Courage

To new trustees of SD#57:

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 :)

Website Motion

Here is a motion that I plan to bring forward at the January 14th, 2014 Board Meeting. Sometimes my motions don't make it into the board book, so I want to share this on my blog in case partner groups have any feedback to offer. It is no secret that our district website needs some help, so hopefully the focus of the Winter Games will provide an incentive to make it better.

SD57 website: http://www.sd57.bc.ca/
2015 Winter Games website: http://www.canadagames2015.ca/

Motion

That district staff make improvements to the design, function, and usefulness of the district website in keeping with other dynamic district websites in BC and in time for the 2015 Winter Games.

Rationale

We want a website we can be proud of.

Employees, partner groups, and fellow trustees have let the board know that the district website is in need of changes. The website will see increased traffic at the beginning of 2015 as our city and region comes under national focus. At the same time many of our facilities will be used by the Games and effective web communication is essential.

Many website improvements have been discussed over the last two years but not realized; placing a one-year deadline encourages staff to set goals for implementing proposed changes. Improvements have been mentioned in past budget planning, so there should not be any new costs associated with this motion.

A new committee working on school projects tied to the 2015 Winter Games needs a place to showcase their work. This is one of many opportunities an improved district website could address.

Other school district websites in BC have achieved high standards for appearance, interactivity, and purposefulness. They include examples of student learning and artwork, staff biographies, district and related community events, links to a variety of staff blogs, up-to-date news and media items, feedback forums, integration of professional development, video clips from leaders, twitter feeds, tutorials, interactive maps, clear communication about strategic planning, positive messages about the community, and so on.

Senior Staff can work out the details on the timeline, who should be consulted, what elements are needed, whether or not new software is needed, etc. Some of this planning work has already been done.

Two additional suggestions:

1. District staff or senior administration should report back to the board by April 2014 with a plan for the website and by September 2014 with progress-to-date. If work has already begun, this could happen sooner.

2. Please seek partner group input on what is needed in a district website. An employee survey is a good way to get this input.

first appointments

I'd like to share my committee and school liaison appointments, and highlight some of the issues that are coming up for school trustees and the district.  Please note that the appointments are not yet official until they are announced at the Jan 24th, 2012 meeting.  I'm still trying to sort out the difference between "timed announcements" and material that should truly be confidential or "in-camera."  If it were up to me, almost all of our trustee business, with the exception of personnel issues and such, would be public and published in advanced.  In addition to the appointments, I think we should also be notifying the public that we have completed criminal record checks. Trustee candidate Shawn Peters was right in his campaign to encourage the board to pursue this.  Every other volunteer organization requires a criminal record check to be around children.  Perhaps this is something the Policy and Governance Committee will be able to rectify.

I am very happy with my appointments. I have a great mix of schools and am looking forward to learning from some strong teachers and administrators that I have great respect for.  I look forward to the committees I will be on.  There are some big issues & opportunities coming up and I hope I do them justice by asking the right questions.  Saying that, I do hope that those who voted me in, and those who will work with me during my appointments, will help me learn all I need to know to ask the right questions; I do not want to do this alone without the public's help.  Sadly I feel the timelines for some up-and-coming issues are pressing and Educations Services and Policy and Governance committee meetings have been cancelled for the month of January.  Some of my issues are plans for bussing, the discussion around reopening of MAC1 in Mackenzie, concerns with the Northern Learning Centre, and Public access and input at meetings.  Some of these will come up at the Trustee/Sr. Administration meeting on Jan 10th, 2012, although I'm not sure if these are on the agenda for our information or if we have some room to discuss and raise issues.  Feel free to email me or leave comments with your suggestions and feedback.

My appointments are as follows:

Committees

1.  Education Programs and Planning Committee

2.  Education Services Committee

3.  Environmental Sustainability Committee

Liaison

1.  District Parent Advisory Council

Schools

1.  Duchess Park

2.  Edgewood

3.  Harwin

4.  Spruceland

5.  Lac Des Bois

Now What?

