WHAT to do tonight? I hate it when there are two parties to go to on a particular night. ;-)
Tonight the Katy Area will have two events to choose from: a Meet-the-Candidates night with GOP candidates for State legislature, and a town hall meeting called by Bill Proctor. Sad. Not because it'll be hard to go to both events. Sad because Proctor doesn't "get it".
More on how the School Board Works: The single group of people who most impact the school district's financial situation is NOT the school board-- it's the State legislature. This group of people decides how much money districts get, and impose mandated programs on the districts (often with no money to make them happen). An important part of the School Board Trustee's "job" is to meet with State and National representatives and tell them how laws they are considering will impact school districts. That requires working relationships with people in office. When the legislature is in session and debating education laws, it's important that they know school board members they are comfortable calling and asking about impact. Last spring, I had several calls from a State Representative on the floor of the house who was asking "Chris, how will this work in Katy?" The reason I was called was because I'd spent the time developing relationships with people in State and National office.
So why is Bill not only skipping an opportunity to further his relationships with folks who will be in the State Legislature, but also drawing people away from that opportunity? I don't know. But it is another example of his idea of "team play".
State Reps need to know how what they do impacts school districts. If you feel that it is important for your State Legislative candidates to know YOUR priorities for education, go to tonights KAR event and let them know. Then, let Bill know you wish he'd been there, too.
KAR: 3/28/12 @ Spring Creek BBQ on I-10 at Westgreen, 6:30-8:30.
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Saturday, March 24, 2012
How School Boards Work, Part III: Who's the Boss?
Saw a comment in that other blog that Bill Proctor is Alton Frailey's boss. I'd like to clarify that misconception. Alton Frailey's boss is the Board of Trustees acting as a body corporate. Think about how horrible a band would sound if instead of having a single conductor, the brass, percussion, woodwinds, and horns all had separate conductors. If each section played at different tempos, and the horns wanted to play a waltz instead of a march, the music would be a mess! State law is pretty smart in this instance: Having 7 trustees ensures the values of the community are woven into all decisions, but by insisting they act as a single unit, they avoid the total confusion of superintendents getting 7 sets of directions.
The job of the Superintendent is, in a nutshell, to educate students and manage the resources of the district. Since Alton Frailey has been in Katy ISD, student test scores have improved, the district continues to win awards for financial management practices, transparency, and for achieving significant student academic growth while keeping spending relatively low, and in 2010 he was awarded Superintendent of the Year for Region IV.
My hope, as a taxpayer and as a person concerned about the students of this community, is that Alton Frailey will focus his energies and talents on running the district, rather than baby-sitting a board that is dysfunctional because two of its members' goal is to derail the business of the district for an election-time publicity stunt. I also hope that the board will get its act together before they "distract" this district to disaster.
The job of the Superintendent is, in a nutshell, to educate students and manage the resources of the district. Since Alton Frailey has been in Katy ISD, student test scores have improved, the district continues to win awards for financial management practices, transparency, and for achieving significant student academic growth while keeping spending relatively low, and in 2010 he was awarded Superintendent of the Year for Region IV.
My hope, as a taxpayer and as a person concerned about the students of this community, is that Alton Frailey will focus his energies and talents on running the district, rather than baby-sitting a board that is dysfunctional because two of its members' goal is to derail the business of the district for an election-time publicity stunt. I also hope that the board will get its act together before they "distract" this district to disaster.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
So, Why DID They Walk Out?
Got a question from Jenni: (read her entire comment on the posting "Proctor and Huckaby Take Their Ball and Go Home")
I'm so confused here I can't make heads or tails, and I'm hoping you can help. Did Proctor and Huckaby walk out because it was inappropriate to take a vote on that issue (offering administrators the 2-year contracts) at THAT TIME, and would it have been possible for them to publicly protest the vote at the time of the meeting? Could they have had the board delay that vote and then stay to take part in OTHER matters? Do you think it's appropriate to ask to grant 2-year contracts to administrators --with cuts coming down the pike (it sounds like Frailey wants to protect his "cronies"-- is THAT the case?)? It's obvious that games are being played, but I'm not familiar enough with how this is supposed to work to make a clear judgment on who is doing what and whether or not it's "o.k."!
These are great questions!
