Talk About It: The Next School CEO
(It’s not too late to make it out to the “Search for the Next CEO” dialogues which are open to the public. There are two more left: October 4th, 6:30-8:30 p.m. Roxborough H.S.; Oct. 6th, 2-3:30 p.m. Simon Gratz High School.)
Around the city, the District has been trying to restart the dialogue with parents and citizens about the hopes and dreams we hold for our public schools. It’s a dialogue that’s long overdue.
For the past several weeks, the School Reform Commission, along with consultants, has set itself up in various neighborhoods to talk about the search for a new CEO. The stories have been poignant, graceful, tragic, and inspiring. Parents who talked about the impact of violence, the immigrant advocates talking about how they’re working on the same issues as they were 20 years ago when they filed a lawsuit, the Germantown minister who said we needed to get off the reform bandwagon --- we know what works in our schools. There was the senior citizen who said she was upset because the district was only reaching out to parents; and she was there because she cared about our public schools and the future of our youth too.
While the dialogue is passionate, the turnout, by all accounts, has been low. It’s a point used by some to either berate the District for poor communication, or to blame parents for not caring enough to invest in this process.
Both criticisms, however, miss the point that this is the first formal dialogue parents have had with the SRC in almost five years. This process is the first time since the state takeover that the SRC Commissioners have engaged in a formal process to really hear what parents and citizens have been saying all along in our homes and our churches, at our barbecues and Home & School meetings.
Our reports have not been glowing. For all the District’s touting of choice, charters, and test scores, the reality is that far too many parents say they haven’t felt the effect of reform in their classrooms. Class sizes are too large; arts and music programs are lacking; instead of counselors and mentors and tutors, we get metal detectors, suspensions and expulsion to questionable alternative education programs; school librarians are an endangered species; and inequity in resources remains a crushing divide.
Consistently when parents talk about a CEO, they’ve said they want an educator at the top.
This desire doesn’t exactly jive with the current national take on educational leadership, which envisions a CEO who is a fiscal whiz, P.R. hound and political strategist all wrapped up into one. Education? Leave that to the underlings.
But parents aren’t dumb either. We know you can poor billions into a system and not see it go to schools. We’ve read about the multi-million dollar contracts and the sweetheart salary packages. We’ve been aghast that $700 per person dinners and Four Seasons bills on the District dime are just “part of doing business.” We know we’ve got public relations consultants, lobbyists, contractors, education management organizations, and everyone else lining up for their cuts while our kids seem an afterthought.
So a lot of parents figure that with an educator at the helm, that person’s got to invest in the classroom. Realistic or not, that sentiment needs to be heard.
And the other message coming through loud and clear? Parents still don’t get taken seriously. Parents still don’t get heard, they’re shut out of decisionmaking, and whether or not you blame them or the process, parents don’t engage with systems unless they feel respected, and they engage with systems the more they are respected.
These are real concerns, real issues, but these don’t get heard when the SRC sequesters itself down at 440 N. Broad Street, leaving the public to testify at 1 p.m. Wednesday afternoons, for 3 minutes a pop with lights flashing at every minute mark of a person’s testimony.
In my lifetime I’ve seen six superintendents and CEOs. To be perfectly honest, I don’t want any more pretense that the next CEO is the magic solution (seehttp://www.youngphillypolitics.com/philly_mag_and_vallas_ceo_myth).
The place for real change is in our schools and our hallways, in our streets and the independent spaces where concerned citizens gather to talk and debate and engage in dialogue about what it takes to change our schools. No matter who the next CEO is, it’s that process of dialogue with the people who are most impacted that will lay the foundation for trust, success and the rebuilding of our schools.
The Messiah
I think we have a tendency to adopt people as messianic figures in many aspects of life, but Paul Vallas sure is a good example in recent Philadelphia memory. Vallas was going to solve EVERY problem and the reality that he was just a man (it turns out, with many flaws) took a while to sink in for some.
So I absolutely agree that the next CEO of our District will by no means solve all problems. However, it is important to remember that a lot of Philadelphians wanted a Jesus-like CEO to solve all of our problems, so the problem here is not just at the top, but involves everyone who wants to feel like something good is going on without being sure that there actually is.
