Former DeKalb board member on school chief search: Hidden political agendas and dubious choices
Former DeKalb school board member Don McChesney has a new essay on his blog criticizing what he deems the flawed and politically driven process that led to the 2011 hiring of Cheryl Atkinson to lead DeKalb schools.
McChesney raises his concerns now because he presumes that the DeKalb board will be embarking on yet another search because Atkinson appears ready to bolt. Neither Atkinson nor the school board will confirm her resignation, but it certainly appears that the board is interviewing interim candidates, including former labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond.
(McCheseney lost his seat to Marshall Orson in November.)
Some of the machinations that McChesney describes are a normal part of any major candidate search. I also think it’s been shown that Lillie Cox, the front runner who withdrew from consideration, was not driven away by school board antics, but was more interested in a job closer to home. In less than two weeks of withdrawing her name in DeKalb, she took the top job in a North Carolina district where she used to work.
As for the overt political agendas that McChesney alleges, I covered three school boards, three city councils and assorted planning and zoning boards in my first years out of grad school. Hands down, the school boards were the most politically attuned and most politically motivated.
McChesney’s essay is long, but here is an excerpt. Read the full piece here.
As speculation mounts that we’ll soon be in need of a new superintendent, it’s a good time to tell you the saga of the last superintendent search. It’s a cautionary tale.
The superintendent search was the most arduous and difficult task I dealt with while on the Board. I almost resigned a couple of times due to the ensuing train wreck I was powerless to stop. I always thought reasoned argument amongst board members would win out in the end. I thought facts mattered. Alas, how naive I was.
Let’s start with our search firm Ray and Associates. Some of our board will tell you Ray and Associates did a poor job. I thought they were quite professional and delivered quality candidates that met our requirements. As the BOE reviewed candidates, some of my fellow Board members ruled out candidates that had top-notch credentials and solid records that clearly met the requirements we designed. With each ridiculous objection, the selection criteria morphed into something else. Ray and Associates grew very frustrated because the BOE had them chasing their tail. In our original criteria we wanted a superintendent with communication and media skills, success in a challenged school system, ability to raise student achievement, and capable of removing the bloat from the central office . I was looking for a clean break and preferred that we not choose anyone with ties to DeKalb County.
We met to study resumes. We spent hours reviewing stacks of applications and resumes. I learned a great deal about my colleagues’ study capabilities. We all isolated ourselves around the room and began to read. We did not have discussions with each other during the entire period. Representatives from Ray and Associates were in the room to answer any questions. I took notes on each candidate. Some Board members seemed to have difficulty staying on task. Attention spans were all over the place. Those who did not take notes had a very difficult time at the end of the process remembering who was who. That is when one of our members asked if we could have pictures of the candidates. I knew then we had a real problem.
After the ranking we came up with six candidates for the top of the list. This would be the group we interviewed. I did not like the list but my top two made the cut. Pam Speaks, Nancy Jester, and I talked after the meeting. We had each ranked the same candidate #1. We found out later that one other member also had this person first on their list. I was feeling optimistic.
Note that the person four Board members ranked number one was not in the final three.
In a fascinating set of events, the Board offered Dr. Cox a contract. One member sat in stunned silence with head in hands – speechless. The board had six or seven members in favor of offering the contract. I was surprised because, while Dr. Cox wasn’t my first pick, she was a solid professional. Ultimately I was happy the process had worked. In hindsight, I should have known better.
As the Board was in negotiations with Dr. Cox, leaks hit the media. The two or three “no” votes had their victory. They obstructed the majority of the Board from carrying out its will.
The remaining candidates were not viable to me. Four of us pressured to bring back the candidate that we had ranked number one. It was a hard fight. Two of our board members were vehemently against my number one. At a previous interview, one of these board members sat near the candidate and fell asleep during the questions. This candidate had the best interview I have ever seen. Members that opposed this candidate either purposefully tried to twist the candidate’s record or they weren’t capable of understanding the facts. Either way, the interests of children were not served well.
At this time, you probably recall, Pam, Nancy, and I wrote a letter to express our frustration with the process. Our voices were being diminished by all means available to those on the board that wanted to further their hidden agenda. Nancy and I were summoned to SACS headquarters. We were told it wasn’t good form to announce one’s vote in advance of a meeting. We maintained that it was corrosive and hostile to leak information to thwart the will of the board until some hidden agenda is realized. At that meeting, I felt we were being nudged to “go along to get along”. Nancy and I held our ground because we felt that it was the ethical thing to do. It didn’t occur to me at the time but, the person, three of us viewed as the most qualified, came from a state that accredits its own schools rather than hand over that responsibility to SACS.
