- if you're going to ask the local education blogger not to liveblog the meeting, maybe don't invite the editor of the Telegram and Gazette editorial page. And his notebook
- good question from WPS admin on impacts on non-zone schools. It's worth noting that one of the innovations many innovation schools don't choose is budget, because they're a pain to manage. I don't say that flippantly; they are. And zone schools are only responsible for themselves, while school committees are responsible for all of their schools.
- worth noting: the zone schools get 80% of the per pupil. Empower takes 3%. It's like double overhead.
- Gabrieli told a small story of how one school was not opting for district special ed services, as an illustration, I believe, of competition. The school district, however, remains legally liable for the students in the zone; if the school doesn't fulfill the special ed needs, it will be the district getting sued.
Showing posts with label Gabrieli. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gabrieli. Show all posts
Saturday, May 5, 2018
A few things that didn't fit into the Empower post
Empower whom?
As someone who does go to meetings about public education during the day, I remain acutely and uncomfortably aware as I do of who cannot. If you work a 9 to 5 job with a half hour for lunch--let alone if you work three jobs with no time for lunch at all--there's a decent chance you're not going to the Board of Education, nor any of the sort of think-tank type meetings that swirl around education, as much else.
Public education belongs to all of us, however, and the more business that is done in places removed from the public eye and public access, the weaker our democracy is, as public education is the foundation of democracy (as always, not my opinion; the state's Constitutional argument for public education).
Thus it was that Empower Schools presented earlier this week at noon on a weekday to a conference room at lunch.
While it's generally referenced as "non-profit," Empower doesn't appear to have an independent tax existence; its 990 form is that of the National Center on Time and Learning/ Mass 2020, which were ("are" in the case of NCTL; Mass2020 doesn't appear to have an online presence any longer) earlier projects and interests of Chris Gabrieli, in that case on extended learning time (NCTL he founded in 2007 as an outgrowth of Mass2020 which he founded in 2000). He also (in between Empower and NCTL) founded Transforming Education in 2009.
Gabrieli, who now mostly is in the public eye due to his position as Chair of the Board of Higher Ed and in Empower, at one point was best known for having run for governor in the Democratic primary in 2006 after races for lieutenant governor in 2002 and Congress in 1998. After he lost to Deval Patrick in the primary, Patrick appointed him to chair the Springfield Finance Control Board, which ran municipal finances from 2004 to 2009. He made his money (before all of this) as a venture capitalist of which this quote from the article regarding Gabrieli's run for governor is on point:
Note, by the way, that it isn't that Gabrieli is making anything out of this; he doesn't draw a salary, per the 990 from Empower, and by all accounts, he doesn't need to.
You don't only buy things with money, however.
The opening of his presentation is indicative of where this is coming from:
This may answer why in Worcester Gabrieli was talking more about "innovation zones" and less about turnaround. The innovations outlined may look familiar to those who know Massachusetts innovation schools:
I put a few other things that didn't fit here in this post.
Public education belongs to all of us, however, and the more business that is done in places removed from the public eye and public access, the weaker our democracy is, as public education is the foundation of democracy (as always, not my opinion; the state's Constitutional argument for public education).
Thus it was that Empower Schools presented earlier this week at noon on a weekday to a conference room at lunch.
While it's generally referenced as "non-profit," Empower doesn't appear to have an independent tax existence; its 990 form is that of the National Center on Time and Learning/ Mass 2020, which were ("are" in the case of NCTL; Mass2020 doesn't appear to have an online presence any longer) earlier projects and interests of Chris Gabrieli, in that case on extended learning time (NCTL he founded in 2007 as an outgrowth of Mass2020 which he founded in 2000). He also (in between Empower and NCTL) founded Transforming Education in 2009.
