It's a semi-amusing laundry list of most of the issues I have been rambling about for the past few weeks. Maybe somebody does read blogs?
It's interesting because they have a discussion of the Superintendent's Contract and a separate discussion about the Superintendent Search process. Does the inclusion of that latter topic seem to give an indication of how discussion of the former will go? (Although I am sure it will be spontaneous and non-rehearsed nonetheless!)
Overlooking the fact that I suspect the Superintendent already has a contract -- which the Committee may ignore at their own legal peril, the Superintendent Search discussion should be interesting. Hopefully, the Committee has learned its collective lesson and realized that they have no experience hiring the leader of a $30 million organization without utilizing experienced professional help. The experience of hiring somebody to wallpaper your living room is not comparable to the experience needed to hire a Superintendent of Schools.
Friendly and well-meaning volunteers certainly have their place -- but deciding who will supervise a $30 million education budget, 500 employees, and 4,000 students ain't that place!
Just to recap some of the adventures of the past two Superintendent Search Committees -- Dr. Young was chosen by a Search Committee and one year later the School Committee was deadlocked on whether to renew her contract. It wasn't until the next School Committee started that the deadlock was broken and the contract extended. This was a situation where the School Committee accepted the recommendation of the Search Committee -- but didn't even like the person enough to renew them a year later.
As many have gone to great lengths to point out, Dr. Johnson was not selected by the last Search Committee -- and some members of that Committee have gone above and beyond the call of duty to make that point loudly and repeatedly. Many of these same folks have also deeply involved in the latest contract fiasco.
So, what did the last Search Committee process actually produce? After an exhaustive nationwide search, the Committee produced a list of three finalists for consideration by the School Committee -- two candidates from out of state -- neither of whom bothered to even show up for scheduled second interviews (you can't beat that for enthusiasm!) and a third candidate who was (and still is) the Superintendent in a neighboring town. The neighboring Superintendent was available because she had already been turned down as a finalist by several other districts that year.
In other words (in what has become the new buzz phrase of the current School Committee!) -- the Committee "gut nuthin' !"
Again, assuming nobody has read the rest of the Open Meeting Law yet (that part that doesn't say anything about DA's invalidating contracts - see pre-July 1 version here), and assuming that the Attorney General's office (or opposing counsel) hasn't stepped in to otherwise illustrate the errors of their ways (yet!), I would hope that the Committee hires an experienced, professional headhunter to search for the next Superintendent -- and free up those well-meaning volunteers to work on PTA fundraisers.
17 comments:
The Schools are facing approximately a $2 million dollar shortfall in the next budget. The gang of 4 might want to have their Search Committee look for that $2 million while they’re searching for a new Superintendent. In the alternative, maybe Mrs. Kangas can sharpen her pencil and present her recommendations on just where that $2 million in cost reductions is going to come from. As I recall, Mrs Kangas said more than once that she felt the budget was full of waste.
DID THE PREVIOUS SC CONSULT WITH A PROFESSIONAL HIRING CO WHEN THEY APPOINTED DR J
Good Question.
The former SC did not consult with a headhunter when we appointed Dr. J. But, we had worked with her for a year which gave a far better indication of her potential than we would have received by interviewing the finalists put forward by the Search Committee -- IF their candidates had shown up for their interviews.
Hindsight being 20/20, I still believe we did the right thing by hiring Dr. J --- but we did it the wrong way. Our enthusiasm -- and our desire to move forward --- instead of just continuing to walk in circles and hold meetings resulted in the politically motivated perception that folks thought the decision was rushed. Unfortunately, that stigma affected Dr. Johnson's tenure.
Given an opportunity for a "re-do" I would have supported hiring a professional search firm. Although I suspect the outcome would likely have been the same, we would have been able to give the public an experienced, objective, professional opinion -- something I didn't think any of us were getting from the original Search Committee.
I do not think we need a search committee. I think Mrs Kangas, Mrs Linehan or Mrs Marshal should be offered the job of Superintendent.
Dearest Bob: Regardless of whether or not a Superintendent search requires the help of a search firm, I’ve been thinking that a systemic self-assessment would be a good first step to successful hiring. Jess, Sherry, Nancy and I have been passing emails and discussing by phone the nature of the school’s and town’s culture surrounding the opening. We’re also asking ourselves: what type of person would be best suited for this environment? What do we want the person in this position to accomplish? How difficult (or easy) will it be to attract good candidates? How much help will we need with the interview and hiring process?
We’ve also been trying to concretely identify our needs, and our available resources to fill our needs. This will help clarify the extent and type of external services we may require. Sherry has pointed out that certain higher level positions require full-blown, retained searches but other situations are better served by a supply of resumes. Jess thinks that maybe we only need help with reference checks and interviewing. I’ve told everybody that as a general rule, more important and higher level positions require more capital (time, energy and research) to complete.
Based on our discussion so far, we might use a search firm or we’ll just let Sherry and some of her pals form a committee and pick somebody Laura and she can agree on.
I thought Kangas & Co. already took over as Supt.
Silly Mary Ellen -- she wasted all those years thinking she needed a PhD to be a good Superintendent! Hell, any library aide, nurse, swim coach, or unemployed hospital tech can run a school district!!
Bob,
Point of Clarification:
Dr. Young was chosen by the School Committee, not the search committee. The Superintendent Search Committee voted to bring several candidates forward to the School Committee for their consideration. The School Committee then did site visits and interviews and they selected Dr. Young.