This is when Cheryl Atkinson entered the discussion. The entire board had previously reviewed her resume and took a pass. Come to find out Dr. Atkinson served on SACS committees before. I also sensed that SACS turned a fourth board member who had always agreed with me on the ranking of candidates. Soon, this board member began to speak out in favor of hiring Dr. Atkinson.
It is here that I had to acknowledge the hidden agenda in this whole process. The superintendent had to be African-American. Anything that interfered with this agenda was irrelevant. The majority had completely lost focus on the students.
The BOE did not pick the most qualified candidate. I did not say that Dr. Atkinson was unqualified. She simply was not the best candidate we had before us. I talked with some people from Loraine including a board member. The things I was alerted to became a reality: micromanaging, lack of information, and traveling with an entourage and driver.
So I say go ask the six who hired this lady to defend their position. I bet you will be met with silence.
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
133 comments Add your comment
bootney farnsworth
February 5th, 2013
5:52 pm
there’s lies, damn lies, and statistics.
growth rates and income increases are not at all tied together. in the areas around the GPC campuses, all have growth spurts, but only in the Dunwoody area has there been any real increase in money coming in.
it stands to reason if an area is getting poorer, there might be a migration of people in similar circumstances going there in search of a more affordable lifestyle.
white folks and asians can be poor, too. and nowhere do the stats deal with the very real issue of illegal immigrants and legal ones who fall through the cracks.
bu2
February 5th, 2013
5:53 pm
@concernedmom
Dekalb is not Clayton because the board behavior hasn’t been as outrageous. The education level of the board is higher on average. And there are bright spots and relatively affluent spots in Dekalb as A Dekalb Resident pointed out. Clayton doesn’t have anchors like Emory University or CDC or Perimeter (it has the airport, but that’s not the same type of jobs-the best jobs, the pilots, tend to go to Fayette County). It doesn’t have the proximity to downtown Atlanta and Buckhead that much of Dekalb has.
Concernedmom30329
February 5th, 2013
7:03 pm
bu2
I agree with you about the pockets of affluence and general location. And I almost came back right away to post that.
But on most of the rest, I disagree. The conduct of DeKalb’s board has been far more damaging than Clayton. Most of the issues in Clayton revolved around meddling, especially at the school level. Note that they have not faced the indictment of a superintendent and staff that DCSS has, they have not learned of a surprise 40 million dollar deficit, their reduction in forces have gone much smoother than DCSS, in part because they don’t have nearly as large of a Friends and Family issue.
So while economically DCSS is better off because of neighborhoods like Druid Hills and Dunwoody, the reality is that our Board isn’t really any better.
NTLB
February 5th, 2013
7:16 pm
Don’t be surprised if Fulton County Schools has ANOTHER school board scandal/superintendent bolting event.
Maureen Downey
February 5th, 2013
7:19 pm
@Already, Some of those links contain households.
Maureen
10:10 am
February 5th, 2013
8:13 pm
Few third world countries are ready for democracy. Any expatriate will tell you that.
But the sordid secret of American democracy is that many of our urban zip codes are likewise il-suited for it. Their local ruling elites are well aware of this fact, but other Americans choose not to recognize it.
By all the available evidence, DeKalb is just such a place.
William
February 5th, 2013
8:25 pm
The fact that Dekalb County is a racist institution comes as a surprise … to no one.
The reason for the counties imminent demise is clear.
Eli
February 5th, 2013
8:28 pm
When we are finally able to free ourselves from the shackles of Dekalb county slavery, the Dunwoody School district will become a model for the country on how to properly educate our children.
GA Teacher 10
February 5th, 2013
8:32 pm
’ve got to defend Maureen on putting perspective to this. Its bad, but its not Clayton County. — b2</b
Sorry my friend, but you’re dead wrong. I have lived here in DeKalb for 5 years, have taught and continue to teach in good ol’ ClayCo going on a decade, and will hit warp speed the Hades out of ClayCo at the first chance.
The running joke is that DeKalb is the “New Clayton County” and from my unique perspective, it absolutely is on it’s way.
I have two young children who will be going to school in Gwinnett, where my wife teaches, and would drive 2 hours one way to work to make sure my boys had no part of Clayton or DeKalb schools. They are indistinguishable.
