Friday, September 5, 2014

All Yours, again!

Topics and questions of your choice. Keep commenting. We believe in full transparency.

17 comments:

  1. The postings on the ApplTrack website are a cause for concerns. Applicants are being contacted for interviews on the same day that openings are posted. That is, the interviews are happening at the same time that the jobs are being posted. How is that possible?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Darn good question!

      Delete
    2. Really, what's the big deal with this? If I was hiring, especially during the school year, I would contact good candidates and interview as soon as possible.

      Delete
  2. If you post a job on Tuesday and interviewing candidates on that same day--how are you actually giving people a chance to apply for the job? It's one thing to notify candidates they've been invited to an interview on the same day--that makes sense. It makes less sense to host the interview on the same day that the job is being posted. Otherwise, who is going to have the opportunity to apply? Only those who knew about the posting ahead of time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It says to me that the job has already been filled before the job posting was typed. No one else should bother to apply. Interviews should be held after the closing of the job posting......something to do with equal opportunity employment?

      Delete
  3. 9:22 began this thread saying that applicants were 'contacted' on the day of the posting. Nowhere did it say that interviews were held that day. And the posting timelines are purely arbitrary, outlined in NFT and NFEP contracts, and have nothing to so with EEOC.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike Lyons should remove his rose colored glasses and talk to administrators in the schools about what is or isn't happening. Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If the administrators felt they were able to speak candidly, and were willing to do so, those would be very interesting conversations. Big IF.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why are administrators not willing to talk candidly? The truth should be known.

      Delete
    2. Principals are not asked to evaluate a superintendent. It makes no sense since principals should be the key evaluators of a superintendent. The public only views the superintendent as a politician. Shouldn't those in the trenches be included? Do we ever learn from past mistakes?

      Delete
  6. good point you make here. But who evaluates the principals? That needs review too!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Also a good point. We know that two building administrators were brought to central office. I thought this Board promised accountability for principals. Instead we get an additional two central office positions. Is this because the unions are cutting deals with those in charge?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Okay, then explain to us why two building administrators got reassigned to central office, thereby creating two new positions.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The After School program in South Norwalk is not going to be ready, as promised. Any comments?

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's disappointing that the community representatives in South Norwalk are already complaining about free after school care. But that's probably not the comment you're looking for. No good deed goes unpunished.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. more concern is the Boe went and gave the money to SNCC and that thug Pena, They overlooked the Carver center and what it has accomplished over the years.

      Delete