to these schools. Our district has many kinds of innovation that, in other states, only come from having charter schools. We have signs of excellence everywhere.
This next year or two is going to be absolutely vital to our district. The change in the Board makeup is going to allow more nuance and balanced discussion about what we do. But I know that no one on that Board is looking for massive change. Kellie LaRue is right; changing direction in a district is like turning a tanker. You can't do it on a dime - it takes time. But you better make sure it's the direction you want.
So I urge you to tell the Board that we need an internal interim superintendent. We do this for our staff because they need that security and we need that trust that will come with a known quantity.
We are the cusp of something great. I believe we can be a great district - I truly do. But we need to get away from what Dorothy Neville calls "costly distractions" and support our staff across the board. Everyone needs a pat on the back for the hard work they do.
Urge the Board to look within. There are answers there. If your wish is to persuade Dr. Enfield to stay, do that.
But do not remain silent and let the Board stew by themselves. It's just too important a decision.
First, there seems to be some hope that Dr. Enfield wants to be wooed. Many out there wanted her to stay and still hope that might be the case. She has said she is firm on her decision but who knows? Is there something that could be done to change her mind? I know for certain the Alliance is working on it. There may be others and that's fine. If you feel that way, write the Board and urge them to get on it.
But I am tending to take her at her word so I'm moving on.
I am now wrestling with the superintendent search versus an interim superintendent.
I would like to see an internal interim superintendent. It would have to be a person who knows the district and who is trusted by many in the district, both at schools and at headquarters.
Because one huge issue here is trust. We as parents and community would like to trust our superintendent but it is the people that he/she guides that need to feel they can trust their boss. They need to believe that person has a valid plan, will take input and just as no one wants the superintendent to micromanaged, doesn't want a superintendent micromanaging their professional lives.
The churn we have all felt has been doubly felt by those who work for the district. Imagine what it must of felt from the inside of JSCEE when MGJ swept in and brought her own people (not hired new people, brought new people). She was authoritarian to all and secretive. That did not breed trust.
Many people at JSCEE may have known or heard about Silas Potter but like any good soldier, kept their heads down and did their own work believing/hoping that the leadership would take care of that problem.
I think that happens a lot at JSCEE - keep your head down and do your best work in spite of who works at the top.
I think there are may be a few there who view the Board a major roadblock to what they believe is the right way to get to better outcomes but I think most welcome them as another set of eyes and ears. It's protection for their own work.
So imagine working like this - I think that just as we all hope for the best, those who work there do as well.
That's why we need trust and a knowledge base of this district more than any other qualifications right now. Because we have great people like Pegi McEvoy, Bob Boesche, Noel Treat and Paul Apostle and others who are helping to right this ship. They all need our support.
It must be a lonely time in our district. The failures of management over the last 10 years are continuing to take their toil. Teachers are under attack, we can't seem to get a handle on curriculum, we have mismanaged our facilities, managed to miss signs about growing capacity issues and more.
And yet, we ALL know successes. We are investing our children's education to these schools. We are investing our resources and time to these schools. Our district has many kinds of innovation that, in other states, only come from having charter schools. We have signs of excellence everywhere.
This next year or two is going to be absolutely vital to our district. The change in the Board makeup is going to allow more nuance and balanced discussion about what we do. But I know that no one on that Board is looking for massive change. Kellie LaRue is right; changing direction in a district is like turning a tanker. You can't do it on a dime - it takes time. But you better make sure it's the direction you want.
So I urge you to tell the Board that we need an internal interim superintendent. We do this for our staff because they need that security and we need that trust that will come with a known quantity.
We are the cusp of something great. I believe we can be a great district - I truly do. But we need to get away from what Dorothy Neville calls "costly distractions" and support our staff across the board. Everyone needs a pat on the back for the hard work they do.
Urge the Board to look within. There are answers there. If your wish is to persuade Dr. Enfield to stay, do that.
But do not remain silent and let the Board stew by themselves. It's just too important a decision.
Comments
In addition, I'd rather the strong people are are in central office stay in those positions. There has been so much movement and restructuring that I'd like to see as much stability as possible.
An ideal candidate would see that there has been a lot of great work that has been done, and that person would not be looking to make sweeping changes but provide leadership, accountability and support for the work that is already happening.
Good grief.
Enfield = TFA = absolutely unacceptable.
Yes, I'm a one-issue person. If a superintendent supports TFA, no amount of "communication skills" will override that colossal failing.
TFA strikes at the very heart of a superintendent's belief regarding the profession of education.
