IE will be out-of-contact with a computer from about noon December 24 through January 6.
If you have a comment to share, please send it by noon December 24 so I can post it. Otherwise, catch you next year! Stay safe! Savor the season!
May our voices come together in greater harmony next year.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Saturday, December 22, 2007
The "underlying" issues
Several people commenting have referred to long-term or underlying issues in our community around schools: That our school system has historically struggled with conflict around what's best for our district. To my memory, our current situation is the worst yet, but I do recall prior significant issues with superintendents and school boards in my 32 years living here.
I recall years ago Lebanon was known for having some of the highest teacher/administrative salaries in the state, but my understanding is this is no longer true. I know that the state-mandated unification years ago, that sucked resources and local control from outlying elementary school districts and swallowed them into one Lebanon Community Schools District, left many of us angry and upset, but that was many years ago. I wouldn't imagine this is still an issue, though it seemed there were more resources in rural schools before this change, which was mandated by state law.
But there have been many other factors impacting our schools over the years. Mills closed and families struggled, creating more stress on school systems dealing with students more in need of parenting, nurturing and social skills than ever before. Monies available for schools are down, so there are fewer dollars and yet more services needed than ever before. Our economy is more diversified these days, but we still suffer high unemployment rates.
But these changes don't seem like what one would call "underlying issues" driving conflict. It would be great if people would write on the nature of the "underlying issues" they see continuing to plague us. Maybe some of you will shed some light.
I recall years ago Lebanon was known for having some of the highest teacher/administrative salaries in the state, but my understanding is this is no longer true. I know that the state-mandated unification years ago, that sucked resources and local control from outlying elementary school districts and swallowed them into one Lebanon Community Schools District, left many of us angry and upset, but that was many years ago. I wouldn't imagine this is still an issue, though it seemed there were more resources in rural schools before this change, which was mandated by state law.
But there have been many other factors impacting our schools over the years. Mills closed and families struggled, creating more stress on school systems dealing with students more in need of parenting, nurturing and social skills than ever before. Monies available for schools are down, so there are fewer dollars and yet more services needed than ever before. Our economy is more diversified these days, but we still suffer high unemployment rates.
But these changes don't seem like what one would call "underlying issues" driving conflict. It would be great if people would write on the nature of the "underlying issues" they see continuing to plague us. Maybe some of you will shed some light.
Employment contracts
Thought I'd start a new thread on contracts for school employees, since several have commented on this topic under the post on church services at LHS. Dennis said he believes rolling three-year contracts are common with superintendents in Oregon, but says he has not verified that. I would imagine he is correct, but would appreciate any knowledge other readers have on this. Again, I see this blog as a place for information exchange and respectful opinion sharing, not me having all the information or answers.
I can see how a rolling three-year contract could generally help a superintendent commit to a community, as being a superintendent is probably by nature, a contentious position and, regardless, we all like as much job security as we can get. Here's the way I could see that working if the superintendent is not meeting community needs: The school board becomes enough disgruntled with a superintendent to decide not to renew the three-year roll. So the superindentent has two years to find another job, or meet board expectations so that the following year, the two-year contract is renewed with another three-year contract, or another two-year contract, or is non-renewed and the superintendent has a year to find a new job.
The concept of needing to formally evaluate to decide whether to renew a contract seems odd, since it is a contract only for the set period of time. It seems like renewing it would be optional.
And does anyone know if a superintendent can legally break their contract and move to another district in the midst of a three-year contract? It seems like administrators take new jobs routinely, just like the rest of us. Do they all wait until the end of a rolling-three year period that rolls on perpetually, which would make it impossible for them to ever leave? I don't think most give three-year notice that they plan to leave, and then don't sign on each year for another three. This makes no sense. No one could ever leave a job if they were continually locked in to a three-year contract.
Can administrators break their contracts, but school boards must vote to continue them indefinitely unless they conduct a formal evaluation or they can be sued for not renewing a contract? Surely other school boards in Oregon have had a superintendent that no longer worked for them. How did those superintendents end up leaving those communities?
I can see how a rolling three-year contract could generally help a superintendent commit to a community, as being a superintendent is probably by nature, a contentious position and, regardless, we all like as much job security as we can get. Here's the way I could see that working if the superintendent is not meeting community needs: The school board becomes enough disgruntled with a superintendent to decide not to renew the three-year roll. So the superindentent has two years to find another job, or meet board expectations so that the following year, the two-year contract is renewed with another three-year contract, or another two-year contract, or is non-renewed and the superintendent has a year to find a new job.
