BOARD POLICIES:
KISD school board members do not write Board Policy. That policy comes straight from the TASB attorneys.
I tried to get two board policies passed one time that I actually wrote, and you would have thought that I was invading Europe! It was amazing the lengths to which Leonard Merrell went in order to stop me from getting those policies passed.
As a Board member, it didn't take long for me to know as much or more than most of the administrators about running our school district. I know that sounds arrogant, but it's true.
Of interest I think, is this Memo that I sent to other Board members in 1994 about things I thought needed attention. What's interesting to me about it now is that almost all of the problems that I addressed are STILL problems for this District! Nothing ever changes, and that is regrettable. These are all policies that should have been addressed and taken care of by the Superintendents. That they did not address them and that the Board did not insist that they do so should be of concern to taxpayers, parents and teachers.
Check this out:
(The following was a memo sent
on July 6, 1994.
[That's twenty years ago!]
It serves to
show the concerns I expressed to other board
members and the administration.
They were all of importance at the time I
brought them up, and many of them still are.
It is interesting, I think , that almost
none of these items were ever addressed. I was
never able to convince the Board that it was their
responsibility to be in control of the school
district or that they were supposed to represent
the best interests of the students and the
taxpayers.)
To:
Board Members and Dr. Stacy
From:
Mary McGarr
The following items (not listed
in order of importance) are items that I believe
need review and/or implementation.
1.
Policies need to be developed on
administrative hiring.(I believe that
administrators, at this point in time, need to
come from our own ranks.
We have had a
leadership training program in effect for
several years, and it is time to reap the
benefits.
If that program
is not working or we are not hiring
teachers who are capable of becoming
administrators, then that issue needs addressing.)
2.
We need to review the lists submitted by
each school summer before last with regard to what
principals and parents thought was necessary to
secure their building and make the children on
that campus safe.
We need to know what has been done, what is
planned, and what we might undertake this year
additionally. Parents were told over a year ago
that security meetings
would be a regular activity in schools.
3.
A program of specific activities needs to
be developed so that the Board might assess what
is happening to our graduates.
We receive data (which I assume we pay for)
from ACT, and there are several other methods of
determining what happens to our graduates.
We need to look at what students want to do
in the 7th or 8th grade, what they actually do
(with regard to their post graduate education),
and what kinds of jobs they are finding.
We also need specific information (and not
just from last year’s graduating seniors) about
what benefits they derived from their KISD
education.
In connection with this data, it would also be of
interest to identify the length of time our top
students (Top 10, National Merit Finalists) have
spent in KISD schools.
All of this data needs to be assimilated
into some kind of coherent and useful form so that
it serves to guide our plans.
4.
We need job descriptions for all
administrative positions, and they need to be
reviewed regularly (at least every two years) by
the superintendent and with board oversight.
5.
We need job descriptions for all personnel
receiving stipends.
This information would be by each position,
and would include specific, verifiable amounts of
time spent in these extra, paid for activities.
Stipends then would be paid
according to how much time OUTSIDE the regular
school day was spent with students.
The amount per hour would be the same, and
no value judgments on the time would be made.
If a person received a salary different
from the regular classroom teacher (plus longevity
pay) for a particular job, then no extra stipend
would be necessary.
6. We need to see mileage reports for the last year from everyone who receives a car allowance so that the continued allotment of these funds is justified and/or adjusted to fit need. We also need to keep track of travel expenses of administrators. I saw a document that said our superintendent last year spent $11,000 on travel expenses. Considering that he had a $600.00 car allowance additionally, that is clearly excessive. [Board members are not allowed to view the expenses of the superintendent. Usually only the board president sees them, and probably even that person has to ask to see them.]
7.
We need to see regular updates (whether
they take up someone’s time to prepare or not) on
the use of our attorneys. The charge against the
Board budget for school related use needs to be
changed.
We
also need to see a monthly report of board and
superintendent expenses.
8. We need to develop incident statistics with regard to discipline/security events. There is no way to know if we have a “gang” problem or if we are not prosecuting criminal behavior, or if one school’s parking lot warrants some additional security, et cetera if there are no statistics. [I thought they didn't have good statistics 20 years ago. You should see the one page print out that they get these days. Our board members are totally in the dark with regard to the amount of crime going on in our schools.]
9.
We really need to work on our public
relations.