Gabrieli, who now mostly is in the public eye due to his position as Chair of the Board of Higher Ed and in Empower, at one point was best known for having run for governor in the Democratic primary in 2006 after races for lieutenant governor in 2002 and Congress in 1998. After he lost to Deval Patrick in the primary, Patrick appointed him to chair the Springfield Finance Control Board, which ran municipal finances from 2004 to 2009. He made his money (before all of this) as a venture capitalist of which this quote from the article regarding Gabrieli's run for governor is on point:
"You're always conceptually selling," Hardymon, a professor at Harvard Business School, said of the venture business. "You have to shape ideas and get people to buy into them. That's the raw material he had in spades."And essentially, that's what the meeting was: this was Empower's sales pitch.
Note, by the way, that it isn't that Gabrieli is making anything out of this; he doesn't draw a salary, per the 990 from Empower, and by all accounts, he doesn't need to.
You don't only buy things with money, however.
The opening of his presentation is indicative of where this is coming from:
Okay, so that's Camden Public Schools whose "governance change" was state takeover under Governor Christie in 2013; Denver Public Schools whose "governance change" was a pro-charter board and superintendent (no longer the case); two mayoral-control cities; the iZones, which are more of the "innovation zone" models; the Education Achievement Authority of Michigan ("could fairly be regarded as a train wreck of educational policy") and the (New Orleans) Recovery School District (which I really hope someone's been writing a book or two on) which is going away; teacher-powered schools (which appears to include everything from Mission Hill to the BTU pilot), the Mind Trust (which grew from the "hey let's let the Indianapolis mayor allow for charter schools" idea), pilot schools in LA, and the Boston Teachers' Union logo, which I assume is a reference to the Boston Teachers Union School.
So: State control; charterizing; mayoral control; innovation schools; or teacher-run schools...pretty much covers those examples.
Which brings me back to the question of whom we are empowering here?
The state run districts clearly have removed power from anywhere near the people who live in the place the schools are. While mayoral control generally is argued for as "making one person responsible," it has generally meant that those who care about schools don't have a place to go with their concerns (particularly when it comes to political action). Charters, we know, don't answer to their communities (and don't have to). Pilots and teacher-run schools may answer to those inside the building; it's not always clear if they anwer to those outside the building.
We've been living in an age of accountability; it is stunning to hear advocated that the local ability to hold accountable those running the schools should be removed.
Empower itself doesn't have a lot of evidence that what they're doing is working on turnaround in Springfield (link is to my notes from their Board of Ed presentation earlier this school year). Empower, of course, came into Springfield as a result of the threat of state takeover, a question about which Gabrieli ducked at his presentation this week. And this is Springfield's third year. That may explain why the Empowerment Zone in Springfield is now interested in other methods of assessment beyond the test scores that brought them into Springfield:
Springfield is doing this:
One wonders if they should talk to MCIEA. In any case, the irony is rich.
Why this would be necessary in a district with nine innovation schools (as many as Boston) which have the same ability to create and use autonomies that the zone schools do would be impossible to understand were it not for the one district: they don't answer to a publicly elected board.
"School committees come and go; superintendents come and go," said Gabrieli when asked what might preclude the school committee from creating a zone. And thus one wants a "zone" outside the elected and appointed process, so it will continue forward, come what may.
Perhaps there are some to whom that sounds like a good thing; to me, it sounds invented by someone who doesn't understand democratic goverance (and if that sounds ironic from me, imagine that). Local democracy is messy, and thus is harder to control; that was much of the discussion of Jennifer Berkshire and Jack Schneider's conversation last June about school boards. It also continually brings me back to this column on democracy being a two-way street when it comes to schools.
The local body has to answer to the whole community, even those outside the innovation creation. They have to take questions at public meetings that have to be publicly accessible.
Local democratic governance isn't perfect--there's a reason why there are, for example, civil rights oversight of districts--but to paraphrase Churchill, it beats the others that have been tried.
I put a few other things that didn't fit here in this post.
Monday, April 30, 2018
If you're not at the table, you're on the menu...and guess who is coming to lunch?
