BOE Elections (SOMSD)

JBennett said:

In my opinion, the most important decider in our school district is the administration.  Most members of a Board of Ed feel that it is their job to support the administration and trust them as "the experts."  On some issues, like personnel and how to allocate money, the administration's control is total.  BOE members are told that even if they disagree with a budgeting or personnel decision that they should make that criticism privately, but still support the administration publicly and in voting under "policy governance."  

 The sentence I highlighted is where the BOE is totally off-base.  They need to play an active role in oversight of the Superintendent. The Ramos tenure was a complete disaster and that's on the BOE's hands. The Superintendent needs to be held accountable.  

yahooyahoo said:
 
Joan Crystal said a "significant" number of seniors are moving into our area. If that's the case, she must have some numbers. If she doesn't, her statement is purely anecdotal.

 I assumed it was anecdotal, which is all that’s required to rebut the idea it’s almost nobody.

JBennett said:

weirdbeard said:

Since the BOE really serves to shape overarching policies and also hire the superintendent (and not much else), no one election will effect too many direct changes in the schools.  What will have a direct impact will be their choice next year of the new super and their ability to attract a person with the right skills and approach for our district.  It's really the super and the administrators he or she hires and oversees who really shape what happens in the schools on a day to day basis.

If you want to be cynical, you could say that the school system is run by a "deep state" that is only changeable on a timescale of years.  
In my opinion, the most important decider in our school district is the administration. 
...
A BOE can lay out areas of emphasis for an administration to focus on and set goals, but it has very little control over how those goals are met.  

 So based on this assumption and the housecleaning that Ficarra has done change is already happening and the new super will be leading it.

max_weisenfeld said:

JBennett said:

weirdbeard said:

Since the BOE really serves to shape overarching policies and also hire the superintendent (and not much else), no one election will effect too many direct changes in the schools.  What will have a direct impact will be their choice next year of the new super and their ability to attract a person with the right skills and approach for our district.  It's really the super and the administrators he or she hires and oversees who really shape what happens in the schools on a day to day basis.

If you want to be cynical, you could say that the school system is run by a "deep state" that is only changeable on a timescale of years.  
In my opinion, the most important decider in our school district is the administration. 
...
A BOE can lay out areas of emphasis for an administration to focus on and set goals, but it has very little control over how those goals are met.  

 So based on this assumption and the housecleaning that Ficarra has done change is already happening and the new super will be leading it.

I think that's right.  Based on what I have seen, Ficarra has had a mandate to leverage his interim status in order to wield a large broom and sweep up many messes that have piled up over time, in order to provide the new super a relatively clean and healthy ship to take over.  It's been long overdue and in some respect painful in the short term.

DaveSchmidt said:

yahooyahoo said:
 
Joan Crystal said a "significant" number of seniors are moving into our area. If that's the case, she must have some numbers. If she doesn't, her statement is purely anecdotal.

 I assumed it was anecdotal, which is all that’s required to rebut the idea it’s almost nobody.

It is anecdotal.  Cathy Rowe, who is organizing the event for seniors new to the area would have more specific figures.

I would also like to know the specific number of seniors who have been priced out in the last five years, and, whether the exit trend has increased or has stayed the same.

I'm personally very disappointed in the BOE election results.  More of the same and that's not what we need at such a pivotal time for this district given the myriad of challenges we are facing.  

I just read in the Village Green that Robert Roe has been requested to address the bathrooms at Columbia.  Seriously??  It's not like the bathrooms became this way overnight which demonstrates a real lack of basic leadership on the part of administration and the BOE.

The more research I do into this district, the more dysfunctional it seems.  It deeply concerns me as a parent whose child will be entering the district shortly.  

Perseverance said:
I'm personally very disappointed in the BOE election results.  More of the same and that's not what we need at such a pivotal time for this district given the myriad of challenges we are facing.  
I just read in the Village Green that Robert Roe has been requested to address the bathrooms at Columbia.  Seriously??  It's not like the bathrooms became this way overnight which demonstrates a real lack of basic leadership on the part of administration and the BOE.
The more research I do into this district, the more dysfunctional it seems.  It deeply concerns me as a parent whose child will be entering the district shortly.  

 +1

I couldn’t agree more. 

weirdbeard said:

yahooyahoo said:

weirdbeard said:

yahooyahoo said:
We need a new superintendent. Where do the candidates stand on the search?
The current BOE needs to be held accountable for this debacle.

