First, the Tulsa World has an editorial calling for the firing of TPS Superintendent Michael Zolkoski, now the Tulsa chapter of the NAACP is calling for his ouster. What are people's thoughts on this, and if he isn't fired, how does the school district move forward?
Yeah, I think when the ship hits an iceberg the captain carries the blame. He brought this concept from Texas. That is where it should have stayed. My experience with these youth boot camps (one of my family members got the treatment) is that they are open to abusive treatment from DI wannabes often with poor oversight. Parents don't find out about it till way later. Same thing happened here apparently.
They make old geezers happy though, "what these young'uns need is more discipline!" yeah, like running till you drop and being refused water really helps turn kids around. And the success rates are about equal to the lawsuits generated. Even if the teachers/administrators were poorly prepared, it was his plan and his responsibility to follow up.
I don't know the superintendent personally, so I don't know if it is fair to say this, but I have yet to meet a single person that has a kind word to say about him. I haven't heard anyone in the teaching profession say the think he is doing a good job. I think it is time for him to go.
quote:
Originally posted by buck
First, the Tulsa World has an editorial calling for the firing of TPS Superintendent Michael Zolkoski, now the Tulsa chapter of the NAACP is calling for his ouster.
Look through the archives of the Whirled and you will find the NAACP's only interest in this is to make sure the superintendent is black.
I cant see excluding a qualified candidate based on the color of their skin, but the NAACP has made it a requirement.
Dont get me wrong, Zolkoski is a dipstick with his private police force and press censor, but his race shouldnt be the focus here. The NAACP is in this for the wrong reason and will just distract people from the real issues.
His clock is ticking... I think they're just trying to work out an escape package. Problem is, what do we do now? And why can't Tulsa attract and keep quality superintendents? This situation is not going to help the state of public ed in Tulsa.
Screw superintendents. Assign their duties to the principals, and leave it at that. The principals are the ones who know the needs and problems of their schools, not an all-theory-no-practice executive.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Screw superintendents. Assign their duties to the principals, and leave it at that. The principals are the ones who know the needs and problems of their schools, not an all-theory-no-practice executive.
I fully agree. Superintendants are obsolete, clueless, overpaid and worthless. The principals are the ones that really know what is going on in the schools. With the money they are wasting on morons like Zolkoski they could give principals the tools they need to run their schools.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Screw superintendents. Assign their duties to the principals, and leave it at that. The principals are the ones who know the needs and problems of their schools, not an all-theory-no-practice executive.
Principals could be tasked with more responsibility - but in your scenario, to whom do these principals report? An elected board of citizens who may have no teaching or educational administration experience? Who determines placement of principals? Who sets district-wide policy and oversees performance - with a goal toward the lowest performers rising up to the level of the best schools? There has to be a "buck-stops-here" person, and that person should be someone with real-life experience in public ed administration... not an elected and largely inexperienced board. Tulsa's problem is that the current buck-stops-here person either really does make or is largely perceived as making very bad choices.
The "buck stops here" is the principal.
More here:
http://www.williamouchi.com/booksum.html
I agree the principals make the real decisions, and with TPS being a large district they have some really good principals and some not so good ones I'm sure. What gets me as I been reading these stories is the postings on the comments section of the paper, one guy keeps taking shots at the teachers union when most of the articles state the teachers union was complaining about the school back in November, way before the paper, and the other is people posting how the kids that complained to the paper should be seen as heros of some sort. No they shoudn't have been subject to the TAC stuff but I hardly see them as heros since they got caught doing stuff to get them kicked out of their homeschool to begin with. The one kid showed up drunk to a football game, was sent to TAC, got out and then got caught with marijuana seeds in his car and got sent back. Now if this was such a bad experience why would you do anything that would get you sent back there?
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
The "buck stops here" is the principal.
More here:
http://www.williamouchi.com/booksum.html
Like I said, principals could assume more responsiblity... but, given this quote from Dr. Ouchi's fact sheet, it seems that even he doesn't believe superintendents should be done away with.
Dr. Ouchi writes: "The picture is one that provokes in me a strong emotional reaction, because I now know that any school superintendent who follows certain management principles can create success — and that there is no excuse for not making every school a success. I have boiled down these lessons into an essence of seven key elements that distinguish successful schools and school districts, and in this book I pass them along to you so that you can help your school to be
successful."I like Dr. Ouchi's idea that there should be more "local"/at school site control. Hire motivated, professional and help them implement unique strategies for success. What works at Carnegie Elementary in south Tulsa isn't the same thing that will work at Springdale up north. (Perhaps rigidity and a one-size-fits-all approach are at the core of NCLB's problems?) However, you still need someone seasoned who can assess success and hold the principals accountable, make sure the district is in compliance with all Dept of Ed regs and coordinate district-wide initiatives (yes, even with local control, there would and should be district-wide programs). Having an unique culture at each school makes sense, however, for the sake of students moving between schools and educators/administrators advacing through our system, there must be demonstrated commitment to shared core values throughout the district.
Someone has to provide direction and be responsible. My only insight is that the last few superintendents have come from outside the local system and have had a hard time understanding Tulsa (doesn't everyone?). It might be time to look within our own region for qualified candidates whether they be from the ranks of public school principals or administrators. People have a tendency to revere their local principal until they face a problem with them and realize their weanesses.
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
I'm trying to envision what a School Board meeting would look like if TPS had no superintendent. Would there be 50 principals reporting on their budgets? Would there be 50 budgets, one for each school?