The concept of needing to formally evaluate to decide whether to renew a contract seems odd, since it is a contract only for the set period of time. It seems like renewing it would be optional.
And does anyone know if a superintendent can legally break their contract and move to another district in the midst of a three-year contract? It seems like administrators take new jobs routinely, just like the rest of us. Do they all wait until the end of a rolling-three year period that rolls on perpetually, which would make it impossible for them to ever leave? I don't think most give three-year notice that they plan to leave, and then don't sign on each year for another three. This makes no sense. No one could ever leave a job if they were continually locked in to a three-year contract.
Can administrators break their contracts, but school boards must vote to continue them indefinitely unless they conduct a formal evaluation or they can be sued for not renewing a contract? Surely other school boards in Oregon have had a superintendent that no longer worked for them. How did those superintendents end up leaving those communities?
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Kudos to Coonrod for Chamber speech story
It was helpful to read Coonrod's clarifying account of the school administration's presentation at the Chamber of Commerce lunch last week, but sad to see how Robinson frames the controversy in our district as "an artificial construct." If only that were so.
I do agree with him that, "Someone has to break up the fight." One good way to break up a fight is for one of the fighters to walk away. It doesn't sound like he plans to in the immediate future, though.
When people are elected to oversee a government district, and the hired manager of the district enrages so many customers and disrespects members of the elected governing board, it's time for the board to fire the manager, if he won't resign.
The argument that he has a three-year contract that must be renewed annually or he can sue his employers (the board) for non-renewal makes no sense. Have any of us who aren't employed in public education ever had a deal like that?
I do agree with him that, "Someone has to break up the fight." One good way to break up a fight is for one of the fighters to walk away. It doesn't sound like he plans to in the immediate future, though.
When people are elected to oversee a government district, and the hired manager of the district enrages so many customers and disrespects members of the elected governing board, it's time for the board to fire the manager, if he won't resign.
The argument that he has a three-year contract that must be renewed annually or he can sue his employers (the board) for non-renewal makes no sense. Have any of us who aren't employed in public education ever had a deal like that?
What's with the church services at the high school?
I have long been curious about the apparently well-attended church services held Sundays at LHS. Does this church pay rent to cover the cost of heating/cooling, custodial services, lighting? Is this something we taxpayers are underwriting?
If our district is charging a user fee or rent for hosting these services, that is one thing. But if they are using them free-of-charge and the district covers the costs of building use, that is entirely another matter.
Robinson, it is reported, attends church in Lebanon: I hope it is not the church he attends that uses district facilities.
And can any person or organization ask to use our facilities after school hours and be treated the same as this church? Just curious.
If our district is charging a user fee or rent for hosting these services, that is one thing. But if they are using them free-of-charge and the district covers the costs of building use, that is entirely another matter.
Robinson, it is reported, attends church in Lebanon: I hope it is not the church he attends that uses district facilities.
And can any person or organization ask to use our facilities after school hours and be treated the same as this church? Just curious.
Jackson and the Sand Ridge controversy
An excellent article by Larry Coonrod in this week's Lebanon newspaper notes some problems it appears Jay Jackson has meeting paperwork deadlines. The headline, however, makes it appear he's committed some horrendous crime by not having mailed in paperwork for his state "license" in a timely fashion. A followup article by Jennifer Moody today in the D-H sheds additional light, noting that Jackson says he has now mailed in that missing paperwork.
Now it certainly does appear Jackson could be better organized or make paperwork a higher priority, but those who want to attack anything Sand Ridge (due to the perception it is favored by Alexander and disfavored by Robinson) make him out to be a criminal. I am grateful that the final quote in Moody's story was not cut: There Jackson is quoted as saying,"I am just one of many people who, working together, accomplish the impossible at a charter school every day, with very little support or assistance from the very people who claim we don't do enough fast enough."
Now I don't know Jay Jackson, though I did hear him speak about Sand Ridge at the Town Hall meeting Rick Alexander hosted months ago at the American Legion. He struck me then as a thoughtful and reasonable man, and this quote resonates as something that may be part of the problem.
It seems to me Robinson has long-resented Sand Ridge being established, as it is outside the scope of his immediate control. It also implies that Lebanon Schools, under his leadership, have not met the needs of all students.
I don't imagine it is a small task to start a charter school. To motivate such an undertaking, there must have been enough Lebanon students with caring and dedicated parents who felt their children were seriously under served by our mainstream public schools: Not a flattering reflection on Lebanon schools.
