VIGO COUNTY, Ind – The Vigo County School Board appears to have selected a new Superintendent and some in the community do not believe that it was a transparent process or that input from the community was taken into consideration.
At Monday nights Vigo County School Board meeting, board members Mel Burks and Paul Lockhart expressed concern that there was no input from the school staff or members of the community.
Emails asking for an interview with Burkes and Lockhart have not been answered.
In a phone interview Tuesday, Vigo County Teachers Association President Mark Lee said that the teachers asked to be involved but they received conflicting answers.
LEE EMAILS
He said that they wanted an open process and that the elected board didn’t have to do what the search committee told them.
OPEN PROCESS
Lee presented the board with a letter outlining the organizations concerns. They included that the board relied almost exclusively on the University Placement Team, and the community has had no chance to meet with the candidates before the selection was made.
An announcement as to who has been selected is expected this week.
We have obtained a copy of the letter that Lee gave to the board and it is posted in its entirety below:
Dear President Lower and Members of the Board of School Trustees,
On April 24, 2018 we asked the Board president if she and her fellow Board members had considered once you had decided on finalists if those finalists would be meeting with community leaders and the leaders of the employee groups of the Corporation before a final selection would be made. We shared that we understood that it is the decision of the Board but suggested consideration by Board members.
On May 18, 2018 in an interview with the Tribune Star the Board president in commenting on the public announcement of the contract terms for a new superintendent and the selection process stated, ‘While some may have suggested the process for selecting a new superintendent has not been transparent, we have followed very specifically the very detailed direction from the University Placement Team. We have not veered away from that. In a public meeting at the start of the search process it was explained there would be no outside group or person involved in this process or interviews. We stuck to that and the Board agreed we would follow their direction and that’s what we have done. It hasn’t always been easy.”
We have concerns referencing the use of “outside group” or “person” involved in the process or interviews. We do not believe our community, community leaders, school employees and leaders of the school employees groups as being outsiders. If there were an “outside group” or “person” it would be the professors serving as the directors of the process rather than as consulting facilitators. In a February 14, 2018 interview with the Tribune Star Dr. Terry McDaniel stated that the University Placement Team “Does about anything a school corporation wants us to do. If a district doesn’t want the team involved in certain steps, it won’t be involved.” In that same interview the Board president stated, “I don’t know at what time the public will be involved, but we definitely want input from the community at some point.”
After our suggestion about community involvement on April 24, we have received contradictory communications. On April 25, the Board president responded, “Thanks, Mark. I do want you involved at some point. Others also.” Although, this is not what we had suggested, we felt that this was a good start. We also know there was Board consideration during the interview process on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday in late April of having an opportunity for administrative staff to meet with candidates and include Dr. Tanoos and myself. For whatever reason, whether time constraints or at recommendation of consultants this did not occur. We are certainly willing to discuss the other communications regarding the contradictory positions.
It appears that the selection process was speeded up after concerns began to be expressed and by May 10 a decision was made by four Board members to finalize the process and offer the position of superintendent. Not knowing the decision had been made by four Board members on May 10 but believing the search had been narrowed to two candidates we corresponded with the Board president on May 13, 2018 suggesting again that there be the opportunity for our community to have a chance to meet the two finalists in varying school and community visits. We also suggested that the recent vetting by Indiana State University in choosing their president would be a model for the Board to consider. We also asked what the hurry was in making a final selection? We suggested a process that ensured our community received the best candidate for superintendent whether it be one of these two finalists or not, and that the Board could support unanimously as recommended.
A great deal of emphasis has been placed on the premise that the Board followed the very detailed direction of the University Placement Team. The main representative of this team that was so integral to the process stated, “If a district doesn’t want the team involved in certain steps, it won’t be involved.” We certainly agree with this statement and believe the Board certainly could have made the choice to have community involvement.
Professor McDaniel in an interview with the Tribune Star on March 6, 2018 shared that he recommends that when the final public vote takes place, that vote be unanimous and then went on to share his reasons. He finished the interview by stating, “If a board ever voted 5-2 or 4-3 he would recommend against the finalist accepting the offer because it would signal “you don’t have total board support.” Since the Board has followed the very detailed direction of the University Placement Team has Professor McDaniel made that recommendation to the finalist to not accept?
We have concerns about the selection process and the finalist that has been recommended. We would like to sit down with members of the Board and have meaningful conversations that may lead to a collaborative and supportive solution to the process that have led us to this point.