Suggestions from each CAT team should be
solicited.
The Board needs to know about the on going
activities of each school and from the athletic
program BEFORE they occur.
The public also needs this information in a
timely manner.
We also need to
look at the collection of news articles
that is compiled each week.
I am interested in knowing how many board
members even look at it.
I do not.
Someone is spending considerable time
compiling it, and their time could be better
spent.
10.
The Board needs to review all curriculum
guides.
I
do not expect everyone to read each one.
I just want
Board members to see what we have.
11. Someone needs to assess the use/abuse of homework in our district, especially at the junior high level. Perhaps this is an item for SBM, but it still needs to be addressed on each campus. (While running for office last spring, the overuse of homework was a frequent complaint from parents. They felt that too much of it was busy work, had no relation to the work being done in the classroom, was never graded properly, was a cause for student cheating, or was the teacher’s answer for enrichment and/or punishment!) [Whatever happened to SBM?]
12.
We need to have a conscientious assessment
of activities for female students.
It is the law that these matters be equal.
Girls need equal access to programs,
facilities, instructors, and time.
13.
We need to revive competition.
The deletion of competition is one of the
goals of Outcome Based Education.
Over the last five years, our district has
had all vestiges of competition removed.
We have done away with the Science Fair on
most elementary campuses, and I expect the plan
was to target it at the secondary level next.
We have eliminated the History Fair.
We have citizenship awards instead of
academic excellence awards.
We honor the top 10 instead of the
valedictorian and the salutatorian.
The most popular kid gets to make the
graduation speech at one high school instead of
the valedictorian who really earned that right.
We name thousands of kids to the “Honor
Roll” when they only have a 3.5 grade point
average (and these averages are based on inflated
grades), and then their parents cannot understand
when their children cannot get in to our state
universities.
Our “Honor Rolls” need to truly reflect
scholarship. We give scholarships to kids who
“deserve” them instead of to kids who “earned”
them by virtue of their excellent grades (the word
is “SCHOLARSHIP”).
We name ten
kids “captain” of the football team so that
no one has his feelings hurt.
The list is endless, but the result is
critical.
We either believe in
excellence
and competition or we do not.
We are doing a great disservice to our many
academic achievers.
Public school is supposed to be about
academic education, nothing else.
When we reward every kid regardless of his
academic success, we are espousing
socialism/communism.
If that’s what we want to do, then we need
to tell the world that that is what we are doing!
The argument that public schools need to
build “self-esteem” is another OBE ploy to imbue
socialist beliefs.
If students do not have self-esteem when
they leave their home, they are not going to get
it at school
with meaningless rewards.
Their self-esteem will come from actual
academic accomplishment.
14.
We need to develop policy (either Board or
ask for Administrative) that addresses
employment of teachers.
Included should be a review of
qualifications regarding their college education
(e.g., did they go to a school, especially since
1975, where they had to make at least 1000 on the
SAT? did they take anything besides education
courses?
what kind of grades did they make? can they write
well?
can
they speak well?
could we require a video tape of them
teaching a class? could we give them an IQ test
before they are hired?)
Are we balancing new
graduates with people who are going back to
teaching after raising a family?
Could we see statistics? What percentage of
our student teachers are we hiring as permanent
employees?
How many of our own graduates are eventually hired
as teachers?
Is that a wise activity?
What policies are in effect for constant
and close monitoring of new hires so that bad
teachers (and we do have some) can be moved on
before they pass the probationary period?
Are we going back to see who is in the
files, or do we hire whoever applied last when a
position opens?
Are we hiring college students before they
have proper credentials over applicants who have
all their credentials in order just because they
are someone’s friend or relative?
What kind of computer cross-referencing of
applicants exists?
How long do we keep applications? Are
irregularities in behavior in prior assignments
revealed in references?
Are we checking their names against local,
county, state and FBI files?
15.
We need to have an updated administrative
salary list each year.
It should not be regarded as confidential
information.
It is open to whoever wants to see it as
per the Open Records Act.
This list should be forthcoming every year
as part of the salary proposal and should not have
to be requested.
16.
The Board has received a copy of the staff
development that occurred this past year, but we
need time at a meeting to talk about it.