First they tried the ballot box, and that failed.
Then they tried the Legislature, and so far, that's stalling (Fingers crossed, of course).
So what do they have left? Private influence.
I speak here of the general notion that it's okay to not have local democratic oversight of one's schools. That was, we know, one of the main two reasons--the other being funding--that Question 2 lost last year.
I've previously on the blog referred to this whole notion as the "zombie" bill, because it will not die, no matter how often it appears to be beaten back.
And now it's coming to Worcester as a "possibility" being presented by the Worcester Education Collaborative "[a]s we head into the next phase our strategic plan work."
You won't find it on their website or their Facebook page, because unless you are among the "leaders of our city’s key sectors," you probably didn't get the email inviting you to a series of lunches now that the strategic plan is out, discussing "novel aspects of the plan or the external factors that may impact bringing it fully to fruition."*
Unless Chris Gabrieli himself is coming to present on how the Empowerment Zone "may impact bringing [the strategic plan] fully to fruition," I'm going go with this being a "novel aspect of the plan" (on which more this week, I promise) even though it is not mentioned anywhere in the plan, unless it's being presented as a "demonstrated best practice regionally" on page 11.
My understanding is that one idea that had been floated during the strategic plan process--but failed--is that of an appointed school committee. As that is the first "novel aspect" that one notes of the Empowerment Zone in Springfield--they do not answer to Springfield's elected school committee--the zombie continues onward.
The Springfield Empowerment Zone currently runs all of Springfield's middle schools and one high school. They have been presented as the Massachusetts poster child of "Third Way Education," the notion that public schools and charter schools can coordinate (which gets some nice debunking here). It's a little odd, though, because the bill that's actually being considered isn't even how Springfield's zone runs, and thus expansion is vehemently opposed (with reason) by the teachers' unions.
The one thing that the Empowerment Zone has had going for it right along, of course, is a stratospheric level of support from Governor Baker and Secretary Peyser, and an unparallel amount of press coverage (no, I'm not going to link. Go Google it if you like.). While one assumes this will not garner local press coverage (as it isn't public) unless carefully selected, meeting with carefully selected "leaders" is of course precisely how one goes about circumventing the democratic--and public--process.
The one thing it hasn't had is any results worth pointing to. Yeah, still.
My fear, of course, is given the Worcester bubble (we don't do a great job of keeping up with things happening elsewhere), this will just sound like a novel idea to Worcester's leaders and they'll be on board.
It's up to us to make sure they know better.
I should perhaps also point out that this goes back to the very concerning opening of the Worcester Education Collaborative, which eight years ago launched by having Paul Grogan come out from the Boston Foundation, who not surprisingly used his time to laud charter schools.
I'll close the same way I closed a blog post on this from last year:
__________________
*yeah, me, either. Good sources.
Then they tried the Legislature, and so far, that's stalling (Fingers crossed, of course).
So what do they have left? Private influence.
I speak here of the general notion that it's okay to not have local democratic oversight of one's schools. That was, we know, one of the main two reasons--the other being funding--that Question 2 lost last year.
I've previously on the blog referred to this whole notion as the "zombie" bill, because it will not die, no matter how often it appears to be beaten back.
And now it's coming to Worcester as a "possibility" being presented by the Worcester Education Collaborative "[a]s we head into the next phase our strategic plan work."
You won't find it on their website or their Facebook page, because unless you are among the "leaders of our city’s key sectors," you probably didn't get the email inviting you to a series of lunches now that the strategic plan is out, discussing "novel aspects of the plan or the external factors that may impact bringing it fully to fruition."*
Unless Chris Gabrieli himself is coming to present on how the Empowerment Zone "may impact bringing [the strategic plan] fully to fruition," I'm going go with this being a "novel aspect of the plan" (on which more this week, I promise) even though it is not mentioned anywhere in the plan, unless it's being presented as a "demonstrated best practice regionally" on page 11.