Woo her back? Nauseating.
You assume strong central office folks will stay under a new sup.
Remember; That's up to them too and several won't.
If those people refuse to do a good job under anyone other than Enfield than they should do us a favor and submit their resignations. I assume they are adults, not children, and do not use selective ethics. But who knows...? It would be nice to know that they are not in bed with Jon Bridge and Chris Korsmo.
similar ....
"He was a great bank president. He had so many good qualities perhaps he can get early release from prison on that embezzlement conviction and we can invite him back."
----
Enfield's action reports were incredibly biased, purposely inaccurate so as to mislead. A lot like the MGJ work product.
The only way I could support Enfield would be.....
if I was so in love with the Ed Reform agenda, that I thought trickery was an acceptable practice to keep it in place.
Others like David Brewster of "Crosscut" recommend buying the next Board at $200,000+ per campaign spending seat.
One obvious way to fight back would be to make the next election, in 2013, a well-funded effort to retake the majority of the school board, putting a scare into Kay Smith-Blum, the hard-to-read new leader of the majority, and Betty Patu.
Both Steve Sundquist and Peter Maier, the incumbents who lost in November, seem to have taken the race for granted against weak opponents, not even doing polling. A combination of the teachers union and other unions, Democratic party activists incensed about Teach for America and charter schools, parents wanting more local control of schools, and the opponents of "fuzzy math" knocked off two key members of the school reform bloc. The reformers say they have learned a lesson: Seattle School Board races have to be treated like Seattle City Council races, complete with consultants, polls, and a budget of several hundred thousand dollars. (Sundquist and Maier each spent about $68,000 in losing; respective victors Marty McLaren and Sharon Peaslee spent $26,000 and $14,000.)
I guess Maier's outspending of Peaslee by 5 to 1 just was not enough. Not the kind of Election that "Crosscut" favors.
Brewster recommends Norm Rice as a possible Superintendent...... Mr. TfA savior.
How Cow, I apologize for screwing up the buying of Seattle .... I did not understand how the "functions of Democracy" operate in Seattle.
Gee Dave thanks for the explanation. At least now I know why Sundquist and Maier summarily dismissed every detail report filed with data I sent them. No interest at all in the intelligent application of relevant data.
--- Good to know they were "two key members of the school reform bloc".... Perhaps they should have included that phrase in their $68,000 each worth of campaign materials.
policies with a smile and better manners.
Give Phil Brockman a try as Supe... he knows the district and local needs better than anyone !
Wow, Brewster gives away a lot here about the corporate ed reformers' backstage strategies in Seattle, and confirms what many of us had long suspected about how and why the "Gang of Four" (Maier, Sundquist, Martin-Morris, Carr) were selected & elected.
Some excerpts:
The strange bedfellows of the populist coalition that took those two seats might indicate, as you would expect in hard times, a growing reaction against corporate-world types like the reform members and many of their well-heeled, new-economy backers. Then, too, the school board has endured a series of management fiascos on its watch. That reform bloc, deliberately recruited from people who know how to be boards for a billion-dollar company, swung the other way from the previous, meddlesome board that drove out Supt. Raj Manhas in 2006. The new board didn't meddle, but it may have given Dr. Maria Goodloe-Johnson too much autonomy.
("deliberately recruited" by whom, I wonder?)
Here's more of their (LEV, Alliance, Nielson, Gates et al) concerted strategy:
The school reform movement began about six years ago as a group of parents and some wealthy backers decided to get on the national bandwagon and to bring in a school board that would stay the course for these tough decisions.
Brewster gets a lot of things wrong and fails to look closely at Enfield's transient resume and track record of not sticking around. Instead he echoes Korsmo's canard about blaming the new school board.
Even if this were true, if a superintendent is so easily scared off by democratically elected board members, s/he doesn't have what it takes to run a school district.
I don't know what strange bedfellows he is referring to -- from what I have seen, those who oppose the backroom corporate ed reform machinations in Seattle tend to be parents and teachers and sensible people who want accountability, integrity and fiscal responsibility from our school district leadership. Nothing very strange about that.
Lastly, that's a weird comment he makes about Kay Smith-Blum. So he and the reformites plan to try to scare her? Nice, really nice. (Geesh.)I wonder what Kay makes of this plan?
Overall, very revealing piece. Thanks for the link, Dan.
Maybe he thinks the populists don't read Crosscut. What a snooty elitist. (Laughing here.)