One easy way to start the process is to find a new CEO who also has a Superintendent's certificate. Just like teachers and principals have to be certified, there is a set of professional standards that many districts use to certify Superintendents. Hornbeck was our city's last Superintendent, and despite his PR problems, he was much better at addressing the real concerns of parents. Maybe we should go back to hiring only certified school superintendents for our CEO position.
I guess . . .
I agree with Ray here. I'd like to see a CEO who was, at some time, an educator--not just an administrator. A hybrid is clearly the best path.
I am working to elect Larry Farnese to the General Assembly. Unless otherwise expressly stated, this and every comment or blog I post on YPP and any action I take hereon is solely attributable to me and not Farnese or Friends of Farnese
Great post. And I agree
Great post. And I agree with you, and with Ray.
When Vallas came in, I was really taken in by the publicity, by his sort of ass-kicking "of course we will do well" stuff. Then, reality kind of set in.
To me what we need is a superintendent, who will work hand in hand with the Mayor, with a focus on a plan, and less on the personality cult of Vallas, Hornbeck, etc. The CEO should not be given the job of selling the district to the State, as has been the case for a while. That has to be the job of the Mayor.
This is so crazy: so much
This is so crazy: so much money spent on structural reform, so much money spent on studies not even read by SRC members, when as Mansei puts it:
I spent much of my volunteer energy in the 1980’s as an executive board member and as co-chair of a now defunct organization, Parents Union for Public Schools. Parents Union was founded by Happy Fernandez and had a mission similar to today’s Parents United for Better Schools. But oh what a difference in the school system's willingness to at least talk to parents! Mansei writes:
In the 1980’s, Superintendent Constance Clayton had monthly meetings with Parents Union (and, if I recall correctly, with other parent groups and educational advocacy groups) to discuss our concerns. Parents Union also had representatives on a range of committees dealing with major policy issues—e.g. promotion policy.
This was no golden age, but the outreach to parents was very different from what Mansei describes.
About that Mayor/CEO relationship and a clarification . . .
One of the concerns I have is the accelerated timeline on the CEO search and not sure whether that's coming from the state (I assume they are the driving agency in the district right now) and if so why they seem to be eager to cut out the next mayor's voice.
By sheer numbers, the national pool for school leaders is thin as is, so it's unlikely that a new CEO will beat a new mayor into office. At the same time, I am baffled why the state and district wouldn't have just given interim CEO Tom Brady a one-year contract -- other than its a smackdown to an exited Chairman Nevels that his hustled in pick (which resulted in current SRC chair Sandra Dungee Glenn walking out of a meeting)isn't welcome no matter how hard he works (and, for the record, Tom Brady is working hard for his job).
The one year timeline could have resulted in the new mayor playing a central role in defining the CEO position, interviewing candidates and ultimately influencing the final selection. With a process underway, it feels more like the state establishing itself as the big gorilla rather than a cooperative partner. Same strongarm tactics, but different administration, albeit with healthier goals than the previous. At the same time, it feels awfully shortsighted for a second term governor to muscle in so strongly on the CEO with a new mayor coming in.
I hope to clarify what I meant by the lack of dialogue between parents and 440 N. Broad. CEO Paul Vallas met with parent groups throughout his tenure and current interim CEO Tom Brady meets with parent groups as well. The difference is that in the past five years, we have had a state takeover body that has played a really different role than the former Board of Education. The School Reform Commission came in to Philadelphia to re-define public education. They have meddled in turning over schools to questionable education management organizations, issued tens of millions of dollars in contracts that haven't previously existed thereby reducing the amount of money to the classroom, signed off on dozens of charter schools, and engaged in secretive and in at least on instance, probably illegal (under the sunshine act)deliberations that ice out most of the public.
They do so with almost no sense of public accountability. The gap really has been with the SRC and the public. Since they are charged with hiring the new CEO, this gap in connection with parents' real concerns and crises is crippling more than just simply clueless.