You’re right in one part that it’s not Clayton: DeKalb has the Dunwoody and Brookhaven areas, soon to break off from what I understand, and ClayCo has nothing like that.
Clayton wasn’t that bad of a place until losing accreditation, but more importantly when they hired that crook, scoundrel, and bully Ed Heatley.
As a matter of fact, I think he may be looking for a job.
Name One
February 5th, 2013
8:34 pm
From the “Druid Hills Charter Cluster” Facebook page:
“The Druid Hills High School cluster of schools currently is exploring the potential benefits of petitioning to become a “charter cluster” of schools. Charter schools are public schools and receive all the funding that non-charter schools receive, but two words distinguish them from public schools as they exist today: autonomy and flexibility. A charter cluster of schools would be governed, not by the local board of education (in this instance, DeKalb), but by an independent Board of Directors with ties to each one of the constituent schools. A charter cluster would have waivers, or flexibility, from certain state and local rules and regulations, in exchange for a higher level of accountability for increasing student achievement. Charter schools use this flexibility to implement innovative or unique programs or models in order to provide educational opportunities typically not available in public schools as they exist today.”
GA Teacher 10
February 5th, 2013
8:35 pm
bu2 — What I just read from McChesney above could absolutely pass as the superintendent search in Clayton instead of DeKalb, save only they all had hidden agendas, instead of half or so.
Ben Bertran
February 5th, 2013
8:38 pm
Thank god for living in CITY OF DECATUR!!!!!! What a true mess Dekalb School System .Let us not forget about APS(Atlanta Public Schools) “same ole soup just a different Spoon”
Name One
February 5th, 2013
8:39 pm
From the “Druid Hills Charter Cluster” Facebook page:
“The Druid Hills High School cluster of schools currently is exploring the potential benefits of petitioning to become a “charter cluster” of schools. Charter schools are public schools and receive all the funding that non-charter schools receive, but two words distinguish them from public schools as they exist today: autonomy and flexibility. A charter cluster of schools would be governed, not by the local board of education (in this instance, DeKalb), but by an independent Board of Directors with ties to each one of the constituent schools. A charter cluster would have waivers, or flexibility, from certain state and local rules and regulations, in exchange for a higher level of accountability for increasing student achievement. Charter schools use this flexibility to implement innovative or unique programs or models in order to provide educational opportunities typically not available in public schools as they exist today.”
Meredith
February 5th, 2013
8:55 pm
Don McChesney is no longer on the BOE so now he wants to spill the beans? Why didn’t he talk when he was before the grand jury about the superintendent search? What a weeny!
GA Teacher 10
February 5th, 2013
8:57 pm
As an educator myself and from a family full of educators, I am generally opposed to charter schools, but after teaching in Clayton for a decade and seeing the same things here in DeKalb, I have no reason or excuse to be against charter schools in these terrible districts.
As I’ve state many times to colleagues, if the districts refuse to get better for whatever reasons (the above superintendent search being a perfect example), than good students with parents who care shouldn’t be forced to attend terrible schools with incompetent leadership. It’s really a shame, for it wouldn’t take all that much to significantly improve some of these schools. But, then that would mean that people in made-up positions I like to call “facilitator / coordinator / specialist / managers” wouldn’t get admin positions they don’t deserve.
A Dekalb Resident
February 5th, 2013
9:33 pm
@Maureen
#1- Your statement wasn’t that the children were getting poorer. It was that the county is getting poorer. Your statement was ignorant.
#2- Your new statement is that the children are getting poorer. But it doesn’t make any sense. Since 2000, according to your source, Gwinnett has gone from having 16% of kids eligible for school lunch to 53% in 2012. Cobb has gone from 21% to 45%. Those schools have literally dealt with exponential growth in children who are eligible for school lunch over the past 12 years. How come those school systems haven’t gone in the crapper dealing with ‘poorer kids’? Your hypothesis that the children are to blame fails.
Third- Here’s the kicker. DeKalb has gone from 66,500 actual students eligible for discounted lunches to 70,500 since 2008. Gwinnett has gone from 65,000 to 88,000 and Cobb has gone from 32,000 to 42,000 over the same period. So DeKalb has added roughly 6% more actual students over the last 4 years while Gwinnett has added roughly 30% and Cobb roughly 20%….and the reason you give that DeKalb can’t teach its kids is because the kids are ‘getting poorer.’?