My understanding is that one idea that had been floated during the strategic plan process--but failed--is that of an appointed school committee. As that is the first "novel aspect" that one notes of the Empowerment Zone in Springfield--they do not answer to Springfield's elected school committee--the zombie continues onward.
The Springfield Empowerment Zone currently runs all of Springfield's middle schools and one high school. They have been presented as the Massachusetts poster child of "Third Way Education," the notion that public schools and charter schools can coordinate (which gets some nice debunking here). It's a little odd, though, because the bill that's actually being considered isn't even how Springfield's zone runs, and thus expansion is vehemently opposed (with reason) by the teachers' unions.
The one thing that the Empowerment Zone has had going for it right along, of course, is a stratospheric level of support from Governor Baker and Secretary Peyser, and an unparallel amount of press coverage (no, I'm not going to link. Go Google it if you like.). While one assumes this will not garner local press coverage (as it isn't public) unless carefully selected, meeting with carefully selected "leaders" is of course precisely how one goes about circumventing the democratic--and public--process.
The one thing it hasn't had is any results worth pointing to. Yeah, still.
My fear, of course, is given the Worcester bubble (we don't do a great job of keeping up with things happening elsewhere), this will just sound like a novel idea to Worcester's leaders and they'll be on board.
It's up to us to make sure they know better.
I should perhaps also point out that this goes back to the very concerning opening of the Worcester Education Collaborative, which eight years ago launched by having Paul Grogan come out from the Boston Foundation, who not surprisingly used his time to laud charter schools.
I'll close the same way I closed a blog post on this from last year:
Calling such institutions "empowerment zones" is rather like calling subdivisions "Forest Way," in that it represents what isn't there. The first thing that happens with an empowerment zone, after all, is the school committee votes to surrender its authority to a board elected by, and representing, no one.
Consider this a warning. As always, you aren't going to see this happen in the suburbs.
__________________
*yeah, me, either. Good sources.
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
Joint Board of Ed meeting
The K-12 Board of Ed meets jointly with the Higher Ed Board this morning at Bridgewater State. They'll be talking about early college and about MCAS.
Then the K-12 Board has its regular meeting.
scheduled to start at 9...we'll see...
meeting called to order; members now introducing themselves. As I don't know the Higher Ed members, I'll do my best.
Bridgewater State president introducing his campus, which is the state's single largest producer of teachers.
Commissioner Chester: terrific discussion, to advance a conversation,
focused on early college
Then the K-12 Board has its regular meeting.
scheduled to start at 9...we'll see...
meeting called to order; members now introducing themselves. As I don't know the Higher Ed members, I'll do my best.
Bridgewater State president introducing his campus, which is the state's single largest producer of teachers.
Commissioner Chester: terrific discussion, to advance a conversation,
focused on early college
Thursday, January 19, 2017
Rennie Center's Conditions of Education in the Commonwealth
...which they've titled "Putting Students at the Center of Reform"
liveblogging once it starts at 8:30
Note: the report they're releasing today is here
Chad d'Entremont, Executive Director, Rennie Center
"visualize a child learning"
shares photos of kids being active, outside, engaged
not in classroom rows...or is it?
frameworks still largely built around a one-size fits all approach
state has accomplished a tremendous amount through the '93 reform law
suggest not that we lose that, that we build upon it
need to address blind spots, find ways to move forward
asking the question and planning for what comes next
liveblogging once it starts at 8:30
Note: the report they're releasing today is here
Chad d'Entremont, Executive Director, Rennie Center
"visualize a child learning"
shares photos of kids being active, outside, engaged
not in classroom rows...or is it?