Lest we forget, Dr. Young did some very good things for our district. It seems that this has been forgotten. We had the technology initiative, textbook adoptions, strategic planning workshops, the hiring of Dr. Johnson as Curriculum director. Was life rosy 24/7? No, but I dare say we could say the same thing about any superintendent.
You are absolutely correct.
Dr. Young did begin many good things. My only point was that the School Committee at that time used a Search Committee but then a year later didn't have enough votes to extend her contract.
The NEXT Committee did extend her contract (and rightly so -- IMHO). Not surprisingly, despite a nationwide search and a "random" committee selection process, many of the same characters involved in the (almost) non-renewal of Dr. Young's contract re-appeared on the Search Committee for her replacement.
I think public inputs are very important to a search process. However, executing a search and reviewing and prioritizing resumes is a project best managed by professionals. I think the School Committee and our schools would be best served by either hiring a Search Firm and or asking the town’s HR Director to oversee and manage the search process. However well-meaning and well-intentioned a volunteer search committee might be, it won’t be a match for the insights and know-how of experienced recruiting professionals – leave this job to the pros.
I agree that a professional approach should be taken if and when we begin the process of looking for a new Superintendant. The municipal side uses the professionalism of their HR director to guide their managers. When it comes to Department Heads in general, applicants are screened by the professionals and the final interviews are done with a panel of folks that include professional staff, a selectman representative, and perhaps representation for any advisory committee that supports the work of that department. Of course with the recent Chief of Police an outside consultant was hired as well as the use of a committee made up of both town professionals and volunteers. It was an excellent process that yielded excellent results.
Bobby, when it comes to finding the right person to fill the present postion we allready have her in place. What we need, is for the gang of four and there Union leader admit a mistake was made and find some reason to save face in the situation, they have caused for the town. Wow, just think of all the time and expence they could save in the budget money and think of all the extra benifit that would have in the Sandwich School district itself.
Look for this process to be damaged by the Union leader, whom I am sure will not stand for any thing less then a yes person who in the end supports no accountability of teachers.
PHEW ! Lots of anger on this blog. Sorry most of you think the present school comm has made the wrong decision re: renewing mej's contract.
One school comm member I heard from (a johnson supporter) claims that parents really care but they are too busy with soccer and whatever to get out and vote. HUH? that's a new one. I voted, my entire family voted. We all voted for new Comm members who we thought might not be so cozy with mej. Why? we have seen way too many hidden agenda by Johnson. This is still going on with Johnson. Anyone notice how she fought so hard to change the job description of the Sped Director. As trite as the new descriptin may have seemed, she had an agenda. Just weeks later, WOW Matt Bridges happens to be available and sort of met the description. It's hard to imagine any one less qualified. Now Johnson has come up with candidates to do the job Clare Driscoll used to do. Hmmm just a couple of years that job was eliminated. Guess she knows she'll need someone who has a clue re: sped law/rules/regs. More agenda? I don't trust her.
So maybe those parents who are too busy to vote become more involved and/or concerned they will vote next. Otherwise, the small persentage of us who take the time to vote will rule the Town.
Any idea what Book makers in London or Las Vegas would offer on the following?
Superintendent search initiated by a vote of 4 to 3 this Wednesday
Current Superintendent sues Town and School Committee for breach of contract, failure to negotiate in good faith and defamation and or libel
Current Superintendent wins claims and damages of $2 million or more
Next year’s School budget cut by $2million or more (not counting legal settlements)
Place Your Bets
I would definitely not bet against Anonymous 5:07 !!
To 4:54 Anonymous -- there should be a lot of anger focussed on the 86% of voters who exercised their right to stay home and let the special interests put their people on board. You're right, if people don't vote they will lose out every time.
There should also be a lot of anger focussed on the folks who went out of their way to lie, and spread misinformation in an effort to get their own way. The really pathetic part is that these folks also went out of their way to brag about it to way too many people.
In the Real World, if you disagree with your employer, you are free to leave -- or the employer is free to boot your cranky ass out the door. Here in Fantasy World, even the worst employee gets (almost) guaranteed employment with health benefits, pension, extensive vacation time and a relatively short workday; yet people shriek like a bunny in a blender if somebody tries to change the way they do anything-- regardless of how poorly something was being done.
FYI Bunnies only shriek at the time of death. Sandwich schools will be completely destroyed at about 10:00 tonight.....85% voters can't complain for their failure to be informed and vote.
The real issue is who the people who did vote, voted for and why? Many people who are plugged in were fooled by one candidate. Why people ran, what drove them and what kind of skills they were bringing to the table was another issue. The majority four clearly have an agenda fueled by forces we the people who do pay attention aren't privey to. There has been no meaningful discussion, no exchange of ideas. It's been a power play for the get go.
They aren't listening to anyone or to reason. They aren't thinking about the schools or the town. They are caught in their own power trip and lack the skills to get out of their own way. It's all been rash and much of it run by I think a unofficial school committee behind the scenes. It's sad really. There is enough blame to go around, but the blame won't save the schools. It won't save the town when housing prices sink lower and lower.
Yes people need to pay attention and engage. Also those paying attention need to wise up.
bob
After sitting through tonights school committee meeting, a couple of things have become clear....
1. Sherry Marshall is clearly not going to blink..even when offered logical compromise soluthins to the whole mej situation.....she continues to dig in her heals and bow to Jessica Linehan.
2. Kangas continues to doodle and pay aboulutely no attention when public forum is in session. Cudos to Maureen Wicklund for calling her on it tonight.
3. At the beginning of the 2011 school year we the taxpayers of the town of sandwich will undoubtedly be paying two superintendents!!!!
Post a Comment