Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Board statement on replacement of superintendent

From the PG:

"The executive committee stated: "We recognize the need to act thoughtfully and with urgency before year-end to ensure that the district has strong leadership in place to continue our commitment to advancing education reform initiatives, student achievement and teacher effectiveness efforts already underway."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10321/1104049-100.stm

13 comments:

Questioner said...

Before year end? No process has even been announced yet, much less public input on the process (such as, the importance of a national search).

The A+ meeting was just a starting point. Why, 6 weeks after the superintendent's resignation, is there a sudden rush to make a decision before year end? Past experience would suggest that probably, a decision has already been made and a process will be chosen to lead to that result.

Anonymous said...

Oy Vey....

Anonymous said...

And the Post-Gazette believed them!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe they'll call the person "interim" for a seemly period of time before declaring them totally suitable.

Not really a surprise; it's the way every other decision has been made.

Anonymous said...

It is abundantly clear that there is no intent to change the status quo. Each of the A+ meeting, last Thursday evening and Monday, morning conveyed the message in multiple manners that the intent was to continue what has been falsely portrayed as progress. Contrary to local media reports, the raw, uncut, unmanaged, unaltered achievement data reveals a steady downward trend in achievement over the past 5-8 years and an ever-widening achievement gap. The pure data is available at PAAYP. Does no one ever check the validity or investigate the substance of the data?

Questioner said...

There's usually some data that can be selected- over certain selected years, for example- that will make the situation look good. The selected data is widely reported and repeated, and few are willing to dig deeper.

The news report seems to say the Board wants to wrap up an actual selection by the end of the year, not just an interim choice.

Anonymous said...

I think they'd only make it interim if they thought people were going to kick up a fuss over the lack of any sort of selection criteria or process. That seems unlikely, since there's barely time for that fact to register.

Anonymous said...

I worry about the day when enrollment in the PPS has dropped to such a point that it's totally clear that the people with skin in the game have voted with their feet.

Suddenly the mayor and council will realize that it's hard to sell a city with schools that no one uses unless they have absolutely no other choices.

At THAT point maybe some local news outlet will finally look back through all the data and notice that it was all there to see, if they'd only bothered to look.

Anonymous said...

I am sure that I will see all of you at Roosevelt's "Bon Voyage Party" in early December. The "invitation" came in the mail yesterday from Saleem and the boys at the Pittsburgh Promise.
$75 a ticket to come on out and thank Mark for his vision, for his union busting, hell, just for being the wonderful guy he is.
I'm getting warm and mushy all over.


The unmitigated gall of these people.

Questioner said...

How many Promise and foundation folks have kids in a Pittsburgh public school?

Anonymous said...

Subtle perhaps to some, obvious to other, clearly the choice has been made for the Deputy, who seems to be a credible person. However, she is closely attached to Broad, Gates, and the current team of Central Office assistant superintendents, chiefs, managers, directors etc. ______a total regime that is on downhill slide over the past five years because of a clear lack of competence. Even with the millions of dollars with of consultants to advise in generalities, this group has not the expertise or commitment to turn around our sinking district. Flight from the city schools is inevitable. What a wonderful opportunity for Charter Schools!

Questioner said...

The problem with promoting a member of the current administration is that he/she will be unlikely to evaluate current approaches and initiatives with fresh eyes. It's not that everything needs to be thrown out but rather that, given less than stellar results, we need to step back and take another look at where we are headed and how we expect to get there.

Mark Rauterkus said...

In other news....

Perhaps a rush to move the IB school (Pgh Obama) into a soon to be vacated Peabody for the fall of 2011 has been side-stepped.

See my blog: http://rauterkus.blogspot.com/2010/11/moving-into-pgh-peabody-high-school.html