I read the latest post on the superintendent's blog http://blog.sd57.bc.ca/?p=405. First of all, thanks to the superintendent for posting again on his blog. Some of us were concerned about the two year break from social media.
The piece "Courage" contained many positive statements and acknowledged that trustees have tough decisions to make, but also included information on the 2010 Sustainability process that I found a bit troubling. Some of it borders on re-writing history. I don't think there was ever a choice between doing something or nothing. No board would have ignored the need for a balanced budget and obviously cuts had to be made. At the end of the year in 2010 the district would have had a balanced budget one way or the other. The blog piece made it sound like the school district would fold and close up shop without the board carrying out the big plan. I'm also reminded that the big plan was not written by trustees but was dropped on them apparently with the idea that they couldn't change it or explain it to the public in any details until the very last day when they had to decide on the whole package. As a parent I found that one of the most troubling parts of 2010. I really liked what Kamloops did in the same year. They put a cost-cutting plan together and when they got lots of feedback about it (which they collected and put on their website) they actually changed the plan and found out that it had much better acceptance.
An example of my concern from the superintendent's blog post:
"That focus was learning and the learner. Every decision had to be about learning. If it wasn't about learning it shouldn’t be part of the discussion."
Contradicting this, there are many examples one could use. Technology stands out for me, this is something that many teachers have talked to me about. When it came to questions about changes to technology that came from the 2010 Sustainability process, the superintendent has said on more than one occasion that it was a financial decision not an educational decision. In other words the decisions were about following a business model, and that education was a secondary thought. These decisions led to many years of decline for technology and an impact on education.
There were other cuts made in 2010 that were done just to save money. If the argument is made that saved dollars can be re-invested in education it kind of makes the argument redundant. Anything and everything can then be said to be about learning.
I agree that the last board had hard decisions and long hours put into that process, but there were many parts of that process that did not go well and should be studied carefully during Strategic Planning to avoid mistakes of the past. I have detailed notes about what went well and what went wrong in 2010 as do others, individuals and partner groups.
I mentioned some unfinished business in my exit speech (and put in a request for a freedom of speech policy) and I would also remind trustees about two issues that we did not deal with:
1. Concerns about the new student information system and how it will be implemented. Please recall the excellent letter from retired teacher John Vogt outlining the issues. He has given permission for this to be shared if any of you need to see it again.
2. June 26, 2012 motion: that the Policy and Governance committee examine practices and consider updating or drafting a new policy for hiring, review, evaluation and support of administration. Carried 4:3.
I am done with this now so I will let others worry about past and future issues. In addition to working together, celebrating success, really listening to input from the educational community, and collaborating on the issues, please continue to keep each other and the superintendent accountable to high expectations. No one would question that our superintendent works hard, but I have also found that he works best when he is under a bit of pressure :)
No comments:
Post a Comment