Naked emperor? 'Glitchy system' triggers call for school leadership change
-
Why won't County school supe Pam Moran, seen here with Schoolnet CEO Jonathan Harber in 2009, release the 268 emails concerning the use of Schoolnet that the Hook requested? County school parents want to know.Flickr photo
In the wake of the Hook's recent cover story Glitchy system: Inside the student software debacle, which examined the County's purchase of a faulty student information system and revealed potential conflicts of interest between school administrators and Schoolnet, the company that supplied the software, school board members have been bombarded with complaints from angry parents.
"We need new leadership for our schools, and we need it now," writes Carmen Garcia, founder of CASE (Citizens of Albemarle Supporting Education), in an email to County School board chair Steve Koleszar. "I hope you'll wake from your peaceful slumber and realize that, as a friend of mine brilliantly reminded me, the emperor has no clothes."
Garcia, who founded her group of County school parents last year in response to the implementation of the controversial 4x4 class schedule, contends that the student information system debacle is another mistake by superintendent Pam Moran.
"We have tried to warn you and the public about the huge conflict of interest we perceived as Dr. Moran's image and words were used to advertise SchoolNet's products," Garcia writes. "Now that the truth has been made public, I want to ask the Albemarle County School Board: What are you going to do about it?"
Parents are also demanding that Moran release the 268 emails concerning the school system's relationship with Schoolnet that were withheld following the Hook's Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, request.
"Dr. Moran should be directed to provide everything requested under the FOIA," writes one parent in an email to Koleszar. "Please correct me if I'm wrong in the impression that Dr. Moran works under your direction."
Koleszar admits that last year's purchase of the Schoolnet student information system was a "serious error," but he insists that the instruction management program the company supplied "continues to be a valuable tool for administrators and teachers."
Not to all teachers. As reported, many Albemarle faculty have found the nearly $2 million package a "waste of time," and many refuse to use it.
Yet Moran, with awards from local and national organizations, has built a professional reputation as a technology innovator and has endorsed Schoolnet products in company press releases. Such circumstances have created unease among some local parents.
"There is no conflict of interest with Dr. Moran. She has not received any payments from Schoolnet," writes Koleszar in response to parent emails.
"The administration you are supporting so vehemently is taking jobs from the highest bidder and moving [them] to other communities or spending time endorsing specific products," writes parent Rebecca Dameron. "This does not serve our community."
Coincidently, Moran and her administration will be conducting a School Board work session on September 22 designed to encourage more spending on technology, specifically digital "learning spaces" and teacher use of technological "power tools."
"This is how the administration sells its ideas to the school board, during these work sessions" says Garcia. "As you'll notice in the agenda materials, they quote people who are in the business of selling technology."
Indeed, in an outline of the upcoming meeting, to be held at Monticello High School’s "media center," aka its library, Moran emphasizes the importance of 21st-century learning by referencing books by Diana Oblinger (a Microsoft executive) and Bernie Trilling (Oracle executive) and Charles Fadel (Cisco Systems executive).
"As the Hook pointed out, and the New York Times wrote, there's no real academic evidence to support the fact that technology enhances student learning," says Garcia. "And the administration doesn't include other viewpoints, just these from people in the technology business."
Garcia thinks there should be a freeze on tech spending– and she plans to say so after Thursday's presentation from Moran– until the administration can demonstrate exactly how the millions spent on the systems have improved student learning.
"The school board is under the reins of the school administration," says Garcia. "They are supposed to be policy makers, not politicians, yet they ignore our complaints and suggestions, and confer with the administration when controversies like this erupt."
Neither Koleszar nor Moran replied to a reporter's request for comment.
"Unfortunately, personal agendas have gotten in the way of what's best for our school system," says Garcia "There's nothing wrong with wanting to be ambitious, but Superintendant Moran is promoting herself so much as an innovator that the real issues are being neglected."
And what are the real issues? Garcia goes back to the one that initiated the founding of CASE.
"We have always just wanted to see smaller class sizes," she says. "It's not rocket science."
45 comments
When will our community recognize a conflict of interest ? Luckily the school board members are elected and can be ousted if they continue to let Dr. Moran refuse to reveal her e-mails. If she has nothing to hide she should willingly do so immediately, if she does, the board is obligated to demand that they be released.
While I understand the suspicion and concern, I'd like to voice it up: Pam Moran is one of the best Supers in the United States. Under her leadership, ACPS not only transformed, but sustained that state of change. It is easy to get caught up in local politics, but for those of you who don't read the national EDU news, this district is consistently illuminated as an example to others. Ask your questions, and yes, demand answers, but lets not be so quick to burn Moran at the stake.
