| BOE Minutes | BOE Home Page | |
| || Human Resources || Next: 2002-12-09 | ||
| Madison Metropolitan School District Madison, Wisconsin Art Rainwater, Superintendent | ||
|---|---|---|
| BOARD OF EDUCATION Minutes for Human Resources October 28, 2002 |
Doyle Administration Building 545 West Dayton Street, Room 103 Madison, Wisconsin |
|
(Portion of meeting held in Closed Session omitted.)
Malina Piontek and Bob Nadler left the meeting at this time. Other staff who joined the meeting were Rita Applebaum, Jane Belmore, Valencia Douglas, Kurt Kiefer, Joe Quick, and Mary Ramberg.
FOLLOW UP: Mr. Allen requested that the next meeting of the Human Resources Committee be scheduled to discuss Board members' writing letters of recommendation for people applying for district positions.
It was moved by Shwaw Vang and seconded by Bill Clingan to approve the minutes of the Human Resources Committee in open session dated March 11, 2002 as distributed. Motion unanimously carried.
There were no public appearances.
There were no announcements.
(Packets included the Superintendent's Management Performance Agreement goals for the 2002-03 school year. A copy is attached to the original of these minutes.)
Mr. Rainwater distributed written information on Department and Division Improvement Projects (copies are attached to the original of these minutes) tied to his goals, the Board's three priorities, and the district's strategic plan priorities. He explained that, at any given time, hundreds of projects are going on commonly focusing on the three priorities. He welcomed any suggestions from the Board. The three MPA goals were reviewed.
Discussion: Reasons for concentrating on African American and Latino children to complete algebra by the end of ninth grade. Incorporating benchmarks for each of the goals by which to measure accomplishment of the goals. Clarifying all three goals with targets and baselines about where the district stands right now and how to measure whether the goals made a positive difference or not, including student performance measures to the extent possible. Discussion or goals relative to ELL population and general curriculum issues (why certain types of packages or approaches are chosen and the process for deciding how effective they are), how the Extended Learning Proposal will be rolled out next summer, and how the Board will approach the budget process. Curriculum issue is an information session item. Effectiveness of curriculum choices goes further; measuring how effective students are reading versus how they got there. Items still fit under the umbrella of the three priorities of the Board. An information session would be good for that item. Extended Learning Proposal will come back before the Board in November. Extended Learning Proposal would be approached the same as Goal 2. Budget item should be deferred to Finance and Operations Committee. ELL issue could be a goal but would need to give the Superintendent more information about what is needed to measure.
Superintendent could propose to the Board what the three most critical issues are and help identify more important numbers to watch and focus on for reporting purposes. Trying to avoid things like last year's Goal 1 where the Board cannot make a judgement about last year and project for this year. Contract calls for measurability in goals and performance, to the extent possible, then evaluating based on the results. Maybe the goals are not constructed the way the Board would like but last year's goals' progress and next steps are outcomes and accountable in terms of creating a framework. Not concerned about the framework but progress kids are making; have to have a shared baseline.
Data has been presented over and over and everyone has access to it and can make judgements. Question remains should the Superintendent's goals be linked to that data. No doubt that the framework will have major outcomes. Web site contains reams of data and all Board questions are answered by presentation. If desired results are not happening, then changes are made. Do not think it is outrageous to link the data to performance outcomes and goals for the year. Need to look at information needed on the three priorities first to have a better sense in terms of goals for the coming year. Need a way to identify how the Superintendent has approached the set goals and evaluate overall what the district is doing.
Have to have four people to agree to this. Should be student oriented. Some are okay but others just seem to be treading water. Want goals and objectives like 3-10 percent gain on this and that. Do not know if everyone wants to see that. Problem is accountability. Can find the data but do not know who is accountable. Will accept consensus about how the Board wants to deal with this.
Some student performance-based goals can be drafted. Board agreed to last year's goals and there is ample data to support them. May want goals that are large enough but step all the way down to percentage changes based on the new framework.
Need to increase the achievement of African American students; no more discussion or fluff. Commitment to three priorities remains. There is a baseline and supporting data. At some point have to say that a particular goal or priority is under control then go on to the next; have not reached that point yet. Should we focus on those? Need to be looking at what kinds of accountability systems accelerate results for children of color and ELL in a much more concrete way. Do not always get the information requested and do not want to look at the web site. Need expertise to identify the crucial things to watch.
Could have Chair of this committee meet with the Superintendent to develop the goals then meet with the rest of the Board. Have asked for an overall change in the approach and the framework does that. Have seen measurable goals and ineffective programs that have been eliminated. Administration is very responsive about information requests. Has never been an issue.
Not sure if new goals are necessary but would like to get a timeline for Goal #1 and what the Superintendent envisions at the end of the year. Do not need quarterly or monthly reports. If the Board members are not satisfied, can bring up issues through the committees or directly to the Superintendent.
It was moved by Bill Clingan and seconded by Shwaw Vang that Chair Ray Allen poll the committee and other Board members to get a notion about what the goals should look like and then bring the responses back to the committee.
Discussion: Do not want to see a number put out there that may not be reached only to have the bar lowered or putting the blame onto one person. Very dangerous to evaluate based on performance of students. Superintendent is the one who is furthest away. Would have to include principals, teachers, and other administrators to make it fair. Motion can be carried out through e-mails. The Superintendent can decide which ones he can work with that are measurable and within his purview and reconstruct this to meet the Board's needs. Board will be held accountable because it will have made the suggestions.
Superintendent is accountable for everything whether there are benchmarks or not. Evaluation is coming up within two weeks to say whether that is true or not. Targets have been worked on. Organization is moving as fast as possible. Best practices are being applied. District is making substantial progress. Setting arbitrary targets is not an effective way to drive the organization. Need to drive the organization positively. Would predict what would happen next year if that were possible. Working as hard and as smart and as fast as it can go. Targets would not move it faster. Board can move in that direction. Do not believe education works that way. Board needs to inform the Superintendent how he can improve.
Measurements do not need to be numerical. Every Superintendent says they are working as hard as they can but that is not good enough for every African American child who goes through this district. Need to have tangible targets that the district is moving forward.
Can gather the input from the Superintendent and the Board. Will reconvene and get consensus that these are the goals to present to the Superintendent.
Motion unanimously carried.
No discussion.
It was moved by Shwaw Vang and seconded by Bill Clingan to adjourn the meeting at 6:56 p.m. Motion unanimously carried.
bl