I am not sure that
a 326+% increase in this budget item over
the past five years is entirely necessary or
desirable. (For your information, from 1989-1993
the student population in KISD increased 18%, the
tax rate increased 34%, and expenditures increased
40%) I also think the direction of most of the
elementary level agenda is toward restructured
education that I thought the majority of this
Board was against.
What is our policy with regard to teacher
and administrative travel?
Who decides what is paid for by the
district and who gets to go to these seminars and
conventions?
Most of the staff development that is
offered outside our district is of the brainwash
variety. The teachers’ and administrators’ time
and the district’s dollars are being wasted on
things that the Board opposes.
17.
The Board needs to address the Waller
County Appraisal District.
If it is costing $300,000 per year more to
belong to it (per Bill
Moore’s chart) as opposed to belonging to
the Harris County Appraisal District, then over
the thirteen years we have belonged, we have spent
$3,900,000.
That’s enough to almost build another elementary
school.
In
four years it will be enough.
When we say we use it so that we will have
control, I think we need to ask, what control?
and for whom?
and for what purpose?
And given the fact that a majority of our
board voted to nominate Steve Hauck for the
vacated WCAD board position, and then he was not
voted in by OUR elected representatives, I believe
I have answered my own question.
Our board does not have control of anything
that matters.
Even if we keep the WCAD, the appraisal
district needs to move out of our administrative
building and their employees need to be separate
and not benefactors of our benefits.
We DO need the room they are occupying.
I also believe we are a large enough school
district that the position of tax collector
warrants one person’s attention. We also need to
address why this appraisal district cannot be run
as efficiently as the HCAD.
Our board also needs to look at the
Appraisal Review Board composition.
Do you know who is on it?
Or how long they’ve been there?
Or what their vested interests are in
holding that position?
That is part of our control, yes?
18. The Board needs to address the issue of salary increases for each of our employee groups and come up with some sort of policy so this policy is understood and accepted and not a political issue each year. It is not fair or smart to increase all levels of salary at the same rate for all employees, and we are not under any obligation either legal or by policy to do this. The only pressure comes from employees, and they need to remember that this is a government, not a privately held company. It is illogical to give people making 50 or 60 thousand the same percentage increase as those making 13 or 25 thousand. All of the district’s employees work very hard, but their value in the scheme of things is not that different, and the ones closest to the students need the greater reward. We also need to remember that employees should be paid according to their educational background, the difficulty of that education, and the time spent on the job. Pay should not necessarily be geared to longevity especially at the administrative level. [When they didn't address this issue, administrative pay got way out of whack. Administrators should not be making four and five times what a teacher makes.]
19.
The Board needs to have agenda time to
review the Technology recommendation that was
printed in February.
I am greatly concerned about the failure of
the plan initially to address the network
capability of
our district.
This problem needs to be rectified
immediately.
I also think we need to revisit our
priorities for having a computer on every kid’s
desk.
Who
is going to monitor the software that students
use?
Do we
have a policy or is it at every teacher’s
discretion?
Are computers going to be a means for the federal
government or the state to implement OBE junk
while we all sit by and watch?
20.
In 1990 the Board paid $10,000 for a
business services review.
I would like to know which of the
suggestions were implemented, which were not and
why they were not.
No sense paying all this money for a
consultant unless we are going to follow through
and follow up with their recommendations.
21. The Board needs to review the Food Service Department. Recently there have been news articles concerning nutrition, the use of Federal subsidies, and the ability to use or not use the Federal free/subsidized lunch program. There have also been some reports from some schools (the latest being the report from Winborn) about the quality of the food being served. The Board should be concerned about the nutrition of the students. Read the menu in the Wednesday edition of the This Week section of the Houston Chronicle and tell me if you would eat this stuff week in and week out and if you think it looks nutritious to you! [Nothing's changed here either.]
22.
The Board needs to see an evaluation of the
intramural program as it was implemented this
year. We have received a numerical
analysis, but what I hear from participants is
that the students and parents were not that
excited about it.
This was a pilot program, and if it is
unsuccessful, we should not keep it.
I am also aware that the
SCOPE [Select Committee on Public Education
which was chaired by Ross Perot] initiative wanted
to do away with junior high athletics and this
program looks to me like a way for the
administration to do that!
23.
The Board needs agenda time to address the
elimination of ability grouping. Most parents
believe their children, regardless of level,
benefit from grouping.
We have instituted Inclusion as a policy
without our Board ever being allowed to make a
conscious decision.