Yes but how can someone who makes atrocious sunglass fashion decisions be trusted with bigger ones?
Perhaps a write-in candidate against Steve Koleszar would be as effect as a FOIA request and take much less time.
In reply to PARENT's comment, I have to say I'm not interested in your point that "for those of you who don't read the national EDU news, this district is consistently illuminated as an example to others." So what?! The "national EDU news" is not responsible for educating kids in Albemarle County and being good stewards of our money. The problems pointed out by The Hook need to be addressed directly and soon. As I have said since my kids started school, every child enrolled in a school deserves to get the very best chance at learning each and every day. Wasted funds frustrate teachers and parents, and leave gaps in resources that directly impact our students. PARENT says our Super ACPS has "not only transformed, but sustained that state of change." I'm not sure what that means how that's an endorsement of good decision making. Parents are looking for forthright answers to direct questions, and they deserve answers now.
Can someone site some research for smaller class sizes? My understanding is it has little to no impact on student learning.
We have always just wanted to see smaller class sizes," she says. "It's not rocket science."
SO if you don't get what you want you go after someone's job. Does Ms. Garcia know anything about education policy or learning, or does she advocate personal uninformed views?
CASE was quick with 4x4 research, and now going after technology research, haven't seen any about class size.
Local politics -and it's very sickening.
following Ms. Garcia's statement about January 27th - you find the following in the electronic school board for that date:
http://esblogin.k12albemarle.org/attachments/aad0d631-2d57-4ff5-9757-a53...
It appears that there used to be no waiting period, and now there is one -as indicated by all the language being highlighted in blue. So it appears Dr. Moran made the vendor rules more stringent. Did Mr. McNair read the policy himself before publishing the quote, or are we just upset because the FOIA was rebuked, and we'll print anything that makes her look like some sort of dictator planning a lucrative golden parachute.
It's interesting that ValueWhatWeHave would suggest that "class size has little to no impact on student learning." Is that the official position of the Albemarle County Public Schools--that class size doesn't matter? Because it would logically follow that if class size doesn't matter, we could save lots of money by increasing class sizes. Is that what administrators and teachers in ACPS believe, and will that belief inform future policy decisions? I would think that if so, they'd be willing to say so.
Wait....how is this: Indeed, in an outline of the upcoming meeting, to be held at Monticello High School’s "media center," aka its library, Moran emphasizes the importance of 21st-century learning by referencing books by Diana Oblinger (a Microsoft executive) and Bernie Trilling (Oracle executive) and Charles Fadel (Cisco Systems executive). -- a problem? These are the people who built the systems. Conflicts of interest are one thing and they're problematic. This is looking to experts in various fields. In and of itself, it's not an issue.
Just asking for research. I assume it's costly to reduce class size - especially large scale. SO there's a tension between spending less money, reducing class size, and any other policy that costs money. Wondering what the research is and considering that due to our current refusal to increase revenue, choices need to be made. My admittedly rudimentary understanding is that it is not quite so clear cut itself on increasing student learning. Ms. Garcia seems to refer to it as a panacea, and no money should be spent unless it reduces class size.
I assume it's a bit more nuanced than that.
ValueWhatWeHave:
Thanks for bringing that to our attention. I've removed the section on the alleged policy change until we can confirm exactly what the policy was previously and what exactly, if anything, was update in January.
The discussion seems to have wandered off the point - my tax dollars (I have no children in the system - though I am an ardent supporter of pucblic education) are being spent recklessly. Make the emails public and prove us all wrong. If there is nothing to hide - then why not release them.
Moreover - this may possibly be only the tip of the iceberg. I would contend that a closer observation of spending would reveal a lot of similar things going on.
ValueWhatWeHave, you're not "just asking for research"--that's disengenous. You went after Garcia's claim that her group "has always just wanted to see smaller class sizes" by suggesting that class size has "little to no impact on student learning." Then you implied that Garcia is "going after" Moran's job because simply because class sizes haven't lowered. Then you ended your post about Garcia's motivation with the observation "
local politics -and it's very sickening." So I'm having a hard time with the faux-innocent "just wondering about the research" when it seems clear that you have an issue with Garcia and the CASE group to begin with.
I honestly do not believe that Pam Moran or anyone in the administration benefited financially from the relationship with SchoolNet. However, I DO think they all got a big ego stroke from the attention at conferences, etc. and certainly the county and the school board basked in the national attention that our use of technology has garnered. My concern is the hubris in dismissing teacher concerns about the faulty system and the requirement that teachers be forced to log in at least once a quarter to show across-the-board use of the system. I would love to see a survey of ALL the teachers to see how many liked or disliked the system and how many thought it made their lives easier. Has ACPS surveyed the TEACHERS to see what improvements they think will increase learning in the classroom?