Let's take the last question first and talk about the games being played: P&H absolutely could have stayed and protested the vote at the time of the meeting. In fact, that is their duty as Trustees. A lot of other business needed to be handled besides the 2-year contracts. From the agenda and my experience, I would guess there were a lot of specific terminations and "RILT" (Resign in lieu of termination) for teachers who are not doing a good job. Those have to happen at the end of the contract cycle, and by a certain date under Texas law. You are absolutely right: games are being played here... and when P&H play those games, it derails the business of running the district.
About voting that night versus later: It was completely appropriate to vote on contracts at that meeting, and if we put it in context of the school year, it makes better sense. This is the time of year that teachers and administrators start looking for new positions, because they are all on contracts that keep them from doing it in the middle of the year. If teachers and administrators are not getting a contract this time of year, it makes jobs in other districts look that much more appealing. It is the piece of paper they have to have to buy a home as it shows they have employment. Holding up those contracts does them a great disservice.
Educator Contracts 101: All professional staff work under contract. There are two kinds; "term" and "probationary". Probationary contracts are usually given to people in the first year or two of a new assignment. Once they have a "term" contract, they basically have a never-ending job, because in order to fire them, the district has to have documented cause. In addition, it is very expensive to let a term-contract teacher go because they have the right to a number of hearings, which are very expensive for the district. That was why the teachers who were given pink slips last year were probationary-contract teachers, because if the district had let go term teachers and they all pursued hearings, it could have cost the district millions.
P&H would have you believe everyone working in the admin building get the 2 year contracts, while those on campuses only get one-year. NOT TRUE. Of all the "administrator" contracts, only 80-ish are 2-year contracts. With 50+ campuses, the vast majority went to principals, and the remainder went to heads of departments, like the chief of police or head of operations or accountability/assessment, etc. Here's why 2-year contracts are offered to some administrators: Who gets one is driven by supply and demand. There are few people who can do the job of a campus principal or head a department, and they are in greater demand. By giving those folks 2-year contracts, it locks them in and protects the district from loosing an asset that the district developed and invested in! How many administrators do you know who left us to find a bigger job at another district because KISD trained them so well! Tying them to a two-year contract helps to keep them at work here. It's not about protecting cronies; it's protecting an asset of the district.
Tragedy is, reviewing the POLICY of giving 2 year contracts now, while the State funding is so uncertain, is a good idea; however I've been told that there was no attempt by P&H to put that question on the agenda One other Trustee has told me privately he would have supported putting that question on the agenda, but not to hold up the awarding of all the teacher contracts. But P&H didn't do that. But it doesn't matter if Bill Proctor has a good ideas or not, if he presents them to the press rather than the board. His value as a board member is diminished because everyone with any sense is reluctant to deal with him when he chooses to do the business of the district in INK.
I'm so confused here I can't make heads or tails, and I'm hoping you can help. Did Proctor and Huckaby walk out because it was inappropriate to take a vote on that issue (offering administrators the 2-year contracts) at THAT TIME, and would it have been possible for them to publicly protest the vote at the time of the meeting? Could they have had the board delay that vote and then stay to take part in OTHER matters? Do you think it's appropriate to ask to grant 2-year contracts to administrators --with cuts coming down the pike (it sounds like Frailey wants to protect his "cronies"-- is THAT the case?)? It's obvious that games are being played, but I'm not familiar enough with how this is supposed to work to make a clear judgment on who is doing what and whether or not it's "o.k."!
These are great questions!
Let's take the last question first and talk about the games being played: P&H absolutely could have stayed and protested the vote at the time of the meeting. In fact, that is their duty as Trustees. A lot of other business needed to be handled besides the 2-year contracts. From the agenda and my experience, I would guess there were a lot of specific terminations and "RILT" (Resign in lieu of termination) for teachers who are not doing a good job. Those have to happen at the end of the contract cycle, and by a certain date under Texas law. You are absolutely right: games are being played here... and when P&H play those games, it derails the business of running the district.
So, why did they do it that way (walk out rather than vote "no" or abstain)? This is my opinion: I don't think it would have changed the outcome of the vote even if all 7 Trustees were present. So what was their point? It was for the Theatrics. We have an election coming up, and they wanted everyone to remember how angry everyone was last year about teacher layoffs, because that is what got them elected, and they are desperate to have two more buds on the board. Walking out and stealing the quorum wouldn't have changed the outcome, but it gave them an opportunity to get the attention of the press. On Tuesday, Mrs. Majors sent an inflammatory e-mail to teachers that indicated she and Mrs. Blackman are the only ones running who care about teachers. Coincidence? I doubt it... To consider this further: who REALLY has the best interests of the teachers at heart? Not P&H: they chose to hold up the contracts of over 4000 teachers with a stunt.
