On another post Anonymous wrote:
"I watched the video of the latest agenda review meeting. I don't
believe that all of the Board members were present. Terry Kennedy was
the first member to respond to the materials. I was very impressed by
her questions. She clearly had done her homework.
Sylvia Wilson
asked about having the "outsiders" being paid to pre-screen teacher
applications. Jody Spolar replied that it is to eliminate any question
of biased screening. The pre-screeners use a rubric of some sort. Our
own administrators use rubrics to evaluate teachers. We don't use
"outsiders" to evaluate teachers. So what takes the bias out of that
process?
There were questions asked about Jan Ripper's contract
at Perry, and the renewal of the Metro Center's contract. Metro is
working with students, and Ripper with the principal and administrators
there. Clearly, Perry is having problems. According to Lippert, the
principals have a say so in who is brought in as consultants in their
school. I don't know that I believe that.
Overall I was
impressed with the new Board's professionalism and attention to details.
They were engaged and listening to one another. These items will be
voted on next week. It will be interesting to see if any are not
approved of, or if they are just rubber-stamped.
As an aside,
Linda Baehr, the Ass't to Executive Director Pgh. Mt. Oliver
Intermediate Unit #2, gave a report. She was a former PPS teacher who
became the Langley principal before she retired."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
58 comments:
Can someone post a link to
1) The January 2014 Agenda Review materials (not just the education committee or business/finance committee materials)
and
2) A link to the January 2014 Agenda Review meeting?
Not having much luck finding them quickly...
Interestingly enough, the video has disappeared from the site. Maybe it will be on later? Strange though...
The Mt. Oliver business is listed under the other 2 agenda review materials on the site.
But shouldn't there be an agenda review for the January 15 agenda review meeting?
http://www.pps.k12.pa.us/Page/59
Here is the link to the materials.
Video not back up yet. Maybe NSA is reviewing it :)
That page just has agenda review materials for 1) education comm 2) business finance and 3) a very short few pages for mount oliver; shouldn't there be a lengthy, separate set if materials from this week's agenda review?
That's all there is/was.
Pps webmaster if you read this can you please add the recent agenda review and materials to the website?
1:37 - The Agenda Review was relatively short. The only documents were 1) Education Committee and 2) the Business/Finance Meeting along with the IU2 packet.
The video was online yesterday! It was also televised on Ch 44 last night from 7:00 to 8:15.
Listen very carefully to Jody Spolar's responses. Often they are very calculated (in use of words) so that the questions are NOT answered as asked but divert to a stream of words that simulate an answer but avoids a direct answer to the question as asked. Too ofter the Board Member that asks the question just lets it slide so as not to seem confrontational by digging deeper.
There ar certain words that preface every answer that will not be given a direct answer. To publish the word here would give Jody (AND OTHERS) a heads up on what words not to use in the future.
I like the comment about Ms.Spolar. Just like the district's leadership has taken the Roosevelt playbook and run with it where PR and communications are concerned, they have also become adept at speaking in a politician style.
Listen to Lane discuss criticisms of her tenure.
Listen to Lippert.
Listen to the head of the RISE evaluation NEVER answer a question.
This is standard operating procedure.
I am still wondering why the video disappeared from their website. Do they ever edit these videos?
Yes they too are... SCRIPTED... all very carefully contrived
The agenda review video is back on the site.
Thanks for letting us know! Comments, anyone? It would be nice to have a lively discussion of each agenda and legislation session.
2:50 I can't say if I noticed when watching agenda review or education committee meeting but Mrs. Kennedy seems to have a habit of restating the answer to her question before she moves on. This is smart since when the person who answers responds in the affirmative to Mrs. Kennedy's restatement there can be no mistakes or misunderstanding.
Did anyone else think there were more items the admin would have to check on when some board members asked questions?
Yes they must check with the puppet master before speaking
With all the tech people PPS has, what takes so long to get last night's board minutes and video on the site?
I don't mind the idea of having outside consultants screen new candidates. I only wish that they had outside consultants screening the internal candidates. Remove the bias. How about a objective screening test for all internal candidates for any posted positions?
10:52, it seems every time we move to a new year, 2014 in this case, it takes several extra days to get the minutes posted.
Going to pop over to the A+ Schools site to check, but do board watch volunteers still attend meetings and do you still think it is necessary?
