Give this woman a chance. Principals are leaving in droves. It is probably hard to recruit people here. Have an open mind, let’s see what she can do. The good people in DeKalb, GA were able to do this, and see?? I’m kidding, we don’t know anything about this woman other than this story. I’d love a follow up in a year, Tom.
Maybe this is changing the topic slightly but why would any parent have confidence in a system that doesn't value or trust teachers? This morning I learned from a D65 parent that technology is now integrated with all subjects. Specifically , this means kindergarteners have laptops. This flies in the face of what we know about the development of children. More specifically, I'm sad not to witness a revolt by teachers and parents. Why do we continue to accept this top-down model of curriculum strategy. Best learning occurs when a teacher designs lessons ( within standards) based on the needs of her/his students.
There was a very good principal and assistant principal at Willard. The white principal left and was replaced by a black woman. Jerry Success was not rehired inspite of the fact that he is black and very well liked. I was looking at the Evanston Review for a certain article and came across another article about the Board trying to tackle the achievement gap It was July 1992. ! Oh well
It would be interesting to see applicants for district admin jobs by race. It appears that the vast vast majority of hires since Horton are not white. I wonder if that’s because they aren’t applying or not being hired? I would get it if the districts student population wasn’t 50% white but it is so why wouldn’t leadership reflect that.
Further to my question above, I am guessing that any good principal or admin knows to stay away from D65 given the myriad of problems so understanding the applicant pool would be interesting. I would guess it’s a lot of candidates that want a high paying job but aren’t cream of the crop. I am also guessing that the candidate pool by race is fairly to diverse unlike the hiring.
I think this comment is bordering on distasteful since it's implying that candidates of certain skin color are less qualified.
I don't think thats what you're trying to say but I think you're opening yourself up to misinterpretation if you aren't really precise in wording around this topic
There's too few admin, especially principal, positions to try to draw a representative sample from.
And of course don't forget that there's always going to be a skew in who applies - e.g. The majority of teachers are female because the vast majority of applicants are female
You are right - that’s NOT what I was trying to say. We need to talk about the obvious. And the obvious if that white admin/principals simply have not been hired since 2020. I truly believe in the power of DEI abut this is not normal. Shouldn’t the admin/principal be diverse enough to reflect the student body? I get the rebalancing to make up for past discriminatory practices but to literally not hire anyone who’s white because they are white in a community where students are 50% white, well why?
Is it possible that white people have less "skin in the game" to strive for more equitable outcomes across racial lines? I'm interested in that type of data you suggest too, but what's the connection between your comment and this article? Simply that a non-white principal was hired and has some kind of faux controversy following her?
It's worth considering that hiring practices historically haven't necessarily been done primarily to mirror the student body vs. with some level of personal bias by those with the power to hire. Based on that, it stands to reason that more non-white people are hired (or voted) into those positions of power...they're probably going to end up hiring more non-white people! It also goes the other way -- it's easier to interview for a job where your potential boss is someone you can easily relate to.
All good points. But one of the concerns I have is that if they aren’t open to filling positions with anyone who is white then their talent pool is far more limited. The connection between my point and the article is that I can’t remember the last time they hired anyone in a leadership position that was white and quite frankly, that’s just weird and suggests exactly what you imply which is the whites can’t deliver equity which I think is total BS. the last time the district delivered any educational gains for black and brown kids was under a white Superintendent. Since Goren, the board and admin just talk about equity. The results are dismal at best and disastrous at worse. Maybe we should be focused on a more balanced view of leadership in D65 and not one that automatically rejects a large percentage of the population based on race alone?
Yeah -- I'm not sure if it's a matter of being "not" open vs. "less" open to hiring a white person in those positions. I think there's probably concern it "sends the wrong message" or feels like going backwards. I also think there's likely a lot of people who felt Goren and previous admins didn't make "enough" progress towards equity, regardless of how the people since have fared.
I think the more recent results are some combination of poor strategy/implementation, a board that's too homogenous in viewpoints (and light on humility/accountability), and mostly that the issues people are purportedly trying to address are deeply ingrained in society -- and it unfortunately is going to take quite some time to figure out what works. COVID feels like such a crutch, but you also can't deny the impact it's had on the students, teachers, staff, and parents...and that likely set us back a matter of years. Sure, cue the "we should have reopened school faster" rhetoric, but there's little we can do now about that beyond recognize the impact it had in potentially inhibiting progress. We're still digging out of a hole here.
I world argue the problems are a direct result of the board and admin starting with Horton. I feel like there is too much data to suggest otherwise. You don’t lose 20% of your students in a few years if you are hitting it out of the park. Other districts with similar Covid closures are not in the state of total financial and operational dysfunction as ours. Yes, learning loss is directly related to how long kids were out of school but the other stuff? The sooner this board gets voted out the better. Until then, it will be bad decisions and zero accountability
Horton created such a mess in District 65 that it is likely to destroy the district. Thankfully my kids have escaped by graduating to ETHS. Still, as a taxpayer it seems like the time to leave Evanston is sooner. The trees were nice, but we have an army of public-ally funded tree-killers dooming that pleasant aspect of Evanston.
