April 25, 2010, 8:00 a.m.
2:30 p.m. update: Murley responds (see bottom of this entry)
April 26, 9:30 update: Meeks responds (see bottom of this entry)
[This is the eighth in what is, as of this morning, an eight-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010, "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010; "Hurlyburly Over Murley," April 22, 2010; "IC Board Peeks at Meeks; Brad Meeks Rounds Out Three Finalists," April 23, 2010; and "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.]
Constituent Relations Important -- But No Deal Breaker
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
Yesterday I reported that I'd emailed an offer last Friday to each of the three finalists for the ICCSD superintendent position. It was an offer to reproduce in this blog, without editing or responsive comment from me, any last minute message they'd like to pass on to the Iowa City community. I indicated I'd report back to you here what happened next. "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010.
What happened was that Mark Bezek acknowledged receipt of the email and provided some comments, and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks failed to acknowledge the email in any way.
(Bezek's prompt reply said that he "really enjoyed my interview session in Iowa City... I came away very impressed with the community, school system and the administrative team, all were very personable and helpful throughout my day...... [. . .] .... Regardless of what the outcome is, I feel I gave it my best shot even with limited sleep and I feel that my interview was reflective of the type of person/leader I am.... What you see is what you get with me [. . .]." (Bracketed ellipses are mine; others are his.))
So one of those things you see, and get, from Bezek is a reply to your email, in an age in which much of a superintendent's constituent relations are going to take place in that medium.
Do I think the results of this little experiment should weigh heavily in the Board's decision of whom to pick? Of course not. But do I think it should at least be one of dozens of the variables in what I've characterized as a "back and forth discussion and fruitless efforts to resolve a classic, impenetrable, multiple-variable-comparative analysis"? Absolutely. ("IC Board Peeks at Meeks," April 23, 2010, last sentence.)
Look, I know as well as anyone the difficulty of staying on top of incoming email. I maintain a number of email addresses, each of which I monitor more than once a day. At the present time there is a substantial backlog, even after the junk mail and list-serv distributions have been stripped out, that involves the organizations, persons and projects with which I have some relationship or responsibility and for which maintain a folder of ongoing email exchanges -- plus a variety of requests from people, formerly unknown, to whom responses are also provided. My goal is to respond to every email within 24 hours. I am not, now, meeting my goal. During a couple weeks of editing student papers, and holding conferences, on top of other obligations, starting early and working into the evenings, my daily triage of responsibilities resulted in the email backlog I am now trying to dig out from under.
So I can understand and sympathize with anyone undergoing superintendent interviews (often multiple and near-simultaneously) in various communities and their triage decisions about email. There are, in short, many reasons why Murley and Meeks might have not responded other than a disrespect and dismissal of constituent email. That's why the failure to respond should not be accorded significant weight.
But the experience is an illustrative lead-in to a discussion of a superintendent's -- and school board member's, for that matter -- constituent relations by email.
So where do my attitudes and practices regarding personal email come from?
The FCC is an "independent regulatory commission," sometimes referred to as "an arm of Congress." A commissioner has no direct responsibility to the President. As Maritime Administrator, however (my first presidential appointment from President Johnson), and "presidential adviser" (White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services; President Carter), the service was part of the Executive Branch and "at the pleasure of the President."
One of the responsibilities of the Maritime Administrator, as it turned out, was to comply with President Johnson's policy on citizens' mail. (This was the pre-Internet age of postal mail.) Any letter addressed to the President, that involved issues within the Maritime Administrator's areas of responsibility, was (a) to be answered, (b) signed by a presidential appointee, and (c) mailed within 24 hours of receipt. The same policy was applied to all presidential appointees.
Senator John Pastore, of Rhode Island, was Chair of the Senate Communications Sub-Committee. Because he had formerly been governor of Rhode Island, I asked him during an informal conversation how he managed his flow of correspondence when governor. His policy was to clean his desk every evening before leaving for home.