We have now been presented with a rather
large grant to further inclusion in our district.
We were also not given the opportunity to
discuss the elimination of honors' classes, the
superintendent who just departed implemented it
without asking anybody, and I believe our students
are losing ground because of this action.
This is the first year the PSAT scores at
Taylor have ever decreased (We did not get the
opportunity to discuss that either!)
Inclusion is not mandated by law; we do not
have the money to do it properly; and I think we
should stop it, or at least curtail it.
This program is adversely affecting more
students than it is helping.
24. The Board also needs to address the inflated grades that are given in our district. This OBE device really is a crime. No one in real life (ideally) wants or gets what they do not earn. We are teaching our children the wrong thing when we tell them they are doing better than they really are. Eventually the truth is told, and it always comes as a shock and is detrimental--especially to their real self-esteem. [Perpetuating self-esteem baloney is now the centerpiece of the elementary grades.]
Co-operative learning, testing
et cetera needs to stop.
25.
We need to see evaluations (mid and end of
year) for all principals (beginning with last
year’s).
26.
We need to see absence from duty reports
for all central administrators for the past year.
27.
We need a comprehensive review of the
elementary reading program, a discussion of our
use of whole language to teach our students how to
read as well as a discussion of efforts to address
needs of dyslexic and ADHD students.
28.
We need a comprehensive analysis of TAAS
scores (at 7th and 10th grades) compared to actual
grades received in language arts and math.
************************************************************************************************************************
I recently ran across this memo to "Nancy." I don't have a clue who "Nancy" is or was, but the memo tells me I had seen the problems with Senate Bill I that was passed in 1995 and which took away control of the local school district under the guise of "returning local control."
See for yourself. Rep. John Culberson had given me the draft copy to peruse for problems. Cedar Hill ISD had it right!
Nancy,
Commissioner Meno has proposed
changing the Texas Education Code. Rep.
Culberson has given me a copy to review, and I am just getting started. (It is on 11x14
paper and an inch and a half thick!) Other
school districts and the Texas Association of School Boards are already lobbying state
legislators because there are a great many proposed changes that Mr. Meno would like to
make that are objectionable to local school boards and to the people who elect them.
The 74th Legislature will consider these proposals when it meets beginning in
January. NOW is the time to object to some of
these proposals with our state representatives and senators.
These recommendations that I have
listed were taken from a resolution to oppose
them from Cedar Hill ISD.
l.
A recommendation to add twenty additional days of staff development to the school
year.
*
(These days will either be in addition to the days teachers already work or will be
days when students will receive no instruction during the school year. Twenty days is equal to a month of school.)
2.
A recommendation for a five percent increase in teacher salaries and two steps
added to the salary schedule, without additional funding.
(Katy ISD already pays well above the state minimum, and I’m not sure this raise
would be passed on to teachers in our district.
The important point is that they [Meno and Ann Richards] are wanting the political
benefit of giving the raises, but are unwilling to provide the funds, leaving that up to
the local tax payers.)
3.
A recommendation to decrease the local school board’s authority to select and hire
professional teachers and administrators.
(This effort to transfer the authority of the Board to the superintendent speaks for
itself.)
4.
A recommendation to decrease the local school board’s authority to dismiss or
non-renew teachers. (Current practice is for
the administration to do this on their own accord and then ask for Board approval.
In my opinion it is one of the checks and balances that is necessary in a
democratically run government. The same logic applies to #3 also.)
5.
A recommendation to change the school board’s exclusive authority to “manage and
govern” the schools of the district by removing the words “manage and,” leaving school
boards with no real authority.
6.
A recommendation to transfer the authority of approving the budget from the Board
to the superintendent. (Meno tried to do this two years ago and was unsuccessful.
His plan is to eventually fund all schools through a state income tax.
If the superintendent has the ability to set the budget items, then the Board loses
all control, for without control of the money, the Board is powerless.)
(Board
members as well as citizens should be very wary of efforts by Commissioner Meno to
continue centralization of power with
Commissioner Meno and the Texas Education Agency. The Texas Education Agency has not done
anything right yet, and there is no reason to expect that they ever will! When the Board
loses authority, so does the local electorate.)
* ( )
My comments.
(I will add to this list as I
read through the proposed changes, as I’m sure that I will find more things with which to
object!)