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.