In my later years at the University of Iowa I was impressed with President David Skorton (for a variety of reasons; he's now president of Cornell University) and his equivalent approach to email -- promptly answering seemingly every one he received. Another classy educational administrator the Regents ran off, Mike Hogan (now president of University of Connecticut), seems to do the same (as well as maintaining his own personal blog). I've noticed that other successful CEOs and institutional leaders seem to be able to do so as well.
Needless to say, having started my federal government service at Maritime at the tender and impressionable age of 29, I tried to emulate the practices of my elders.
As a school board member, I tried to do the same thing while noting, "As a school board member you may not get any pay, but at least you get a lot of grief." You also get a lot of email. No one holds a gun to your head and forces you to run for school board. Having chosen to do so and having been elected, however, the position imposes some responsibilities. The effort to learn about the ICCSD, Iowa education law, innovations in K-12 education globally and in the U.S., write a column about K-12 issues for the local paper every two weeks for three years, and time spent preparing for and attending Board meetings -- and answering email -- often added a not-insignificant number of hours to my work week.
When I commented to a superintendent (not Lane Plugge) about the email load and asked for advice, it produced what I found to be a startling response: "Just ignore it. Don't answer. If you answer their emails you'll just get more." Needless to say, I found the counsel neither responsible nor persuasive. But apparently some of the other board members followed the advice.
There have been a number of times, still to this day, when an Iowa City resident will describe some occasion and issue, and say with appreciation, "You know, I emailed every Board member and the Superintendent, and you were the only one who ever answered." That has always been reward enough for the hours and effort.
For a superintendent, or school board member, to simply ignore constituents' email is (in my opinion) the modern-day, electronic equivalent of holding a public meeting for constituent input on some issue while board members sit hear-no-evil-see-no-evil-speak-no-evil silent, with no response, as if to say, "Our decision has been made, don't try to confuse us with the facts."
I made the offer to the finalists of space in the blog sincerely. (1) It is consistent with the FCC's former "Fairness Doctrine" to give someone who has been the subject of media reporting and commentary (with today's definition of "media" including blogs such as this) an opportunity to respond to what has been said. (2) It could have been useful for the ICCSD Board and community members to have the benefit of a final word from each finalist.
But I was also engaged in a bit of an experiment. "If you build it will they come?"; if they are emailed, do they respond?
The answer, it turns out (at least on this occasion, and within this timeframe), is that Mark Bezek responds, does so promptly, and with a friendly spirit; and that Steve Murley and Brad Meeks do not even acknowledge receipt of the email.
Because most everything of what the community knows of these three gentlemen is based on what they (and others) say rather than what they do, perhaps this one example of what they do will be useful.
But to emphasize again: there can be many reasons for the failure to respond, and in no event should the experiment be given more than minimal, marginal consideration in comparing the qualities of the three.
Finally, of course the invitation still stands -- both this week and throughout the years of service of whomever is ultimately chosen by the Board: anytime they want to communicate to this blog's readership directly they can do so with whatever they want to say (including scathing criticism of myself).
As emailed Friday, I wish each of them good luck in their pursuit, have not designated any to be a personal favorite, and look forward to welcoming to Iowa City and the school district whomever the Board ultimately selects this evening.
[P.S. As an interesting sidebar on the saga of superintendent selection for the ICCSD, and the seeming inability of the District's Board members and their search firm to find any possible candidates anywhere throughout the entire state of Iowa (and its 350-plus school districts), our neighbor to the west, the Clear Creek-Amana School District is now considering four finalists for its superintendent position. How many Iowans could it find? Four. Four out of four. All of them (at least one of whom is from the sizable city of Waterloo). Amazing! How on earth could they have done that? Maybe we should ask them next time. Or perhaps we might just check the Iowa Department of Education's list of 361 superintendents with their names and phone numbers and start calling around. "CCA Announces Superintendent Candidates," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 23, 2010; Editorial, "Our Quick Take on Last Week's News Stories; Superintendent Candidates -- CCA," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 25, 2010.]