I have an issue with one group being quoted throughout an article that alludes to a public official being incompetent as is the case with the emperor from the story.
Ms. Garcia has written the school board stating "We need new leadership for our schools, and we need it now," - clearly calling for her job.
She then talks about Moran's priorities being off base. "This is how the administration sells its ideas to the school board, during these work sessions" says Garcia. "As you'll notice in the agenda materials, they quote people who are in the business of selling technology."
As Chris points out -somehow consulting experts is a problem.
Then when asked what she wants she states "We have always just wanted to see smaller class sizes," she says. "It's not rocket science."
I do have a problem with that, and it is local politics. If Dr. Moran had been promoting herself nationally as a "class-size innovator" I doubt CASE would be writing demanding her job.
The rocket-science comment is what drew my call for research. If the answer is indeed so simple and easy to implement, then where is the research? I'm sure lower class sizes would help, but I'm also sure that it isn't as simple as Ms. Garcia condescendingly suggests.
As an educator for over 30 years I can attest that the value of IT in education is VASTLY overrated. Google and Wikipedia are wonderful, quick sources of data and the WWW is in general useful in that regard. However, beyond providing useful secretarial help the rest of the flood of IT garbage is just that: garbage. I was optimistic when Dr. Moran took over as Superintendant but her subsequent fixation on Tweeting and hyping this company's IT products have been serious disappointments.
I appreciate The Hook bringing this to the public's attention.
The county needs to address basic needs such as redistricting and not be swept up by the tech race in the name of garnering attention. Teacher load is the correct term for this discussion, not class size--they are not the same. But we are nitpicking. AHS is extremely overcrowded and only growing, while MHS sits with empty seats. Stop the fancy talk about techno-learning spaces solving problems (as if MESA can be replicated across all schools) and redistrict before trailers show up at AHS as they already have at Hollymead. School Board, please show us you don't need a visual cue (trailers) before you take action at AHS. Students and teachers are already paying the price for the lack of action an d the problem is only going to grow. Save us from the super's "contemporary learning spaces" and move students to where there is space. Don't just take the easy way out and 2 more students to all AHS classes. Act now.
For the record, I participated in the WAHS graduation in the gym in 2009. In our pre-ceremony exercises , we were instructed to turn off our cell phones, and spit out our gum. Imagine our surprise when we saw Dr. Moran tweeting and chewing gum. She violated the first rule of being there, she wasn't "there". But perhaps the best part was when Dr. Bruce Benson addressed us as Albemarle High School. Usually, that would not be remarkable, except that his own daughter graduated that night, from WAHS. We are all still chuckling over that slip. For us, all of them, the BOS, Benson and especially Dr Benson, and Dr Moran came across as phony. We had a nice graduation anyway, but now we fell as apathetic as them. It's funny that they sold us down the river for what???
@redistrictnow-Hollymead is scheduled to be redistricted next year, FYI.
The advantages of a Smaller class size has been proven by virtually every private school in the country for the last 50 years.
The kids will learn technology from simple curiuosity when they hit puberty and search porn.
The sad part about technology is that with google correcting spelling and so many short cuts to the answers these kids are graduating without basic reading and writing skills, and forget math...
They have no comprehension of civic responsibility and do not understand even rudimentary economics. All they seem to want to know is how much vacation they get and how soon before they get an automatic raise.
I say give each teacher 16 kids, an agenda and 180 days to make it happen. We need less interference from the administrations not more.
(and all the emails should be reviewed by the county attorney, redacted and released)
@tim taylor - your post hit the nail on the head my friend.
What is really galling is that last year in the name of allegedly saving $800,000, the schedules of all of the county high schools were changed with primarily semesterized classes, students taking 8 (not 7) classes and teachers teaching 6 (not 5) classes. There has been some respite from semesterized classes but the educational experience of all high school students has been degraded as they have too many classes and the teacher have too many students (140+)
To find out that close to $2 million was ill spent, after the education of all high school students was significantly altered in the name of saving money is just frustrating. I do not think the administration or the School Board still understand the impact their decisions have had on the high schools.
To redistrictnow--I believe that ACPS will allow your child(ren) and those of anyone who has these concerns for wanting more students at Monticello High School to enroll there if you would simply ask for a waiver--that is as long as there is space available. Who do you think should be shipped out of their community? The ACPS staff reports that they will need to build onto Monticello to handle students if they redistrict them to that school. Maybe there are other solutions. It might be worth exploring if you care about all the children in the county.
Have you attended School Board Meetings in the last year?
Do you have your facts straight on overcrowding at every school or is this hearsay?
