Here's my answer to the question posed on Richmond.com's "Ask the Mayor," (where his answer kicked the question my way.) I also felt compelled to respond to Don Harrison's "Back Page" essay on the superintendent search process and committee.
First, from "Ask the Mayor"
I live near Albert Hill Middle School in the near West End and noticed some construction at the front steps. Can I assume this is related to the school system making improvements for students and parents with disabilities? - Wilton Burford, Museum District
Mayor's response: I wish I could say that is the case. The Richmond Public Schools has $7 million available for making improvements required by the Americans with Disability Act, yet has filed for only a handful of permits to initiate such work this summer. This is a school matter that City government has no control over, so I suggest you contact your School Board representative to find out the status of ADA improvements.
Kim's response: I'm the school board representative for the 1st District, which includes Albert Hill Middle School. The construction Mr. Burford noticed is part of the work RPS is doing to repair the crumbling but historic concrete balustrade at the front of the school. Last year the spanish tile roofing project was completed, and the PTA has plans for landscape improvements, so things are really looking up for overall appearance of this jewel of a building. But appearance does no good if the building's not accessible, so Albert Hill will also receive interior ADA upgrades in the days ahead. The mayor's correct that the school system now has $7 million available to complete critical ADA projects like the ones coming to Hill. $2 million came through savings achieved in RPS operations and $5 million was appropriated by city council on July 1, so there will be more ADA upgrades ahead for the system. We'll have an ADA update soon for anyone interested in getting the complete picture of the ADA projects; contact me for meeting details, which should be finalized within the next day or two. In the mean time, I invite Hill neighbors to take a look inside to see the numerous architectural features that give the school its wonderful character. A fireplace in the circular artroom and a turn of the century stove in the teachers lounge are just a few. Museum District residents and others, please feel free to contact me with any questions about the ADA or other ongoing capital projects for our aging 1st District (or citywide) school facilities at kbridges@richmond.k12.va.us.
Second, comments on Don Harrison's "Back Page" essay in Style
I've been very involved with the superintendent search process, so I feel compelled to comment on three aspects of the article:
1) Re: the quoted assertion that this search/selection committee “...was formed with no process in place, nor any duties or responsibilities identified." Not true! Actually, it's quite the opposite. The board adopted a detailed process with duties and responsbilities identified.
Two school board committees, the committee I chair and the HR committee chaired by Chandra Smith (6th district representative) spent much time reviewing search processes, and Chandra and I worked together to craft a selection process based on current research and best practices from systems across the country. The school board refined and approved this process in May with duties/responsibilities assigned task by task. One of the things Chandra and I learned from looking at how other systems had tackled their searches was that clarity about roles--who should do what? what are the expectations of RPS? the school board? the committee?---is crucial to a good search. So we worked hard to make the tasks clear to each party.
Also wrong is the statement that "the end result is a team that is uninformed about the hiring process or the necessary qualifications of a superintendent." To the contrary, the search committee was informed about both the hiring process and the qualifications the school board seeks. Chandra and I presented not only the process to the search committee--we also reviewed for them the forum/survey results, information about the hiring process, suggestions gleaned from other systems' searches, and superintendent qualifications/job description.
2) Re:public forums and publicity - Don's right that those were done quickly, but the rationale was to try to capture parent responses before the end of the school year. They were conducted by the school board, not the search committee, and Don's also right that TJ turnout was abysmal. Yes, we should look at additional ways to promote such events, but it was advertised and reported in the papers, on the website, and sent to principals (who can post information at the schools however they see fit.) In addition, in the 1st District I sent out at least two e-mail reminders to my constituent e-list, and other groups (PTAs, for example) added the forum to their e-mail reminders.
Once the superintendent announced her decision to leave, the school board scrambled to get some public dialogue going before the end of the school year. Participation rose with each forum but it did disappoint to see how low the attendance was. We did get far more responses (200+) from the survey RPS did. The board discussed additional opportunities to get public input and the sense was that these forums/surveys would not be our only effort, but again we wanted to reach out quickly on the first one.
3) Re: the composition of the search committee - There are others on the committee whom Don didn't mention, members with both parental and direct school involvement experience, so I have found it to be a mix of school consumers (i.e. parents, employees), education experts (VCU, UR, VUU), and business representatives. I support getting some of our biggest critics to participate in this search. One of the things RPS has been accused of in the past was ignoring the critics, so I thought it was admirable that George Braxton brought some on board on this effort.