I disagree with your premise that DeKalb is somehow disadvantaged and the actual numbers back that up.
Here’s the issue. Those other school districts aren’t losing the students whose parents have a choice in where they send their kids (private or move to another district) because the other districts are competent and managed correctly. (gasp!) They have been able to sustain more growth in their ‘poor’ population by continuing to be attractive to other families. Please stop trying to make alternative excuses for your paper’s sources on the DeKalb BOE.
Hawthorne Parent
February 5th, 2013
9:40 pm
Could not agree more with this from Anonymous:
“Maureen, I love that you give us this outlet for discussion but I must disagree with your statement that so many of DeKalb’s problems are because we are getting poorer.
That certainly doesn’t help, but if the Board had been good stewards of the money and good stewards of their greatest asset, Good Teachers, we would be in a much stronger position to help all of our students, poor and not-poor.”
dekalbite@Maureen
February 5th, 2013
10:44 pm
“Baltimore has one of the brightest superintendents and a compliant school board in place — appointed, not elected, by the way. And it is improving, but incrementally. (As is DeKalb, for that matter, relying on similar data that Baltimore uses to show its improvements.)”
I’ve heard you say that DeKalb is improving before, but have not seen the data to back up your statement. Here is data for 2010-2011 (straight from the AJC which was obtained from Georgia DOE:
2009:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2009/07/crct-scores-released.html
2011:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-comparing-standardized-test-scores.html
2012:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/shocking/
In a few areas our students have shown improvement, but so have all of the other systems. They have shown GREATER RATES of achievement improvement than DeKalb. It’s as if DeKalb students are walking slowly while the other school systems’ students are walking rapidly and in some instances running. The students in these other systems are their future competition for jobs. That is why the rate of improvement is so important.
I agree with you that poverty is a huge factor in student achievement. That is why it is important to compare DeKalb with demographically comparable systems. In order to control the variables, we must look at other systems with comparable poverty rates. We still come up short. Look at this data:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/07/dcss-title-1-schools-and-ayp-shell-game.html
Look at our poverty rate compared to Marietta City Schools:
Economically Disadvantaged students in all AYP grade levels:
Marietta City – 76%
http://archives.gadoe.org/ReportingFW.aspx?PageReq=103&CountyId=781&T=1&FY=2011
DeKalb County – 74%
http://archives.gadoe.org/ReportingFW.aspx?PageReq=103&CountyId=644&T=1&FY=2011
Yet Marietta City has a MUCH better rate of achievement than DeKalb. Go to those links to also look at the achievement rates.
Rockdale County Schools:
Rockdale has 60% economically disadvantaged and 90% of their schools are Title 1 (DeKalb has around 70% of their schools as Title 1) yet EVERY single one of Rockdale’s Schools MADE AYP 2010, 2011, and 2012 while DeKalb has steadily fallen behind with less and less schools making AYP (lowest percentage in the metro area).
From 2004 to 2011, Rockdale almost doubled its number of students on food stamps while enrollment stayed virtually the same. DeKalb also almost doubled its number of students on food stamps while enrollment stayed virtually the same. Do you need those links?
Please compare demographically similar systems when looking at achievement rates and you will see how DeKalb has a much lower rate of achievement. Just saying our students are poor so that is why they do so poorly on content mastery is not enough. That is the same excuse the DeKalb BOE and past administration have been using for years. That is blaming the parents, teachers and students for low scores while excusing the administration who sets ALL policies, procedures, allocation of funds in the system, and in addition directs the teachers how, what, and when to teach content.
I’ll say this once agin. DeKalb students are not less intelligent, our teachers are not less hardworking and our parents are not less involved than DEMOGRAPHICALLY COMPARABLE systems, yet they lag behind similar systems in achievement rates. This is not up for debate. The data clearly shows this. There is only one question – Why?
The difference is in the administration (superintendent and BOE members).
It’s no coincidence that the superintendent of Rockdale Sam King was Georgia Superintendent of the Year for 2011 and the superintendent of Marietta City Schools Emily Lembeck was Georgia Superintendent of the Year for 2012. Both have directed resources into the classrooms and protected the core business of the school system, especially during this Great Recession.
Have you every visited the Marietta City School System and the Rockdale School System and then compared them with the DeKalb County School System? There is a world of difference.
DeKalb does not have inferior children, parents and teachers. We have inferior management.
