The board members dedicated substantial time to evaluating Superintendent Brett Charleston. They encountered a technical glitch in the evaluation tool, causing discrepancies in the submitted evaluations. This issue led to concerns about the fairness and accuracy of the performance levels being calculated. Members expressed unease about proceeding with the evaluation until these issues were resolved, emphasizing the importance of an accurate and fair assessment process. The evaluation process itself is considered one of the board’s most significant responsibilities, requiring careful consideration and input from all members.

The evaluation discussion included a prepared statement indicating that although such evaluations are typically conducted in executive sessions to preserve privacy, the superintendent had opted for a public discussion. This public approach did not permit public questions about the evaluation. The board members used a specific tool to assess the superintendent across several standards, with a maximum of three comments per standard. Despite encountering technical difficulties, the board worked through each standard, discussing the inclusion of comments and ensuring they aligned with the established goals.

A notable point of contention arose around the district goals. There was confusion regarding whether the board or the superintendent had drafted these goals, leading to debates about the relevance of certain comments in the evaluation. Some board members argued for the exclusion of irrelevant comments, while others suggested incorporating valid points into a summary at the conclusion of the evaluation.

The board also faced challenges in ensuring all perspectives were considered, highlighting the rigidity of the evaluation tool. Members expressed a desire for more flexibility in future evaluations to accommodate diverse viewpoints and feedback. As the discussion progressed, voting took place on whether to include specific comments, with members raising their hands to express their opinions. The process aimed to encapsulate the board’s collective sentiment, even if specific comments were not included in their exact form.

In addition to the evaluation, the board addressed the appointment of Kelly Hughes as the new principal of Bird Elementary. Miss Hughes was selected from a pool of 42 applicants after multiple interview rounds that included stakeholder input. Her impressive data analysis presentation, focus on team building, and commitment to a positive school culture were highlighted during the meeting. Board members praised her as a team builder with strong leadership qualities, describing her as “a true instructional leader” with a focus on literacy.

The meeting also celebrated student achievements, particularly in athletics and technology. Dr. Charleston acknowledged students who excelled in the technology department, recognizing their contributions to audiovisual operations at district events. The board celebrated a successful athletic year, with Glen Rock winning numerous championships and receiving accolades for sportsmanship. The boys’ winter track team and the Glen Rock baseball team were specifically highlighted for their achievements.

Future planning discussions included scheduling a board retreat and conducting the superintendent’s evaluation. Members debated potential dates for the retreat, emphasizing its importance for the board’s collective functioning. A survey tool was suggested to streamline the scheduling process and ensure maximum attendance. The need for this retreat was emphasized as beneficial for the board as a whole.