In researching superintendent search committees elsewhere, I didn't find any with a composition that suited everyone, but I did come to believe that we shouldn't exceed the 15 members that it has. Some systems have had gigantic committees (others, much smaller than ours) and I thought this size was large enough to encompass a good number of stakeholders yet small enough to be effective.
Anyhow, the search process is far from done and there are more steps along the way. Public outreach is going to be even more critical, so all input is welcome on spreading the word better or on other aspects of the search.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Friday, July 25, 2008
The Richmond Crusade asked school board candidates
As an unopposed candidate, I didn't get to answer the school board candidate questions asked by the Crusade for Voters last week, but I promised to answer them here.
What is the biggest challenge facing RPS? Poverty.
Not just the poverty that impacts many of the families and neighborhoods served by Richmond's schools, but a poverty of interest and involvement that spanned years and led to neglected infrastructure and a disconnect between the community and the schools. Community investment is clearly on the rise--just look at the exponential increase in business/faith/civic partnerships with the school system that have occured in the last 18-24 months--but it's not nearly where it needs to be. And, yes, the socioeconomic challenges of the majority of students play a major role in our schools. This is common in most urban centers, but as both the recent Economic Policy Institute and Education Equality Project reports show (see David Brooks' 6/13/08 NY Times article for background as well as the respective group websites) a successful urban system does take a comprehensive approach combining school reform with initiatives in areas like health care, early education, family support, and economic development.
What is my position on charter schools? Mixed, but hopeful.
Traditionally, I have seen the most successful and long-lasting progress in public education come through grass-roots involvement in existing schools. But, when that involvement is stagnant, I have begun to see how innovation can attract it. Charter programs can be laboratories for innovation; that's why I decided (or I should say voted since I'm certainly not the sole "decider")to let a very dedicated group bring their ideas and energy into the schools. Is it a perfect program? No, but there's no such thing at any school, anywhere. Are the circumstances surrounding the charter ideal? No--state law, school system policies, and limited experience with charters all made this first Richmond attempt difficult, and cumbersome. But, we've got to give lots of things a try if we want everyone involved in our schools, and we'll never learn how to innovate if we don't take the plunge once in awhile.
(I can't remember the wording of the last question, but it was something along the lines of) Why do I want to serve on the board--does power or prestige factor in? I haven't found the Richmond school board to offer much in the way of either, but it does have an attractive quality to it.
When we have a board meeting that starts at 4:30 and ends at 10:30, and I'm paying out of my pocket $7 for my boxed dinner and $10 an hour for a sitter, that free bottled water doesn't feel very prestigious. But that's okay, because something else definitely attracts me to the job. I've found a wealth of work to be done that doesn't make the headlines or even Street Talk. As anyone who serves on a corporate or nonprofit board knows, an organization has to get good at both the mundane and the splashy to be successful. Progress--even in the areas that few people see--is addictive, and I want to be part of creating more. And maybe it's because I have two personal stakes in RPS (a rising 6th and 8th grader) but trying to make their public education experience the welcoming, inclusive, and diverse learning community that I had is a big incentive to continuing to serve.
As I've told many people who ask how things are going on the school board, it's not always fun, but it's somehow always engaging.
What is the biggest challenge facing RPS? Poverty.
Not just the poverty that impacts many of the families and neighborhoods served by Richmond's schools, but a poverty of interest and involvement that spanned years and led to neglected infrastructure and a disconnect between the community and the schools. Community investment is clearly on the rise--just look at the exponential increase in business/faith/civic partnerships with the school system that have occured in the last 18-24 months--but it's not nearly where it needs to be. And, yes, the socioeconomic challenges of the majority of students play a major role in our schools. This is common in most urban centers, but as both the recent Economic Policy Institute and Education Equality Project reports show (see David Brooks' 6/13/08 NY Times article for background as well as the respective group websites) a successful urban system does take a comprehensive approach combining school reform with initiatives in areas like health care, early education, family support, and economic development.
What is my position on charter schools? Mixed, but hopeful.