I do agree that the lack of full disclosure has everyone upset. Having had a child attend and graduate from an Albemarle county school over 4 years ago, I can say that the students are getting a lesser quality education now under the direction of the current Superintendent. It is not the fault of the teachers. It is because they are so overburdened with administrative minutia, additional classes to teach, technology-related busywork and oppressive top-down management.
To ValueWhatWeHave and anyone else who might be interested:
After taking a closer look at the amendments made to the County school system's Vendor Relations policy, we have this to report:
As you'll see, while the original Vendor Relations policy basically bans vendors from soliciting good and services to school employees on school property, the amended policy actually allows for greater interaction with vendors as long as there is authorization from the superintendent.
Original Vendor Policy adopted July 1, 1993:
The School Board recognizes the value of the staff's being informed of the latest commercial materials available to assist in their teaching and welcomes competent representatives of such publishers and manufacturers. However, the Board does not want classroom teachers distracted from their duties or undue administrative time taken from previously assigned duties.
No vendor, agent, or sales representative may enter the schools to advertise or sell goods or services to employees or students unless specifically stated in the regulations portion of this policy. Any person/persons found soliciting goods or services to students and employees in the schools or on school property during school hours will be subject to legal action. [end]
January 27, 2011 amendments to Vendor Relations policy:
The amended Vendor Relations policy says that….Any person/persons found soliciting goods or services to students and employees in the schools or on school property during school hours "without appropriate authorization may" be subject to legal action.
Additional amendments allow vendors "to sell, arrange demonstrations of products or services, or take orders for goods or services" on school property with the authorization of principle or superintendent.
Permits schools or departments to enter into educational sponsorship and partnership agreements as described by Policy KQ, Commercial, Private, and Corporate Sponsorships and Partnerships.
Allows school employees involved in procurement transactions to accept a job with a vendor as long as they provide written notice before they begin the job.
Basically, the amended Vendor Relations policy appears in its language to be prohibiting certain relationships with private vendors, but actually allows for a closer, more cooperative partnership with private vendors with authorization from the superintendent.
The "Disclosure of Subsequent Employment with Vendor" policy appears particularly disingenuous, as it allows what it pretends to prohibit by simply requiring written notification.
As a past employee of ACPS, I can attest that SchoolNet has been nothing but a headache for the IT dept and the educators. The first phase of SchoolNet was brought in about 6 years ago to handle testing. The thought was to use a pool of questions so that testing was more standard across the classes. If a child took Algebra with Mr. X, a different child would see the same questions even though his teacher is Mrs. X. The teachers formed committees to create the pool of questions. The problem was that the equipment (and we're talking in the millions) failed A LOT. It caused educators to revert back to creating their own tests and this equipment sat in common areas and collected dust. Looks like SchoolNet has made ACPS their premier client and continues to sell them inferior products that have not been tested to its full extent.
Volunteering to PAY to be a guines pig for a software company is NEVER a good idea.
All these companies doiis charge US for fixing THEIR errors.
It seems like a neat idea to be the first guy on the block with the new car but not if it has to be towed back to the dealer 5 times while they work the bugs out.
Mr McNair -
I'm glad that you find things to be disingenuous - is this an oped piece or a news story?
Because you seem to selectively quote here is the text from the subsequent employment policy from ACPS that you allow Ms. Garcia to hyperbolize on in your article:
Disclosure of Subsequent Employment with Vendor
As required by the Virginia Public Procurement Act, no employee or former employee with official responsibility for procurement transactions may accept employment with any bidder, offeror or contractor with whom the employee or former employee dealt in an official capacity concerning procurement transactions for a period of one year from the end of employment by the Division unless the employee or former employee provides written notification to the Division prior to commencement of employment by that bidder, offeror or contractor.
Here is the text of the same policy from Williamsburg:
Disclosure of Subsequent Employment
No employee or former employee with official responsibility for procurement transactions may
accept employment with any bidder, offeror or contractor with whom the employee or former
employee dealt with in an official capacity concerning procurement transactions for a period of
one year from the end of employment by the school division unless the employee or former
employee provides written notification to the division prior to commencement of employment by
that bidder, offeror or contractor.
Another schoolboard in Fredericksburg:
Disclosure of Subsequent Employment
No employee or former employee with official responsibility for procurement transactions may accept employment with any bidder, offeror or contractor with whom the employee or former employee dealt in an official capacity concerning procurement transactions for a period of one year from the end of employment by the school division unless the employee or former employee provides written notification to the division prior to commencement of employment by that bidder, offeror or contractor
Washington county:
Disclosure of Subsequent Employment
No employee or former employee with official responsibility for procurement transactions may accept employment with any bidder, offeror or contractor with whom the employee or former employee dealt in an official capacity concerning procurement transactions for a period of one year from the end of employment by the school division unless the employee or former employee provides written notification to the division prior to commencement of employment by that bidder, offeror or contractor.