 What debacle?  Hiring Ramos?  That was several years ago and I agree was a debacle.  Dr. Ficarra, on the other hand, has been the best super this district has had in years.  It's a shame that by law he has to be an interim.  He has made definitive and hard choices that urgently needed to be made, and has brought in skilled interim admins who have started whipping some of the departments in shape that had previously been left in shambles.  Bringing him in was one of of the best things the board could have done.  My opinion, of course.

Totally disagree.  Ficarra needs to go asap.
You must have no children in the high school.

 I do.  While there have been some bumps in the road, I see vast improvement across many fronts.

There's no denying that our BOE and Administration have made their share of mistakes in the last decade (and I don't exclude myself in that criticism), but I think that the South Orange-Maplewood School District is a very hard district to administer.

This is a district where there are very high levels of mistrust for the Administration/BOE from  different sections of the public.  When there is so little trust, mistakes are not easily forgiven.  If a handful of students or one foolish teacher does something wrong, it is taken to be emblematic of a problem that is tolerated or even encouraged by the BOE and a controversy erupts.  When there is little trust, issues that might be resolved quietly in other districts end up being litigated here or battled over in public.

South Orange-Maplewood is a very well-educated community too and there are a lot of people here who consider themselves to possess expertise in education.  These people might actually be bona fide experts, they might truly have lots of professional experience, and they might actually be "right" about whatever issue they raise, but sometimes their desire to be involved with the school district (and to criticize it) makes leadership more difficult.  

Having more educated people I assume might also correlate with litigation.  

Finally, we should consider that the average superintendent in a K-12 district only lasts 2.7 years on the job.  A superintendent starts with a honeymoon, but then has to make decisions that alienate people and might make mistakes too.  

Personally I’ve found the SOMA district to be somewhat behind the curve in implementing 21st century educational initiatives that happen to be standard in many other places. Everything seems to be controversial, when in fact these are best practices everywhere else. I’m not sure why there is an adherence to outdated and ineffective ways of doing school. Not to mention difficulties with meeting state curriculum standards in many areas. So strange. Maybe if there was an effort to implement more engaging teaching methods, we wouldn’t have a huge achievement gap.

annielou said:
Personally I’ve found the SOMA district to be somewhat behind the curve in implementing 21st century educational initiatives that happen to be standard in many other places.

Yes. Perhaps the district being overwhelmed by increasing numbers of students/overcrowding and insufficient budgets has led to administrative inefficiencies that has led to systemic and cyclical inefficiencies (and inequities).  

For example: 

1. It appears to take the administration months to create a master schedule in the high school and middle schools. In the computer age, that is a ridiculous and unnecessary waste of human resources. 
2. Then that master schedule's inflexibility/sluggish movement leads to students being stuck in an inflexible education system. 
3. Then some parents become a squeaky wheel to fight the inflexibility, resulting in some students experiencing more flexibility in the system then others. 
4. From this, inequities in student experiences emerge.
5. These inequities, when recognized, then require additional administrative attention -- increasing the burden on already stretched human resources. And likely resulting in other systemic inefficiencies and/or inattention that will also result in student inequities -- as well as resulting in an inability to fix inefficiencies that already exist. (Go back to #1).

Perseverance said:
I'm personally very disappointed in the BOE election results.  More of the same and that's not what we need at such a pivotal time for this district given the myriad of challenges we are facing.  
I just read in the Village Green that Robert Roe has been requested to address the bathrooms at Columbia.  Seriously??  It's not like the bathrooms became this way overnight which demonstrates a real lack of basic leadership on the part of administration and the BOE.
The more research I do into this district, the more dysfunctional it seems.  It deeply concerns me as a parent whose child will be entering the district shortly.  

 Don't let all of this color your perspective if your kid isn't even in the system yet.  Every single teacher my son has had into 7th grade I have been either thrilled with or okay with.   I have always been able to talk to admin when needed.  I do stay active around the school and volunteer where I can. 

  I don't deny the district has problems.  I don't personally think that it is due to incompetence, I think it stems from underfunding for the desired results, but others can disagree. 

  My point, though, is that it really isn't bad where it counts the most.  

sprout said:

annielou said:
Personally I’ve found the SOMA district to be somewhat behind the curve in implementing 21st century educational initiatives that happen to be standard in many other places.

Yes. Perhaps the district being overwhelmed by increasing numbers of students/overcrowding and insufficient budgets has led to administrative inefficiencies that has led to systemic and cyclical inefficiencies (and inequities).  
For example: 

1. It appears to take the administration months to create a master schedule in the high school and middle schools. In the computer age, that is a ridiculous and unnecessary waste of human resources. 
2. Then that master schedule's inflexibility/sluggish movement leads to students being stuck in an inflexible education system. 
3. Then some parents become a squeaky wheel to fight the inflexibility, resulting in some students experiencing more flexibility in the system then others. 
4. From this, inequities in student experiences emerge.
5. These inequities, when recognized, then require additional administrative attention -- increasing the burden on already stretched human resources. And likely resulting in other systemic inefficiencies and/or inattention that will also result in student inequities -- as well as resulting in an inability to fix inefficiencies that already exist. (Go back to #1).