The bloggers noted in today's D-H article, especially LT, seem to dig for anything they can find to discredit anyone who has conflicts with their beloved Jim Robinson. It's a shame these bloggers accuse others of rumor and divisiveness, yet dish up huge servings of these very things themselves.
I do think Sand Ridge and Jackson need to take a hard look at their organization and an apparent pattern of missed deadlines. It's not right, if it's true as reported, that a former Sand Ridge teacher was unable to obtain a teaching credential in another state due to lack of paperwork follow-through by Jackson.
But screaming "illegal" at Jackson over significant-sounding paperwork issues doesn't seem helpful. I think a better approach is to ask ourselves how the district and community can help Jackson meet deadlines, while he does the hard work of running an underfunded school with little help.
Now it certainly does appear Jackson could be better organized or make paperwork a higher priority, but those who want to attack anything Sand Ridge (due to the perception it is favored by Alexander and disfavored by Robinson) make him out to be a criminal. I am grateful that the final quote in Moody's story was not cut: There Jackson is quoted as saying,"I am just one of many people who, working together, accomplish the impossible at a charter school every day, with very little support or assistance from the very people who claim we don't do enough fast enough."
Now I don't know Jay Jackson, though I did hear him speak about Sand Ridge at the Town Hall meeting Rick Alexander hosted months ago at the American Legion. He struck me then as a thoughtful and reasonable man, and this quote resonates as something that may be part of the problem.
It seems to me Robinson has long-resented Sand Ridge being established, as it is outside the scope of his immediate control. It also implies that Lebanon Schools, under his leadership, have not met the needs of all students.
I don't imagine it is a small task to start a charter school. To motivate such an undertaking, there must have been enough Lebanon students with caring and dedicated parents who felt their children were seriously under served by our mainstream public schools: Not a flattering reflection on Lebanon schools.
The bloggers noted in today's D-H article, especially LT, seem to dig for anything they can find to discredit anyone who has conflicts with their beloved Jim Robinson. It's a shame these bloggers accuse others of rumor and divisiveness, yet dish up huge servings of these very things themselves.
I do think Sand Ridge and Jackson need to take a hard look at their organization and an apparent pattern of missed deadlines. It's not right, if it's true as reported, that a former Sand Ridge teacher was unable to obtain a teaching credential in another state due to lack of paperwork follow-through by Jackson.
But screaming "illegal" at Jackson over significant-sounding paperwork issues doesn't seem helpful. I think a better approach is to ask ourselves how the district and community can help Jackson meet deadlines, while he does the hard work of running an underfunded school with little help.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
LT has a mostly good post
I checked out the blog at Lebanonsfortruthandreconciliation.blogspot.com today and was pleased to see a post I mostly agreed with. It's the first LT post I've agreed with, though I haven't read the archives, which may contain others. It's titled "Who is Responsible?" and reviews the roles all of us play in this Lebanon educational dilemma. I encourage you to check out this post. Generally, I don't read this blog due to negative rumors and gossip it spreads and perpetuates in what feels like an arrogant, hostile tone. But this post is softer and seemed more seriously concerned about reconciliation. Thank you, LT. Unfortunately, I don't have the answers to the questions LT asks. LT and I certainly don't agree with my proposed initial step of asking Robinson to resign, and with his role in the district's problems, but at least it seems there are some things we agree on. Noticing aspects of agreement may be another "first step".
My lack of computer skills...
I want to apologize for some typo's in this blog. IE has not yet figured out how to edit when one is in "comment" mode. IE also unsuccessfully spent time looking for a way to create a "new comments" section, so readers can easily notice what is new. You can tell I do not work much with computers, but hopefully will be patient with me, even if you disagree with my views.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Lebanon's high transfer-out rate
The article in the D-H yesterday showing Lebanon with the highest Mid-Valley rate of students transferring to other districts for schooling came as no surprise. Some reasons given, by way of explanation in the article, like parents working out of Lebanon and wanting to transport their children to schools in the town where they work, are probably true in a small number of cases.
The "Westward Ho" frame for this apparent phenomenon was interesting, but seemed an attempt to minimize how poorly these data reflect on our district. It has long seemed that Jennifer Moody's coverage of the district favors the current Robinson crew, rather than objective reporting which unfortunately seems quite out of fashion these days generally.
I would bet most out-of-Lebanon transfers occur at the high school level, and that most really are due to problems getting appropriate courses with the under-funded academy model. It seems that now students are allowed to take classes outside their assigned academies, that situation has improved somewhat.
I have heard of people requesting transfers due to issues with the Lebanon schools, but listing other reasons on transfer-request papers for fear of being denied the transfer if the truth be told. Pretty hard to verify this or run stats, but I know of several people who lied on forms due to fear (realistic or not) they would be turned down listing their true reasons.
