Seattle Superintendent Performance Evaluation

Here's Superintendent Banda's Performance Evaluation.  You will see that this is based on a "supermajority" of the Board (I would assume that to be 5 people) with a minority assessment coming at the end of the evaluation. 

From the evaluation:
These evaluation criteria focus on five areas:

Hire, Develop and Strengthen Leaders:

Teacher/Principal and Central Staff evaluations; Hire quality leadership to fill vacant positions; professional development
Raising expectations and improving academic performance and opportunities of all students:
narrow achievement gaps, growth for English Language Learners; implementation of Common
Core State Standards;

Building relationships with selected stakeholders to connect them to our schools: 

Family engagement, Labor Partners and community based organizations.
Governance Team Priorities and Areas of Continuing Emphasis: 

Develop a plan for BEX IV and EP&O levies; a framework and process for collective bargaining; bring professional growth and Evaluation system to scale; develop community outreach
for the strategic plan; develop the Equitable Access Framework; develop student support strategies; expand the transparency of district decision-making

Core Competencies:

Collaboration; Getting Results, Decision Quality and Problem Solving, Integrity, Accountability and
Fiscal Responsibility

Overall Assessment:
In his first year, Mr. Banda has performed well in leading the District. The superintendent’s performance has been evaluated by a supermajority of the Board as “Exceeds Expectations” in
four areas and “Meets Expectations” in the fifth area.

In applying these criteria, the Board acknowledges that it has high expectations, and a rating of “Meets Expectations” is seen as having met those expectations. A rating of“Exceeds Expectations” should be considered as performance significantly above what is required. 

My biggest issues are these:

- Equitable Access Framework - I have no idea why this is so challenging as it affects nearly every other decision.  As Charlie has pointed out, they moved forward with BEX IV without it.  Now it appears they will move forward on boundaries without it.  It affects program placement which will affect boundaries/capacity management.

And yet it is still on the "to do" list.

- I'm with the Board; I'd like to see some stronger outward leadership action by the Superintendent.  From the halls of headquarters to the greater community, I think this important.


Anonymous said…
He makes thoughtful, quality decisions, as evidenced by his handling of the MAP Test controversy.

What? Really? That was thoughtful? It seemed boneheaded at best. He escalated a non-issue, then made a threat, then failed to act on his threat. Then promised to think about it later - only to tell high schools they don't have to do it if they don't want to, but can. Same as they were before. But nothing about the real issue. That's leadership? I don't think so.

Another strength - hiring the assistant superintendent, and sped director. Really? Just filling a seat is now representative of "outstanding work"?

What a farce of a review.

Charlie Mas said…
The utter failure to develop the Equitable Access (the program placement procedure) is completely outweighed by work done on BEX IV, the levies, preparing for collective bargaining, PGE, and community outreach for the strategic plan.
Charlie Mas said…
Hiring a SpEd director appears to have been quite a challenge.

I can see why. The job comes with all of the responsibility but without the authority to fulfill the responsibility. Plus there's a Board director pounding the table about cutting SpEd expenses and the local newspaper ranting about the cost of transporting the students.

Yeah, I can see how that was a tough position to fill.
n said…
The minority report in which it is claimed he received less than satisfactory ratings in all five areas sounds like sour grapes to me. He's not perfect but give him a chance.

As a teacher who has issues with bloated administration, I never realized how sick it all really is. It does trickle down...
Anonymous said…
Hiring a sped director had never really been a problem. It's never hard to promote someone into that spot. That's what has happened for literally decades, and it's what happened this time. For better or worse, sped director is stepping stone position. There were many internal hand up for it. And, a person similarly credentialed, but from another district was promoted instead. There's no evidence this was a particular challenge.

Sped reader.
mirmac1 said…
This part killed me:

Minority View:
Not all Board members agreed with the above assessment. The interviews indicate that there a split among the views of the Board, with a minority of the Board concerned about the Superintendent’s overall performance. In the view of these members, the Superintendent’s performance is “unsatisfactory” or “below expectations” in all five major categories.

Again, with the divisiveness. well said…
Its ALL a farce being perpetrated on this entire community!

Empty words crafted by the Alliance's "spin" folks outside Banda's office.

The "mission statement" ought to read: "Telling you what you want to hear, for decades"

Seattle just can't take frank political discourse. It has to hide behind public masks.

My two cents.
mirmac1 said…
Interesting that the Times is not ripping up Banda because of the two "anonymous" dissenters on the board...

Editorial: Superintendent José Banda survives divisive Seattle School Board’s judgment
And the Times starts off by saying it's rare for any employee to get unanimously great marks in their first year and the rips those on the Board who ranked him lower.

The Times also wants - as Mirmac says - for those who ranked him lower to out themselves.

Uh, no, because it's a personnel matter and they HAVE to keep silent. They know that but it suits their purposes to make that statement.

I'm sure those on the Board who have any concerns are talking to their employee, the Superintendent. But in private.

I personally could not support any raise at this time. I do agree more with the majority than the minority of the Board on his work.
mirmac1 said…
Another commenter rightfully notes that KSB and Betty spoke openly about their vote against extending MGJ's contract. Perhaps that is why it was a vote NOT an evaluation.
Charlie Mas said…
There were two different items on the Board agenda. One was the superintendent's annual performance review and the other was the introduction of an extension of the superintendent's contract. They come around the same time but they are two separate Board actions. There is no vote on the evaluation but there will be a vote on the contract extension at the next board meeting.

I suspect the vote on the contract extension will be unanimous.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

COVID Issues Heating up for Seattle Public Schools