Finally the actual text form the Virginia Procurement Act:
§ 2.2-4370. Disclosure of subsequent employment. -- No public employee or former
public employee having official responsibility for procurement transactions shall accept
employment with any bidder, offeror or contractor with whom the employee or former employee
dealt in an official capacity concerning procurement transactions for a period of one year from the
cessation of employment by the public body unless the employee or former employee provides
written notification to the public body, or a public official if designated by the public body, or both,
prior to commencement of employment by that bidder, offeror or contractor.
Look similar?
It doesn't appear as though Dr. Moran is the disingenuous one on this issue. All those school divisions have the same language regarding your other issues with the policy revision as well. It seems any shcoolboard who has updated policy DJG in the past 5 years uses the same language. According to the Prcurement act, vendors include things for yearbooks, class rings, cap and gowns etc. So that may be the reason for such a policy of allowing them in schools with permission of principals. Vendor does not mean schoolnet, Dr. Moran's potential conflict of interest, and why she decided not to release e-mails is a story worth reporting, - but this article and the quotes in it are inflammatory, and not based in any kind of reality of Dr. Moran trying to make it easier for hereself to get a job with Schoolnet through updating school board policy.
Several comments:
First, the issue of class size. While there are conservative "researchers" (Eric Hanushek comes to mind) who consistently diminish the importance of small class size, most research confirms its educational value. One of the most he single most important class size studies was Project STAR in Tennessee, which was a "large-scale, controlled study of the effects of reduced class size." The results? "In every instance, small classes outperformed the other class types." Unbelievably, Hanushek faulted that study because it didn't test students BEFORE they entered school.
Second, one commenter pumps up the credentials of those who will speak to the School Board at its meeting at Monticello High School. He calls them "experts." What he doesn't say is that they are "expert" sales representatives, not educators. None of them has ever taught in a K-12 public school, which now, in fact, seems to be the chief criterion for being a public school education "expert." It's not. Moreover, each of the companies these marketers represent has been accused of and/or settled fraud charges for overcharging government agencies.
This was in the news last summer: "Oracle Corporation, the world’s second-largest software maker, has been accused of defrauding the government, resulting in damages of up to $1 billion. The U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit against Oracle claims that Oracle overcharged the government for software." Here's the Justice Department's announcement:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/July/10-civ-873.html
And almost exactly a year ago this was reported: "Cisco Systems and Westcon Group North America will pay the United States $48 million to settle claims they made misrepresentations to the General Services Administration and other federal agencies in violation of the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced." The charge was that Cisco and Westcon "“knowingly provided incomplete information to GSA contracting officers during negotiations in regard to Westcon’s contract with the GSA, which resulted in defective pricing of Cisco products and submission of false claims to the United States.”
In another case, Hewlett Packard settled fraud charges for $55 million. And Oracle paid $46 million to settle fraud charges against its subsidiary Sum Microsystems. Meanwhile, these companies see public education as a prime market for its products even though, as the New York Times reported, "schools are spending billions on technology, even as they cut budgets and lay off teachers, with little proof that this approach is improving basic learning." In fact, there's a fair amount of evidence that technology distracts from and undermines authentic learning rather than aiding it. But technology companies will never, ever acknowledge that.
Third, the commenter ValueWhatWeHave spends a lot of time on petty issues. Localities changed their vendor policies because of a change in state law. Simple as that. What's not so simple to discern, given all the public statements and blogging on the SchoolNet site and promoting SchoolNet products that weren't very good –– and especially considering all the withheld e-mails, 268 of them –– is the superintendent's real relationship with SchoolNet. Does ValueWhatWeHave think those e-mails should be released?
Lastly, the bigger problems with the county schools "leadership"( and with the Board) are a very serious lack of communication, well-practiced deception and hypocrisy that have become standard operating procedure, and a climate –– a culture –– that seems to be permeated with fear, distrust, disrespect, and top-down authoritarianism. These area not indicators of quality leadership, but the lack thereof.
Bill,
Totally agree with you. Its like people pay for products to protect themselves from weak OS development on their computers.
ValueWhatWeHave:
If interpreting information is considered "opinion" that I guess all reporters are guilty of writing op-eds. First of all, I did not find "things" disingenuous. Just the language in one section of the updated policy on Vendor Relations. Of course its language is borrowed from the Virginia Procurement Act. I've read the text you provide. Clearly, the Vendor Relations policy was updated to more accurately reflect the current language. No one is suggesting that Ms. Moran and her administration wrote it themselves. The point is it allows for more interaction between vendors and school officials than the previous policy given authorization from school administrators, which raises a larger issue about the relationship between public schools and private vendors. If you don't think the Disclosure of Subsequent Employment with Vendor appears disingenuous, we'd love to hear why you think that.