frameworks still largely built around a one-size fits all approach
state has accomplished a tremendous amount through the '93 reform law
suggest not that we lose that, that we build upon it
need to address blind spots, find ways to move forward
asking the question and planning for what comes next
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
May Board of Education: Springfield Empowerment Zone Partnership
the backup is here
per the backup: SEZP is:
"really neat to have in front of us today" those working in Springfield
The Board of SEZP is as follows:
Chester: Gabrieli "was a key" contact with me, "aren't there measures short of receivership"
And the union, "very vital to us" in this partnership
MOU between and among DESE
School district "has appointed a board to receivership of middle schools
"this is a very promising approach to thinking about middle schools"
and I'm not going to be able to keep track of who is saying what here, as their backs are to me in a gym and they have no place cards
Gabrieli: excited to share this, level of collaboration is very high
"ultimately what matters is the results of the students"
DESE's willingness to think out of the box
"not directly obvious from the regulations but clearly well within them"
9 middle schools in Springfield serving 4000 students had Level 4 status
81% it says economically disadvantaged...I don't think that can be right
the state has four members; the city has three
Legal agreement between Zone, Springfield, and DESE approved in a 6-1 vote of the School Committee
new teachers' contract, modeled on Lawrence's contract: all working conditions are at the school level; ELT is "affordable" and no lanes; steps based on "merit"
Superintendent speaks of great flexibility in contract
"this kind of autonomy I would have loved as a principal"
"This teachers' contract is really a model for the state"
Gabrieli interested in expanding zones elsewhere in MA
SEZP believes "schools are a fundamental unit of change"
"school performance distributes on a bell curve and we have an obligation to move that curve to the right"
"pretty similar to the strategy we've taken in Lawrence"
"SEZP educators have broad autonomy"
Principals "create plans with solutions that fit a school's specific needs"
current performance analyzed>>principal and leadership team vote on operation plan>>SEZP approves plan
Principal says "how I was ever a principal before this, I don't know"
"what we truly do with that hour" (of ELT)
"intervention and attacking the trends and the needs of our schools"
reading class in addition to regular ELA
nine schools are all completely different: gifted program, social justice program
program "that best supports the students and the staff as well"
middle schools (in response to Q from Sagan) are assigned by address
visited Lawrence on numerous occasions; borrowed best practices across the state
reading program is geared towards our proficient students "and that's why we received the scores we did on our PARCC"
one hour of reading intervention each day, one hour of math intervention each day
Gabrieli "some framework to doing this all aggressively"
"schools are at the top of the triangle"
"active coach" of consultants that "were brought on"
Achievement Network: consultant that "makes sure we're true to our operational plan" in a one hour meeting with the principal, hiring, observations of teachers
"acceleration academy strategy" as in Lawrence "we've chosen to do only math" so far
now speaking of Teach Western Mass recruitment
quality of life, advertising to attract teachers at this point, at some point to move towards retaining teachers on the spot
SEZP holding schools accountable "configuration changes can include partnership with independent organizations like UP Education Network" opening UP Academy Kennedy this fall
Gabrieli: "the two leaders speak to the kind of leadership you can attract"
Founders Fellow program moving particular people into Springfield
"sustainable collaborative governance" says Gabrieli
Gabrieli: "there are early signs of progress" though not much academic evidence
could hire earlier than last year
Morton: "this partnership takes courage"
"everyone has to give something up"
"almost as if the entire city of Springfield has wrapped itself around the Zone"
Doherty: is there a long range vision of expanding up to high school or down to elementary?
"looking at some of these as best practices" which are being shared out to other schools
Sagan: same contract in place at others?
Warwick: This contract applies only to zone; "a lot that we do have in place at other levels" and progress is strong at other levels"
Gabrieli: would rather have parents, teachers, principals come to the conclusion that this might be needed
Warwick: there are other middle schools (than these) outside the zone
Moriarty: (from Holyoke) MOU with receiver, now described as an alternative school
"partnerships are hard"; mid-level admin, others resented receiver brought in
reciever was seen as an imposition; is there a good process, "a good ventilation system, if you will," if either partner is not happy
Gabrieli: each school is very clear who the decision makers are
biweekly check-in meetings (I don't know who is talking right now) collaborate as partners
what's going on across the zone
Warwick: behind it 100%, won't tolerate anyone not being behind it 100%
Peyser: interesting to see this kind of change in our public education system
do you see this as school turnaround or a long-term governance strategy?