And for the record, I love Betty Patu.
northender
Give Phil Brockman a try as Supe... he knows the district and local needs better than anyone!
Rooster et al., The _old_ Phil Brockman would've been an excellent choice for superintendent, but he is not that person anymore. He believed in MGJ and her joined management team specifically to support her agenda--something he said he'd never do again after his earlier interim stint as ed director.
Hire Mr. Brockman as Superintendent and you will successfully sustain the MGJ-Enfield era for many more years.
SPSinsider
DWE
Signed, we need somebody to clean house
Next steps according to King 5:
The Seattle School Board is jump-starting efforts to recruit a new superintendent who can take over next July when interim schools chief Susan Enfield's contract expires.
Enfield surprised many observers on Friday when she issued a statement saying she did not want to be a candidate for the full-time job.
School Board President Michael DeBell said the next step is soliciting bids from executive recruitment firms specializing in high-level government jobs. The board wants to settle on a final bid in January so that the recruiting firm and board members can work through the winter and spring to find the right candidate.
The goal is to announce a hire in June, DeBell said.
Last July, the School Board budgeted $100,000 for the superintendent search. Some of that money has been spent on surveys and town hall meetings with parents and others interested in the process, but most of it remains unspent.
Enfield took over the school system in March after her predecessor, Maria Goodloe-Johnson, was fired after a state audit found the district's small-business contracting program provided little or no public benefit. The man who directed that program, Silas Potter, is now facing criminal charges that he and two co-defendants bilked $250,000 from the district.
Reporting by KING 5's Ed White.
Looks like head-hunting will begin for the "properly-trained" reformer to me. But then, that's another supposition by me.
northender
First -- unless I misread Melissa, I think the idea that SE wants to be "cajoled" into staying is pure conjecture (I realize several people have said it by now -- but certainly not SE (or anyone else who claims to be privy to what is going on in her head). As long as we are in "pure ficticious conjecture land," I think that she has gotten an offer -- or an "all but offered offer" expression of interest from elsewhere, that it may allow her to reorganize her home situation so that she and her spouse do not work in separate cities/states -- and that she has concluded that it is either a better next step, or a "just as good" next step without all the possible hoo rah of one-year extensions, explaining/defending/disowning some of her past positions/actions here -- and thus, she is acting in her own best career interests and taking the "other position," whatever it is.
On a (mostly) unrelated note -- "tianna," one of the commenters to David Brewster's article, had some really interesting things to say about David's school board assertions -- he/she finds him only "partly" informed, and in discussing why the other TWO incumbents did not also go down in flames, he/she states:
"The other surviving board member and the darling of ed reform on the board is Martin-Morris - who worked with LEVite turned lobbyist Lisa Macfarlane to do a backroom deal to get TFA into town. That gave him substantial behind the scenes boosts from the LEV and Alliance and Stand groups against challenger Buetow. As well, he rode the coattails of his "diversity" which he brought up endlessly in debates. Liberal Seattle voters clearly wanted diversity on the school board (despite the fact that Martin-Morris's credentials at turning his diversity into powerful policy are limited at best.)"
I can only attest to the diversity stuff -- because I read/heard some of it myself. But the "darling" of ed reform?" I wonder if that is why he seemed to go sort of "Stepford" on us, shut down his blog, and basically stop engaging (someone commented how the information "flow" seemed to switch from "Harium taking voter's comments to the Board" to "Harium explaining MGJ's agenda (for which he was going to vote) to the voters.) And a LEV backroom deal between Harium and Lisa to get TfA? Huh! We certainly all know that it was done as a "backroom deal" (first clue -- when everybody seems to be publicly signing on -- but none of their reasons make any sense -- it means that the REAL reasons are very different, and are not being disclosed) -- but I have never had any real inkling of who else (other than Susan Enfield) was a real proponent on the board."
At any rate -- this is about the purest form of gossip there is, given that I don't have a CLUE who tianna might be. But -- for those interested, tianna has much more to say on the subject -- some of it (such as the fact that Seattle voters may have "caught on" to the idea that business interests are trying to "buy" a board -- and won't go for it -- and the fact that many Seattlites dislike the tone and content coming from the current leadership at LEV and the Alliance) seems like pretty much spot on analysis.
Cliff Mass
Another Superintendent Bites the Dust
In March, when I was appointed Interim Superintendent of Seattle Public Schools, the District was in crisis. I was tasked with assembling the very best team of professionals to help lead this District, create transparency, improve communication and restore trust between families, the community and Seattle Public Schools.