So at the very least, Schoolnet misrepresented its products and their efficacy to a government agency. Is the County not going after them for breach of contract or fraud?
The county school system's executive leadership is enamored with the latest and greatest technology and equates that with "learning" or being "world class."
The county schools' leadership is unwilling to confront this issue and answer questions from teachers, parents and citizens. It has, apparently, intimidated both students and teachers who attempted to exercise free speech to ask questions.
And there are groups of teachers, parents, employees and citizens who have lost faith in the leadership of the schools and are asking the Board to do its job. If the Board governs the School Division as a corporate body, as it says it does, then its job is to determine if the Division leadership has the confidence of the community, is steering the ship in the proper direction, and is fulfilling their moral, ethical and fiduciary obligations.
There they stand, arm in arm. Are they an actual couple? I don't know. But it is a pardonable interpretation and, with everything else that has happened runs to why this whole debacle doesn't pass the sniff test.
The claim that there is no conflict of interest may, or may not, be correct in the narrowest, technical application of that term. But people whose jobs are to advance or to protect the public interest and trust must go beyond mere technical compliance; for them there must also be no APPEARANCE of a conflict, either. And by that rubric, Pam is in very clear violation.
I believe the most important and best thing she can do right now is to release the emails - not simply under an FOIA request, but rather because it is the right thing to do. And the more damning they are, the more it is right to release them. And the next thing she must do, in my opinion, is to offer her resignation to the Board. If she does not do so of her own volition, and if this matter continues to gain traction based on facts, her separation from service will come at the hands of someone else. There are, no doubt, all kinds of reasons for action that "seemed like a good idea at the time," but it will be difficult to support the evidently cozy relationship with a vendor whose technology failed, and to follow by placing obstacles to discovery of the facts. But as Pam probably knows, School Superintendents, like ministers, often suffer a very short half-life wherever they may be employed, so if she takes her leave, she'll be one of many.
Finally, the Board needs to consider whatever legal action may be undertaken to recover funds paid out for a system that did not perform to its specifications.
All of this assumes the Hook report and comments offered by educators and others in a position to know are substantially accurate - and only the facts will indicate if they are.
Disingenuous means being not sincere or lacking truth in some way. The policy is clear and cohesive. The title isn't "The policy to further limit vendor relations" It's called "vendor relations". It implies there will be vendor relations and lays out ground rules, dictated by the Commonwealth, supported and executed by the local School Board.
No one said - 'We're going to limit our vendor relations' and then put in a plan that would loosen them - thus being disingenuous.
In fact the item in the agenda says this "Virginia Code §22.1-253.13(7) requires that school boards review all policies, at a minimum, every five years. In addition, the Board's policy service provider, the Virginia School Boards Association (VSBA), provides annual February and May updates for consideration by the Board.
Staff has reviewed a number of existing policies for revision, deletion or review. A table summarizing the types of changes in each policy is attached"
I listened to the podcast and Dr. Moran didn't comment on policy revisions that night.
The quote from Ms. Garcia that has been retracted (thank you) was something to the effect that Dr. Moran somehow loosened the policy so she could say ,' I'm going to work for schoolnet, bye."
Updating schoolboard policy to reflect Commonwealth policy is not disingenuous (not honest, sincere, or forthcoming), it's the schoolboard's job.
I do agree that many reporters interpret facts - and maybe that is the problem as the line gets blurred from what is fact (the policy changed to reflect a statute at the Commonwealth level) and what is interpretation (that such a policy is disingenuous).
What I find issue with, is the sensationalistic nature in which these two stories were written. You had facts that would have called to light a potential conflict of interest and certainly a need for Dr. Moran to be more forthcoming about her involvement (yes @ democracy I think that there needs to be more communication about the actual issue) - a good story of about 1/3 the length of the original. What has been printed in two stories is a lot of irrelevant information that distracts, attacks, and opines on possible, and certainly not proven motives of an educator, who has been at the very least an above average steward of our school system. Even if PayAttention is correct, and certainly the School Board needs to continually evaluate school executives against the standards he/she has stated, there is a respectable way to decide that, without what has transpired on these pages.
Valuewhatwehave-- I understand your comments. But the AC School board and Central Admin have consistently dismissed complaints of parents and teachers. Leadership in ACPS sets its eyes on highly visible and "out in front" policy and when honest questions arise, rather than step back to assess and answer, they draw in and put up a defensive wall to keep their projects from standing out in the light of day.