Ed Johnson
February 5th, 2013
10:51 pm
McChesney: “The Board’s short list for interviews included Lillie Cox as number one.”
Yup, Cox was my number one, too. Another small system so-called “hick” from near where Cox was in North Carolina at the time is now Kentucky Education Commissioner. So much for small system “hick” experience not being applicable to big bad “urban” school districts.
McChesney: “We are not in a diverse system. We are in an African-American system in DeKalb. If you are not African-American the welcome sign is not out.”
Perhaps a lead-in to having a brutally honest dialogue on “institutionalized racism” as at least one “African American” on the APS school board has called for? Of course mirrors will have to be available.
Wish McChesney had also covered Atkinson being a graduate of Eli Broad’s The Broad Superintendents Academy.
dekalbite@Maureen
February 5th, 2013
11:04 pm
“Baltimore has one of the brightest superintendents and a compliant school board in place — appointed, not elected, by the way. And it is improving, but incrementally. (As is DeKalb, for that matter, relying on similar data that Baltimore uses to show its improvements.)”
I’ve heard you say that DeKalb is improving before, but have not seen the data to back up your statement. Here is data for 2019-2012 (straight from the AJC which was obtained from Georgia DOE:
2009:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2009/07/crct-scores-released.html
2011:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-comparing-standardized-test-scores.html
2012:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.wordpress.com/2012/07/25/shocking/
In a few areas our students have shown improvement, but so have all of the other systems. They have shown GREATER RATES of achievement improvement than DeKalb. It’s as if DeKalb students are walking slowly while the other school systems’ students are walking rapidly and in some instances running. The students in these other systems are their future competition for jobs. That is why the rate of improvement is so important.
I agree with you that poverty is a huge factor in student achievement. That is why it is important to compare DeKalb with demographically comparable systems. In order to control the variables, we must look at other systems with comparable poverty rates. We still come up short. Look at this data:
http://dekalbschoolwatch.blogspot.com/2011/07/dcss-title-1-schools-and-ayp-shell-game.html
Look at our poverty rate compared to Marietta City Schools:
Economically Disadvantaged students in all AYP grade levels:
Marietta City – 76%
http://archives.gadoe.org/ReportingFW.aspx?PageReq=103&CountyId=781&T=1&FY=2011
DeKalb County – 74%
http://archives.gadoe.org/ReportingFW.aspx?PageReq=103&CountyId=644&T=1&FY=2011
Yet Marietta City has a MUCH better rate of achievement than DeKalb. Go to those links to also look at the achievement rates.
Rockdale County Schools:
Rockdale has 60% economically disadvantaged and 90% of their schools are Title 1 (DeKalb has around 70% of their schools as Title 1) yet EVERY single one of Rockdale’s Schools MADE AYP 2010, 2011, and 2012 while DeKalb has steadily fallen behind with less and less schools making AYP (lowest percentage in the metro area).
From 2004 to 2011, Rockdale almost doubled its number of students on food stamps while enrollment stayed virtually the same. DeKalb also almost doubled its number of students on food stamps while enrollment stayed virtually the same. Do you need those links?
Please compare demographically similar systems when looking at achievement rates and you will see how DeKalb has a much lower rate of achievement. Just saying our students are poor so that is why they do so poorly on content mastery is not enough. That is the same excuse the DeKalb BOE and past administration have been using for years. That is blaming the parents, teachers and students for low scores while excusing the administration who sets ALL policies, procedures, allocation of funds in the system, and in addition directs the teachers how, what, and when to teach content.
I’ll say this once agin. DeKalb students are not less intelligent, our teachers are not less hardworking and our parents are not less involved than DEMOGRAPHICALLY COMPARABLE systems, yet they lag behind similar systems in achievement rates. This is not up for debate. The data clearly shows this. There is only one question – Why?
The difference is in the administration (superintendent and BOE members).
It’s no coincidence that the superintendent of Rockdale Sam King was Georgia Superintendent of the Year for 2011 and the superintendent of Marietta City Schools Emily Lembeck was Georgia Superintendent of the Year for 2012. Both have directed resources into the classrooms and protected the core business of the school system, especially during this Great Recession.
Have you every visited the Marietta City School System and the Rockdale School System and then compared them with the DeKalb County School System? There is a world of difference.
DeKalb does not have inferior children, parents and teachers. We have inferior management.