The "Westward Ho" frame for this apparent phenomenon was interesting, but seemed an attempt to minimize how poorly these data reflect on our district. It has long seemed that Jennifer Moody's coverage of the district favors the current Robinson crew, rather than objective reporting which unfortunately seems quite out of fashion these days generally.
I would bet most out-of-Lebanon transfers occur at the high school level, and that most really are due to problems getting appropriate courses with the under-funded academy model. It seems that now students are allowed to take classes outside their assigned academies, that situation has improved somewhat.
I have heard of people requesting transfers due to issues with the Lebanon schools, but listing other reasons on transfer-request papers for fear of being denied the transfer if the truth be told. Pretty hard to verify this or run stats, but I know of several people who lied on forms due to fear (realistic or not) they would be turned down listing their true reasons.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Report of Robinson's speech leaves me puzzled
An article in the Democrat-Herald last night discusses an administrative presentation at a Chamber of Commerce lunch: A "State-of-the-Union" speech, so-to-speak, titled the "State of Education in Lebanon."
Did the reporter miss something, or was there nothing to miss? As reported, Robinson decries those who voice opposition to his governance, notes our schools are not preparing students for the future but the way to prepare them is through tecnological advancements that "don't exist yet, but will?" Boy, this really points the way for specific, positive changes!
He notes that LHS will never return to the type of high school most of us remember, and states our current dropout rate of 8% (down from 9.6% seven years ago) prevents us from meeting the federal No Child Left Behind standards. In seven years the dropout rate fell 1.6%! I am wondering if this unimpressive change is even statistically significant.
He complains of the struggles among school board members, and among city council members, and how these weaken community support which then negatively impacts student success. The article concludes by quoting Robinson: "Parents have to be front and center when their school feels threatened."
Well, Mr. Robinson, that is exactly what many of us are doing. Our schools feel threatened: Threatened by your leadership style.
Please Mr. Robinson, Mr. Kelley, and others who have circled-the-wagon around you, please retire, please find work elsewhere.
Parents are standing front and center. Our schools are threatened. There is indeed a need for change. Please be a leader: Take the first step. Resign. Your resignation will not resolve the problems, but you must step down before this community can begin to heal and move forward under positive leadership.
Did the reporter miss something, or was there nothing to miss? As reported, Robinson decries those who voice opposition to his governance, notes our schools are not preparing students for the future but the way to prepare them is through tecnological advancements that "don't exist yet, but will?" Boy, this really points the way for specific, positive changes!
He notes that LHS will never return to the type of high school most of us remember, and states our current dropout rate of 8% (down from 9.6% seven years ago) prevents us from meeting the federal No Child Left Behind standards. In seven years the dropout rate fell 1.6%! I am wondering if this unimpressive change is even statistically significant.
He complains of the struggles among school board members, and among city council members, and how these weaken community support which then negatively impacts student success. The article concludes by quoting Robinson: "Parents have to be front and center when their school feels threatened."
Well, Mr. Robinson, that is exactly what many of us are doing. Our schools feel threatened: Threatened by your leadership style.
Please Mr. Robinson, Mr. Kelley, and others who have circled-the-wagon around you, please retire, please find work elsewhere.
Parents are standing front and center. Our schools are threatened. There is indeed a need for change. Please be a leader: Take the first step. Resign. Your resignation will not resolve the problems, but you must step down before this community can begin to heal and move forward under positive leadership.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Success despite ourselves
What a delightful gift! The LHS choir and band performed spectacularly at last night's holiday concert. Listening to these talented musicians, directed by their talented teachers, in a standing-room-only shabby auditorium, could only fill one with pride and wonder. Here were some of Lebanon's finest high school students, creating professional-sounding music, despite conflicts among those administering their school district, despite problems with scheduling due to the academy system, despite a tired and aged physical facility.
These students were supported and appreciated by parents, relatives, friends, teachers, and community members who initiated well-deserved standing ovations. How heartening that art and art education continues to flourish despite the environment at the top.
These students were supported and appreciated by parents, relatives, friends, teachers, and community members who initiated well-deserved standing ovations. How heartening that art and art education continues to flourish despite the environment at the top.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Role of the School Board
In my opinion the role of school board members is to hire an effective superintendent, then basically let her/him run the show. Board members set policy, and provide leadership and direction. The Oregon School Board's Association may have additional or different thoughts on this, but they don't need to inform my thinking as I don't hold them in particularly high esteem.