About voting that night versus later: It was completely appropriate to vote on contracts at that meeting, and if we put it in context of the school year, it makes better sense. This is the time of year that teachers and administrators start looking for new positions, because they are all on contracts that keep them from doing it in the middle of the year. If teachers and administrators are not getting a contract this time of year, it makes jobs in other districts look that much more appealing. It is the piece of paper they have to have to buy a home as it shows they have employment. Holding up those contracts does them a great disservice.
Educator Contracts 101: All professional staff work under contract. There are two kinds; "term" and "probationary". Probationary contracts are usually given to people in the first year or two of a new assignment. Once they have a "term" contract, they basically have a never-ending job, because in order to fire them, the district has to have documented cause. In addition, it is very expensive to let a term-contract teacher go because they have the right to a number of hearings, which are very expensive for the district. That was why the teachers who were given pink slips last year were probationary-contract teachers, because if the district had let go term teachers and they all pursued hearings, it could have cost the district millions.
P&H would have you believe everyone working in the admin building get the 2 year contracts, while those on campuses only get one-year. NOT TRUE. Of all the "administrator" contracts, only 80-ish are 2-year contracts. With 50+ campuses, the vast majority went to principals, and the remainder went to heads of departments, like the chief of police or head of operations or accountability/assessment, etc. Here's why 2-year contracts are offered to some administrators: Who gets one is driven by supply and demand. There are few people who can do the job of a campus principal or head a department, and they are in greater demand. By giving those folks 2-year contracts, it locks them in and protects the district from loosing an asset that the district developed and invested in! How many administrators do you know who left us to find a bigger job at another district because KISD trained them so well! Tying them to a two-year contract helps to keep them at work here. It's not about protecting cronies; it's protecting an asset of the district.
Tragedy is, reviewing the POLICY of giving 2 year contracts now, while the State funding is so uncertain, is a good idea; however I've been told that there was no attempt by P&H to put that question on the agenda One other Trustee has told me privately he would have supported putting that question on the agenda, but not to hold up the awarding of all the teacher contracts. But P&H didn't do that. But it doesn't matter if Bill Proctor has a good ideas or not, if he presents them to the press rather than the board. His value as a board member is diminished because everyone with any sense is reluctant to deal with him when he chooses to do the business of the district in INK.
Friday, March 9, 2012
A Most Misunderstood Creature: The School Board
Having served on the school board, thought I'd spend some time here answering questions and talking about how the board works. It is a phenomenon that people who are happy with their schools don't bother to follow the doings of the board and don't bother to vote. Now that the district is at a crossroads, it is critical that people know how it works so they can see that a school board that doesn't function efficiently will impact classrooms eventually, and they need to understand how important it is that they vote in school board elections.
Comment I heard yesterday: "It's a 'rubber stamp' board!" What makes you think that, I asked, and was told it's because the votes are always 7-0. That doesn't mean a rubber stamp at all. The board is a 7-headed creature, and each "head" should bring individual values, concerns, ideas, etc to the discussion.
First of all, about 90% of what the board votes on is very mundane matters that don't require a long discussion because the path is obvious, or it's something where the path is very narrow due to State or Federal law. On the other matters where there is a real issue and direction to be given, the DISCUSSION should be lively and should indicate where a consensus can be reached. Then, a 7-0 vote gives the administration clear direction on the issue. When a 4-3 vote comes down, it leaves administration (and parents, taxpayers and everyone else) wondering how long that decision will hold, and no one will move forward on the decision without wondering if they are doing something that will be a big waste of time. It's a bit like Mom and Dad giving Junior directions on cleaning his room. Dad might want clothes up and vacuuming, and Mom wants all that and linens changed and dusting. If Mom and Dad don't get a unified direction out there on the things they can agree on, Junior is going to blow off cleaning his room at all or will play Mom against Dad!
One big difference is that Mom and Dad usually hash out their differences in private, while state law requires that the school board discuss it in a public meeting. Fortunately, in order to make the meeting more efficient, the school board has information about the item that is sent to every member ahead of time from the Superintendent. If they talk to more than 2 other members about it, it will violate the Open Meetings Act, so KISD has a practice where if a board member has a question about the materials, he is to send that question in an e-mail to the administration. Then, the question and answer will be sent to every board member. That way, everyone arrives at the meeting with the same knowledge, ready to discuss the topic. If Mom has read Dr. Spock and Dad has not, time will be needed to get Dad up to speed on the topic and what the experts say. If Mom and Dad have both come to the discussion with the same information, they can efficiently get to the meat of the matter.