TheGoldenRam
February 6th, 2013
12:37 am
@ Maureen,
I just got around to reading the Annenberg report on New York City schools you linked to earlier in noting the shortcomings of “portfolio” districts. I’m a bit confused by what you’re alluding to by sharing this study. The overall takeaway is that when it comes to “college readiness” in New York City Schools, there is no better predictor for performance than skin color. The statistics are pretty stunning. The report says in part, “No single neighborhood factor was as strongly associated with college readiness as racial/ethnic composition. The strongest negative relationship to students’ college readiness scores was the percentage of Black and Latino residents in the city’s neighborhoods – the higher the percentage of Black and Latino residents in specific neighborhoods, the lower the college readiness scores of the high school graduates (in 2011) in those neighborhoods”.
By now, I think everyone has caught on to that trend. New York City experiences it, Atlanta experiences it and my medium-sized city in Florida experiences it. Frankly, it’s just about everywhere. I don’t see how this is an indictment of the ‘portfolio’ model. There are some really great public schools in New York City.
The glaring problem is that there is a huge conversation that America is unwilling to have. That is how the issues of culture, race, expectations and institutional ‘equity’ are affecting public schools and our society. And I totally understand why that conversation doesn’t occur. Too many in positions of influence make the calculation that these topics are far too messy to talk about. The cost/reward model places them off limits. So everyone dances around the questions and people say what they think others ‘want’ or ‘expect’ to hear. I’ve grown up around politicians. I have a family member that was just elected to the Legislature. It has always amazed me how huge the candor gap is between private cocktail party talk and public discussions; much of it on some really huge social issues.
We need to honestly talk about these things because the innocent children are the real losers when we don’t. We need to talk about how the legacy of slavery and institutional racism screwed up our country. We need to talk about how cultural attitudes that do not value family, education and personal responsibility are deficient and damaging. We need to admit that there are some things a governement can break, yet has little capacity to put back together (families). We need to talk about how quota systems that sacrifice competency on the altar of diversity do far more harm than good. We need to talk about how educational, disciplinary and social policies often result in the reinforcement of low expectations. That we lose so many good kids while making unreasonable accommodations for the not-so-good kids. We need to talk about a whole bunch of things.
The true legacy of dysfunctional school systems like Dekalb is that they too reinforce low expectations. The expectations Americans have for their public schools. It’s going to result in more of the same. “If you can’t beat ‘em, leave ‘em”. Charters and vouchers and triggers are the future because so many view their unproven solutions as far more viable options then addressing the mess we have now. Start over. Start fresh. It’s so much more pleasant when no one rocks the boat with uncomfortable conversations.
teacherwantingachange
February 6th, 2013
7:04 am
Maureen,
As you acknowledge, Dekalb is dealing with serious financial issues. But you wouldn’t know that by the way board chooses to use money intended for students:legal fees; inflated salaries for instructional supervisors and specialists; leadership academies over smaller classes; raises for select employees; reimbursements to compensate for misspent funds; a new car for the super; furlough days that result in no work days.
Are you saying that all the other politically driven boards you used to cover also spent public funds as egregiously? And are you also suggesting that the problems of smaller school districts in Georgia would impact the state as much as the problems in Dekalb? Last week you posted the declining unemployment rates in the state. I thought Dekalb County had seen the greatest job loss while Cobb and Gwinnett, counties with better performing school districts, had not.
Blue Ed
February 6th, 2013
7:26 am
bu2: You’ve betrayed your personal animosity toward McChesney consistently on this blog and DSW2. What are you, a mouthpiece for Marshal “Single-Agenda:-Fernbank-Forward-and-the-Rest-of-Dekalb-Be-Damned” Orson and, even better, one of Gene Walker’s best buddies? Get over it, your man beat McChesney. And wasn’t Orson referenced in the SACS report as having already meddled in local school affairs after the election? Hopefully, his term and that of the rest of the board will be shortened considerably. Marshall, we hardly knew ye! Thankfully!
bu2
February 6th, 2013
9:05 am
@Blue Ed
I don’t have personal animosity toward McChesney. I just think he was a poor person to have on the board. Someone who, in this day and age, sends out an e-mail saying he is having a meeting without women to avoid excessive emotion, is displaying an astounding lack of good sense. The whole tone of his campaign didn’t say anything about what he did. It was all attacks and reflected poorly on him. The article above displays McChesney’s animosity towards everyone else but Jester. That animosity isn’t something you can hide by being polite. He imagined the worst possible motives of everyone who disagreed with him. It contributes to the unwillingness of the board to work together. I liked McChesney’s priorities better than a lot of the others, but we needed someone better on the board.