It is my belief that when Lebanon hires a top-notch superintendent, one Rick, Josh and Debi respect and who respects them, they will be relieved to collaborate and hand over any reins they are holding.
I disagree with those who argue no quality administrators will take the job, given the publicity about our school board over this last year. Lebanon is a lovely community: We all chose to live here, didn't we? And we truly won't know what the applicant pool looks like until we begin recruiting. I have faith good, qualified people will apply. After all, we have many quality teachers in this district despite it's reputation, though I am sure some have left due to the difficult school district atmosphere.
I am sure Rick, Josh and Debi have better things to do than micromanage this district, which I doubt they are actually doing to the extent some claim. However, being elected to a school board and then repeatedly hearing complaints from citizens about roadblocks parents face dealing with certain administrators, and then being disrespected themselves by these same administrators, might lead a board member to investigate and initiate change. This might indeed lead board members to work for change at the top.
It is my belief that when Lebanon hires a top-notch superintendent, one Rick, Josh and Debi respect and who respects them, they will be relieved to collaborate and hand over any reins they are holding.
I disagree with those who argue no quality administrators will take the job, given the publicity about our school board over this last year. Lebanon is a lovely community: We all chose to live here, didn't we? And we truly won't know what the applicant pool looks like until we begin recruiting. I have faith good, qualified people will apply. After all, we have many quality teachers in this district despite it's reputation, though I am sure some have left due to the difficult school district atmosphere.
I am sure Rick, Josh and Debi have better things to do than micromanage this district, which I doubt they are actually doing to the extent some claim. However, being elected to a school board and then repeatedly hearing complaints from citizens about roadblocks parents face dealing with certain administrators, and then being disrespected themselves by these same administrators, might lead a board member to investigate and initiate change. This might indeed lead board members to work for change at the top.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
A new blog for people concerned about education in Lebanon
Welcome. This site is for all who seriously seek positive change for the Lebanon Community School District. I will go by "IE," and those who have visited the "LT" blog will notice I have views quite different from those LT expresses.
Unlike LT, I will work to state the truth as I see it without name-calling, put-downs, or otherwise arrogant writings. That said, I know I will not do this perfectly, as this is an emotional area of concern, and I am not a perfect person.
While I understand Lebanon has a history of tumultuous relationships between school superintendents and the community, I believe the time has come to support any efforts by our school board to replace current Superintendent Jim Robinson as well as administrators who support his continued presence at the district office.
In recent months it has become increasingly clear that Robinson's reputation, deserved or not,
as a condescending and dismissive administrator who punishes teachers who voice opposition to any of his ideas by transferring them to positions they don't want, has made it impossible for him to effectively administer this district. He needs to resign. Until he does so, this district will continue to muck around in dysfunction.
It's true his resignation will no doubt be followed by a transition fraught with confusion and turmoil, as most transitions are, but it is necessary for any healing to begin. We must somehow end this cycle of lawsuits, accusations, and conflicts without effective resolution. We need a clean slate for healing to begin. Sometimes one must lance a boil, vs. continuing to apply salve and bandages, before positive change is possible.
Since Mr. Robinson has not resigned, it seems he cares more about himself than this community. This should not surprise, since he has a history of making scornful comments about Lebanon and its residents. Some say Robinson has changed. I have seen no true evidence of this, have you?
Unlike LT, I will work to state the truth as I see it without name-calling, put-downs, or otherwise arrogant writings. That said, I know I will not do this perfectly, as this is an emotional area of concern, and I am not a perfect person.
While I understand Lebanon has a history of tumultuous relationships between school superintendents and the community, I believe the time has come to support any efforts by our school board to replace current Superintendent Jim Robinson as well as administrators who support his continued presence at the district office.
In recent months it has become increasingly clear that Robinson's reputation, deserved or not,
as a condescending and dismissive administrator who punishes teachers who voice opposition to any of his ideas by transferring them to positions they don't want, has made it impossible for him to effectively administer this district. He needs to resign. Until he does so, this district will continue to muck around in dysfunction.
It's true his resignation will no doubt be followed by a transition fraught with confusion and turmoil, as most transitions are, but it is necessary for any healing to begin. We must somehow end this cycle of lawsuits, accusations, and conflicts without effective resolution. We need a clean slate for healing to begin. Sometimes one must lance a boil, vs. continuing to apply salve and bandages, before positive change is possible.
Since Mr. Robinson has not resigned, it seems he cares more about himself than this community. This should not surprise, since he has a history of making scornful comments about Lebanon and its residents. Some say Robinson has changed. I have seen no true evidence of this, have you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)