In Your Corner

Our latest review of School District happenings has been centered on the issue of hiring practices. Recent School Board meetings indicate a continuing rift with the Superintendent over the selection of new employees. Filling open positions is a critical requirement and the lack of these employees is extremely expensive as consultants perform essential tasks. .

Our review found that it is very difficult to appropriately assign blame. However, it is evident that the School Board and Superintendent are NOT working together to rapidly solve the problem. In a perfect world the School Board would set policy and let the Superintendent and her staff carry out those policies with appropriate oversight. At this point the School Board is aggressively challenging individual hiring practices and critical jobs remain unfilled a year after the new Superintendent and Board were seated.

This situation begs many questions. Is the Superintendent putting forth the best person(s) for the job? Are Board members helping or obstructing? Are the written qualifications for individual jobs too rigid? Are the contracting/financial irregularities uncovered by the Superintendent affecting hiring approvals?

We have addressed those questions to individual School Board members, District Staff and in our Schools Committee’s meetings with the Superintendent. Possibly as a result of our inquiries, an MCTA officer was invited to join the selection committee for the District’s new Director of Operations. This committee consisted of a School Board member, three senior District Staff representing the Superintendent, Human Resources and Information Technology, and our “Community Representative”.

There were some 40 applications received from around the US for this nationally advertised position. Most were eliminated due to obvious deficiencies and the result was 11 candidates who met the majority of written requirements. The Committee’s task was to down-select through a formal interview process. The first round of interviews resulted in 5 candidates selected by formal scoring. Since two of those were via long distance telephone, a second round of face-to-face interviews was delayed two weeks to allow for travel and scheduling. Following the second round of interviews the Committee eliminated two candidates and forwarded the three deemed best capable of performing the job to the Superintendent.

It was certainly eye opening to view and participate in the process. On the positive side, the District Staff displayed knowledge, thoroughness and dedication to the process. On the negative, it was amazing to see first hand some of the constraints placed on filling critical vacancies.   Without violating the confidentiality agreement required to serve on the committee it is difficult to address the problems observed with specificity. However, the main issue appears to be the rigid reliance on formal education, local experience and other requirements deemed absolutely mandatory. It is always good to seek the very best person possible, especially for a critical employee. However, our Board members have experience in filling many senior positions in the private sector, civil service and Fortune 100 corporations and found it amazing to observe the unthinking reliance on preset requirements. For example, we believe a person without an MBA may be fine for some positions if it is offset with years of demonstrated excellence using applicable skills and experience. Also, the number of years of Florida Schools experience may be less applicable to selection than confirmed professionalism in a similar position in another state or industry.

In summary, we appreciate the opportunity to participate in the process, and hope that the School Board will begin to allow more judgment in the process. They should hold the Superintendent responsible for results, and work with her to quickly fill the key vacancies in District Staff.