Nancy and Don got called on the carpet, as mentioned in his article, by SACS for good reason. They were publically undermining the board’s decisions. It wasn’t as underhanded as leaking info to the AJC, but it had the same effect. What I do dislike about Nancy’s and Don’s actions is their self-righteous obliviousness to their own contributions to the problems. His writings mirror the tone on DSW2 where a writer last week talked about the “alleged” death of Atkinson’s Father and thought she should provide a death certificate to prove it. You can’t have rational conversations with people who see conspiracies in every corner. Don & Nancy didn’t make as big a contribution as some of the others to the problems, but they are not without blame. And its Don who needs to let it go (remember, its his article we are talking about).
bu2
February 6th, 2013
9:17 am
To put it more simply, we needed people on the board with better people skills. When you lose and fight it out in public like Don and Nancy, you harden the opposition to you. You make it less likely that you can win over people to your way of thinking. Someone else might be better able to convince a Donna Elder to vote differently or find common ground with Sarah Copelin-Woods. Instead, we had the group who seem to think employment of people in the community is the top priority of the school district (Bowen/Walker/Cunningham) consistently getting their votes.
A Dekalb Resident
February 6th, 2013
9:26 am
@bu2
So what your saying is that Don and Nancy shouldn’t have aired their differences in public after the fact but instead should have leaked confidential information during the process like the other board members did?
McChesney should be angry at the other board members. They conspired with the AJC to use unethical and possibly illegal acts to submarine the process and got away with it.
Let’s make sure we state that again…you are siding with board members that leaked confidential information to the AJC in order to subvert the process.
You have zero credibility and are certainly a sock puppet.
bu2
February 6th, 2013
9:53 am
@ADR
You have the same problems Don had. Anybody who wasn’t 100% with him was against him and evil and lacked integrity. It totally negates your reading comprehension abilities and brings you an interpretation almost exactly the opposite of what was actually written. That’s one of the problems with this county, an inability to tolerate differences. Simply having Deal appoint a new board doesn’t deal with that problem at all.
Disgusted in Dekalb
February 6th, 2013
9:55 am
Dekalbite nailed it: “DeKalb does not have inferior children, parents and teachers. We have inferior management.”
Private Citizen
February 6th, 2013
11:09 am
The zinger out of all of these comments is maybe? the prohibition for consideration of candidates from states who do their own accreditation.
What this means is the accreditation mechanism is at the center of a political spider web. As a state, Georgia seems to have a great deal invested in using “school board” and superintendent positions as a network system for something completely other than education as a priority. Teachers know this when they run into a strange political “attitude” from bosses. Considering this perspective, I awoke the other day (time of day of fresh ideas/ observations) thinking of how I have repeatedly seen the most talented and professional career “pro” educators get sidelined or get second-class treatment in this type system, where the political power structure comes first. This proxy requires talented teachers to act like sheep or be extremely passive any time there is an issue of substance. Point is that politically appointed managers are telling other people what to do in a profession. It was well said by an outgoing subject-level director who was getting removed from their post against their will and through no fault of their own who gently said, “the uneducated are telling the educated what to do.” The most professional / talented teachers have the least political power. It is a strange system and it runs deep. Maybe superintendent is expected to be a sort of “talking head” object to front for this complex system of local power based on those cliches who run this local (state / federal?) power almost like organised crime? It is this same bunch who for a decade or more have made teachers sit in chairs like little kids and indoctrinate them with any manner of things and require the teachers to be “reverant” and go along with it.
Private Citizen
February 6th, 2013
11:11 am
spelling / “reverent” Feeling or showing deep and solemn respect: “a reverent silence”. respectful – deferential – reverential.
Dekalbite@Maureen
February 6th, 2013
1:49 pm
Sorry for the typos. What I meant to say:
Here is data for 2009 – 2012 (straight from the AJC which was obtained from Georgia DOE:
A Dekalb Resident
February 7th, 2013
10:17 am
@bu2
Set up as many straw men as you want, the fact that you refuse to acknowledge is that the board members you are defending leaked confidential information and violated their fiduciary duties.
Being unethical is not a difference to be tolerated.
Billy Ray
February 7th, 2013
9:29 pm
I don’t know if Michael Thurmond is the answer. I do know he will meet the school board’s most important requirement: he has correct skin pigment.