Superintendent or King?

Every once in a while I rant about schools. Okay, whenever someone will listen. But right now it's summer and I really don't want to burden my friends about this.  They have kids home and the Homework Pain Scale is on Zero for another month.
But our Superintendent is really pretty good at one thing.  He's good at sounding compassionate.
Those mean old school board members just aren't working with me to implement my Great Plan for the System to Guarantee Improvement For All Children.  Because I believe (Contrary to school board members) that All Children Can Learn.
This is so denigrating and demeaning and wrong on so many levels but the press just doesn't seem to get it right.
The school board members who haven't drunk your Koolaid (For all you who have heard this term before, look up Jim Jones Massacre on Wikipedia. It was actually Flavorade. He got a lot of people to buy his religion and die for it because they followed him like sheep without thinking.)  are a little tired of being blamed for the failure of your plan.  You see, they are interested in making sure we do fund things we need in the REST of the district, too.  We are not interested in crowded classes and overburdened administrators just to make money for something else... something nebulous, and not very specific.  Your plan has not had clear goals or any data to show its improvement (though you keep asking us to look at the data... Where is it? I would think if you had data showing success you would publish that instead of "the school board doesn't like me" rants weekly.) or most importantly HOW MUCH IT IS GOING TO COST.  I have seen a lot of cosmetic improvements like paint, floor and ceiling tile, and flower beds in the schools you have targeted. However, where the rubber meets the road it is hard to see the improvement.  The discipline systems that were set up before you got here were managing things pretty well.  Though it doesn't count at the state level, lots of kids were graduating from those programs (LAPS and CAPS were exemplary:  I know several students personally who were saved by these programs to go on to graduate and realize their dreams. Thank you CAPS and LAPS teachers!!) You did away with this program without having another in place. I agree with you that suspending a kid does not necessarily educate him, and that they need to be identified and their problems handled.  SO when you got the chance to implement your own system, you waited 6 months into the year (with chaos and no administrator knew what to do in the meantime) to get your plan going and I went and observed.  First we went to the out-of-school suspension classrooms.  That program was completely unsuccessful. The teachers are supposed to wave the kids down with metal detectors (due to the number of weapons violations there) but the teachers have not been trained on how to use them or what to do with them.  I volunteered to be waived down. I have a plate in my neck but other than that was wearing NO metal.  It went off around my waist (I was wearing elastic waist capris at the time) and they didn't know what to do.  I said, what if it was a student? They said they would just let them in anyway.  Because they can't frisk a student. So safety was/is an issue. Then all the students come into two classrooms.   The teacher and teacher's aid have to "teach" students from Grades 6-12 which with Comprehensive Curriculum or Core Curriculum basically means they would have to look up six different grades for the lesson plans they were supposed to be doing FOR EACH SUBJECT. Because out of school suspension kids don't bring their books or assignments to out of school suspension; and profess to not know what they are studying.  Which you can imagine is true some of the time... these are not honors students usually.  They are bored in class which is why they get in trouble in the first place and they don't pay attention because to them it doesn't matter.  These students would be better served by a serious meeting with a teacher or counselor to identify the needs of the student and help them understand how education can benefit them.  I would actually like to see this go on a yearly basis starting in kindergarten, but just try to get a counselor who wants to do that.  A 15 minute meeting with every kid in school once a year? That might take... days!!
Anyway, these kids look hunted.  They look guilty even when they are doing what they are supposed to be doing.  The teachers give them computers and have them look stuff up and do a report.
So why the guilty looks?
Kids know how to get around the teachers who are distracted and annoyed about being there with kids who don't want to be there who will be gone in 3 days and they can't bond with them or get to know them.  They know a whole lot more about computers and passwords and how to get around firewalls than the teachers too. (And I will go out on a limb, any administrator even in the tech department under the age of 21.) So they are not doing what the teachers assigned with any alacrity --why should they? They aren't graded on it!-- so they goof off and text their friends and play games and look at sites they shouldn't.
These are not the kids who need computers.
These kids do not need to be there. If I had a kid on 3-day suspension there is no way I would let them hang around these kids in this program with the quality of education they are receiving.  They would get a better education pulling weeds in my yard.
They need to talk to a counselor or a judge or someone in the truancy sector that can find out the problem and explain to them why education is beneficial to them.  You know, some kind of program. It doesn't have to take all day, in fact 15-30 minutes, maybe an hour each and how much better if the student has to bring a parent with them for this so they can help with the solution.
SO that was just one section of the program and from what I saw in the hallways and peeking into classrooms and listening at doors it was probably more effective than some others.  There was screaming going on by both school employees and students, neither of which is acceptable.

