End of the Year Changes May Be Foretelling for Others

As for the title of this thread, I am hearing some rumblings of a rather large change that may come to the district very soon.  I am trying to learn more and when I know for certain I will let you know.  I hesitate to say anything specific.  There are two reasons for me saying anything at all.
 One, because I believe parents deserve a heads up early (if only to brace yourself). 

Two, because I rarely get any credit or acknowledgement from the regular media, I'd like to be able to say I was the first one to raise the red flag.

We have all seen the shifting sands of principal movement.  I asked the district some questions about this issue and here are the questions and replies.

1) Why were parents at SS given a survey too late to turn it in?  Parents say they got notice of the survey (and there is a notice but not a link to the survey still at the SS website) just days before the announcement on Friday.

 

We held a parent engagement meeting on Tuesday, June 10. A follow-up survey in several languages went out on Wednesday, June 11 through Friday morning, June 13. We reviewed feedback from the parent meeting and survey results and made the appointment by Friday evening. We had to balance the desire for parent/family input with the constraints of time.

 

(My reply: does anyone think this "parent engagement" was anything but a show?)

2) Is the "principal leadership coach" position that Ms. Scarlett is taking a new one for SPS?  If not, who held that position previously?  What is the salary for this position (and what was Ms. Scarlett's previous salary)?

 

This position is an addition to our current principal leadership coach, Michael Starosky. The position used to be called a “Human Resources Consulting Principal.” A second position was added through our bargain with the Principal’s Association of Seattle (PASS) to help with leading new principals and professional development. Ms. Scarlett’s current salary is $113,607 and in her new role her salary will be $121,636. 

 

(Hey, ANOTHER additional position at headquarters.  See those dollars getting further and further away from schools?  And why, if we have Executive Directors who were former principals, do we need two additional coaches?)

3) I note that the Wedgwood community is also looking for a new principal but they are doing it thru their BLT team with an active community engagement.  What is the Superintendent's procedure for choosing new principals and why do some communities seem to have more engagement than others?

The Superintendent has the right to make a principal or assistant principal appointment at any time, for any reason. The Superintendent may elect to elicit input from stakeholders including staff, parents, and community constituents but can make an appointment whenever he or she deems necessary.

 

(This is the standard, canned answer and really, not good enough. Board, I'm looking at you.)

4) If the entire leadership team from Graham Hill is changing and yet dramatic staff changes have occurred at Graham Hill based on Ms. Morrison's leadership, how will this all work with a new principal?  From the Rainier Valley Post:

The changes leave no one in charge to orient the new staff scheduled to start at Graham Hill in the fall, including a librarian, a family support specialist, a special education position, several instructional assistants and seven teachers — nearly half of the 16-member teaching staff — most of them first-year educators who were recruited by Morrison and are expecting to work for her when they start in the fall.

"We are confident that a high-quality principal will be found for Graham Hill and will continue Dr. Morrison’s fantastic work. We are going to bring in a principal right away who can begin building relationships with families and staff. Given the timeline, Southeast Region Executive Director Kelly Aramaki will meet with staff, families and Dr. Morrison to get their input and then most likely bring in an interim principal who can work closely with Dr. Morrison to ensure a smooth transition. The interim principal will be someone who has the experience and skills needed and the vision and leadership style that aligns well with Dr. Morrison’s vision and leadership style and the work that needs to happen at Graham Hill moving forward. We have already posted the Graham Hill Elementary Assistant Principal position as well, and are looking for someone who is familiar with the community. This position will be filled by the end of June.  The new principal and assistant (in consultation with Dr. Morrison) will then work in the summer to build relationships with staff and families, set up opportunities for current staff to bring new staff on board, and continue the work set in motion by Dr. Morrison over the past two years."

 

(Bring in a new principal "right away" when staff and parents are gone?  Nope, this person will start working on those relationships in the fall.  I do find it interesting that there is this perception that the work that Dr. Morrison has done is exactly what the new principal will want to do.)

5) Why was the assistant principal, Chad Kodama, allowed to leave his job at GH as assistant principal before the end of the school year?

According to Morrison’s email, Kodama “decided to look for new opportunities to stretch his ‘school leadership legs’ in some neighboring school districts.”

The District cannot comment on confidential personnel matters.

 

(That's a fair enough answer and I think I should have directed that question to Mr. Kodama.   Not so helpful to leave when there is so much turmoil but apparently, "stretching" his legs was more important.)

6) In the previous MOU/agreement with the New School Foundation and the district, the New School Foundation was accorded input/vote on any principal at South Shore.  Is that clause in effect with LEV?  If so, who from LEV participated in the discussions over this change?

Kelly Aramaki had a conference call with Amy Liu, Chris Korsmo and Diane Buckley from LEV last week (Wed., June 11) to get their input on desired characteristics for the next principal of South Shore.

 

(Ah, I thought so. To note, Korsmo is CEO at LEV, Diane Buckley is the CFO, Amy Liu is a policy director.  So three people got to give input.  I clearly didn't phrase my question correctly but if I had I would have asked if they were in the principal interviews and did they have a vote.  

Again, South Shore is a good school doing good work.  But they are afforded things that no other school is and that is somewhat troubling.  They get more money because of the MOU with LEV, they have a brand-new building (and they were not first in line to get a new building and there are meeting records to suggest that they used the partnership leverage to push up the list), and they get money from the F&E levy even as other school with high F/RL don't.  And, it seems LEV was able to give more input than most parent and staff.) 

 

Also, Charlie points this out (in an e-mail to the Board):

Here is the problem in a nutshell:

“The Superintendent has the right to make a principal or assistant principal appointment at any time, for any reason. The Superintendent may elect to elicit input from stakeholders including staff, parents, and community constituents but can make an appointment whenever he or she deems necessary.”

The inequity of this catch-as-catch-can process - actually the absence of any process - leaps out to everyone who sees it. This disparate treatment of school communities is intolerable and must end.

All the Board needs to do is write a policy that directs the superintendent to write a procedure for principal appointments. The Board should not dictate the procedure, only require that there be one. It’s very similar to the Board’s policy requirement that the superintendent write a program placement procedure. The policy didn’t dictate the procedure, only that the superintendent have one. See how badly that has turned out? Here we are, all these years later, after it has been named as a Board Priority for three consecutive years, and we still have no program placement procedure, no idea how they are determined, no “Equitable Access Framework” (whatever that is), and no timetable for getting one. In the absence of order we have chaos.

Also, the principal appointment at SouthShore was in violation of the Alternative Education Policy C54.00 which requires:

“School community participates in the selection of instructional, support and administrative staff.”