A central topic of the meeting was the evaluation of Superintendent John Rabadu, which had been partially completed previously. Concerns were raised about the clarity and effectiveness of the evaluation goals, particularly the initiative to “create and execute a storytelling program.” It was suggested that the superintendent had not adequately addressed this goal, specifically regarding the establishment of a baseline through surveys. The committee agreed on the importance of providing feedback and decided to send the finalized evaluation to the superintendent for review before the next meeting. The committee also debated the necessity of reading the evaluation into the record and decided to include it in the agenda for the upcoming Thursday meeting.

Discussions about the superintendent’s goals highlighted the challenges in aligning overarching objectives with specific sub-goals due to varying state standards. The committee considered focusing on one or two indicators, allowing for more targeted evaluations and feedback. There was a proposal to extend the superintendent’s contract, emphasizing the benefits of leadership stability after a period of turbulence in the school district. The superintendent acknowledged the complexities of school leadership and the challenges posed by frequent administrative changes. A member appreciated the continuity provided by the current leadership and noted that extending the contract would formalize the district’s steady state.

Another focus was the development of new goals related to student achievement and growth. The committee introduced a draft underscoring the responsibility of administrators to assess student achievement from early grades through graduation. There was an emphasis on establishing clearer indicators beyond subjective teacher assessments to measure both academic and social-emotional growth. Suggestions were made for specific assessments, particularly at the high school level, where concerns about the reliability of current indicators were highlighted. The necessity of aligning curriculum investments with measurable student outcomes was stressed, with references to recent curriculum changes like new math programs.

Absenteeism was identified as an issue affecting educational outcomes. The committee debated its role in addressing the problem, with some members asserting it as a chronic issue requiring systemic solutions, while others believed existing policies were sufficient. The discussion acknowledged absenteeism as primarily an administrative responsibility.

The committee also discussed the importance of special education within the overall assessment framework. There were calls for regular reporting on special education initiatives and outcomes to ensure the community is informed about these issues. Tracking where graduates go after school was raised, with interest expressed in understanding the post-graduation paths of students.

The meeting further explored the evaluation of instructional staff and setting appropriate performance assessment goals. Concerns were raised about whether existing rubrics adequately address cohesion across different school buildings. Feedback from parents regarding the transitions their children experience between schools underscored the need for a more unified approach within the district to ease these transitions. The potential for 360-degree feedback mechanisms was discussed, involving gathering feedback from various stakeholders to provide a more rounded perspective on instructional leadership.

The committee recognized the challenges involved in implementing fair and comprehensive evaluation systems. There was an acknowledgment of the importance of clear communication about the evaluation process and the provision of professional development opportunities for principals and assistant principals. Discussions also highlighted the need for evaluations to reflect a constructive approach to improvement rather than cataloging deficiencies.