Live Blog From Superintendent Evaluation Committee Meeting
Submitted by Allen Gwinn on Mon, 11/30/2009 - 17:05.
Well, we're a little bit late, but better late than never. We're here to discuss the proposed superintendent evaluation tool.
Obviously the proposal to give the superintendent 20% of his "points" relating to the management of funds in the District has some asking where is his impetus to manage the money!
It's an important meeting and is not being streamed, so I thought I'd blog it. There are only 17 spectators/employees in the auditorium. It looks like about half of the attendees are DISD employees.
Looking around the room for board candidates, the only candidate in attendance (in addition to the incumbent, Leigh Ann Ellis, who sits on the board) seems to be Bernadette Nutall.
Neither Bruce Parrott nor Sally Cain appears to be in attendance.
Carla Ranger is cross-examining Jerome Garza on percentages used in the superintendent's evaluation "tool" with respect to what the TEA recommends. She wants a certain part of the superintendent's "grade" to include how he or she relates with the Board of Trustees.
Jerome Garza is responding that he doesn't think the evaluation should include the superintendent's "popularity" with the board.
Edwin Flores is concerned that the board makes decisions that would affect the superintendent's "numbers" in the tool.
Leigh Ann Ellis points out that the taxpayers need to be better represented.
Carla Ranger insists on more categories.
Clearly there is going to be a difference of opinion over weighting of the numbers.
It looks like this may end up going back to committee with a vote, likely, in December.
[Ed Note: One idea might be to define 3 supercategories ("academics", "financials", and "satisfaction"). Weight each of them at 30%. Then add an additional "subjective" 10% to factor in things like newspapers scandals or kudos.
Everything is interrelated. In other words, you can't impact financials without having an effect on satisfaction and academics. The "subjective" factor gives the superintendent an additional incentive to "keep it running smoothly."
What do you think?]
ed u asked...
Represent the taxpayer...where did that come from?
I think the job is too big and needs to be given into a process of redevelopment that focuses on servicing the need, not the cost or debate to defend the authority to not do the job. I thought the Edison contracting concept was a reasonable option, given the event the contractor was legitimate. I think the job of the administration is to produce the education of the community.
If the community does not have the resource to be educated there is no education. The Superintendent is responsible for the production of education the taxpayer funds provide to educate. There are laws the school needs to be in compliance with, but not at the expense of wasting taxpayer funds, to understand how to not comply and still proceed.
When the teacher/administration lies and changes document to hide the truth of the fact of the child/children not being appropriately educated in the DISD, that trains the child to know the way to success is to cheat and lie. That is what DISD is teaching, not the 3 R's.
I think we need to just understand that the people are all criminals, and there is no possible way to grade or evaluate them because they have the authority to harass and do malice when ever they need to squelch the truth.
The superintendent needs to be graded on honorableness and straightforwardness. Here in the promised land the Lewisville District had a budget issue, and the Superintendent held town hall PTA meetings at EVERY campus, a full year before the expected crunch, with complete candor and openness of the issues and option available to the taxpayer. Same issues here, but the difference is the energy is focused on the school's ability to service the community, not cover up the facts so to raise bond money to have projects to skim from. What ever the data the school will produce, the fact is the funds are being wasted and the kids are being mistreated. The superintendent in DISD has the additional burden of educating many children who are not legal residents.
The school board needs to establish the end goals and based on the needs of the children the organization needs to be outlined and the Superintendent needs to follow that outline with enough wriggle room to as you say "keep it running smoothly"
There needs to start with the foundation of the financial funds laws, and programs that are the core of the outline. Each child has a mandated fund. The Central administration needs to be completely eliminated, and the site management needs to be completely informed and responsible. Any shortcomings are a direct reflection on the site administration, and the superintendent is responsible to provide training or resources for that site and students. The principal should have administration support to request and be provided by a general site based administration fund. The school district "central" resources administration support and provides what else that campus requires.
Each campus would have the Federal IDEA funds and Title I and all the other state and other tax funds that the site can manage, and hire their own staff for Speech OT Autism ABA and manage their own evaluations, being that the campus has the responsibility to understand the needs in the ARD committee, the school principal would have to provide to the community, without the harness of 3700 tugging and denying resources, other than giant legal coffers for the Due Process altercations, they pay the hearing officers to pretend to be impartial at. Each campus would be managed in a way that the parents are engaged and active, or the school will not have kids if the principal is not so good.
I think the BOT needs to abolish the ability for the DISD police to cover up the administration Felony crimes, and start being legitimate.
There needs to be a complete job description analysis and change, other than it is all a waste of time and tax payer funds. The only result is a non educated society of liars and cheaters who are experts of getting away with it.
It is a fact the BOT planned for this mess. There is no clear agenda to do the right thing for the kids
Post new comment