Bob, I would bet my left arm that if interest rates were down to the 4% range, there would have been a lot of people selling up and leaving. I’m out the door as soon as financially feasible. It’s not just the Board at 65. The city seems to feel that it’s not important to stick to fiscally prudent policies, either.
Chief. 39 were white; one was black; And she got the job. Interestingly, the head of the search committee was also black. It could’ve been coincidence…
I guess, it just seems like an interpersonal issue and not something more systemic. I'm not sure I can fault anyone for having interpersonal conflicts at some prior job or else I'd never get work !!
Personally this article is pretty accurate. Spencer-Grant cared ablut the Black and brown kids. She was old school for sure. Amber constantly gave students who had repeatedly been in fights a slap on the wrist and kids who were first time offenders arguing in the hallways suspensions. She was unfair and had favorites. She was harsh to Black kids and lenient to white kids. Our daughter was jumped and expelled from the district(was reversed after footage was viewed) and the girl who jumped her stayed at school for the rest of the day because her mother had to work.
Just the fact that there was even a vote like this and that it was agreed that there needed to be a change while she was in charge should have been enough for D65 to reconsider. There is a REASON so many admins and staff are leaving D65 and hiring practices are one of them. We already know the board has failed so many times at hiring anyone decent. Why should we trust this choice?? D65 has gone down the toilet.
Good to see that there’s at least some concern about staff and student safety at d65. Granted it supposedly happened out of state, which is maybe why the local media is willing to write about it, even irresponsibly. I find it incredible that Turner lashes out against one sided narratives. Considering what happened at Haven, I’m shocked that’s a concern of d65 all of a sudden.
This post leads me to ask one question: are there ANY Horton/Turner- era hires that have been good or better than the people they replaced?
Our elementary school hired a new principal during this time. The replacement hasn’t been a disaster, but doesn’t seem as good from a communications standpoint as the person they replaced.
Are there any cases where Horton/Turner have been good??
Also, is that Essentials data publicly posted for the whole district somewhere?
Give this woman a chance. Principals are leaving in droves. It is probably hard to recruit people here. Have an open mind, let’s see what she can do. The good people in DeKalb, GA were able to do this, and see?? I’m kidding, we don’t know anything about this woman other than this story. I’d love a follow up in a year, Tom.
Maybe this is changing the topic slightly but why would any parent have confidence in a system that doesn't value or trust teachers? This morning I learned from a D65 parent that technology is now integrated with all subjects. Specifically , this means kindergarteners have laptops. This flies in the face of what we know about the development of children. More specifically, I'm sad not to witness a revolt by teachers and parents. Why do we continue to accept this top-down model of curriculum strategy. Best learning occurs when a teacher designs lessons ( within standards) based on the needs of her/his students.
Vikki Proctor
This is a good point. Who is the Director of Curriculum? It starts with that role.
There was a very good principal and assistant principal at Willard. The white principal left and was replaced by a black woman. Jerry Success was not rehired inspite of the fact that he is black and very well liked. I was looking at the Evanston Review for a certain article and came across another article about the Board trying to tackle the achievement gap It was July 1992. ! Oh well
It would be interesting to see applicants for district admin jobs by race. It appears that the vast vast majority of hires since Horton are not white. I wonder if that’s because they aren’t applying or not being hired? I would get it if the districts student population wasn’t 50% white but it is so why wouldn’t leadership reflect that.
Further to my question above, I am guessing that any good principal or admin knows to stay away from D65 given the myriad of problems so understanding the applicant pool would be interesting. I would guess it’s a lot of candidates that want a high paying job but aren’t cream of the crop. I am also guessing that the candidate pool by race is fairly to diverse unlike the hiring.
I think this comment is bordering on distasteful since it's implying that candidates of certain skin color are less qualified.
I don't think thats what you're trying to say but I think you're opening yourself up to misinterpretation if you aren't really precise in wording around this topic
There's too few admin, especially principal, positions to try to draw a representative sample from.
And of course don't forget that there's always going to be a skew in who applies - e.g. The majority of teachers are female because the vast majority of applicants are female
You are right - that’s NOT what I was trying to say. We need to talk about the obvious. And the obvious if that white admin/principals simply have not been hired since 2020. I truly believe in the power of DEI abut this is not normal. Shouldn’t the admin/principal be diverse enough to reflect the student body? I get the rebalancing to make up for past discriminatory practices but to literally not hire anyone who’s white because they are white in a community where students are 50% white, well why?
Is it possible that white people have less "skin in the game" to strive for more equitable outcomes across racial lines? I'm interested in that type of data you suggest too, but what's the connection between your comment and this article? Simply that a non-white principal was hired and has some kind of faux controversy following her?
