Click here for a video of the Minooka CCSD 201 Committee of the Whole Meeting that occurred on May 27, 2015.
Clearly, not everyone is a fan of my blog or my right to free speech which is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (see the exchange between Ed Cronin and myself from minute 48:00 to 53:10 in the above video--warning, contains some explicit language).
To see what I actually wrote about the similarities between the severance packages of the College of DuPage President and Superintendent Gegenheimer, click here.
In addition, for background regarding the Minooka CCSD 201 school board's unanimous vote to reprimand Superintendent Gegenheimer for unprofessional conduct, click here for a Morris Daily Herald article and here and here for previous posts.
Further, to read about why I blog about Minooka CCSD 201 and why I believe that public bodies and public officials who spend taxpayer dollars should be subject to public scrutiny and transparency, click here. The school board is responsible for spending over $30 million dollars in taxpayer monies every year. I believe that taxpayers should be able to hear and see how their publicly elected officials spend their hard-earned dollars, regardless of whether they are able to actually attend the school board meetings.
Regarding the concern that my blog might scare away potential candidates for superintendent--if a potential candidate does not think that they can maintain a sufficiently professional demeanor toward school board members, staff, and parents such that I would call for their reprimand or non-renewal, then I hope that they have chosen on their own not to submit an application for the position of superintendent. I will never know whether any potential candidates have chosen not to apply due to my blog. However, there are currently 42 applicants for the position of superintendent. I have been told by a representative of the IASB that a district of our size should expect a candidate pool of between 30 and 50 applicants.
Finally, for anyone who wants to know what my agenda as a school board member is, it is to provide a good education to the students at an affordable price to the taxpayers. And I would like this to be done by school officials and employees in a professional, ethical and legal manner.
Click here for a video of the business portion of the Minooka CCSD 201 Regular Meeting that occurred on May 27, 2015.
Saturday, May 30, 2015
Thursday, May 28, 2015
Why Minooka CCSD 201 Needs a Whistleblower Protection Policy
The main functions of a school board are to set a vision for the district and to provide oversight by ensuring that district personnel are meeting the vision set for the district in a professional, ethical and legal manner.
One of the key problems of a hierarchical organization like a school district is making sure that those at the upper tier of the hierarchy, such as school board members, are kept fully informed of important issues concerning the lower tiers of the hierarchy, such as teachers and aides. The school board should be made aware of the concerns that teachers, aides and other staff have regarding what is going on in their classrooms and at their schools, ideas that they might have on how the district could improve in its job of educating students, and any significant complaints that they may have regarding the educational process or their employment. Unfortunately, this type of information does not always reach the school board.
The school board also needs to ensure that those in management do not abuse their authority over teachers and staff, and sometimes even principals, by stifling the flow of information, ideas and complaints from employees to the school board.
I cannot tell you how many times I have heard about the "chain of command" in our school district. It has been said many times that teachers or other staff should not be bringing issues to the school board but should rather follow their "chain of command" if they have ideas or problems with their job or with the educational process affecting students. For example, this means that if a teacher has an issue they would like to raise, they need to raise it with their building principal. It is then up to the principal to discuss the issue with the superintendent, who will presumably discuss it with the school board. When the "chain of command" works properly, information flows up and decisions or directions flow down.
But what happens when that doesn't happen? What recourse does a teacher, for example, then have to let the school board know about their concern? Well, they should be able to come to a school board meeting and tell the school board what they want them to know. Or be able to ask for a meeting to discuss the issue with the school board. Or even be able to send an email to the school board. But employees in our district have not always been encouraged to do that, and some may feel that they have even suffered adverse job actions as a result of their doing this because they failed to follow their "chain of command."
So, let's talk a little about the concept of a "chain of command," a concept that is borrowed from the military.
What the district has done is to borrow one concept from the military but omitted the countervailing concept of whistleblower protection. The concept of the chain of command allows the hierarchy to function on a day-to-day basis. The concept of whistleblower protection allows issues and complaints to by-pass the chain of command and jump some or all levels of the hierarchy. This concept serves a number of purposes: (1) it allows those at the top of the hierarchy to, at times, receive unfiltered information from all levels of the hierarchy; (2) it allows those at the top of the hierarchy to ensure that the mid-level managers are held accountable; and (3) it allows those on the "front lines" to know that they have a viable outlet for complaints without threat of retaliation.