Gabrieli: an early question
"spirit in which we all entered this was going into novel territory"
"it's not the state doing some alone, it's not the district doing something alone, it's partners"
"is it necessary"
"goal is not to have an automatic end"
Warwick: a lot more learning to be done in this
"I just love this contract; I wish it were in place when I was a principal"
improve this work, build on it
Morton: have there been an exodus of parents from the schools?
Warwick: has been a lot of positive press, haven't had any requests
extended time, extended PD for staff
Gabrieli: parents know relatively less of this than we do, see schools that are changing
"very committed to data collection"
"net health of the school"
Sagan: talent pool, talent drain: not necessarily able to attract staff
"Holyoke trading best people and not attracting new talent" which was debunked by the Commissioner previously
Principal: no competition, the job fairs have been huge
collaboration helps everyone, "we're all in this together"
want to recruit the best talent
Chester: don't see the talent question as limited to western Mass, particularly for turnaround principals
teaching pool: one thing to think about opening an elementary slot, another to think about opening a high school chemistry slot
some inventive things happening
discussions with UMass Amherst; not affordable housing for their faculty in the area, talking about housing in Holyoke
in Springfield, too many schools were stuck
"very aggressive" choices made by state
"some level of disruption to the status quo"
avoiding state receivership, keeps schools in the hands of the school committee (it does?) but protects the schools from business as usual
per the backup: SEZP is:
a groundbreaking voluntary partnership of Springfield Public Schools (SPS), the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), the Springfield Education Association (SEA), and Empower Schools aimed at rapidly improving outcomes for Springfield's middle school studentsChester: this Board knows the work of receiverships in schools and districts, work done with Level 4 schools as well
"really neat to have in front of us today" those working in Springfield
The Board of SEZP is as follows:
SEZP Board - SEZP has a 7-member board that governs the nonprofit. Four members are appointed by the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education to serve 5-year terms; the other three members represent the Springfield community in their official capacities. The current board members are: Chris Gabrieli, Chairman; James Morton; Beverly Holmes; John Davis; Domenic J. Sarno (in his role as Mayor of Springfield); Daniel J. Warwick (in his role as Superintendent of SPS); Chris Collins (in his role as Vice Chairman of the Springfield School Committee)
Chester: Gabrieli "was a key" contact with me, "aren't there measures short of receivership"
And the union, "very vital to us" in this partnership
MOU between and among DESE
School district "has appointed a board to receivership of middle schools
"this is a very promising approach to thinking about middle schools"
and I'm not going to be able to keep track of who is saying what here, as their backs are to me in a gym and they have no place cards
Gabrieli: excited to share this, level of collaboration is very high
"ultimately what matters is the results of the students"
DESE's willingness to think out of the box
"not directly obvious from the regulations but clearly well within them"
9 middle schools in Springfield serving 4000 students had Level 4 status
81% it says economically disadvantaged...I don't think that can be right
the state has four members; the city has three
Legal agreement between Zone, Springfield, and DESE approved in a 6-1 vote of the School Committee
new teachers' contract, modeled on Lawrence's contract: all working conditions are at the school level; ELT is "affordable" and no lanes; steps based on "merit"
Superintendent speaks of great flexibility in contract
"this kind of autonomy I would have loved as a principal"
"This teachers' contract is really a model for the state"
Gabrieli interested in expanding zones elsewhere in MA
SEZP believes "schools are a fundamental unit of change"
"school performance distributes on a bell curve and we have an obligation to move that curve to the right"
"pretty similar to the strategy we've taken in Lawrence"
"SEZP educators have broad autonomy"
Principals "create plans with solutions that fit a school's specific needs"
current performance analyzed>>principal and leadership team vote on operation plan>>SEZP approves plan
Principal says "how I was ever a principal before this, I don't know"
"what we truly do with that hour" (of ELT)
"intervention and attacking the trends and the needs of our schools"