I admire Mr. Brentley as much as the next guy, but would love to see him stop bringing up Mark Roosevelt at every opportunity. We are all well aware of how we got where we are.
Yes, there are still volunteers for Board Watch. While this new PPS Board is showing greatly improved and approach to their responsibilities, the Board Watch form lists several key areas that are definitely not a part of Agendas and Legislations. The checklist includes maximum achievement for all students and a focus on policy-making. Policy and Achievement are rarely before the Board in ways that will advance education for all students. Just saying . . .
Don't know what A+ does with this kind of information or whether it makes any difference at all;but maybe attention should be narrowed to areas such as these where real action is needed.
WHO is Dr. Connie Sims now at the Legislative table next to Drs. Lane and Lippert? Is she employed by the District? What is her position? What are her areas of responsibility: When did she come on board?
We know that she formerly was a consultant with the Danielson Group and did work in Pittsburgh, but when and how did she come to work for PPS? What were the results of her work as a consultant?
Does anyone have information that they can share that will answer these questions?
On Connie Sims from Legislative Mtg Minutes:
"17. Dr. Connie Sims - Board authorization is requested to enter into a contract with Dr. Connie Sims. The primary scope of her work will be to conduct regular school visits for the purposes of increasing inter-rater reliability and improving the quality and frequency of feedback and school-based professional development that all teachers receive. Dr. Sims will conduct co- observations and working sessions with administrators and ITL2s. She will regularly meet with the Performance Management team and the Assistant Superintendent who oversees her schools to discuss data on each school and create action plans to support principals around this data. Dr. Sims will work intensively with principals who have not yet earned complete certification through the Instructional Quality Assurance Certification process as needed.
The operating period shall be from July 1,2012 through June 30,2014. The number of days covered under the contract shall not exceed 100 days. The cost of this action shall be at a rate of $1,800 per day (including travel, off-site preparation, and submission of reporting). The contract amount shall be up to, and will not exceed, $180,000 from account line 1214-16N- 2832-330 for 100 days of work over the course of the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school year."
What makes these people demand this kind of money? That rate works out to $450,000 a year, and we all know people in public and parochial education who did so much more for so much less- in a field where the work itself is a huge source of compensation. Ironically, we might to better by paying a lot less, to find people who aren't in it mainly for the money.
!!!
"The operating period shall be from July 1,2012 through June 30,2014. The number of days covered under the contract shall not exceed 100 days. The cost of this action shall be at a rate of $1,800 per day (including travel, off-site preparation, and submission of reporting). The contract amount shall be up to, and will not exceed, $180,000 from account line 1214-16N- 2832-330 for 100 days of work over the course of the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school year."
OMG: PPS cannot be serious! $1,800 per day and the schools and scores are going down and getting progressively worse over the past two years. Check even the PPS REPORT although its 400+ pages online! (Never mind the State report.)
When did consultants become eligible to sit at the Legislative table? Even Assistant Superintendents are not at the table!
Of course at the rate of $450,000 this lady should be in the Superintendent's and Chief's chairs and perhaps several others as well. But, as Dr. Holley reiterates again and again "Where is accountability for results." What are students getting at this exorbitant cost of Central Office and multiple Consultants?
Is this unbelievable or what?
When the pg complains about tax increases it is always the refusal to close woolslair that is blamed; consultants are not mentioned. This persons fees will eat up about one sixth of the extra tax revenue.
Wonder how the retirees of the City of Pittsburgh feel about Regina Holly's statements?
Dr. Holley was not at the agenda review so this board meeting afforded her the chance to zero in on some important issues.
*She questioned Jody Spolar about the "outsiders" pre-screening teachers. Spolar said they were looking at experience and qualifications,and doing writing prompts. Holley asked, "Only for teachers?" I feel this question from Holley speaks volumes.
*Dr. Holley questioned the additional money requested for the N.Y. Univ. people at Perry. She was right on in stating that evaluation/tools, specific goals, and accountability should have been done BEFORE they started. She is disappointed that this didn't happen considering the money put in. Dr. Lane said this is all being done now. (Bellefield doing what it should have done before the horse left the barn)
*Dr. Holley is disappointed in the lack of oversight at Perry since Oliver came in.