As kbojar says, there is no golden age, but Parents Union existed at the same time as Alliance Organizing Project. The loss of both those organizations along with the folding of a number of other education watchdogs like Citizens Alliance has definitely impacted the public's ability to feel engaged and protected.
Thoughts on the Next CEO
My kid is going to be in kindergarten next fall, and we're looking at all public schools so far. Something has changed in terms of how people think of the District and what it's potential is and a lot of that has to do with the energy and enthusiasm Vallas brought, so I give him a great deal of credit. He definitely left the District in a better place than when he found it. I know about the missteps and the shortcomings, I just think that - in the balance - he did a great job.
A quick anecdote to make a point; when I was growing up, a neighbor was a VP at a large, multinational telecommunications firm. Next thing you know, he and the family were moving to Indiana where he was going to be the CEO of a multinational pharmaceutical firm.
At first, I didn't get it - how to do you from one industry to and assume a preeminent leadership role in another that’s completely different? Because there are certain core leadership qualities that facilitate managerial effectiveness in any arena. I think that a new CEO with academic or teaching experience would be fantastic, but I wouldn’t make it a litmus test.
I couldn't disagree more
..on the benefits of Vallas' tenure, but even more importantly on the importance of the next head of Philly schools being an educator.
I find it amazing, actually, that you refer to education as an "industry."
As an educator, I think that it's paramount that our schools have a leader who is an educator first as well as a good administrator.
Here's just one reason why:
If by reducing class size your raise test scores -- along with providing teachers greater opportunity to tailor instruction to better match the individual needs of their students, along with allowing teachers to get to know their students better and to build stronger relationships, along with freeing more time for teachers to develop creative curriculum and work with colleagues at improving their craft -- so be it.
But an educator - as opposed to "CEO" who is focused on public image and whose training is in the private sector - might be less likely to focus more on something like raising standardized tests scores than on reducing class size. A CEO like Vallas might be more likely to work to achieve raising standardized tests scores even as s/he fails to achieve the more important goal of smaller class size. And that's exactly what Vallas did.
I'm sure many educators might disagree with my arrangment of priorities, but regardless, an educator as "CEO" would be more likely than someone whose expertise is developed in an "industrial" environment to elevate educational goals over PR goals or other goals that are are more applicable within a business context.
Some skills needed to head our schools are certainly generalizable, and can be developed in an industrial context. However, other needed skills, and even more importantly some knowledge, can only be developed through extensive experience in an educational environment. We need a CEO who is an educator, who has been a teacher in a classroom, who has experiences as a leader within an educational institution, who has studied and worked on applying theories of educational psychology and educational psychology, who knows about epistemology, who knows about developmental psychology, who knows about current trends in education and the history of educational reform.
More on the next CEO
I think that when filling positions - whether in the public or private sector - you don't want to narrow your pool of applicants too much at the beginning of the process. I'd cast a pretty broad net when looking for the next SDP CEO. I do disagree that the Vallas era wasn't a good one for the District...I've seen too much positive change and momentum at the ground level to not give him (and others) credit for what's happened here the last few years.
I need more than that on the next CEO
I agree that we don't want to narrow the pool of applicants unnecessarily - but I still think that being an educator is a necessary prerequisite for the "CEO" of a public school system. I don't understand why you assume that requiring applicants to have experience as an educator would necessarily cast a less than broad net; there are many educators that have an incredibly wide and diverse skill set - and I think it's clear that knowledge of context-specific variables is an indespensible skill to running a school system.
The belief that a school system can be run like an industrial entity is probably the biggest single factor holding quality education back (outside of larger socio-economic issues such as funding inequities).
Modeling schools on an industrial entity was a fundamental principle in how our schools were desgined, but in spite of so much evidence showing how outdated such a view of education is in today's world, people who don't really understand how education is different from industry hold on to the false belief that schools can be run like an industry. Vallas (and those who advocate further privitazation of our schools) is a perfect example of people who don't a broad-enough knowledge base to undertand the differences between education and industry, and how to create differentiated policy accordingly.