Many types of disclosures are already protected under Federal and state law. Other types of disclosures are not protected by statute but may be protected by common law or under constitutional provisions. A whistleblower protection policy would protect disclosures that are currently in the "gray" areas or do not receive legal protection. These would include disclosures such as those issues brought to the attention of the school board by teachers at a school board meeting.
Some will say that a whistleblower protection policy obstructs the day-to-day operation of an organization. Basically, you don't want to have employees running amok and tattling on their supervisor every time their supervisor tries to direct them in their job--which supervisors are obviously allowed and required to do. A whistleblower protection policy would not allow staff to disparage, insult or undermine their supervisors or otherwise impede on their supervisors legitimate decision-making authority.
Rather, a whistleblower protection policy would allow all staff the opportunity to notify the school board of important issues that should not be "swept under the rug" and which they feel their supervisors may be keeping from the school board. Such issues generally do not get better with age and should be dealt with as promptly as possible so they do not grow into larger issues or infect the culture of an organization. Such a policy would encourage staff to speak freely with the school board if they felt that their legitimate ideas or concerns were being stymied by their "chain-of-command" without fear of reprisal.
Whistleblower protection policies only make sense in an organization that cares not only that the job gets done (the "ends") but how the job gets done (the "means"). In other words, if one believes that the "ends justify the means," then a whistleblower protection policy is a foreign concept. If one cares both about "ends" and "means," then such a policy is warranted.
One of the key problems of a hierarchical organization like a school district is making sure that those at the upper tier of the hierarchy, such as school board members, are kept fully informed of important issues concerning the lower tiers of the hierarchy, such as teachers and aides. The school board should be made aware of the concerns that teachers, aides and other staff have regarding what is going on in their classrooms and at their schools, ideas that they might have on how the district could improve in its job of educating students, and any significant complaints that they may have regarding the educational process or their employment. Unfortunately, this type of information does not always reach the school board.
The school board also needs to ensure that those in management do not abuse their authority over teachers and staff, and sometimes even principals, by stifling the flow of information, ideas and complaints from employees to the school board.
I cannot tell you how many times I have heard about the "chain of command" in our school district. It has been said many times that teachers or other staff should not be bringing issues to the school board but should rather follow their "chain of command" if they have ideas or problems with their job or with the educational process affecting students. For example, this means that if a teacher has an issue they would like to raise, they need to raise it with their building principal. It is then up to the principal to discuss the issue with the superintendent, who will presumably discuss it with the school board. When the "chain of command" works properly, information flows up and decisions or directions flow down.
But what happens when that doesn't happen? What recourse does a teacher, for example, then have to let the school board know about their concern? Well, they should be able to come to a school board meeting and tell the school board what they want them to know. Or be able to ask for a meeting to discuss the issue with the school board. Or even be able to send an email to the school board. But employees in our district have not always been encouraged to do that, and some may feel that they have even suffered adverse job actions as a result of their doing this because they failed to follow their "chain of command."
So, let's talk a little about the concept of a "chain of command," a concept that is borrowed from the military.
What the district has done is to borrow one concept from the military but omitted the countervailing concept of whistleblower protection. The concept of the chain of command allows the hierarchy to function on a day-to-day basis. The concept of whistleblower protection allows issues and complaints to by-pass the chain of command and jump some or all levels of the hierarchy. This concept serves a number of purposes: (1) it allows those at the top of the hierarchy to, at times, receive unfiltered information from all levels of the hierarchy; (2) it allows those at the top of the hierarchy to ensure that the mid-level managers are held accountable; and (3) it allows those on the "front lines" to know that they have a viable outlet for complaints without threat of retaliation.
Many types of disclosures are already protected under Federal and state law. Other types of disclosures are not protected by statute but may be protected by common law or under constitutional provisions. A whistleblower protection policy would protect disclosures that are currently in the "gray" areas or do not receive legal protection. These would include disclosures such as those issues brought to the attention of the school board by teachers at a school board meeting.