It's worth considering that hiring practices historically haven't necessarily been done primarily to mirror the student body vs. with some level of personal bias by those with the power to hire. Based on that, it stands to reason that more non-white people are hired (or voted) into those positions of power...they're probably going to end up hiring more non-white people! It also goes the other way -- it's easier to interview for a job where your potential boss is someone you can easily relate to.
All good points. But one of the concerns I have is that if they aren’t open to filling positions with anyone who is white then their talent pool is far more limited. The connection between my point and the article is that I can’t remember the last time they hired anyone in a leadership position that was white and quite frankly, that’s just weird and suggests exactly what you imply which is the whites can’t deliver equity which I think is total BS. the last time the district delivered any educational gains for black and brown kids was under a white Superintendent. Since Goren, the board and admin just talk about equity. The results are dismal at best and disastrous at worse. Maybe we should be focused on a more balanced view of leadership in D65 and not one that automatically rejects a large percentage of the population based on race alone?
Yeah -- I'm not sure if it's a matter of being "not" open vs. "less" open to hiring a white person in those positions. I think there's probably concern it "sends the wrong message" or feels like going backwards. I also think there's likely a lot of people who felt Goren and previous admins didn't make "enough" progress towards equity, regardless of how the people since have fared.
I think the more recent results are some combination of poor strategy/implementation, a board that's too homogenous in viewpoints (and light on humility/accountability), and mostly that the issues people are purportedly trying to address are deeply ingrained in society -- and it unfortunately is going to take quite some time to figure out what works. COVID feels like such a crutch, but you also can't deny the impact it's had on the students, teachers, staff, and parents...and that likely set us back a matter of years. Sure, cue the "we should have reopened school faster" rhetoric, but there's little we can do now about that beyond recognize the impact it had in potentially inhibiting progress. We're still digging out of a hole here.
I world argue the problems are a direct result of the board and admin starting with Horton. I feel like there is too much data to suggest otherwise. You don’t lose 20% of your students in a few years if you are hitting it out of the park. Other districts with similar Covid closures are not in the state of total financial and operational dysfunction as ours. Yes, learning loss is directly related to how long kids were out of school but the other stuff? The sooner this board gets voted out the better. Until then, it will be bad decisions and zero accountability
There were about 40 candidates for the Evanston library
It is safer to run for library positions clearly. Less mud slinging and toxic pathetic women calling people racists.
Horton created such a mess in District 65 that it is likely to destroy the district. Thankfully my kids have escaped by graduating to ETHS. Still, as a taxpayer it seems like the time to leave Evanston is sooner. The trees were nice, but we have an army of public-ally funded tree-killers dooming that pleasant aspect of Evanston.
I'm still on a mission to avenge those woodpeckers
Bob, I would bet my left arm that if interest rates were down to the 4% range, there would have been a lot of people selling up and leaving. I’m out the door as soon as financially feasible. It’s not just the Board at 65. The city seems to feel that it’s not important to stick to fiscally prudent policies, either.
Chief. 39 were white; one was black; And she got the job. Interestingly, the head of the search committee was also black. It could’ve been coincidence…
Per ERT, teachers union in Tacoma filed complaints against her, which is enough for me to give her a chance.
I guess, it just seems like an interpersonal issue and not something more systemic. I'm not sure I can fault anyone for having interpersonal conflicts at some prior job or else I'd never get work !!
Personally this article is pretty accurate. Spencer-Grant cared ablut the Black and brown kids. She was old school for sure. Amber constantly gave students who had repeatedly been in fights a slap on the wrist and kids who were first time offenders arguing in the hallways suspensions. She was unfair and had favorites. She was harsh to Black kids and lenient to white kids. Our daughter was jumped and expelled from the district(was reversed after footage was viewed) and the girl who jumped her stayed at school for the rest of the day because her mother had to work.
Just the fact that there was even a vote like this and that it was agreed that there needed to be a change while she was in charge should have been enough for D65 to reconsider. There is a REASON so many admins and staff are leaving D65 and hiring practices are one of them. We already know the board has failed so many times at hiring anyone decent. Why should we trust this choice?? D65 has gone down the toilet.
But like the vote they talk about was completely unofficial and could’ve been like 4 people. Should she just never work again?
No. But D65 isn't in the position to take any risks. And this was a risk.
Good to see that there’s at least some concern about staff and student safety at d65. Granted it supposedly happened out of state, which is maybe why the local media is willing to write about it, even irresponsibly. I find it incredible that Turner lashes out against one sided narratives. Considering what happened at Haven, I’m shocked that’s a concern of d65 all of a sudden.
This post leads me to ask one question: are there ANY Horton/Turner- era hires that have been good or better than the people they replaced?
Our elementary school hired a new principal during this time. The replacement hasn’t been a disaster, but doesn’t seem as good from a communications standpoint as the person they replaced.
Are there any cases where Horton/Turner have been good??
Also, is that Essentials data publicly posted for the whole district somewhere?