Additionally, I don't dismiss your experiences at the "ground level," but, clearly, your evaluation of Vallas' leadership is not shared by the majority of public school parents. And there's no reason to assume that other "CEO's" wouldn't have been able to create the positive changes you experienced while at the same time doing a better job with the many failings of Vallas' tenure.
The Emporer has no clothes
Friedman, what exactly do you do for a living? It can't be teaching or you would have realized that Paul Vallas is nothing more than a self-promoting charlatan. Did you benefit from one of Paul's deals?
How can you seriously say that a man who put the school district $183 million in debt left it in better shape? Maybe if you were truly in on the ground level (inside the classrooms) you'd realize that this city got taken, big time! Where are all the schools he promised to build? Why was the violence inside our schools continually suppressed by Vallas and his minions if he was really implementing his "Zero Tolerance" policy like he said he did? Why are more than half the schools without libraries and music and art on the endangered list if not already gone? Why did Paul continually refuse to let Alan Budkovitz, the city controller, look at the financial books. If Vallas really did "overspend" like he claims then he should be able to tell us what it was on. Where is all the artwork that he removed? Why did he commission a report on school violencen then sit on it when it didn't say what he wanted it to say? According to Timoney her effort to save the district money were blocked by Vallas. What's he got to hide?
Vallas was too busy handing out no bid contracts and sweetheart deals to take care of the real problems in our schools. When it finally caught up to him he jumped just like a rat leaving a sinking ship.
Your claim of him improving our schools is absurd. It reminds of Hitler's promise to the Germans that in ten years they would not recognize their own cities. Adolf was right because their cities were all ruins by then. Vallas didn't carry it to that extreme, but for all his promises, as Bob Dylan once sang, "Nothing Was Delivered".
Let's Take it Down a Notch
There's no doubt that Vallas came to Philadelphia like a carnival huckster selling snake oil. However, let's not make Vallas out to be a straw man for inadequate and unfair state funding of education and a really terrible federal law, Leave No Child Behind.
As I said earlier, Vallas' success in Philadelphia was awarded to him by all of the people who live in our city who wanted him to succeed. Facts became less important than the feeling of reform that Vallas promoted.
That's a lesson to all of us moving forward to think more carefully about realistic expectations , and subsequent qualifications for a new School District leader.
To keep it simple, I repeat what I said above which is that we need a proper superintendent whose job it is to oversee spending and curriculum development. We can hire a PR firm and lobbyists (who should work closely with Mayor Nutter) to do everything else.
Jack Straw from Wichitai
No Child Left Behind (aka Leave 'Em All Behind) is a terrible law. However, no matter what the funding is Vallas and his ilk will see to it their politically-connected buddies will be taken care of before the kids get their share. That's why it's important that the next CEO have some educational experience in the classroom. Too many people write schools off as an industry. However, unlike factories we cannot send our raw product (children) back if they aren't up to factory specs. You work with what you get and too often that job means less and less to work with these days. Vallas was the guy who gave Arthur Anderson (of Enron fame) 10 million in no bid contracts even though they had no previous school experience.
Resume of a CEO/Resume of a Superintendent
The problem is that despite what your opinion is about Vallas's tenure in Philadelphia, he was really the ideal candidate for the position when he was hired. He had run a large and similarly troubled city school district in Chicago, improved test scores, graduation rates, teacher and administrative performance, and was generally thought to be the real deal. There were rumblings later about problems with his management in Chicago, and he was politically connected, but more so in Illinois than Pennsylvania. But still, if you're looking at candidates for CEO of the schools now, and you have the chance to hire someone with experience doing precisely that job, you would still have to give those candidates the edge. As imperfect the translation may be from CEO of a business to CEO of a school system, the translation from either classroom experience or administrative experience in a different context is arguably even worse. Being able to work with children doesn't translate to working with teachers, or vendors, or principals, or politicians, or even parents. No job is like running city schools, except running city schools.
Here is a throroughly idle thought, following Ray's point about outsourcing school district PR. Why is it necessary to have a single CEO? Couldn't the SRC appoint a school superintendent with oversight of educational and personnel issues, and a district manager to handle the noneducational finances (i.e., buildings, materials, contracts, noneducational staff, treasury, etc.)? Obviously, these two people would have to work together -- as well as with the mayor, the SRC, and others -- but it seems from our discussion here that the hardware and software (so to speak) of schools really require quite different kinds of education, expertise, and work.