Traditionally, I have seen the most successful and long-lasting progress in public education come through grass-roots involvement in existing schools. But, when that involvement is stagnant, I have begun to see how innovation can attract it. Charter programs can be laboratories for innovation; that's why I decided (or I should say voted since I'm certainly not the sole "decider")to let a very dedicated group bring their ideas and energy into the schools. Is it a perfect program? No, but there's no such thing at any school, anywhere. Are the circumstances surrounding the charter ideal? No--state law, school system policies, and limited experience with charters all made this first Richmond attempt difficult, and cumbersome. But, we've got to give lots of things a try if we want everyone involved in our schools, and we'll never learn how to innovate if we don't take the plunge once in awhile.
(I can't remember the wording of the last question, but it was something along the lines of) Why do I want to serve on the board--does power or prestige factor in? I haven't found the Richmond school board to offer much in the way of either, but it does have an attractive quality to it.
When we have a board meeting that starts at 4:30 and ends at 10:30, and I'm paying out of my pocket $7 for my boxed dinner and $10 an hour for a sitter, that free bottled water doesn't feel very prestigious. But that's okay, because something else definitely attracts me to the job. I've found a wealth of work to be done that doesn't make the headlines or even Street Talk. As anyone who serves on a corporate or nonprofit board knows, an organization has to get good at both the mundane and the splashy to be successful. Progress--even in the areas that few people see--is addictive, and I want to be part of creating more. And maybe it's because I have two personal stakes in RPS (a rising 6th and 8th grader) but trying to make their public education experience the welcoming, inclusive, and diverse learning community that I had is a big incentive to continuing to serve.
As I've told many people who ask how things are going on the school board, it's not always fun, but it's somehow always engaging.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Mayor Working Hand in Hand with Schools
Alright, it's in Dallas, but Richmond can dream can't we? Forget a link, the whole news article is worthy of reading right this minute. The bold and italics are mine, results of excited highlighting of the big-picture thinking and mayor-initiated collaboration going on in other cities.
Dallas mayor's focus on schools seen as plus
12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, June 15, 2008
By KENT FISCHER / The Dallas Morning News
Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert acknowledges that his public education projects won't by themselves slash the city's dropout rate or dramatically boost literacy. But by creating city-sponsored programs focused on specific high-need areas, Mr. Leppert has joined mayors around the country who are increasingly involved in education reform, even though their offices have little authority over city schools. Their reasoning is simple: A high-quality public school system is fundamental to urban renewal, to creating jobs, to keeping families from fleeing to the suburbs.
In launching his four education projects – scholarships, summer jobs, early literacy and sprucing up old schools – Mr. Leppert has created programs that complement reforms under way in the Dallas Independent School District. And, if those are successful, more city-school ventures could be on the horizon. "In good communities, everybody works together," Mr. Leppert said. "Just this week, [DISD Superintendent] Michael Hinojosa and I were talking about some other problems we need to tackle."
In some cities – Chicago and New York, for instance – mayors have actually wrested control of schools away from school boards and are now operating their city's schools out of city hall. But such instances are still relatively rare.
By contrast, the efforts of Mr. Leppert and other mayors depend on their ability to marshal civic resources and to recruit corporate leaders to address specific problems that schools have identified. Mr. Leppert is relying on grants and corporate donations to fund his initiatives, and he's using his bully pulpit to call attention to the district's needs.
"He's using his office to raise the public attention to the needs of children, and he's not working at cross purposes" with the school district, said Kenneth Wong, a professor at Brown University who has studied mayoral involvement in public education. "I would say he's right on track with what's going on nationally."
Dr. Wong said he sees more school district/city government cooperation across the country. Children's issues – especially public education – play well with parents, and voters generally expect different government agencies to work together to solve big problems, he said.
Parents "don't understand why mayors shouldn't be part of the [education] solution," Dr. Wong said. "Mayors are playing an important role – a more formal role – because voters see it as the mayor's obligation" to improve the health of the city, and that includes good public schools. Dr. Hinojosa said he does not expect Mr. Leppert's programs to work in isolation. He said the mayor's efforts were designed to complement DISD's Dallas Achieves! reforms.
"[Former mayor] Laura Miller and I – we didn't talk on a regular basis," Dr. Hinojosa said. "... [Mr. Leppert] was the only candidate for mayor who came to visit me and ask what it was we needed." The two continue to meet regularly.
But the work of mayors in other cities suggests that Mr. Leppert could go further.