I am incredibly proud of the work our students, teachers, principals and staff have accomplished over the past 10 months. Seattle is fortunate to have such a team of dedicated educational professionals. The progress we have made is significant:
• Seattle Public Schools students outperformed the state average in every tested subject in Grades 3-8;
• Our four-year graduation rate is up from 67 percent to 73 percent in the last year;
• Our overall school performance is increasing, with 27 schools increasing their overall performance level during 2010-11;
• Enrollment is on the rise; and
• Our city passed yet another Families and Education levy that will provide essential supports to our students.
While I am proud of what we have accomplished together, today I am announcing my decision to neither seek nor accept the permanent position of superintendent after my contract ends in June. This was not an easy decision for me to make given my commitment to Seattle and to our students. I wish the school board well in their search for a new superintendent, and will work with the new appointee to ensure a smooth transition for our staff, students and families. It is my sincere hope that the board will continue to build on our successes to date and continue the momentum we have built. I believe strongly that losing this momentum would be a disservice to our students and staff.
Our work here is far from over. Continuing to improve outcomes for all students and attack our achievement gaps will require great principals, great teachers, connected families and community partners and a central office serving schools by supporting high quality teaching and learning in every classroom. Please know that I remain dedicated to Seattle Public Schools and will continue to partner with, and serve you all to the best of my ability in the months ahead.
While we may hold different opinions on how to best serve our students, we must remember they are counting on us to fulfill our mission of ensuring that they are prepared for college, career and life. It is essential that we discipline ourselves to keep this mission—and our students—at the forefront of all we do, and not allow adult issues, egos and politics to stand in the way.
I want to thank you for your support. I will be forever grateful for having had the opportunity to serve the students and community of Seattle.
Sincerely,
Susan Enfield's Signature
Susan
Susan Enfield, Ed.D.
Interim Superintendent
Seattle Public Schools
Well Dr. Enfield I am more than please you are resigning as the superintendent at the end of the year. It seems like Christmas and New Years came early. I find it really interesting that you say the district has done a better job with the graduation rate. You said that graduation rate is up from 67 percent to 73 percent. Yes that is an improvement but not by much. You came from being the chief academic officer and pushed to not spend money on Summer School and drop it altogether. So you have not increased the graduation rate but rather decreased it.
You of all people should know that when kids do not graduate and get into trouble and become incarcerated that we the people of Seattle pay for it later. Due to the districts faulty budgeting and not finding money for alternative programs and making sure kids graduate, we now have a higher drop out rate. I am now pleased to hear you are hitting the yellow brick road.
You spend a lot of time talking about closing the achievement gap in your interim as a superintendent. It does appear that you and your lack of leadership have widened the achievement gap.
Some places I think you have failed the taxpayers and students are:
1. Not funding summer school
2. Trying to make a terrible graduation rate seem like a great thing
3. Teach for America and 5 week trainees
4. Financial mismanagement and financial stewardship and your inability to run a district effectively
5. Lastly, you were never a superintendent in the past, had no experience and did a poor job
Basically you argue that our enrollment is on the rise. But you have not found out how to effectively not over enroll students and help to create an effective learning environment. You as an academic individual should know that when schools are over crowded it is hard for teacher to teach and students to learn. Your answer is to hire more administrators and make costs larger. But admins the last time I checked do not instruct or teach classes.
You have also gotten rid of school counselors and instructional assistants. Also, you have not provided students with text books. I think that the other screw up was you were not effective in your hiring staff. All the people you hired were new trainees. Nobody is held accountable for mismanagement under your leadership. There is always somebody else to blame it on.
However, there will be some people whom will miss you in the Seattle School District. That would be the ineffective leadership of the Seattle Education Association. I am sure Johnathan Knapp will miss you dearly because he will have to cozy up to another superintendent.
Lastly, Stand for children and Teach for America will also miss you. But I bid you a fond farewell. Hopefully you have as much fun screwing up the next school. Because you have an impressive resume.
Best of luck in your future,
Nick Esparza
I'm not saying anyone has refused to do anything.
Its just that fellow bloggers sometimes make huge assumptions about individuals and then are stunned when events go differently.
If I had worked under MGJ and watched the district become as disfunctional as it did. Then helped Enfield improve things significantly, I would take some personal and professional pride in that accomplishment.
The prospect of having all that good work go south again after the alliance picks us another "Queen" figurehead may just be too much for me and I may chose to hang it up or do something else.
After a few times up the hill, I bet pushing that rock gets kinda heavy when it lands at the bottom again.