And if splitting and demystifying the job cuts down on the "New Jesus" factor, that's a fine bonus.
--Tim
Clarification on Schools leadership
When the state takeover occurred, the School Reform Commission announced a restructuring of administration, creating new job titles (though I am not sure whether those job descriptions have ever been made public):
-- the CEO of schools;
-- the Chief Academic Officer, CAO, currently held by Dr. Cassandra Jones, formerly held by Greg Thorton, now CEO at Chester City;
-- a Chief Operating Officer, held by longtime district employee Fred Farlino; and
-- a Chief Financial Officer, currently held by Jim Doosey, and formerly held by Folasade Olanipekun-Lewis, who created waves when it was announced she had received a cozy nine month full salary and benefit severance package.
(All these positions, for the first time, are held by interims)
At the time, people viewed the CEO position as a managerial role with the thought that the primary responsibility would be to build relationships with Harrisburg to improve funding. Ironically, Vallas went out of his way at the beginning of his tenure to insist that the Philadelphia schools did not need more money -- squandering an opportunity to get us real dollars when he had the good will of everyone.
Strangely, I am not wedded to whether a CEO is an educator. For example, interim CEO Tom Brady has been surprisingly well suited to easing the transition from Vallas' chaotic departure. Hardly a headline seeker, Brady's low -key style, team approach, and operations background has generated a sense of some calm and stability (albeit temporary). He held his ground on the politically-connected Aramark, has spent hours listening to the public and parents, and somehow made the opening of school this past month, including leveling, one of the quietest in memory.
At the same time, what's clear is that Vallas' lack of education experience resulted in a failure to achieve systemic, substantial gains in the schools. He didn't "get" professional development, rolled back class sizes, and his creative budgeting resulted in schools' getting hammered on their school based funds particularly at the elementary end. He threatened principals rather than cultivated them, and, in my opinion, made a major error in abandoning the teacher capital and recruitment campaign. Like a non-educator, he relied on annual test score data to trumpet achievement, but neglected to nudge the drop-out rate upward or make a difference in high school achievement results.
The classroom is where students make it or break it in schools. Any long-term change must focus there. It doesn't take an educator to know that, but it takes someone concerned about education to know when to step aside and let the professionals use the money, resources, and political capital necessary to effect long-term advances.
Sorry, but that's a condescending attitude about teachers
A good teacher is a great deal more than just someone who is "able to work with children," as you imply. A good teacher understands educational psychology, philosophy, and methodology at theoretical and practical levels. That is vital knowledge for someone that is heading a school system. In addition, a good teacher does, in fact, know how to work with principals and parents - as well as with other teachers. They know because they've done so throughout their career.
I'm not suggesting that you take someone who's taught in a classroom all their career and hire them as the "CEO," but that you hire someone that has experience with managerial and noneducational issues affecting large-scale institutions - but who also has the experience and knowledge of an educator.
Speaking anecdotally, in my experience, administrators of educational institutions who lack inside knowledge of the work of the professionals they supervise have been the worst. They don't have a fully-informed perspective on what it's like to close the door to a classroom and face a group of students, or what it's like to collaborate with another teacher, or what it's like to discipline a student, or what it's like to fail a student, or what it's like to design curriculum, or what it's like to collaborate with another teacher, or what it's like to discuss a student's progress with his/her parent, or what it's like to be supervised by a principle, etc, etc.,
No condescension intended
Just to clarify -- I teach college now, and have for eight years, but I also have a degree in education and have taught in high schools and middle schools; my brother is also a high school math teacher. (He was so good at teaching algebra, I realized that I needed to do something else. I still tutor kids in HS math, writing, and test prep though.)
My point is that the key variable is not classroom experience as such but successful administrative experience in education, whether as a department head, in professional development, or as a principal or superintendent. Furthermore, even success at any of those levels may not translate to success in managing a large, complicated, problem-ridden urban district like Philadelphia.