2:30 Update: Murley Responds
Upon my return home from a noontime event today I found an email from Steve Murley, timestamped 11:34 a.m.
The most significant excerpt from that email, which provides as much or more of his useful and reassuring insight into our Board members as our additional insight into him (which it also does):
One comment that you made in your blog post from April 17 deserves to be revisited. You stated that, "Indeed, one should be extremely suspicious of anyone who would be willing to be considered for the job of working with such a school board." Your comment was made in reference to concerns that you enumerated about the lack of a clear governance system, delineation of measurable goals, discussion of educational innovations, and absence of metrics for results measurement related to boundary changes. I am in full agreement with you that these are indeed important issues for the Board to tackle. However, the absence of these does not indicate to me that the Board has chosen to ignore them or that the Board thinks they are unworthy of attention. In fact, I would argue that from my limited interaction with the Board, just the opposite is true. During my first interaction with the Board concerns about board governance were raised and, to a Board member, all agreed that the issue needed to be addressed to further solidify the work in front of them. The presence of measurable goals is one that we discussed at length and that the Board seems to clearly understand are needed to assess progress over time. The issue of concern about educational innovation was also raised frequently by Board members, most notably, when I asked them to provide for me their thoughts about where they wanted to see the District in 5, 10, or 15 years during the last public interview. Finally, although the boundary discussion has been underway for the past eight months, I felt that all of the Board members were clearly concerned about the students in each of the schools and were sincerely working to find the best outcome. In working with many different Board members over the past 11 years in Wausau I would argue that dedicated, committed Board members who recognize the issues in front of the District and are willing to tackle all problems, big or small, hard or easy, are what best serve the students and residents of a community. That is why I chose to return to the Iowa City School District as a finalist and why I hope to have the opportunity to serve the students of the ICCSD.
As promised in "Finalists Responses? Decision Sunday? Finalists Offered Last Word," April 24, 2010, I will leave his comment to stand on its own, which it is quite capable of doing, rather than responding to it.
April 26, 9:30 a.m. Update: Meeks Responds
And as of Monday morning, here is Brad Meeks response in its entirety:
It was good meeting you last week. I appreciate you taking the time to study the process, perspectives of the candidates and a willingness to discuss the issues. Being a former school board member, I’m sure you can readily understand that selecting a superintendent is one of the most important responsibilities of the school board and having the citizens involved in the process is important. It was an enjoyable day touring the community and meeting the people of the district.
I wish the board and community well as the decision is made on the selection of a new superintendent. Iowa City has a great school system and community.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
April 23, 2010, 7:45 a.m.
[This is essentially the sixth in what is, as of this morning, a six-part series on the Iowa City schools search for a new superintendent: "School Boundaries: There Are Better Ways," April 16, 2010 (with links to 23 prior, related blog entries and other writing); "How to Pick a School Superintendent; And My Questions for Candidates," April 17, 2010; "Bringing Home the Bacon and Bezek," April 20, 2010, "ICCSD's Triple Play: From Bezek to Murley to Meeks; Bezek Can Talk the Talk -- On Four Hours' Sleep," April 21, 2010; and "Hurlyburly Over Murley," April 22, 2010.]
Want to know the results of the finalists' "email exam"? See "IC Supers' Email," April 25, 2010.
Brad Meeks Rounds Out Three Finalists
(brought to you by FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com*)
With the conclusion of Brad Meeks' public meet and greet and Board interview last evening the Seven Bishops of the Board disappeared behind the curtain, leaving us to wait for either the white flag of surrender (and a new search), or the white puff of smoke, perhaps a week from now, informing the community that a new leader has indeed been anointed.
Today is our day to review the third and last finalist: Brad Meeks.