 There are too many administrators in the first place.  How many assistant principals are there? over 20

JBennett said:

weirdbeard said:

yahooyahoo said:

weirdbeard said:

yahooyahoo said:
We need a new superintendent. Where do the candidates stand on the search?
The current BOE needs to be held accountable for this debacle.

 What debacle?  Hiring Ramos?  That was several years ago and I agree was a debacle.  Dr. Ficarra, on the other hand, has been the best super this district has had in years.  It's a shame that by law he has to be an interim.  He has made definitive and hard choices that urgently needed to be made, and has brought in skilled interim admins who have started whipping some of the departments in shape that had previously been left in shambles.  Bringing him in was one of of the best things the board could have done.  My opinion, of course.

Totally disagree.  Ficarra needs to go asap.
You must have no children in the high school.

 I do.  While there have been some bumps in the road, I see vast improvement across many fronts.

There's no denying that our BOE and Administration have made their share of mistakes in the last decade (and I don't exclude myself in that criticism), but I think that the South Orange-Maplewood School District is a very hard district to administer.
This is a district where there are very high levels of mistrust for the Administration/BOE from  different sections of the public.  When there is so little trust, mistakes are not easily forgiven.  If a handful of students or one foolish teacher does something wrong, it is taken to be emblematic of a problem that is tolerated or even encouraged by the BOE and a controversy erupts.  When there is little trust, issues that might be resolved quietly in other districts end up being litigated here or battled over in public.
South Orange-Maplewood is a very well-educated community too and there are a lot of people here who consider themselves to possess expertise in education.  These people might actually be bona fide experts, they might truly have lots of professional experience, and they might actually be "right" about whatever issue they raise, but sometimes their desire to be involved with the school district (and to criticize it) makes leadership more difficult.  
Having more educated people I assume might also correlate with litigation.  
Finally, we should consider that the average superintendent in a K-12 district only lasts 2.7 years on the job.  A superintendent starts with a honeymoon, but then has to make decisions that alienate people and might make mistakes too.  

No one ever said it was an easy job.  It is hard.  That's why it blows my mind when adminstrators and the BOE make the same mistakes over and over.  For example, how about PROACTIVE COMMUNICATION? Communicating proactively with parents is not hard to do, but yet it's been a problem for as long as I have lived here.

lord_pabulum said:

There are too many administrators in the first place.  How many assistant principals are there? over 20

 Not sure of your counting, but leaving that aside - which assistant principal positions would you eliminate, and which would you keep?

I count a minimum of ten school buildings in the district where classes are held.  If there are twenty administrators district-wide, that is an average of two administrators per school.  

For reference: 

SOMSD appears to have 29 certificated administrators, 538 certificated teachers, and over 7,000 students

(which is approx 18.5 teachers per administrator; 241 students per administrator; and 13 students per teacher).

Montclair appears to have 29 certificated administrators, 590 certificated teachers, and nearly 6,700 students

(which is approx 20 teachers per administrator; 231 students per administrator; and 11 students per teacher)

Millburn appears to have 17 certificated administrators,  396 certificated teachers, and under 5,000 students

(which is approx 23 teachers per administrator; 294 students per administrator; and 12.6 students per teacher)

https://www.state.nj.us/education/data/cs/cs17/district.htm

https://www.state.nj.us/education/data/enr/

nohero said:

lord_pabulum said:There are too many administrators in the first place.  How many assistant principals are there? over 20

 Not sure of your counting, but leaving that aside - which assistant principal positions would you eliminate, and which would you keep?

I would start with one for each school. 

lord_pabulum said:

nohero said:

lord_pabulum said:There are too many administrators in the first place.  How many assistant principals are there? over 20

 Not sure of your counting, but leaving that aside - which assistant principal positions would you eliminate, and which would you keep?

I would start with one for each school. 

 Leaving each school with how many, under your understanding of how many are there now?  If you know.

Distribution would not necessarily be an equal number at each school.  Larger schools such as CHS,  would likely have more.  Smaller schools like South Mountain Annex would likely have the least.

So far as I know, there's one assistant for each elementary, two at each middle, and more than two ( not sure how many) at CHS.