In St. Louis, for example, the mayor has successfully backed a slate of reform-minded school board candidates – twice. Denver's mayor helped negotiate a teacher contract and advocated for a controversial teacher pay-for-performance plan. In Stamford, Conn., City Hall oversees purchasing, payroll and IT for the school district.
Dallas has dipped its toe in that water. As part of the 2002 school district bond campaign, DISD and the city built two city libraries on the campuses of two new schools. The facilities serve both as city libraries and as the schools' media centers.
Mr. Leppert and Dr. Hinojosa said there have been no discussions about a further blurring of the administrative lines between City Hall and DISD, although Mr. Leppert said he is "open to anything." For now, both the mayor and superintendent seem content to build the mayor's initial four programs into successes, and then use them to launch more partnerships.
"These programs are complementary right now," Dr. Hinojosa said. "We're going to see how these [programs] roll out. Will they work? We don't know, but they'll make for an interesting study."
Dallas mayor's focus on schools seen as plus
12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, June 15, 2008
By KENT FISCHER / The Dallas Morning News
Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert acknowledges that his public education projects won't by themselves slash the city's dropout rate or dramatically boost literacy. But by creating city-sponsored programs focused on specific high-need areas, Mr. Leppert has joined mayors around the country who are increasingly involved in education reform, even though their offices have little authority over city schools. Their reasoning is simple: A high-quality public school system is fundamental to urban renewal, to creating jobs, to keeping families from fleeing to the suburbs.
In launching his four education projects – scholarships, summer jobs, early literacy and sprucing up old schools – Mr. Leppert has created programs that complement reforms under way in the Dallas Independent School District. And, if those are successful, more city-school ventures could be on the horizon. "In good communities, everybody works together," Mr. Leppert said. "Just this week, [DISD Superintendent] Michael Hinojosa and I were talking about some other problems we need to tackle."
In some cities – Chicago and New York, for instance – mayors have actually wrested control of schools away from school boards and are now operating their city's schools out of city hall. But such instances are still relatively rare.
By contrast, the efforts of Mr. Leppert and other mayors depend on their ability to marshal civic resources and to recruit corporate leaders to address specific problems that schools have identified. Mr. Leppert is relying on grants and corporate donations to fund his initiatives, and he's using his bully pulpit to call attention to the district's needs.
"He's using his office to raise the public attention to the needs of children, and he's not working at cross purposes" with the school district, said Kenneth Wong, a professor at Brown University who has studied mayoral involvement in public education. "I would say he's right on track with what's going on nationally."
Dr. Wong said he sees more school district/city government cooperation across the country. Children's issues – especially public education – play well with parents, and voters generally expect different government agencies to work together to solve big problems, he said.
Parents "don't understand why mayors shouldn't be part of the [education] solution," Dr. Wong said. "Mayors are playing an important role – a more formal role – because voters see it as the mayor's obligation" to improve the health of the city, and that includes good public schools. Dr. Hinojosa said he does not expect Mr. Leppert's programs to work in isolation. He said the mayor's efforts were designed to complement DISD's Dallas Achieves! reforms.
"[Former mayor] Laura Miller and I – we didn't talk on a regular basis," Dr. Hinojosa said. "... [Mr. Leppert] was the only candidate for mayor who came to visit me and ask what it was we needed." The two continue to meet regularly.
But the work of mayors in other cities suggests that Mr. Leppert could go further.
In St. Louis, for example, the mayor has successfully backed a slate of reform-minded school board candidates – twice. Denver's mayor helped negotiate a teacher contract and advocated for a controversial teacher pay-for-performance plan. In Stamford, Conn., City Hall oversees purchasing, payroll and IT for the school district.
Dallas has dipped its toe in that water. As part of the 2002 school district bond campaign, DISD and the city built two city libraries on the campuses of two new schools. The facilities serve both as city libraries and as the schools' media centers.
Mr. Leppert and Dr. Hinojosa said there have been no discussions about a further blurring of the administrative lines between City Hall and DISD, although Mr. Leppert said he is "open to anything." For now, both the mayor and superintendent seem content to build the mayor's initial four programs into successes, and then use them to launch more partnerships.
"These programs are complementary right now," Dr. Hinojosa said. "We're going to see how these [programs] roll out. Will they work? We don't know, but they'll make for an interesting study."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)