Some will say that a whistleblower protection policy obstructs the day-to-day operation of an organization. Basically, you don't want to have employees running amok and tattling on their supervisor every time their supervisor tries to direct them in their job--which supervisors are obviously allowed and required to do. A whistleblower protection policy would not allow staff to disparage, insult or undermine their supervisors or otherwise impede on their supervisors legitimate decision-making authority.
Rather, a whistleblower protection policy would allow all staff the opportunity to notify the school board of important issues that should not be "swept under the rug" and which they feel their supervisors may be keeping from the school board. Such issues generally do not get better with age and should be dealt with as promptly as possible so they do not grow into larger issues or infect the culture of an organization. Such a policy would encourage staff to speak freely with the school board if they felt that their legitimate ideas or concerns were being stymied by their "chain-of-command" without fear of reprisal.
Whistleblower protection policies only make sense in an organization that cares not only that the job gets done (the "ends") but how the job gets done (the "means"). In other words, if one believes that the "ends justify the means," then a whistleblower protection policy is a foreign concept. If one cares both about "ends" and "means," then such a policy is warranted.
Wednesday, May 27, 2015
Results of 5 Essentials Survey 2015
Once again, each public school district in Illinois was required to
participate in something called the 5 Essentials Survey. This was a
survey created by the University of Chicago to measure schools and
districts along five factors that were found by their study to be
essential to the success of a school district.
The survey responses were used to evaluate districts and schools in the
following five areas: Effective Leaders,
Collaborative Teachers, Involved Families, Supportive Environment, and Ambitious Instruction.
Click here for the results of the 5 Essentials Survey for Minooka 201. The separate reports for each of Minooka 201's seven schools are here: Minooka Primary Center, Minooka Elementary, Aux Sable Elementary, Jones Elementary, Walnut Trails Elementary, Minooka Intermediate School, and Minooka Junior High School.
Click here for the results of the 5 Essentials Survey for Minooka 201. The separate reports for each of Minooka 201's seven schools are here: Minooka Primary Center, Minooka Elementary, Aux Sable Elementary, Jones Elementary, Walnut Trails Elementary, Minooka Intermediate School, and Minooka Junior High School.
Friday, May 22, 2015
Next Minooka 201 School Board Meeting
The next meeting of the Minooka CCSD 201 school board is
Wednesday, May 27, 2015. The Committee of the Whole Meeting starts
at 6:00 p.m. in the board room (the old library) at the Minooka Primary
Center located at 305 Church Street in Minooka. The Committee of the
Whole Meeting will be followed by the regular Board Meeting at 7 p.m. Each of the meetings is
open to the public, and everyone is encouraged to
attend. You can find the agenda for each of the meetings here.
Information for the Committee of the Whole Meeting can be found here. Information for the regular Board Meeting can be found here. In addition, the Assistant Superintendent's Report and Superintendent's Report can be found here and here.
Information for the Committee of the Whole Meeting can be found here. Information for the regular Board Meeting can be found here. In addition, the Assistant Superintendent's Report and Superintendent's Report can be found here and here.
Friday, May 15, 2015
Special Meeting of Minooka 201 School Board
The Minooka CCSD 201 school board will be holding a special meeting on
Wednesday, May 20, 2015. The meeting agenda is available here.
The main agenda items for the meeting will be discussion of the search
for a new superintendent and implementation of full day
kindergarten. The meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m. in the board room
(the old library) at the Minooka Primary
Center located at 305 Church Street in Minooka. As always, members of
the public are welcome to attend.
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
Minooka CCSD 201 Superintendent Search
Monday, May 4, 2015
Special Meeting of Minooka 201 School Board
The Minooka CCSD 201 school board will be holding a special meeting on Tuesday, May 5, 2015. The meeting agenda is available here.
The main agenda item for the meeting will be board discussion with a representative of the Illinois Association of School Boards (IASB) regarding the search
for a new superintendent. The board has hired the IASB to assist in conducting a search for a new superintendent, and this meeting is being held in order for the board to give some direction to that search in terms of what the school board will be looking for in a new superintendent. The meeting will be held at 6:00 p.m. in the board room
(the old library) at the Minooka Primary
Center located at 305 Church Street in Minooka. As always, members of
the public are welcome to attend.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)