Summary: He seemed relaxed and self-assured last evening as he easily handled the questions, well regarded by those he works with (according to our local news reports), talks the talk (e.g., importance of communication and collaboration), recently (seemingly successfully) put 70% of his students in different schools (boundary changes), got in a bit of a twist (law suit) over location of new high school, comes from a district a fraction of the size of ours (i.e., five elementary and two middle schools, one high school), a 49-year-old who will have a son attending UI and already has a wife from Cedar Rapids (a prescient choice). (Photo credit: NIck's iPhone; Meeks at "Meet and Greet.")
For those following this saga, there is also an additional, insightful piece this morning about Steve Murley and his insights regarding the process of superintendent hiring and evaluation: Jeff Charis-Carlson, "Clarifying the Roles of Boards, Superintendents," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 23, 2010, p. A9. Give it a read.
To begin our recap on Meeks, here are excerpts from some basics in Lee Hermiston's early overview:
Meeks said his son, Devin, is going to be a freshman on the University of Iowa swim team in the fall and his wife, Terri, spent her childhood in the Cedar Rapids area. . . .
According to the district's Web site, the population within the Farmington district is 30,000 and the student population is 6,400. The district employs almost 750 people, including more than 400 licensed teachers.
Those who know and have worked with Meeks during his seven years as the Farmington superintendent describe the Gettysburg, S.D., native as a visionary, an innovator and someone who values the opinion of others.
Julie McKnight, a Farmington School Board member . . . was looking for a strong leader with problem-solving skills. "He's displayed that and more" [having] transformed Farmington from a "mediocre district, at best," to a "very good district with a lot of great things happening." . . .
Christine Weymouth, assistant superintendent of education services for the Farmington district, . . . said "It's been fabulous working with Brad. Simply fabulous. He's a great leader."
Weymouth and Farmington School District human resources director Linda Goers said one of Meeks' best qualities is his ability to listen to many voices. . . .
"He's . . . one of those people that asks questions and gathers all of the information. He doesn't make quick, snap decisions. He values input from all the parties involved."
Meeks was involved in some controversy in 2005 when the school district and city had a dispute about the location of a new high school. McKnight said the district found a suitable location on the north end of the district, but the city wanted a location closer to the center of town to attract business. A lawsuit eventually was filed and went to mediation . . ..
"Typically, the best way is to try to be as objective as possible and get information out to the public so they understand what the two sides of the issue are," [Meeks] said.
Lee Hermiston, "Meeks Described as Innovative, Visionary," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 17, 2010.
And here are excerpts from the local papers' reports of his performance last evening:
Rob Daniel, "Candidate backs team approach; Cites how it improved test scores," Iowa City Press-Citizen, April 23, 2010, p. A1 ("Brad Meeks said one of his proudest moments as superintendent of the Farmington (Minn.) School District was seeing the passage of a $112 million bond that built a new high school and a fifth elementary school. . . .
During a meet-and-greet with community members before the interview began, Meeks told the story of how Gillian Lynne became a choreographer later noted for her work on the Broadway musicals "Cats" and "The Phantom of the Opera" . . . showing it is necessary to encourage students. . . . (Photo credit: Nick's iPhone; Meeks telling meet and greet crowd his Gillian Lynne story.)
[L]last year, three Farmington area schools were taken off the federal watch list under the No Child Left Behind Act thanks to improving test scores. He said one way that was accomplished was by hiring more reading and math specialists who work with teachers on instructing students.
"It should be a team-teaching approach," Meeks said. "What our test scores are showing us is it's a more effective model."
He also . . . tries to . . . 'keep the right people in the room,' when they are developing curriculum or negotiating a new contract with teachers and other district employees.
"It starts with trust," Meeks said. "My role as superintendent is to place people ... where they're going to be successful. I'm not the keeper of all knowledge.").
Greg Hennigan, "Candidate Isn't New to Challenges of Redistricting," The Gazette, April 23, 2010, p. A2 ("Farmington opened a new high school and added an elementary school and reconfigured its middle schools. About 70 percent of its students and staff were in new buildings this year.
“We didn’t miss anything, and it went off real well,” said Meeks, the Farmington superintendent. . . .