If I didn't know you, I would say you "snarked" me.
MGJ brought then here along with the rest of the Stand for Children/LEV/charter crowd. They are still managing things.
I honestly think they are a major problem because they are controlling what information reaches us and thereby manipulating the whole process.
Did Don Neilsen buy in?
Who, me snark? Never.
: b
I'm always impressed by the rich discussion and the level of informed posters on this blog as well.
northender
The idea of having an interim with knowledge of the district, and a ready understanding if our key issues is interesting. When you say interim, what period of time are you thinking about? One year, two years? I like the idea of someone who does not have a huge learning curve. And I like that an interim might be a better known entity to the community, allowing a better assessment of what kinds of thinking they might be importing. Ideally, an interim would have a good rep with teachers.
If there are good candidates inside, why not save the time, money, and energy by trying them first. I have little faith that Seattle schools will be saved "Deus Ex Machina" style right now in its current state by someone from outside the community.
FedMomof2
I know, ya'll think I'm high or something. I am kind of. I'm high on us being free of the truth-challenged Enfield. Maybe I need a kick in the head. Jon Bridge, where are you?
3. NEXT.
2. we are NOT inventing warp drive.
NO Superintendent Puppy Mill Power Point Pros / Aristocrat Defenders
GetOverOurSelves
I do not want to woo anyone; I'm just putting out what I hear.
A great big thank you for your tireless work, which greatly contributed to Susan Enfield's "decision" to move on after not being coronated.
When someone is exposed as two-faced in her own words, people don't stay fooled forever (although Charlie sure made some troubling rationalizations).
I, too, am in celebration mode.
--Dan Dempsey rocks!
I like Peg McEvoy too much in the position she already holds. I worry that Noel may not see the critical need to do something IMMEDIATELY to replace/demote Cathy Thompson -- but I think he is NOT an Ed Reform guy (at least not yet) and is not beholden to that crowd at all for his future career. I agree that Noel would need to get some weight on the ed/curriculum/teaching side -- but he might be a good candidate to finish cleaning out the bad parts of HR, dealing with the intimidation/recrimination stuff, etc.
Does he have experience managing a significant number of people and a large budget?
Could the Phil Brockman critic who posts here see Brockman as CAO with Treat as Super?
His initial read of the Ninth Circuit court decision re: HQT and TFA was bunk, but he has carried himself admirably since then. His people skills exceed slick Susan and I can't really see him blithely spouting talking points ad nauseum.
He would need to be able to make the tough calls though. I think Charlie should be his hatchetman (and first to go, current hatchetman Ron English - but that's just me).
He's worthy of consideration.
The last Board was pathetic.
If the new one fails then out with them.
Thw Board cannot let them fail.
No way!!!!
Good riddance Enfiels.
Good luck over centralizing the next district you land in and
hurting students.
I might be able to be swayed, but I'd rather they go straight to a search. We have to finish out SE's contract anyway, right?
SE was not a good fit for the job, obviously. I'm grateful she figured that out and has stopped wasting the taxpayer's money and time. If she wanted the job she would have fought for it (and truthfully, she wouldn't have had to fight too hard). She didn't want it and that's awesome for us in the long term.
Woo? I'd like to see Enfield pay back some of her salary. She didn't earn it. What has she accomplished? How has she earned the trust of the teachers? Anyone tapped to fill this role should be a teacher. Conduct a local search without any conflicts of interest. Look at what each superintendent has accomplished, the good and the bad over the past 20 years. That's a generation. Decide what to scrub and what to keep.
Mr. White
Enfield became Super on 22 hours notice. Only Betty Patu believed a clean full break from MGJ was needed at that time and said so. ....
So now we know from Brewster that the Reform Bloc Four was running the show for Raikes et al. No wonder a clean break from MGJ's de facto policies was NOT allowed.
The reason I ask is because I just started a company. My new company, Cummings and Associates, specializes in superintendent recruitment. What follows is a description of our process. I copied it from our web-site (Cummingsandassociates.com), which is currently off-line until the update is completed.
At Cummings and Associates a highly trained Recruitment Consultant will meet with you personally, to help you develop a Superintendent Profile specific to your District. Using this Superintendent Profile your Recruitment Consultant will conduct a national search for that one individual out there who will be the perfect 'fit' as your new Superintendent. Furthermore we charge less than some of those other reruiters and unlike them, we guarantee our results.
Give Cummings and Associates a call today at (206) @&!-#$%^.
Cummings and Associates- We do the work so you can rest easy.