Now that the campaign and election are done it looks like there's lots to learn in the next few weeks. The inaugural meeting is coming up on Dec 6, and a series of orientation or training sessions here and also in Vancouver. I got an email from the board office asking what my top 5 things I wanted to learn about first were. We got to choose from a list of categories. Here's what I put (yes, I gave 10 not 5 things):

• district plan, leadership, technology
• what can/should I do on my own, what should be done only as a group
• school programs and long-term sustainability, is this where "green" initiatives fits?
• are 1701s the only extra funding cases?, equity for all vs. fairness for students generating funds
• the BCPSEA relationship, hiring philosophy for leadership
• trustee/school relationship, the kinds of questions that are worth asking
• purchasing as it overlaps with school and teacher innovation
• categories, is this where 1701s equity vs. fairness issues would come up?
• improving achievement, connection to rural schools (including technology), relationship to other school programs
• figuring out Robert's Rules

I'm also wondering what kinds of things I should use this blog for now that I am a trustee. If anyone has suggestions feel free to leave a comment. I really appreciate the help my husband Glen gave me in researching and editing the blog and campaign material, he really is an ubernerd when it comes to the school district's history and issues. Kind of a walking encyclopedia but with more facial hair. I also appreciate the input that other teachers and parents had on my campaign, there is so much passion and interest out there for making our schools work for the students. Thanks also to my kids for putting up with a big change to their nights. I've been working evening shifts at Costco for the past month, one more shift left and then I'm giving up the job to focus on being a trustee.

Issue #8 Long-term Planning

Problems:

The district ignored its own 2003 sustainability report in key areas, including the construction of new facilities and configuration changes that would have prevented the big deficit in 2010.  While well-documented funding shortfalls accounted for some of the money woes, the school district spent money and expanded board office staff between 2003 and 2009 as if the enrollment decline was a surprise. Paying the piper, as it was said, was held off until 2010.

The district’s own planning process is not working as intended. The current district plan for student success includes elements simply copied from previous plans that are not longer correct and report on work already underway. The district technology plan and district technology committee have been suspended (2005 and 2009 respectively), and the School Planning Council model has fallen apart without teacher involvement. We need to look positively at the next 10 years of student, teacher, school, and district growth plans.

Solutions:

Sustainability discussions need to happen regularly, perhaps on a three year cycle, and not just in response to crisis. On open model of consultation, similar to the way city plans are developed, and a public review of draft plans should be used. The process used to arrive at cuts in 2010 should not be repeated. Any committee charged with finding savings or building for the future can’t just include board office staff, it needs to include trustees, parents, teachers, administrators, and other partner groups.

The district has to decide what it wants to get out of its District Plan for Student Success. If it is to be more than just a report, there has to be a more robust feedback cycle used, and it should go for editing and review by partner groups. If the district is unwilling to build a new technology plan, it should be included in the annual achievement contract. Again, as with issues #6 and #7, listening and responding plainly to the teachers and administrators who are meant to do the work of district plans is crucial for success.

Learn from other organizations and school districts on how to use the district website for a much more involved level of interaction with educators and the public. We keep hearing about "21st Century" technology skills - to take this seriously we need this modeled at all levels in the school district.

Issue #7 Honesty in Education

Problems: 

Too many policies, goals, bad news, and announcements are “managed,” the message goes through “branding and handling” and the public has to decipher the jargon. These are the techniques used in large corporations and politics, but they shouldn’t dominate education. It is hard enough to read between the lines in government documents, we shouldn’t have to decipher reports from the board office or guess at what is meant by "21st Century Learning."  This buzzphrase in particular has come mean everything from privatization of education, to replacing teachers with commercial distance education services, to project-based learning, to increasing computer skills. Educators must explain what they mean, and not just repeat the phrase.


