What I Learned Today, Part Two

The Board's Ad Hoc Committee meeting was not a great way to end the day as it was both irritating and dumbfounding.

At the meeting, representing the Board were Brandon Hersey, Leslie Harris and Chandra Hampson. Representing staff, it was Superintendent Jones, head of Communications Bev Redmond and Board office staff. I was the only "guest." 

What they were trying to hash out is the community engagement around defining "a well-resourced school." What is being proposed are "Learning Walks" at several schools deemed to be well-resourced. Ms Redmond outlined what it might look like:

In an hour to an hour-and-a-half, Jones and the Board will take a walking tour of the school, maybe have some "construction experts" to explain good points from the building side, and then engage with community using some kind of prompt like thoughts on what parents think a well-resourced school looks like. It was stressed it would NOT be an open mic. 

They will "harvest the content" from meeting to meeting, using the same prompt at each school. There will be "4-6 opportunities offered with regional distribution across the district." The "full Board" would "participate in the tour; provide information on the Board's role in the initiative area, and listen to community member feedback to inform board decisions in the initiative area." The Superintendent and the staff apparently will explain their role as well.

All that in an hour-and-a-half and parents, do NOT get it in your head to talk about anything else. (Now if it were me and you had a majority of the Board in one place, I sure WOULD pepper them with questions.)

Outcomes: Thoughout this tour, district leadership and community members will build understanding of the issue areas and how it impacts or is implemented in school buildings; build relationship between the Board and community; build relationship between staff and community; and build community understanding of the Board role and staff role in decision-making and addressing issue.

Yes, one short, carefully controlled meeting is going to "build relationships." I call bullshit. 

What these choreographed meetings are really is the public's introduction to this new Student Outcome Focused Governance (SOFG). They are going to let parents and staff see how interactions will happen under this new governance. 

The dates selected are all Tuesdays; August 29, September 12, September 19, October 3, October 17 an October 24. You know, right when school starts and parents have nothing else to do. 

Director Harris raised her hand. She asked about including the issue of closure and consolidation into these discussions, especially since the Superintendent had promised meetings on this important issue to occur in June (which clearly has not happened). She seemed concerned that parents would not understand "the process" that would be used. She said that the school closure issue would be "a tsunami" of issues if the district didn't clearly explain how it would work. 

Redmond babbled about "starting the conversation" and I could see Director Harris' face fall. I noticed that the chat room function had not been turned off and I made one simple statement, "Director Harris, I hear you,"  Hampson immediately jumped in and requested it be turned off.

Jones said talking about a well-resourced school  - "buildings, services and programs" - was important because parents would be able to see that even if there was some pain that parents would "trade-up" in the benefits of a well-resourced school. He mentioned closing 20(!) schools to get 10 much better ones. He said it was about "where we want to go and not the budget." Again, I call bullshit.

Harris said that some people believe the process is already rigged and there is "a secret list" of schools to be closed. She urged "read aheads" and I believe she meant messaging that would explain the baseline for closing a school and the process.

Hersey said there is no secret list and Harris nodded. Again, I call bullshit. There is going to be a minimal process, both because of the cost of doing so AND the outrage that the staff and Board would have to face. Then the district will announce the winners/losers? and that will be the end of it. No Board member or staff member in leadership will be listening to any school community. 

Hampson went off on some tangent about explaining "how we work together so people know how we operate." She said that everyone should be careful with the word "we" so that parents and the public don't get confused.  Then she went to that tired canard about the community's "vision and values" which have NEVER been defined and NEVER been discussed in any public meeting.

Hersey said something about not letting the process look like CYA instead of "building the narrative with schools." He said "for some it will be an opportunity to gain an education experience for their child that they don't currently have."

Harris asked that tomorrow at the announcement of these meetings, that there should be a timeline of the process with deadlines. No real answer there. 

I cannot stand this disingenuous talk, this corporate-speak, managing and massaging the message instead of providing real information and honesty about the situation.  

I call bullshit. Voters should vote out every incumbent that they can and demand better. 

Jones took just a two-year contract instead of the typical three-year term fand so, next June, his contract is up. So with the pain of closing some schools, the new Board will have to figure out whether to keep him or start looking for a new superintendent. I said today that I cannot see a superintendent search but if Jones blows this process, it's not going to be good for him. 

Or this district.