I'm all for lowering administrative costs as much as possible, but doing away with the Superintendent isn't a very good idea.
I work with a man whose wife is a TPS elementary teacher. She said the current Superintendent wants to make all of the TPS schools charter schools. Sounds like a bad idea to me.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
Our current president does not meet those stringent qualifications.
Originally posted by pmcalk.
"but I have yet to meet a single person that has a kind word to say about him."
Well we are all going to help Dr Z.... pull the ripcord on his "Golden Parachute"...
There that is so kind it hurts.....
[}:)]
Dr. Z needs to go. He has however been poorly served by his staff at the ESC. No superintendent will be able to deal with the problems in TPS until they make dramatic changes to the staff at the ESC.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
I thought the guy before him was really solid. Just couldn't keep him around.
I thought Sawyer just got old and retired. I didn't like everything that Sawyer did, but Floyd is right, he was solid. He could also play the banjo.
Witch Dr. Z has to go. So do his biggest cheerleaders on the School Board who have co-signed his B.S., carte blanche, Gary Perceful and Matt Livingood. During their tenure on the School Board they have reliably demonstrated a failure to act in the best interest of parents, teachers, students, and support staff, as well as poor judgment in their decisions(not only in regards to the TAC scandal, but on numerous other issues), often in the face of overwhelming public sentiment against their decisions or positions. If public officials aren't representing the will of the public, then who are they really representing? They are both piss poor excuses for public servants who should do the honorable thing, take responsibility for their incompetence, and resign effective immediately so elections can be held to replace them during the regularly scheduled upcoming elections, that way the public can be spared the costs of a special election. I doubt with egos as big as these two have, that either of them will do the honorable thing. They have just about the worst cases of SDS syndrome I've ever seen. It almost takes dysfunction and denial to a whole new level. If they won't resign, they deserve a recall.
I've only had one opportunity to work near the man and he was pretty much an a$$- I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe it was just a bad day but I've heard similar things from other people- So, IF he's that way all the time, adios.
Okay, sounds like there is cause for people to question our superintendent and the school board for a an outright lack of oversight or very lax oversight of the TAC.
These are the most at-risk students, so it would stand to reason that there should be more interest in this program unless the whole unspoken intent in the first place was to warehouse these kids until they dropped out or squeaked by and graduated.
That's all fine and good, I get that. But aren't we really saying we expect someone else to look out for our kids when we assign blame to someone like Zokolski? Politicians keep promising more funds for education and deliver sometimes on those promises, but more funds and someone else's shepherding of our kids doesn't make two whits difference if the parent is not interested nor involved in the child's education.
This is an "alternative" program. Why do most kids wind up in alternative programs? What sort of families do these kids come from? Granted there are some kids who come from "perfect" families who take interest in their education, but not the majority.
What happens next is that parents with limited interest and input in the ultimate success of their children will find a sleazy attorney who will get a class-action settlement against the school district, which will take away funds from programs that help kids who really care to be in school and whose parents care as well.
The whole deal stinks, but if parents would take their responsibility more serious, there would not be a need for alternative schools in the first place.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
I thought the guy before him was really solid. Just couldn't keep him around.
You're right. I think Sawyer was capable and well-respected. I was thinking of the guy before him. And it just seems like the last batch of candidates wasn't that impressive.
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
I thought the guy before him was really solid. Just couldn't keep him around.
You're right. I think Sawyer was capable and well-respected. I was thinking of the guy before him. And it just seems like the last batch of candidates wasn't that impressive.
Wasn't that Thompson? He was really good, but it was pretty clear Tulsa was just a stop on his career path.
They should promote/elect a superintendent from within TPS IMO. Bringing in these people from around the country does no good.
If you bring in someone from a city larger than Tulsa, that person is likely being run out of his previous city for being a complete failure. Thats what I always think when these goofballs show up in Tulsa boasting about how they ran Detroit or some damn place.
If you bring in someone from a city smaller than Tulsa, it may actually be based on success, but they might not have any experience dealing with a school system the size of TPS.
I'm sure there are many qualified, dedicated people currently working in Tulsa who know from first-hand experience what works and doesnt work here, what the needs are, etc. Look at in-house candidates rather than importing another failure.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Basic requirements for next TPS superintendent:
1. Understands subject-verb agreement.
2. Able to express coherent thoughts in speech/writing.
Is it really that hard to get a qualified superintendent? Seems like we've been scraping the barrel for a while.
I thought the guy before him was really solid. Just couldn't keep him around.
You're right. I think Sawyer was capable and well-respected. I was thinking of the guy before him. And it just seems like the last batch of candidates wasn't that impressive.
Wasn't that Thompson? He was really good, but it was pretty clear Tulsa was just a stop on his career path.
Dr. John Thompson. His only achievements as superintendent were wearing a funny looking hat and closing campuses after students were killed in a freak shooting at Wendy's. The folks in the media who tried to make him a hero deserve a career in the panhandle.
He was a fraud by and large. I had a teacher tell me about how he lied on his resume. He also was quite adept at getting a new contract and Jeep Grand Cheroke every year or two.
I think Thompson ended up in Pittsburgh after Tulsa. Here is a faitly recent article about him. http://www.ajc.com/Metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/claytontalk/entries/2008/03/24/meet_john_thompson.html
It's amazing how TPS keeps finding the wrong people (Sawyer aside).