Chief Academic Officer

Sorry; I only realized this morning that this didn't post last night. This gives some more context to the report from Jackie Reis at the T&G this morning

 
We have a description of the Chief Academic Officer...Administration is asking that this move forward tonight so as to start advertising on Sunday.
O'Connell is concerned about "eligible for" certification rather than having it. He's making the point that this is not a position that you want someone completing a practicum during.
Luster gives the example of a principal who may not have served directly under a superintendent but had met all other requirements (who may even work in the district now)
O'Connell speaks of not wanting "on the job training...(it's) important for the person to do the work"

Monfredo asks that the position require residency within 18 months (he wants this to be part of the advertisement)
Boone: that requirement would disallow people who work for us NOW to not be eligible: "that concerns me" Cites that most Massachusetts superintendents do not live in the districts that they lead
O'Connell cites that Jim Garvey lived in Auburn and moved when he was appointed; Caradonio also moved when appointed; Mulqueen moved at his contract extension
Foley suggests making it part of the conversation during the interview process; O'Connell concerned about letting people know up front
Biancheria says "there shouldn't be a question of embracing our city...if it affects the pool that will apply, so be it...should be proud to put that on the advertisement"
Vote goes 5-2 on including a residency requirement in the advertisement (Foley and Novick against)

Novick asks that we including teaching experience (that will be included in the interview process) and asks that we move communication up the list to required. Done.
School Committee to get periodic updates on the process as it goes forward: will happen
Advertisement to start this weekend