Sunday, July 22, 2012
Today's Superintendents
All one has to do is Google 'failed school superintendents' or 'unsuccessful school superintendents' and there are pages of evidence that suggest that the 'answer to our prayers' superintendents don't really exist. Now the Republicans are suggesting that we appoint a candidate with a business degree for superintendent. Is this really what Norwalk needs? Or is this a knee jerk reaction to the financial mess that was created? Don't we need a Leader who makes sure the CFO does his/her job, the curriculum Dept does their job and the principals are doing what they are supposed to do? Other districts have chosen MBAs and have found out it just doesn't work. Not long ago, it was trendy to hire a business to take over schools. That didn't work either. School systems don't produce products. We have children! Will the Board make a 4 th mistake in our list of failed superintendents?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The different Board of Ed factions make it tough to imagine how they'll make a good choice. Toss in a Mayor looking to save face over the budget mess and his support for Susan Marks and you have a recipe for disaster.
ReplyDeleteI hear some of the R's think that Michele Rhea was great in D.C.- what they don't know is that she did a lot because she had buckets of grant money. As that dried up, her faults started to show. The D's think of Tony Daddona as the end-all-be-all. Yep- you gotta love their objectivity.
The best thing is to have a small screening committee with NO POLITICIANS OR UNION OFFICIALS ON IT. Pick business leaders, some rank and file teachers and a school leader or two from another city. Let them screen the applicants and send the top few to the Board of Education. It's the way it's done everywhere else. It will keep politics out of the decision.
It is not a republiscam or democrap problem. I've seen too many Boards of Education in Norwalk annoint a supreme leader instead of hiring an employee. The superintendent of schools is the employee of the Board of Education. All nine of them need to remember that.+
ReplyDeleteThe next superintendent doesn't need to be an expert in finances. The next superintendent has to be an expert in leadership.
ReplyDeleteWill the majority of non-leaders on the BoE get it right this time, or will the Mayor encourage them to screw it up again?
Oh please, a business person can NOT effectively lead a school system. What a mistake! I certainly hope the Board will include a group of parents, administrators and teachers to help define who we need to look for in the next superintendent. Is the Board really that collectively stupid that they think they will choose a superintendent without other involvement?
ReplyDeleteWhy don't we just hand the district over to Mellion, Ditrio and Moore...they've won this latest battle, bullied everyone and seemed to have stifled most of NPS staff. Watch enrollment drop.
ReplyDeleteNot only will enrollment drop, watch and see how ineffective the schools will become with all the crap that was pulled on the NFEP!! The days of going above and beyond are out the window.
ReplyDeleteHow unprofessional! I assume you mean the secretaries and aides. Well, next year you can be eliminated. A job is a job in today's world! Be glad you have a salary.
DeleteMarks was highly ineffective. Please stop blaming everyone else for her failure. No one can give one example of an "initiative" by Marks that was stopped. Why? Because none existed.
ReplyDeleteThe BoE should have already met to discuss an interim appointment, the posting for Marks' job and the process for hiring a replacement. Unfortunately, Chairman Chiaramonte is incapable of that level of leadership.
Delaying the hiring process didn't work for Rosa Murray, Shirley Mosby and Amy Jimenez three years ago. The public was so disgusted they elected all new faces.
ReplyDeleteWhy does Chairman Jack think this hiring will go any better?
I don't think the incumbents lost for just one reason. I think it showed how out of touch they were. That Board kept the public in the dark on everything- how they handled the superintendent search was a symptom of the bigger problem.
DeleteI expect better from this bunch. It's time the people on that Board of Education remembered that NONE of them should be acting like politicians. We're in a crisis- we need leaders, not politicians.
If the Republicans are making suggestions, it's because they've already made up their mind (it's singular because that bunch shares Lyons' brain).
ReplyDeleteMaybe the businessman they have in mind is Fred Wilms?
Friedrich Wilms as Superintendant?
DeleteThank God for certification requirements.
Wait!! It gets even more scary. No longer is there a certification requiremenmt to be a Ct public school superintendent. Freddy the Banker running the show? God help us!
DeleteLet's put the bashing aside for just a second. What scares me is not the Republicans or the Dems on the Board of Education. What scares me is that the majority on both sides won't hold a superintendent accountable. The majority of them don't understand that the superintendent of schools is an employee.
ReplyDeleteSo we are stuck with a big group who don't have the right stuff to know their job is to hire an EMPLOYEE and supervise that EMPLOYEE as our representatives.
I think it is more about giving an unknown a three year contract. We need shorter contracts, or at least a first year probationary contract with the stipulation that there will be no buyout. It seems tome that theBoard can not afford to buy out a superintendent if he/she turns out to be a disappointment. It also appears that the Republicans were afraid to admit to a mistake in this last appointment. Clearly these two flaws in the system are a roadmap for disaster. Correct them for the sake of the students, teachers, administrators and all other staff!
ReplyDeleteAmong the current bunch, it was Mayor Moccia, Chiaramonte, Haynie and Lyons who wanted to give Supt. Marks everything she asked for. They were joined by Keyes and Marks' Facebook fan Mike Barbis in never voting against her.
Delete