By Susan Turk

October 8, 2010—Harris Stowe State University, St. Louis—  The Special Advisory Committee on the SLPS held their final short and sweet public meeting at 2 p.m. today.  It lasted a mere 45 minutes.   The purpose of the meeting was to present, review and approve their final report.  They approved it by a unanimous vote without discussion.  The report contains 9 recommendations to DESE which were presented to the public at today’s meeting.  You may read them below.

“A. Recommendations to DESE

1. • The Committee recommends that the following principles shape the policies and operations of the school board:

––A school board represents the education system to the public. The board should carry tax initiatives and bond issues to voters and concern itself with the fiscal integrity of the district.
––A school board represents the public to the superintendent. The board must set the standards and expectations for quality education and hold the superintendent accountable for responding to the public’s questions and concerns.
––A school board’s most important duty is to hire and retain the best possible superintendent, and dismiss one who is not an effective educational leader. If the chosen superintendent cannot run the district better than the board members, that person is not the right one for the job.
––The superintendent is responsible for running the district, employing and monitoring staff, and preparing budgets.
––Board members should not interfere with the superintendent’s duties by micromanaging. Instead the board should demand full and honest reporting from the superintendent and then deal directly with the superintendent to assure itself of the quality of education offered in the district.

2.• DESE should ask the state legislature to redefine the powers and duties of St. Louis’s school board to comply with best practices of effective boards as described above and to clarify that the board’s central duty is to hire, retain, and, when necessary, dismiss a Superintendent who is responsible for the daily management of the school system. This should be achieved by amending RSMo. § 162.621.

3.• We recommend that DESE be mindful of the importance of stability and consistency realizing that SLPS needs a sustained period of stable leadership if current initiatives are to progress. In 2006, this Committee concluded that stable leadership would be crucial for the future success of the SLPS. The Committee stands by that conclusion.

4.• The current members of the SAB have shown that they can work together for the good of St. Louis’s children and should continue to serve on the SAB. Because of the importance of stability and consistent policies, DESE should monitor the SLPS and maintain the current SAB as long as progress is being made or until accreditation is regained.

5.• DESE should develop reasonable criteria for assessing progress in the SLPS, recognizing that it takes time to turn a large school system around. DESE should measure SLPS progress against data collected for the 2010-2011 school year, which will be collected according to the current Accountability Plan.

If DESE determines that progress is not being made toward accreditation, DESE should consider recommending to the appropriate appointing authorities that one or more members of the SAB be replaced.

6.• While the Committee supports the ongoing work of the SAB, we believe, as we did in 2006, that it is a temporary solution for serious problems. When accreditation is regained, we recommend that DESE initiate a return to a permanent form of governance. Well ahead of that time, the legislature should be asked to amend RSMo. § 162.1100 to allow for the transfer of operational power from the SAB to a permanent board.

7.• We conclude that there is no clear evidence to indicate that an elected board is better than an appointed board or vice versa; however, we believe that an elected board will be most acceptable to St. Louisans and, hence, will garner the most community support in the long run. We therefore recommend that the permanent board be elected.

8.• We recommend against moving to a permanent hybrid board, part appointed and part elected, believing it undesirable to have two classes of board members.

9.• The transfer from the SAB to an elected board should be done in such a way as to maintain stability and continuity and to minimize disruption. We recommend that an elected school board be gradually phased in over a period of several years. The legislature should amend RSMo. § 162.601 to accomplish that goal. School board members should be newly elected beginning on the first general election date after accreditation is regained. For example, in year one, two new members would be elected to add to the three members of the SAB; in year three, two more members would be elected bringing the elected members to a four to three majority. At the time of the next election two new members would be added and two members of the SAB would step down. The remaining single member of the SAB would step down at the time of the next election.”

Let’s consider what they are saying here.

At some nebulous time far off in the distant future, an elected board should regain governance of the SLPS. No timetable is given.  The time of the decision is left to the state board of education’s discretion dependent on the SLPS regaining accreditation.  Until that time the SAB should remain in control.  When an elected board regains control, it should have less authority than the board of education had in the past.  They want the statute (RSM162.621) which delineates the board’s powers to be amended to limit its power.

The criteria for judging progress should start with the current school year.  If this is the baseline year, that would eliminate consideration of the embarrassing data from the SAB’s first two years during which the number of accreditation standards met by the SLPS decreased.  How convenient.

In order to transition to an elected board in a manner different from what current statute provides, RSM 162.1100 and RSM 162.601 will have to be amended.  Current law allows for the return of the elected board of education 30 days after the end of the SAB’s term and their term is set to expire on June 30, 2011.  The SAC does not want to leave well enough alone.

They say a hybrid board is undesireable in a permanent board but not a temporary one.  So, for a period of possibly 5 years or 4 election cycles, there will be both elected and appointed board members serving together because they intend to never allow the current board of education to become the successor governing board.  It is their intent to kill the beast, to completely circumvent the elected board of education and literally start with a clean slate.

At some point the board of education, as currently constituted will cease.

For these recommendations to prevail, they will have to survive the legislative process.  It is time to talk to your legislators.

The entire SAC report can be read at http://dese.mo.gov/slpscommittee/reports.htm.

Ron Jackson Disappointed

Former School Board Member Ron Jackson attended today’s SAC meeting.   Jackson was one of the four citizens along with Vince Schoemehl, Darnetta Clinckscale and Robert Archibald, chosen by Mayor Francis Slay to run together and form a majority voting block on the school board in 2003.  During the three years that they controlled the school board, they instituted the policy of running the school district like a business, the model still in use today.

Jackson addressed the SAC during their public comment period.  He remarked that he was, “concerned about putting the elected board back in. I see no evidence that elected boards help poor and minority student achievement because they are unstable.”   He said that he prefers “appointed or hybrid boards.  We need stability, predictability and certainty.”  He asked the SAC, “to reconsider their decision to allow the elected board to regain authority.”
 
Jackson is an expert on instability during an elected board’s tenure.  During the three years when he and his colleagues controlled the board of education, the superintendent’s office was occupied by five different people.  Indeed, during the 10 month period from June of 2004 through March, 2005 four superintendents revolved through those doors.  That instability was primarily due to Jackson’s belief that Rudy Crue was going to accept the job of superintendent when Bill Roberti’s year was up.  Consequently, a sham search for a superintendent resulted in no second choice candidates. When Crue left Jackson at the altar, so to speak, going to Miami instead, their board was forced to hire a real search firm and do a professional search, costing the district an extra 10 months of interim superintendents.

If any board was a poster child for a state takeover it was that one.

Calendar
 
October 9, Saturday, Educating for Change Curriculum Fair, 9:30 a.m. -1 p.m., Roosevelt HS, 3230 Hartford Avenue, St. Louis
 
October 14 , Thursday, regular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108
 
October 16, Saturday, SLPS Town Hall meeting, 9 a.m., Vashon H.S., 3035 Cass Avenue
 
October 16, Saturday, Magnet School Open House, 11a.m. - 3 p.m. all schools
 
October 18, Monday, regular monthly Board of Education meeting, 7 p.m., Carr Lane VPA Middle School Dance Studio, 1004 N. Jefferson
 
October 28, Thursday, regular bi-monthly SAB meeting, 6 p.m., 801 North 11th Street, room 108

Please note, The Schools Watch has a new mailing address, P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118. Our email address continues to be SLS_Watch@yahoo.com

Questions for the Watch?
Letters to the Editor?
Stories to contribute? News tips?
Send them to SLS_Watch@yahoo.com