In the weeks leading up to the election, I'll try to talk about other aspects of board service. Knowing what a board does will help people figure out who the best person for the job is. Send in questions about board service in a comment and I'll tackle the topics as best I can.
Comment I heard yesterday: "It's a 'rubber stamp' board!" What makes you think that, I asked, and was told it's because the votes are always 7-0. That doesn't mean a rubber stamp at all. The board is a 7-headed creature, and each "head" should bring individual values, concerns, ideas, etc to the discussion.
First of all, about 90% of what the board votes on is very mundane matters that don't require a long discussion because the path is obvious, or it's something where the path is very narrow due to State or Federal law. On the other matters where there is a real issue and direction to be given, the DISCUSSION should be lively and should indicate where a consensus can be reached. Then, a 7-0 vote gives the administration clear direction on the issue. When a 4-3 vote comes down, it leaves administration (and parents, taxpayers and everyone else) wondering how long that decision will hold, and no one will move forward on the decision without wondering if they are doing something that will be a big waste of time. It's a bit like Mom and Dad giving Junior directions on cleaning his room. Dad might want clothes up and vacuuming, and Mom wants all that and linens changed and dusting. If Mom and Dad don't get a unified direction out there on the things they can agree on, Junior is going to blow off cleaning his room at all or will play Mom against Dad!
One big difference is that Mom and Dad usually hash out their differences in private, while state law requires that the school board discuss it in a public meeting. Fortunately, in order to make the meeting more efficient, the school board has information about the item that is sent to every member ahead of time from the Superintendent. If they talk to more than 2 other members about it, it will violate the Open Meetings Act, so KISD has a practice where if a board member has a question about the materials, he is to send that question in an e-mail to the administration. Then, the question and answer will be sent to every board member. That way, everyone arrives at the meeting with the same knowledge, ready to discuss the topic. If Mom has read Dr. Spock and Dad has not, time will be needed to get Dad up to speed on the topic and what the experts say. If Mom and Dad have both come to the discussion with the same information, they can efficiently get to the meat of the matter.
In the weeks leading up to the election, I'll try to talk about other aspects of board service. Knowing what a board does will help people figure out who the best person for the job is. Send in questions about board service in a comment and I'll tackle the topics as best I can.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Update! On Feb. 4 I posted about using iPad textbooks in the classroom.
Here is a local school board that is looking at this and putting iPads in classrooms. I look forward to seeing their results! Kudos to the Fort Bend ISD Board for their vision and continued work on student success!
Sunday, February 12, 2012
A Call To Action for the Texas Legislature
An interesting editorial in the Chron today calling on the Gov to pay attention to his own back yard and call a special session to deal with school finance. Read it here. Hopefully, more voices will join this call and the legislature will get to work and actually fix the system, as opposed to just bandaging it. It is embarrassing that Texas school districts have to sue the legislature on a regular basis to require it to do its constitutional mandate: ...it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools. (From Texas Constitution, Article 7, Section 1.)
It is a shame to have legislators tell school boards, "PLEASE: Sue us!" Not to mention the expense to school districts across the state-- the lawyers don't work for free, and an industry has been created of lawyers dealing with the suits and monitoring compliance to the rulings. More of your tax dollars at work-- on NOTHING productive!
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Friend J sent this today:
USA Today reviewer Edward C. Baig describes his experience using the first Multi-Touch digital textbooks published for the iBooks 2 for iPad app, noting that they are “engaging in ways that were simply not possible with the textbooks I grew up with.” Baig likes the portability, updatability, and low pricing of iBooks 2 digital textbooks and touts specific features like instant search, highlighting, bookmarking, and interactive graphics. Writes Baig, “It’s better to see an animated tour of the genome in E.O. Wilson’s Life on Earth than just to read about it. ”Read more…
I hope our State Legislators read USA today! My only beef with the article is that Baig says," ...And no matter how compelling a digital textbook might be, it is only useful to a student if the teacher or school decides that this is indeed the textbook to use with their class." (emphasis mine) In Texas, it doesn't really work that way, unless the legislature and State Board of Education allow the book as a choice. I hope they take this to heart and allow school boards (with the input and guidance of teachers and schools) to consider the digital textbooks. That way, communities can chime in on which resources are appropriate for their particular community. And MOST importantly, the Legislature need to allow digital textbooks to be considered a resource for which they will PAY.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)