When Lane, Lippert, etc. were questioned about the consultants that have been brought into Perry, King, and Westinghouse, they said the focus is on classroom management and discipline (SESI), and increased GPA, attendance, and discipline(N.Y. Univ). Do we really need to pay outsiders to address these issues? I am sure we have our own teachers and administrators who could "consult" on these issues. (and much cheaper) And when central office ties teachers' and principals' hands regarding curriculum, discipline, and observations, no wonder we have major problems. Big Brother is watching.
Dr. Holley really impressed me with her insights and questions. She clearly is not a puppet. Hopefully this board will continue making decisions in the best interest of our students and not those of corporate America. We either begin to "fix" PPS now, or we will eventually have a charter school in every neighborhood and no PPS.
Gee whiz, thanks for the info. I had thought maybe Dr. Sims had replaced Dr. French and nobody had done a press release. BTW, I think there is a mistake on the district organizational chart under the superintendent's page. Dr. Lippert is not on it but Dr. French is still there.
The PPS retirees are in support of Dr. Holley's statements, questions and concerns. Prior to the MR years school administrators and their teachers were expected to develop a plan to improve student performance, discipline and family/community engagement. Using this model, we were not in a one size fits all mentality which is exactly where PPS currently resides. We can clearly see that the current course implemented by MR and Lane is not the path we should have ever walked.
Just as each child is unique, so is each school. When the cookie cutter method of instruction began, we saw the gains that PPS was making began to decline. MR always said, 'It would take time." Well it's been 10 years and the results show zero impact for the vast majority of our schools.
Schools that showed promise are now in failing mode. We must ask ourselves, who should be held accountable and responsible for the dismal results? Clearly, it is not the teachers and school based administrators of yesterday. How do we know this? Well look at how many teachers have been forced into retirement or resignation. Have the scores gone up? NO! Just look at the number of school based administrators that also jumped ship or retired even though they were effective leaders during the MR and Lane tenure. The numbers are staggering!
It's a sad story when the hammer keeps falling on those who work in the schools while those who sit at Bellefield continually refuse to believe that it's their failed leadership and policies that are at the heart of PPS poor performance. What is even more disappointing is when Board Members let this continued pattern of failed experiments touted as educational reforms continue as following the course. How many years will it take before the Board recognizes that the leaders currently in charge rely so much on consultants because they themselves have no idea how to solve the problems of low student performance in urban America?
Nicely stated, 11:32. AMEN!
Note that Success Schools (now known as SESI-Special Education Services, Inc.) has a RENEWED contract of $343,950 for a six month contract ("January 23, 2014 to September 30, 2014")from two separate account lines.
How can this be justified? Seriously?
I am stumped but so no an insider that maybe I just can't understand because I have never been more than a consumer of education.
Since I could not find the minutes of the last legislative meeting, I looked at the agenda review materials. C. Sims is listed many times on tabs as "additional person(s) accountable for this tab."
I just do not understand this stuff at all.
Does that mean that consultants are accountable for hiring more consultants?
"Additional persons responsible"? Who is the first person listed as responsible?
Still asking how a consultant can sit at the Legislative Board table? Does C. Sims work as a district employee AND as a consultant?
This seems very strange to say the least! Can anyone explain what the real deal is on this?
Does the consultant speak when she is at the table, or just sit there? If just observing, couldn't she sit in the audience with other observers? Or is she giving administration prompts on how to respond to questions?
C. Sims sat at the Legislative table next to J. Lippert and she answered questions from the Board. No Board member questioned the process or asked why she sat at the table, so it seems safe to assume they knew who she was and why she was there?
Does she have an official position (beyond consultant) that puts her at the Legislative table when assistant superintendents do NOT sit at that table?
No, she is not given administrative prompts. She answers questions, clearly, that Lane and Lippert cannot answer.
The questions asked here need answers.
Is there a legal issue that needs clarification?
Even if C.Sims is replacing C. Otuwa who has not attended any Board meetings for more than a month, C. Otuwa did NOT sit at the legislative table.
Anyone know what has happened to C.Otuwa?
Dara Ware Allen was not sitting at the table. She sat behind the table. I thought she wanted the Clayton contract voted on at this meeting? It never came up.
Dara Ware-Allen is also an assistant superintendent like David May-Stein and Christiana Otuwa and none of these Ass't Supts sit at the table!
So why does Connie Sims sit there?