Meeks, 49, has been Farmington’s superintendent for seven years. He started his career in his native South Dakota and also has been a teacher, principal, coach and athletics director. . . .
The city and the school district disagreed on the location of the high school, which resulted in a lawsuit that contributed to the school opening a year later than usual and seeing its price tag balloon to $97 million, according to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Also, voters overwhelmingly rejected a proposed $24 million sports facility addition to the school, the newspaper reported. . . .
When asked how he would help school board members prepare for a potentially controversial decision, Meeks said he’d get them as much information as possible and present them with multiple options.
Meeks cited as one of his proudest moments getting three of the district’s schools off the “in need of assistance” list under the federal No Child Left Behind law this year.").
For the insightful observations and opinions of an experienced, observant and thoughtful classroom teacher, here are the morning's comments from my wife, Mary Vasey, "Brad Meeks, Team Player," Iowa City Press-Citizen On The Record, April 23, 2010:
As a long time classroom teacher I was happy to hear Brad Meeks talk about his management style. He emphasized more than once his practice of involving the staff and community when appropriate. He talked about getting the right people in the room when planning and making decisions. When asked about accomplishments he gave credit to others instead of claiming it solely for himself.
Three schools in his district were taken off the School in Need of Assistance list. He said they identified the issues, made a plan and then used an online testing program three times during the year to monitor progress and make adjustments. I did not have a chance to ask him about it but I wonder if students took the test at various times(not as a group that is) and were involved in looking at the results. Then I would hope the students were a part of the planning process about how to proceed and make adjustments.
When asked about what he was proudest of Meeks cited two things. One was a math program but the other is what got my attention. He said that they minimized pull outs from the classroom. Specialists and special education teachers work with the teachers in the classroom as members of a team. He said that the test scores reflected the wisdom of that approach. I have talked with some teachers in Iowa City who said that, in their schools, there were more and more pull outs and that it was quite disruptive. My own experience has been that the team approach is effective.
I think both Steve Murley and Brad Meeks are strong candidates. They also have quite different styles. Murley has strong communication skills and a fairly traditional management style. I think Meeks would have a quieter, more inclusive style. Bezek’s main strength is that he comes from a district similar in size to Iowa City and he is the only one who talked about having an alternative school.
Michelle Hillenbrand, "School Board interviews third hopeful," The Daily Iowan, April 23, 2010, p. A2 ("Brad Meeks . . . said Thursday that searching within a budget for inefficiencies can allow him to stretch the dollar.
By purchasing a different type of health-care policy . . . the district saved $1.2 million . . ..
“How we build our budget should reflect our priorities, and our priorities should be in the classroom,” he said. The quality of teaching and class sizes also top his list of priorities . . ..
Linda Goers, the director of human resources in the Farmington district, hailed Meeks as a visionary. “He has the ability to look long-range and find ways to get input so everybody is kind of on the same path toward the goals in the district” . . ..
“What makes a difference in the classroom more than the class size is the quality of the teacher in that room,” . . . [b]y providing staff development to teachers, he said, he hopes to ensure their quality.
When asked by School Board members how he plans to close the student-achievement gaps, Meeks said he would begin preparing students for testing earlier by providing online tests throughout the year, a method he says would allow teachers to modify their approaches based on individual student needs. . . .
But some in Farmington criticized Meeks for accepting a salary only 10 percent less than the superintendent in his neighboring district, the Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan School District, which has 4.5 times as many students as Farmington.").
The questions asked by the Board have, appropriately, been similar if not identical for each finalist. Since I have not summarized them before, here were the ones I made a note of last evening. (This is an approximation, not a transcript of the precise language.) (Photo credit: Nick's iPhone; from left: Michael Shaw, Mike Cooper, Pati Fields, Gayle Klouda, Brad Meeks, Tuyet Dorau)
Why Iowa City?
What have been your proudest moments, and what do you wish you'd done differently?
What is your management philosophy, and how would you assess your own strengths and weaknesses?
Tell us about your dissertation, addressing "perceptions and expectations" in community-schools partnerships.