reading class in addition to regular ELA
nine schools are all completely different: gifted program, social justice program
program "that best supports the students and the staff as well"
middle schools (in response to Q from Sagan) are assigned by address
visited Lawrence on numerous occasions; borrowed best practices across the state
reading program is geared towards our proficient students "and that's why we received the scores we did on our PARCC"
one hour of reading intervention each day, one hour of math intervention each day
Gabrieli "some framework to doing this all aggressively"
"schools are at the top of the triangle"
"active coach" of consultants that "were brought on"
Achievement Network: consultant that "makes sure we're true to our operational plan" in a one hour meeting with the principal, hiring, observations of teachers
"acceleration academy strategy" as in Lawrence "we've chosen to do only math" so far
now speaking of Teach Western Mass recruitment
quality of life, advertising to attract teachers at this point, at some point to move towards retaining teachers on the spot
SEZP holding schools accountable "configuration changes can include partnership with independent organizations like UP Education Network" opening UP Academy Kennedy this fall
Gabrieli: "the two leaders speak to the kind of leadership you can attract"
Founders Fellow program moving particular people into Springfield
"sustainable collaborative governance" says Gabrieli
Gabrieli: "there are early signs of progress" though not much academic evidence
could hire earlier than last year
Morton: "this partnership takes courage"
"everyone has to give something up"
"almost as if the entire city of Springfield has wrapped itself around the Zone"
Doherty: is there a long range vision of expanding up to high school or down to elementary?
"looking at some of these as best practices" which are being shared out to other schools
Sagan: same contract in place at others?
Warwick: This contract applies only to zone; "a lot that we do have in place at other levels" and progress is strong at other levels"
Gabrieli: would rather have parents, teachers, principals come to the conclusion that this might be needed
Warwick: there are other middle schools (than these) outside the zone
Moriarty: (from Holyoke) MOU with receiver, now described as an alternative school
"partnerships are hard"; mid-level admin, others resented receiver brought in
reciever was seen as an imposition; is there a good process, "a good ventilation system, if you will," if either partner is not happy
Gabrieli: each school is very clear who the decision makers are
biweekly check-in meetings (I don't know who is talking right now) collaborate as partners
what's going on across the zone
Warwick: behind it 100%, won't tolerate anyone not being behind it 100%
Peyser: interesting to see this kind of change in our public education system
do you see this as school turnaround or a long-term governance strategy?
Gabrieli: an early question
"spirit in which we all entered this was going into novel territory"
"it's not the state doing some alone, it's not the district doing something alone, it's partners"
"is it necessary"
"goal is not to have an automatic end"
Warwick: a lot more learning to be done in this
"I just love this contract; I wish it were in place when I was a principal"
improve this work, build on it
Morton: have there been an exodus of parents from the schools?
Warwick: has been a lot of positive press, haven't had any requests
extended time, extended PD for staff
Gabrieli: parents know relatively less of this than we do, see schools that are changing
"very committed to data collection"
"net health of the school"
Sagan: talent pool, talent drain: not necessarily able to attract staff
"Holyoke trading best people and not attracting new talent" which was debunked by the Commissioner previously
Principal: no competition, the job fairs have been huge
collaboration helps everyone, "we're all in this together"
want to recruit the best talent
Chester: don't see the talent question as limited to western Mass, particularly for turnaround principals
teaching pool: one thing to think about opening an elementary slot, another to think about opening a high school chemistry slot
some inventive things happening
discussions with UMass Amherst; not affordable housing for their faculty in the area, talking about housing in Holyoke
in Springfield, too many schools were stuck
"very aggressive" choices made by state
"some level of disruption to the status quo"
avoiding state receivership, keeps schools in the hands of the school committee (it does?) but protects the schools from business as usual
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)