Based on the tabs Dr. Sims signed, it seems the scope of her work is greater than what was provided by anon 2:54.
Sept. Board minutes...Sims is Deputy Super. Interesting appointment considering she lives in Seattle.
Oh what a coincidence, Seattle, and slipped in before the board changeover .
I misspoke. It was the August min. The official title is chief of school performance. She was appointed on August 21 to be pn site 118 days btw August 21 and July 1 and available 21 days for emails and calls. She is considered part time.
Sims contracted for $98,690 for 139 days at $710/day.
Also in the same minutes, Lippert was to receive an extra $5,000 PER semester for taking on extra duties.
thanks I will start looking for the press release now or maybe a pg article. stop laughing.
At $1800.00 per day, the #17 item, states! Oh my goodness! Nice work if you can get it. But, PPS needs all the help it can get, even if she lives in Seattle. Isn't that where GATES is located? Hmmmmm.
If Sims is "Chief of School Performance" she is replacing French. That was her title. Is she next in line for Lane's position?
Didn't Dr. Sims work with Westinghouse last year?
Westinghouse scores are the worst in PPS for last year: Reading 29% proficient, Math 25% proficient, Science 8% proficient, and Writing 22% proficient.
That the Board approve authorization to pay Dr. "Constance Sims for consultant services to
assist the Superintendent with managing the Office of School Performance. Performance
priorities for this consultancy will be reduced to writing and set forth in a contract for services.
The contract period for theses consultant services shall be September 2, 2013 through June 30,
2014. Total payment shall not exceed $98,690 for 139 days at a daily rate of $710 from account
line 4017 010 2360 330."
The above paragraph appears in the 8-21-13 minutes in the personnel report. What does "reduced to writing" mean? It seems that somebody should do research to create a timeline of pay, position and responsibility for the individual. From the bios it seems she is dedicated to education, but I also know plenty of retired teachers and professionals who never really leave the profession. Evidence, our board make up.
The January Board minutes are finally online. There is no personnel report (retirements, leaves, transfers, etc.) like there always was. Is this something new? Did nobody retire or transfer? Seems strange...
I'm also wondering about the lack of personnel information. This information must be recorded and shared with the public. Where is it PPS?
Nice to see people are paying attention. Why no personnel? Perhaps December was a big month for forced resignations?
Happy Holidays, indeed.
Pure Reform, the watchdog of PPS, pick up a phone and tell them that the public has a right to have the personnel report published in the board minutes.
Now that people have noticed it will most likely get posted soon.
As you are reading the personnel report each month, take note of the "resignations" and remember that these are usually two decade veterans who have been advised to do so by their "union." I almost coughed up a lung at the complete bile that union VP wrote as a letter to the editor this past week.
Here is a guy---much like his boss---who believes that he can placate any teacher through his discussion techniques. In the cold light of day, he is yet another guy who simply has no peer, and PPS knows it. It was given back over the past three contracts.
What to change things between the PFT and administration? VOTE!!! This retired PFT member can't even imaging the leadership of a Fondy and our union brothers and sisters of the 70-80's ever falling for the bologna that Tarka and Esposito fed to their members. YOU have a voice; it's called VOTING!
Perhaps the personnel report will become another secret document similar to the eligibility list. Not to be confused with the seniority list. Neither of which we never saw with Sylvia Wilson sitting along side of Fondy or Tarka. Is it possible this too will become a 'private' document not for public review? Do I smell a rat?
I came into the district with teachers like the retired writer above. I can say that those union brothers pushed negotiations that allowed teachers to make a good salary and enjoy good benefits. I can say that Fondy, Paul Francis. Joe Zunic and Nancy Ewing..among many others....would have had the rank and file walk out rather than give back an inch.
Tarka and Visgitis literally gave back everything.
I will debate one point however, and that's about the 'vote' comment. Yes, I do believe it is the duty of every member to vote. That 1000 teachers did not vote last year is reprehensible. But I also know that the PFT has mastered the idea of rigging votes, and that goes back to the last days of Al and the first days of Tarka.
I've voted against the last three contracts as they did nothing for young teachers and did not even afford me a cost of living increase. I've voted against both Visgitis and before her, Tarka.
But in the end, I don't think it makes much difference.
Once you have allowed the genie to leave the bottle, there is no getting him back in.
Post a Comment