Apparently, even Vallas's purported success in Chicago didn't translate to Philadelphia. The question is whether that is structural -- for example, in Chicago, it was Vallas's patron Mayor Daley who took over the schools, not the state of Illinois -- or whether it has something to do with the biography of the CEO. As Mansei suggests above, it was Vallas's administrative failures with the state and with other adminstrators that helped to botch his tenure, not necessarily his lack of experience with classroom education. (It's a different situation, but I'm also reminded of the Recycling coordinator who just left, who innovated in Arizona and was stymied here.)
I still think, though, that the best qualified candidate for head of the Philadelphia schools is someone who's had success heading up a similar program in another large city. Anyone know anybody like that?
--Tim
Another example of the importance of being an educator
Standardized curriculum.
Someone without experience as an educator might look at inconsistency in teacher performance, or discrepancies in the subject matter different students of the same age are studying, and mandate all teachers teach to the same thing at any given time of the school year, year after year, without consideration of the specific needs of individual students. This would be a classic response by someone that fails to see the distinctions between education and industry. Standarizing curriculum (just like standardized testing) creates the illusion that you can create some kind of a uniform basis for objectively evaluating and quantifying teacher or student peformance; but, in reality you are creating an invalid tool - in other words, you are creating a system for controlling certain outcomes but not really reaching a viable target. An educator knows that there are way too many uncontrollable variables in a classroom environment to achieve good results by limiting their creativity and their ability to be flexible in their approach.
Someone with experience as an educator might see the need to address the problems created by a wide diversity in curricula -- but as someone who's actually worked in a classroom -- would understand that by mandating a standardized curriculum, you run a risk of stamping out the creative interests of good teachers, and diminishing the ability of teachers to modify curriculum according to the needs of individual students.
Most of the good teachers I've talked to about Vallas recognize the problems that he was addressing by increasing the standardization of curricula, but feel that the extent to which he implemented a standarized curriculum policy reduced the effectiveness of their teaching and the enjoyment of their work.
This is a classic example of what you would get in industry if you have someone as a CEO who lacks an inside knowledge of the "manufacturing processes."
There are no absolutes here. I'm sure that it's conceivable that a CEO without experience as an educator could rely on research well enough to make good decisions related to educational issues. And I'm sure that a CEO with a great backgound as an educator could fail miserably to make good high-level managerial decisions. And the dichotomy I set up regarding standardized curriculum is obviously a simplication.
But all things considered, I can't see how anyone would think that experience as an educator wouldn't be highly relevant experience to running a school system.
I can't speak to Vallas' career elsewhere, but again, in my experiences teaching at elementary, middle, high school levels, as well as at community colleges, private colleges, and universities, I've never encountered an educational administrator without experience as an educator that I felt was worth their salt.
certification
a relatively small point, but receiving a superintendent's certificate from the state means you are certified not only as an instructional leader, but an administrative one as well. this is far from my area of expertise, but ask anyone who has completed the graduate work needed, and the passed a superintendent's test and they will tell you their expertise is as much managerial as educational.
Caring For Children Starts At Home!!!!
All I hear is people talking about bringing in someone with a winning record from other cities. You mean to tell me that we can't find anyone in our own backyard? It would be nice to fill the position with someone that's really from Philly, or is that possible? Doesn't someone here want to tackle this job and save our children? Stop trying to find another person out-of-state to replace Paul Vallas. With Vallas track record with our school system , he shouldn't be hard to replace! Can someone help me with this?
Junior Williams
juniorwililams007@earthlink.net
http://mycityscapephily.eponym.com/blog
Again -- does anybody know
Again -- does anybody know anyone like that? :)
I'd put up Maria Quiñones-Sanchez, but I think she's already got a job that starts pretty soon.
--Tim
you keep looking for a name
the point I am trying to make about looking for people with superintendent certifcates is that there are plenty of people who are qualified to run the district, i just don't know their names.
we don't need someone known to be in charge. that was a mistake that started with goldsmith and was continued with vallas. we need someone who knows eductasion to run the district. we need the Mayor to do all of the politicking that Vallas tried to do. we also need the mayor to handle all the systemic problems (like poverty) that make it so hard for kids to succeed in our district.