In regards to this issue, the school level staff in Albemarle County knew there was a problem before the school year started. As late as November, Diantha Mckeel stated in a board meeting that "working with UVa, she knows what it's like to implement new data systems." So do teachers, and teachers knew that the difficulty was not normal system issues, it was a flawed system. I'm sure the FOIA e-mails would prove that dozens if not a hundred or more teachers knew the system was broken before the end of September.
The unbelievable hardship inflicted on ACPS teachers, counselors, and principals by this system, the failure to our students in inaccurate grade and attendance reporting could have been alleviated if the leadership was responsive to it's body. The insistence on sticking with this product, despite overwhelming evidence of its lack of use at best and absolute failure at worst, defies logic. It defies logic so much that it leaves one searching for a reason. The only two that make sense are incompetence or ethics.
First, Dave McNair does top notch investigative journalism (if it were Hawes Spencer writing it I would be suspect about selling papers). So If Dave is on it if there is smoke there is probably fire.
Second, I am glad organizations like CASE exist to counter all those advisory committees that ACPS appoint packed with brown-nosers who take whatever the administrators tell them as gospel. School divisions in Virginia are top-down plantation-like organizations and teachers are usually treated poorly as are poor students and their parents. Administrators are like a special interest group, they have a lot of power in defining agendas and releasing things to the media.
Third, don't confuse technology for learning with the administrative technology system that Ms. Moran and the administrators and school board screwed up on. They are different animals. The fact that they purchased a very expensive lousy administrative system (that almost jeopardized my kid's college app.) is a fairly significant indicator of failure of leadership. There can be some good outcomes for learning if classroom technology is conceived of in a way that focuses on specific content learning and in which the teachers are part of the program design. Don't confuse Moran's adminisitrative systems debacle with all educational technology.
Fourth, If the school board is going to protect its administrators of if the administrators are running the school board, vote them out. That's accountability just like the SOLs are accountability.
As to the commentor above who claims that all these other school systems have the same policy language concerning conflict of interest with vendors, what a joke. They all engage in corrupt activity and they copy each other's policy documents as long as they can get away with it.
Moran fell into the same ego trap as most superintendents: they all want glitzty, high profile programs to sell the public that the are "doing something" substantive. Its an image projector, a sleight of hand. The whole award for being an avid texter is bogus and part of the problem. Moran should be focused on other issues like achievement gap and segregation, how the athletic programs are influenced by big money contributers, etc. We should not expect superintendents to be media rock stars, this pushes them into the arms of corporations who get scratch the supts backs if they get something out of it.
The whole commercialization of public education is alarming and is a national trend, not just with administrative technology systems but with the entire curriculum and text book scams. We have known this since the Bush-McGraw-Hill publisher connections around 2000. Our reading programs are not influenced by the professional teachers of reading but by administrators who get babmboozled into buying national programs. We need to root out all the commercial corporate influence in the schools and it would take a vigilant school board with a really good supt. with public support to pull that off.
Time for her to go and perhaps a new school board as well. Remember County residents, they are your schools, they don't belong to school boards, central offices, or corporations. Parents get involved and go to meetings and don't be fooled by high falutin administrative talk or buzz words. Don't be putoff, be persistent, show up repeatedly. Its simple, public schools are democratic institutions, they should be responsive to the public but also highly influenced by what teachers (not administrators) think is best. Teachers and parents should work together, not against each other.
@JSGeare. Unfortunately, nothing will change at the instructional level if Pam Moran is replaced with an internal candidate from the current management structure. Moran rules from the top but she is part of a troika of like-minded individuals. We must sweep house or we're back to square one. If not, nothing will have been achieved where it really matters, policy which returns us to the real world of teachers teaching with decent student numbers and good working conditions without technology they have not requested and do not use. At a back to school night the other night, one teacher remarked to parents apropos technology and text books, "we want books in our hands." About as low tech as you can get.
"Allows school employees involved in procurement transactions to accept a job with a vendor as long as they provide written notice before they begin the job" So what? I do not believe anyone is questioning what employees do with vendors AFTER they are no longer employed by the schools, but, rather WHILE they are employed by the schools. Ayone working at Moran's level should know better.
It is common all over the US for administrators to insist that purchasing administrative software aids in student learning. It was remiss of the local school board to swallow it. It never bothered to ask "How?" I think the members of the school board need another look by the voters.
The commenter ValueWhatWeHave wrote that "I think that there needs to be more communication about" the SchoolNet problem. But he refused to say whether or not he thinks the 268 (TWO HUNDRED and sixty-eight) e-mails withheld by the superintendent should be released as part of that better "communication." So, I ask once again, does ValueWhatWeHave think those e-mails should be released?
