Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Please. Make. It. Stop.

I think I am - rather absurdly - looking forward to new editions of the Lebanon Express.

Why?

Because there's usually another story regarding the school board.

Admittedly, this is somewhat like looking forward to the next major train wreck.

This week, our saga continues with yet another low. I was sure the Board had hit rock bottom, but, like the Bush Administration, they've kept digging.

In the latest story, there are two things I want to touch on. The first:

Nearly a month after the Board of Education put School Superintendent Jim Robinson on administrative leave, at least one teacher has turned down a job offer from the district because of the on-going clash between board members and the superintendent.

...

“We did offer a job to a special education teacher who declined, saying ‘no thanks, your district is throwing off more red flags than a bullfight,' “ said Steve Kelley, acting superintendent. “It's too bad because special education is a very tough slot to fill.”

Board member Josh Wineteer says he does not believe the current controversy is hurting the district's ability to recruit teachers. “I think there is a lot more factors that go into our ability to recruit,” he said.


Ouch. Even given that this is only one position, it's a safe bet the shenanigans in the district have caused potential teachers to not even bother applying. Verdict: The stupidity hurts students!

Shocking.

No, really. I'm amazed...that the teachers' union is taking this in stride. I'd be popping pills like there was no tomorrow if I were a teacher right now and my school board was pissing all over my school's chances of hiring quality staff. And I know the teachers are furious at Robinson, but blind rage is not, um, becoming of professional teaching staff. Ever.

But wait - our good friend Rick Alexander, savior of the Lebanon Community School District, is about to weigh in on this horrible news:

Rick Alexander, who made the motion at the Aug. 1 special board meeting that led to Robinson's removal said that although some teachers might not want come to Lebanon during this public dispute, in the long run teacher retention will be better if a review can identify the root cause of what he says is widespread teacher dissatisfaction.


Wow. That almost sounds reasonable. It also sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before?

I know.

"If you want to make an omelet," Lenin insisted, "you have to be willing to break a few eggs."


Put charitably, Alexander's unspoken suggestion is that the only way to solve the issues of teacher dissatisfaction and Robinson's authoritarian leadership style is, conveniently, Alexander's way: With a very large hammer.

Put uncharitably, Alexander is willing to tear down district in order to achieve his goals. I honestly don't think he realizes there is any other way. It's politics through ignorance! It's also very clearly an "ends justify the means" argument. Those sorts of arguments are bollocks. Alexander's not creating a peaceful district with solid, grounded ways of resolving conflicts before they get to the let's- suspend-the-superintendent stage; he's creating a model for nonstop gridlock and petty politics. No one with half an ounce of sanity is going to want to teach in that kind of environment, and teacher retention is going to - surprise! - continue to suck.

Anyway. On to the second thing I wanted to address:

Meanwhile, the board has moved away from the performance review of Robinson that was called for in the motion that placed him on leave. It is now contemplating what one board member describes as a ground up review of the district, including the school board.


Unbelievable. The flimsy curtains that surrounded this pathetic charade are falling away and lo and behold, Rick Alexander has no f***ing idea what he's doing! Imagine my consternation.

You'd think that if this is the case, Robinson would be reinstated, since the original motion was to suspend him based on a performance review of his performance.

You'd think wrong:

Asked after the last board meeting why Robinson is still on leave, if the review process is looking at the district as a whole and not the superintendent, Alexander said that if Robinson was working, employees would be intimidated and might not give honest answers to whoever the board selects to carry out the fact finding. Even if interviews are held in private, Robinson would still know who talked, Alexander said.

Wineteer agrees with Alexander on keeping Robinson on leave during the review process. “If you are going to get an unbiased view, the CEO can't be present during the audit,” Wineteer said.


Neither do you get an unbiased review if the people who call for it are folks who are known to want Robinson's head on a stick, but whatever.

And kudos to Express reporter Larry Coonrod for asking the question. I wish he would have pushed harder, since Alexander and Wineteer are so obviously clueless, but hey, he forced them to justify the decision on the record, and that provides a trail for them to be held accountable to. Let's see more of that. If they are really on the right side and telling the truth, there's no harm in having a record of their statements, is there?

I have several reactions to this revelation:

1) Performance reviews of people who are working take place all the time. Yes, it is true that the person in question can be suspended, but it's certainly not necessary - especially when the performance review is no longer directed at one person.

2) What evidence does Alexander have for the claim that Robinson will "know who talked" during a private, confidential performance review? (Unless it's never occurred to Alexander and Wineteer that a real performance review does not consist of the dynamic duo talking to teachers and handing out poorly-constructed surveys, which I have to admit seems a possibility at this point.) Is Alexander really suggesting that a) the board can't select an independent, trustworthy party to conduct the review; b) Robinson can read minds; or c) the information put forth in private interviews is that traceable? I'd like to see some evidence for Alexander's assertion here, but I'm not holding my breath.

3) Ethically, the Board just shot itself in the face. How any sane person could trust these clowns after this is beyond me. In fact, this whole episode is making me sick to my stomach. It's pretty obvious that if you suspend someone for a reason, and that reason disappears, you reinstate that person. You don't just shift the rationale for the suspension. Speaking of...

4) Why did they shift from a performance review to a district review, anyway? I'll grant that a district review is probably a decent idea, but as Chris Fisher has been pointing out relentlessly (to his credit), this stuff costs money. Money the district does not have. Is anyone paying attention besides him? I'd love to start seeing some anonymous comments from District Office employees, teachers, and staff about this whole fiasco, especially when it comes to how much money and time is being pulled from, you know, TEACHING STUDENTS. Some inside dirt would be great. Here: The Express newsroom can be reached at 541-258-3151. Pass it on.

Finally, there is the news that Bo Yates is under investigation by the TSPC based on a complaint filed by Superintendent Robinson. I don't actually have anything to say about that, but it could prove to be an important detail.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let's say their reasoning is "Robinson can read minds." That seems to be the most entertaining.

Unknown said...

Hi again,

Just read your post about the school board meeting article. If you pasted together a couple of the members' comments, the conclusion that you reach is they are backing away from the "evaluation" of "Robinson" to an "investigation" of "programs" because otherwise they will get their (own) pants sued off -- and rightly so.

Fisher kept saying that he was not going to put his family's finances at risk by doing something illegal and he was the one who said that it is an investigation not an evaluation. When reminded of the liability issue by Fisher, all of the board members got in line and started talking about "programs."

The obvious conclusion is that the lawyer fully informed them of their personal liability for illegal actions and that the majority of the board is still so dumb to think that they can find cause to terminate Robinson's contract. The fact that they have not even identified any actions for investigation that would be clear wrong-doing by Robinson (sex with students, taking his wife on a cruise on the district's dime, or robbing a bank) means that there is no grounds even for an investigation, let alone termination.

Hometown insanity is exactly the right characterization.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.