Schools should be about mistakes and successes, experimentation, and ongoing development. If things aren’t going well (like finances, a program that isn’t working, a school that is empty, or a policy that is counterproductive), we (the board office, trustees, schools, teachers) need to be brave enough to confront the problem head-on and not spin the news to make it look positive. One example is the FAQs that parents received during the 2010 closure process. It seemed that easy, obvious questions were answered in a calming manner, and the tough questions were left off the list. We need to change the culture at the board office so that all partners in education are encouraged to speak plainly and openly about problems and plans. When jargon or buzzwords are used to suggest that something has changed, it can take away from the real effort staff and students put in to make a difference. The school district has entertained so many philosophies as the right way to “go forward” but does not always stop to ask if they are compatible. Professional Learning Communities (PLC), Assessment for Learning (AFL), 21st Century Learning (21C), and Personalized Learning are only a few of the concepts that are in use. Each one may have something positive to offer, but it is too easy to simply repeat the words even if the ideas themselves are not well understood or used in schools. Public education, of all places, should set the bar higher for language and communication.

Solutions:

Co-opt the support of critics and supporters alike in reviewing school district publications. Look for jargon, cliches, innuendo, and “weasel-words” (like they do on Wikipedia) and try to replace them with real data, qualitative data, or genuine language. Enlist the support of the district’s best writers and analysts to critique and edit reports and polish up documents.

Look for ways to use the school district website and other forms of communication to provide interaction with the public and employees. In 2010 the Kamloops School District used their website to post ongoing feedback on their reconfiguration (cutbacks) report, a searchable, organized collection of public input. The result was that the trustees and district staff were able to see where changes to the plan were needed and they could readjust (with wide-spread satisfaction) before heading into a “do or die” meeting. It is important to note that this was not done to please the crowds, it achieved the same financial goals while providing a more convincing case that student learning was protected.

Issue #3 Communication

Problems

Trustee Communication: Our trustees typically gather information from the public and respond at a later date. This is true of board meetings, and also of the entire Sustainability process in 2010. Individual trustees are often great listeners, and get things done for parents and schools, but their input and consultation procedures make this harder.

Website Communication: The district website has lots of information, and has improved since 2010, but is also confusing to navigate and does little to celebrate student success.  Many links are dead ends, catchment maps have not worked for two years, and the design does not have the professional appearance that might be expected of a district with a $125 million budget. Many of the school sites have the same issues. Teachers report that the site controls are too difficult to use and as a result are no longer involved in website contributions. Our biggest high school (PGSS) has given up on the district-provided website system and has their own dynamic website embedded within the dysfunctional one.

Parents Communication: parents get conflicting information when they ask for reasons behind decisions and data about their schools. In 2010, parents were shown three conflicting lists of school capacities and projections, and were made to wait for freedom-of-information requests for information that should be publicly available.

Solutions

As a parent recently requested at a board meeting, the trustees should be willing to respond to questions and presentations from the public, either immediately after the input, or publicly (if appropriate) on the district website. Parents and others who give input are rarely offering private concerns, they are bravely representing the concerns of many, and those many wish to hear what the school board has to say, even if it is bad news. Some kind of regular interaction and input on plans is needed, not just “thanks, we’ll get back to you later.” Revising the official consultation process is a tall order but must be addressed if improvements are desired.


I'm not the only trustee candidate to suggest this (Don Sabo has clear ideas about this), but I think as many trustee meetings as possible should be public.  Keep personnel matters private, but almost everything else can be dealt with out in the open as a public institution. This should also extend to the so-called "senior learning team" that has set out some excellent topics for their consideration. See p. 5 of the District Plan for Student Success. There work will be so much more powerful if their discussions, at the developmental stage, are not confined to the board office but are open to others. They can't succeed if the people who have to live with their plans (like parents and teachers) have been excluded from the planning process. More about this in Issue #8.

Add interactive functions to the school district website, fix the dead ends, and remove content that is.  It has come along way, but we can learn from other districts that have attractive, functional, dynamic websites like Kamloops-Thompson, Gulf Islands, Columbia-Kootenay, etc. The access to reports, plans, organizational charts, info for parents and educators, etc. on these sites is excellent. Let teachers and students have access to websites again, so that school websites can easily reflect the character and spirit of each school.

The board office, as part of its planning cycle and ongoing attention to sustainability, should publish a yearly synopsis of school data, accomplishments, issues that were dealt with by the board, issues on the horizon (financial, educational, community issues). We should partner with the DPAC on this, as they have already filled the gap in recent years with the excellent resources and data on their website.