Not Really
I'm not really looking for a name. My suggestion of MQS was tongue-in-cheek.
I think there are plenty of people who are qualified to run the district if the district, and the district's relationship to the city and the state, were in an ordinary, reasonably healthy state of affairs. They are not. So I think this will be hard.
On the other hand, if there is anyone local, preferably certified as a superintendent (even though I'm skeptical of the value of educational certificates in and of themselves), who would be a good candidate to bump up, then I very much would like to hear about that person. If they don't have a name yet, then they will.
--Tim
2 questions
1- why are you skeptical about the value of certification?
2- if the problem of the state and city's running of the district is agreed to be a political one, why no let political leaders the mayhor handle it and find one of the many qualified people you allude to run the district?
2. If you look at what I
2. If you look at what I said above, I think separating the business-organizational, ed-admin, political, and PR aspects of the CEO job is a great idea. If that means thinking about the CEO as a more modest position, with a focus on the political side of things (while the chief educational, operational, and financial officers take care of the rest), then that's even better.
I don't think the mayor alone can handle the political side of the equation, because, again, as I mentioned above, the mayor doesn't have control over the school district, like in Chicago (and like Michael Nutter's been trying to get); functionally, the state is in charge of the schools. Someone at the district has to be able to deal with the mayor's office, the state, and the SRC directly, even when the budgetary and political agendas of those bodies are in conflict with one another.
1) I'm a bit down on teacher/educational certification because I don't like anything that makes it harder for people to switch careers. More personally -- My own teaching certification has lapsed, since I haven't been teaching K-12 and haven't taken education classes while I've been in a PhD program and teaching in college. I have perfect scores on my certification exams, much more teaching experience than most first-year teachers, and apart from certification, I have credentials out my ass. It would be nice, were I to go back to high school teaching, if I could seek jobs at public schools rather than prep schools.
--Tim
First off, you need to talk
First off, you need to talk with George Schmidt (at Substance News or District 299, the comments section) about Vallas' "success" in Chicago, especially when it comes to testing. Schmidt got fired for exposing Vallas' test success by putting the test online. Once people got a look at the test it was quickly dispatched. Of course, Vallas, being the vindictive type, fired Schmidt and then tried to sue him for plagarism. George no longer teaches despite his long career in education, but he still follows the Chicago public school system and how the politicians use it for their own gain.
Secondly, if teaching experience is not important for a CEO of a school district then why did Vallas constantly lie about his own teaching experience. Every time you read about it the facts changed. Even the Ink printed two versions of his "vast" teaching experience over the years. The closest version to the truth came out when he tried to run for governor. Turns out he had taught for a year at some private Montana school. Hardly the teaching experience necessary for a CEO of two urban districts.
Teachers know what the hell is needed for the schools better than any administrator. We know what materials work. Check out the math series they are using for the middle school grades (which suddenly become elementary grades once they are pushed into the elementaries around town). There is no homework included (like there is with Everyday Math) so teachers are expected to "create" their own homework to pass out and then copy it themselves. Of course there is no extra paper for the copiers which are constantly in use. The reading series also requires extensive copying since no workbooks were purchased for the kids. This is coming from a school district that claims it wants to go "paperless" (hence the big push to take benchmarks in the computer lab since the crap computers in our own rooms never work). I guess if they can pass the cost for paper onto the teachers then hire some more Mustangs for consultants, reports they will never read and meals at the Four Seasons. Don't get me started on the special ed. shortages or the lack of security as school police officers are rotated around to schools instead of staying at the schools they were originally assigned. The folks at 440 are safe so that's what matters in the end.
Ever wonder why there is a law that prevents ONLY teachers from striking. Politicians, administrators and parents know that we are the lifeblood of this school system. Teachers go, the whole district goes too. We know better than anyone about the job of running the schools, but nobody ever wants to listen to the teachers. Has the SRC ever once set up a meeting to discuss problems in the district with the teachers? Nah, let's waste half a million and then ignore the report. I testified once before the SRC, but I might as well have stayed home. They could care less.