I've noted this before, but it bears repeating: the big problems with the county schools "leadership" are (1) a very serious lack of communication; (2) well-practiced deception and hypocrisy that have become standard operating procedure; and (3) a climate –– a culture –– that seems to be permeated with fear, distrust, disrespect, and top-down authoritarianism.
Both superintendent and Board have known about their communication shortcomings for years. They've hired "media relations" personnel and gone on "listening tours," but they just don't seem to hear what's being repeatedly said. Communication for them appears to be a one-way street. Four years ago the much-ballyhooed Resource Utilization Study recommended the schools to "develop and implement strategies to improve communication between the central administration and local school teachers, administrators, and parents." The 4x 4 and SchoolNet debacles are prime examples of failure to do just that.
One commenter suggested a survey of teachers to find out what they think. But the county schools "leadership" has assiduously avoided such a survey. That 2007 Resource Utilization Study pointed out that in 2004-05 and in 2005-06 the local government side conducted employee surveys and said this: "Although there have been indications that employee climate surveys would be implemented in the school division, this has not yet been accomplished." One of the recommendations in the study was to conduct "a climate survey at
the various school sites, as requested from the field." Several teachers offered to help write the survey and analyze it. But there's been no such survey.
There's a reason for that. As one teacher put it, “Albemarle county schools leaders seem to be increasingly inept and far-removed from the day-to-day realities of public education. Worse, they do not actively seek teacher input, and when they do get teacher input it is repeatedly ignored.”
ValueWhatWeHave says the the current superintendent is "at the very least an above average steward of our school system." The School Board and her central office loyalists (who get paid handsomely) might agree with that assessment, but I'd bet plenty of parents and most teachers would not.
@SomethingStinky, et al: I am not surprised to learn that Pam has the support of certain people within management who share her values and her agenda and who may be candidates as replacements, or have much to do with selection of a presumed outsider. So it is with all large organizations, and, indeed, support of management is necessary if anything is to be accomplished.
Likewise, when matters of questionable conduct and a waste of vast public funds at high levels are credibly reported, there is a tendency of stakeholders elsewhere in the system, such as the teachers, other subordinates, and not least of all, the parents, to be more forthcoming on other issues which are more systemic and would otherwise attract little attention. Thus, the comments attached to this news item suggest other details which, together with the "big" story, begin to sketch the outline of a possibly disturbing management agenda and style. A pattern emerges.
Whether the pattern arises from programmatic sources, or is simply the result of attitudes which penetrate all levels of the organization, hardly matters. What matters is the evident waste of large sums of money, a cozy vendor relationship with a high cringe factor, a marginalized community of educators, a very aroused crowd of parents and a population of students who will be the ultimate winners or losers. That's the bottom line; that's the "action item."
The attention, energy and resources which would otherwise be focused on the education of children (may God help them) is now and shall be directed to circling the wagons, producing paperwork, creating and administering committees of inquiry, addressing an eager media, answering calls from concerned or outraged parents, and all such other activities pursuant to managing the crisis at hand. We do now, or probably shall soon have, a highly dysfunctional organization.
Which is exactly why Pam should insist on full disclosure, and offer her resignation; so that the Board, the teachers, the parents and the students may move on. Board members are elected, and the stand they take on this issue will not doubt loom large in the eyes of their constituents both now, and at the next election. Let's hope we need not wait until then.
Can Moran and her egocentric techies! This is public education not some experiment in silicon valley.
There is only one legitamate avenue to the truth and that is to release the emails or at least have a third party review them to see if they deserve further scutiny.
If the board will not make sure this happens then the board is guilty of aiding and abetting anything that is in them that is damning.
I find it ironioc that many people blame the government for allowing corporations to hide emails yet allow the government itself to do the same thing.
The emails need the light of day.
Heaven forbid the children get an education in the meantime.
I see nothing that calls for the parents to get involved in the actual education their children. School is NOT a babysitting service- it is absolutely imperative that parents take part in the education process.
Many may learn something along the way.
Yes, there are poor teachers and administrators, but that is no excuse for poor performance by a student. There are poor managers and the like in the work place, but that rarely creates an atmosphere for poor performance.
You want to see some research identifying the benefits of smaller class size, look at www.classsizematters.org.
I want to separate the use of instruction technology in the classroom, from divisional use of technology such as schoolnet. I've had children at all three levels of schools in this devision and many teachers effectively and beneficially use technology as instructional tools. These allow students to communicate more effectively, both to the teacher and with classmates. In-class technology can allow a student's creativity to blossom in ways standard and antiquated technology never will. There far too many teachers in our own division who do not, and will not consider new technology as a tool to enhance education. That is a shame. But again, this type of technology is totally unrelated to a wasted IT program such as schoolnet