Deputy Superintendent to Leave in January
Deputy Superintendent Charles Wright announced, via a letter to staff, that he is leaving SPS, effective Jan. 5, 2016. It's a bit of a curious letter as he doesn't say anything about his future plans but does give a long list of the accomplishments that he has worked on. He also says this:
I wonder who will get the blame for this change - the new Board not even yet in there or the Superintendent? Maybe I should ask Sherry Carr who went out of her way in her farewell remarks to name how many of each category of senior management had left over her eight years in office.
As you prepare to work with a new board, more closely with the community, and continue to work with one another to strengthen the system’s ability to support students, I encourage you to read the book The Trust Imperative by Stephen Hacker. Some of you may recall that I mentioned this book to you in September 2014. It will be an excellent resource as you engage in intentional conversations about re-building trust where you believe it does not exist. The book offers insights and tools to help you understand and build trust across a spectrum of key elements including trust readiness, worthiness and willingness.I have heard that he has been handing this book out and I hope to read it soon myself. I'm glad he asking staff to work on trust issues. I'm not sure what he means/context of "worthiness."
I wonder who will get the blame for this change - the new Board not even yet in there or the Superintendent? Maybe I should ask Sherry Carr who went out of her way in her farewell remarks to name how many of each category of senior management had left over her eight years in office.
Comments
GOOD RIDDANCE.
I lay it to the new board some of whom were NOT going to be lectured by Mr. Wright the way the last one was.
Ed
I'm sure he'll be more lard on the top at the City of Seattle DEEL.
As for Wright, if he stays local my bet is the city under Murray or the state under the early learning grab for management types. Conjecture no evidence. Also conjecture - more downtown staff not wanting to deal with new board and bolting. Would not be a surprise. Would not count most as a loss.
DistrictWatcher
Wright was heavily involved in the city's prek program. He signed an agreement that allowed the city/ district to align computer/ data systems- something that left me feeling uncomfortable. When it came to the city's prek program, I felt he wasn't forth-coming with information. He would say one thing, but documents would say another. I was upset when the board was told that they would vote on the city's prek service agreement, but that document got shoved into a stack of papers; the board voted on accepting funding, but the superintendent signed the agreement.
My guess: Wright is heading for the city's DEEL. I'm not sad to see him leave.
I know you might not believe it but I always hold out hope when new senior leadership comes in. I found it odd that Mr. Wright had moved to Seattle and, in a matter of months, was on the Board at the Alliance for Education. But his resume looked so good.
I found Mr. Wright to be a person who seemed to truly care and I again wanted to believe the best. At one work session a couple of years back, I felt moved by his words about wanting change for this district. He mentioned a consultant that had helped management. I thought about it and, for the first time EVER, went to a senior management person (Wright) and offered to raise the money to hire that consultant who he thought so highly of in terms of being able to move the district forward.
He turned me down. He looked surprised, thanked me but said they thought they could do on their own.
Well, lesson learned. I tried.
Last spring, he went to a Board committee to talk about asking for $1M for a consultant because they "could not wrap their arms around operations."
No, I won't miss him.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2014/01/02/people-to-watch-in-2014-seattle-area-edition/
Another SPSer
DistrictWatcher
Why not lose an administrative position that had really no mission whatsoever, except to Banda.
It might start a trend.
Another SPSer
I have more of a problem with Michael Tolley. Given a choice, I would have preferred Tolley to leave.
Tolley needs to go.
I don't even agree with AnotherSPSer that he has good intent. Vaguely similar to the notion of NCLB, his idea of "fair" is NCGA, or No Child Gets Ahead. The only way to do this is by requiring all classrooms in all buildings to work from the same (inadequate) plan, schedule and overall roadmap. This all but guarantees kids who are ahead -- for whatever reasons -- are ill-served, and it all but guarantees that kids who are struggling won't get adequate help.
While you're at it, send Heath out of town on the same bus with Tolley.
Wasn't it Mr. Wright who, at a Board retreat, told the Board - in a scolding tone - that the staff had no capacity to take on any of the Board's priorities for the year - including bell time. A few weeks later he committed countless hundreds of hours of staff time to the City's pre-school initiative without any approval from the Board.
Or am I remembering it wrong?
I don't think he said they didn't have time to do Board priorities, but he did seem to be the one who organized some political theater; not sure if it was at the same Board retreat. When bell times was presented at a meeting, the entire senior staff came behind the podium, indicating that their work would be (negatively) impacted by doing bell time work. Really, the IT dept is negatively impacted by bell times?? C & I?? It was also astounding.
I think he is a bright man, but somehow missed that it is the Board who sets the priorities, and his job is to implement them.
NotARobot
The city's prek program is part of a research study called P20 and the research will be conducted out of Rutgers University. An Institutional Review Board will oversee this project to assure students are not psychologically harmed. There was little to NO discussion around this fact. At one point, district documents indicated children would be asked "culturally sensitive" questions. This sentence was removed, but we don't know much about the research that will be conducted. I never felt that adequate light was shed on this fact and there was never a healthy discussion on this subject.
As previously mentioned, many feel prek will benefit children. Yet, there was an astonishing lack of transparency.
I would like to see Shauna Heath leaving also. Her sneaky tactics to undermine the purchase and use of Math in Focus should not be acceptable to the board or the superintendent. I don't know what Michael Tolley does. Is he actively messing things up or just allowing others to do so? I can't see that we need him now that they're hired people to supervise principals and now someone to supervise the people who supervise the principals. Wasn't that his job?
NotARobot
Oh do I miss having a real newspaper! In the better old days, when the Times was more real and the PI was still here -- some good investigative reporter would have jumped on this. But today we just have the slumbering ST "Smaug," asleep on its dollars and its captive subscribers, and hard to rouse unless someone wants to suggest an estate tax.
I also agree with Lynn that something needs to happen w/r/t Shauna Heath. The elementary math insubordination fiasco is really a terrible situation. And the board should not allow it to continue -- it is not good for teachers to see downtown get away with these sorts of shenanigans without rebuke; and it is not good for kids to have their math curricula tampered with by someone whose fiddling has made the program worse, not better.
Another MGJ chair warmer who needs to go before real change is possible.
I'm hearing a City SPP preschool contractor is resisting enrolling a child with disabilities. This is a violation of Titles II and III of ADA and places the City in the cross-hairs.
Wright and Toner have set up a separate and unequal system within SPS preschools. If you're going to do something, do it equitably. No loss if these two leave. More time, resources, and focus on K-12.
Lastly, I can respect Toner/Wright for wanting to provide opportunities for low income students. However, in the process, there was not an attempt to support the interests of the district. Hundreds of administrative hours were spent on this project and the city is sitting on over $100M for early learning; the city should have reimbursed a cash-strapped K-12 educational system for administrative work.
The city's prek program impacts district operations and this initiative needed to be vetted in Audit and Finance...it was not. The city has plenty of funds and they should be reimbursing the district. As is, the district is providing free space to private prek providers that are supported by the city/Family and Ed. levy.
LayOff