I know there are districts where the teachers never have to raise their voices.  Here they scream at the students. Some administrators demean teachers in front of other teachers and in front of students.  The Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent have both been caught on audio using foul language when shouting at administrators.
Think about Private Sector jobs.  How about an office where they distribute widgets. How long do you think a CEO would last if he blasted at the shareholders? How about to an employee? You don't think he'd be slapped with harassment charges? Fired immediately? Yet we put up with a superintendent who bullies, demeans and publicly criticizes everyone who does not agree with him immediately.  He has shown no data to prove his programs are successful or paraded any students who have benefitted from his programs.  He has only gotten community leaders who do not have kids in the system to get on board with his compassionate, wonderful plan and they get up at school board meetings and go on ad nauseum about how wonderful the superintendent is.  Every once in a while a teacher afraid of losing her job will get up and spout off about how wonderful he is too. In the meantime we hear from many, many teachers who have been harassed, bullied and badgered to tears and into retirement.  Good, experienced teachers who act as mentors to the learning teachers.  The new evaluation system is ridiculous and does not allow for students to evaluate their teachers. Why then is the superintendent allowed to evaluate the school board?
From a personal perspective, I have seen what he has done to my husband. He has kicked my husband, a school board member, out of the SCHOOL BOARD OFFICE.  Red in the face, veins pulsing, he has used foul language and accused Greg of micromanaging when Greg came  to the office to pick up some financial figures that were promised at the last board meeting.  He was told that all requests should go through his office.  Wow, isn't that micromanaging? You, the School Board Member, are not allowed to access any employee of the school board without going through the superintendent. He has shown consistent traits of paranoia.  One thing he has never shown is "willingness to work with school board members" because he has never even tried to reach out to Greg to discuss his Plan, or provided him with the information he asks for before a board vote.  It is impossible to have an employee who does not provide the information you request, who screams at you, who does irrational things and doesn't trust locals, without having some friction.  This sounds more like hiring a relative, because anyone else would have been fired long ago.  But here we have school board members who have not balked at the lack of concrete data (financial) in the Plan and they have "no problem" with the superintendent.  They are obviously not doing their jobs.
Anyway, another thing about this that annoys me greatly is the press assuming that issues are all personal by the board.  First of all, Greg is from Seattle and has no "good ole boy" network going on. He does not golf, he does not drink, he does not hang out at restaurants with people who can further his political career.  He just ran because he lost the coin toss when we realized we were going to have to do something about the school system ourselves because our school board member was voting directly in opposition to everything we believed in--small class sizes, teacher support, facilities that were safe and fiscal responsibility.  So he got on the board and does his best every day to research and make informed decisions.  The super hired a good ole boy from Mississippi that was less qualified than all of the other applicants and the school board questioned his decision, especially when it was discovered the candidate did not even meet the minimum requirements of the job description.  The press (KPEL in this case) accused the board of just being out of sorts that "their guy" was not hired. Since Greg had no idea who the other applicants were except by their applications, that is completely unfounded and I don't think was an issue for any other school board members either.  So they reprimanded the super for hiring someone represented to the board to be qualified, who was in fact not qualified for the position.  This was not about sour grapes, it was to keep the school board from being in violation of their own policy of hiring qualified candidates.  Now the super is demanding an apology, without any change in behavior on his part.
I could go on for days about this. I just wanted to get it on the page and set the record straight.  I just want what every parent wants. I don't want more taxes, but I do want the school board to show fiscal responsibility for the money they do have.  The last time a tax was approved it was for teacher raises in 2002.  This tax promised taxpayers that the money would only go to give teachers raises.  It wasn't to go for plans, projects or programs, wasn't to pay for stuff or things or pretty. It was to go directly to the teachers.  Now that is also being criticized by someone who wants that money for other things. 
Doctor Pat Cooper:  Shame on you for trying to deceive the taxpayers and steal their money.  Shame on you for your bad temper. Shame on you for your terrible example and for lying to the press.  Shame on you for firing some of the finest administrators we had, and keeping some that should have left. Shame on you for killing proven working programs.  Shame on you for lying to special interest groups to get them to believe this is for the children, when it is really about you.  Shame on you for despising fiscal responsibility.  Shame on you for treating teachers like dirt.  Shame on you for believing you can slander your bosses.  Shame on you for allowing your staff to present your ideas without any idea how much they will cost, then blame the board for not funding them.  Shame on you most of all for refusing to work with the school board members to try to work together. For All The Children.