How do you decide when there is a need to reallocate funds; who is involved in that decision making process and how do you communicate about it to stakeholders?
How do you interact with your school board?
What are some specific examples of how you communicate with the community about complex and controversial issues?
How do you go about identifying an issue, coming up with an approach, implementing it, and then monitoring and assessing outcomes?
What have you done to establish good working relationships with employees?
How would you go about preparing the Board on a sensitive issue?
What do you do to encourage employee participation in organization planning, and what is an example of an idea you have implemented that came from a staff member?
How can we close the achievement, assessment and access gap?
What ideas do you have for the ICSSD relations with the City and UI?
Given the stresses of the job, how do you stay renewed?
To what extent have you been involved in legislative activity?
What is the role of the Board in curriculum development?
How important is average class size and what can you do about it?
Each finalist was also given an opportunity to ask questions of the Board. Three of Meeks' were:
What is your idea of an optimal superintendent-board relationship?
What is your sense of the priorities for a superintendent's first 30 days on the job?
What is the Board's approach to Board members' school visits? (Photo credit: Nick's iPhone; from left: Sarah Swisher, Michael Shaw, Mike Cooper, Toni Cilek, Brad Meeks)
If you're interested in the answers as well as the questions, as mentioned below I'm hopeful the District's videos of the three sessions will be cablecast on the District's channel repeatedly between now and the puff of white smoke.
One additional comment:
I have been frustrated by the Regents and UI seemingly focusing on the need to improve communication with the legislature and people of Iowa, while simultaneously failing to utilize the multi-million-dollar resource that is now called "Iowa Public Radio" (station announcements don't even hint that the University of Iowa is the licensee!), and the ICCSD Board's failing to ring all the benefit it might from its very own television channel. So I couldn't help but be impressed with how creative the Farmington District has been with its informative streaming videos for the community ("Ed Channel Online") -- notwithstanding its size.
(The District's Web site is a part of the rSchoolToday group and the "Wiki Way of Websites," which from appearances looks like a good way for small districts to go.)
Not incidentally, in this connection, the three evenings' ICCSD School Board interviews of finalists have been videotaped by the District -- initially for purposes of Board members only. Hopefully, they will be distributed for the community on the District's cable channel as well.
So, how do the three stack up? Is there an obvious choice? None is from among Iowa's 300-plus superintendents; all will start from ground zero trying to understand Iowa school finance and getting to know the legislature, Iowa City's culture, the role of the University, UIHC and major businesses in Eastern Iowa, not to mention the stakeholders already in place when they arrive. All are "white males in suits" (teaching backgrounds: two former coaches (who also did some teaching) and one industrial arts instructor). None is a national star superintendent. All are, as then candidate Obama once characterized candidate Clinton, "nice enough." None had much to say (or, in fairness, were asked) about education, curriculum, or teaching methods. All are, clearly, at least minimally competent (actually more than that, but at least that); each has his supporters and detractors, his impressive accomplishments and things for which he wished for a redo.
Although I don't have a recommendation for the Board as to whom they should pick -- nor would it make much difference if I did (except, perhaps, to lessen the chances of whichever finalist I favored) -- I will go way, way out on a limb with regard to whom I would take a wild guess they'll end up with. Mind you have have not a scintilla of a clue from anything that is first, second, or even third-hand information or rumors from any member of the Board. It's just a guess based on what I observe, know about, and my evaluation of, the Board members (as distinguished from my evaluation of the finalists). So who will they pick, after hours of back and forth discussion and fruitless efforts to resolve a classic, impenetrable, multiple-variable-comparative analysis? Brad Meeks.
_______________
* Why do I put this blog ID at the top of the entry, when you know full well what blog you're reading? Because there are a number of Internet sites that, for whatever reason, simply take the blog entries of others and reproduce them as their own without crediting the source. I don't mind the flattering attention, but would appreciate acknowledgment as the source -- even if I have to embed it myself.
-- Nicholas Johnson
# # #
