Background: On March 9, 2009 the Board of Trustees of the Sweetwater District voted to terminate the contracts of Karen Janney and Dianna Carberry, Assistant Superintendents. Both were assigned, provisionally, to principal positions in the district, a demotion and (eventual) reduction in pay.
Key Points: ➢ This action was taken in closed session, on a closed session agenda that did not specify that action would be taken on these positions. ➢ The closed session agenda specified action on 1 principal position only, ➢ Due to the lack of information in the closed session agenda (either the posted agenda or backup information on Board Docs) the public was not given an opportunity to have input into this major decision. ➢ No reason for the termination and reassignment was given, to the public or the Assistant Superintendents, except for “a lack of confidence” in them. o This decision was never discussed with Dianna or Karen, and in fact they were not notified until 4:00 and 4:30 on the afternoon of the Board meeting. o Each Assistant Superintendent had only 1 completed evaluation in the last three years – a violation of their contract which called on Dr. Gandara to do annual evaluations. o The one evaluation that was done was completely positive o Neither had been given any indication from Dr. Gandara, either verbally or in writing, that he was dissatisfied with their work. No assistance plan was given, therefore they no opportunity to rectify any concerns Dr. Gandara may have had. o This all seems to be in direct contrast to Dr. Gandara’s frequently used phrase – “if an employee does not succeed the first time, your superintendent will pick them up, dust them off and put them back on the their feet to try again”. o If the superintendent had a lack of confidence in Karen and Dianna why did he assign Karen the task of exploring and getting agreement from the community on a Common Calendar for our district and our feeder districts to be presented to the Board– one of his goals, and why did he assign Dianna to be his duty officer in his absence up until Jan 09? ➢ The termination and reassignment is not connected to the reorganization of the district and is not a cost saving measure. The two positions remain on the recently approved reorganization chart. Although Dr. Gandara stated that the positions would not be filled until the budget is resolved, the savings is all smoke and mirrors since Karen and Dianna will continue to receive their salaries. ➢ Karen and Dianna are both highly respected by their colleagues and peers throughout the district and the community, as evidenced by the outpouring of support they have received since Monday night. ➢ The timing of this decision was educationally unsound, causing disruption at 3 school sites just before state testing and the WASC visit at Montgomery High school. At the district level the disruption comes as we are going through district wide WASC and District Program Improvement mandates. o This lack of concern for critical district requirements reflects a statement Dr. Gandara made at a principals meeting that WASC (accreditation) and activities related to the district program improvement process should be treated as minimally important and not disrupt what the schools were already doing. ➢ Please note: All management staff reassigned at the last Board meeting were female and close to or over 50 years old. Conversely, several men had position changes that were promotions, or resulted in an increase in salary. ➢ There will be a significant loss in historical knowledge at the district level, and a loss of knowledge, expertise and continuity for on-going projects in the district. At this time in the district (WASC, Program Improvement, etc…) this is irresponsible and harmful. o Dr. Carberry is the Principal Investigator or contact on several projects the district is involved in with UCSD, including the BioBridge project. Her loss could jeopardize funding on these, or future, projects there. o Both Dianna and Karen have been working with SWC to coordinate Summer School programs and other services, giving additional opportunities to SUHSD students o Karen Janney has been coordinating the implementation of the Common Calendar o Karen Janney is one of the Internal Facilitators for the Strategic Plan and has been coordinating the implementation of, and updates to, the plan. Both Karen and Dianna are responsible for implementation of many action plan strategies. o Both Dianna and Karen have been the lead contacts with the external entities / facilitators from SDCOE for District Program Improvement, School Program Improvement, SAIT and QEIA. All these programs have legal timelines and requirements that must be met. o Karen Janney oversees the Academic Support Teams and other district support measures for our Program Improvement schools. Her efforts and guidance were part of the team approach that propelled Sweetwater High out of Program Improvement. ➢ The arbitrary, secretive and capricious manner by which this decision was made violates the beliefs and intent of our district Strategic Plan. In fact, recent decisions and actions by the Board and Dr. Gandara have reduced the strategic plan to a joke throughout the district and completely negated it’s potential to truly drive reform leading to educational excellence in the district ➢ Both Dianna and Karen have attended a large number of community events, and represent Sweetwater at many SDCOE functions. Frequently they have been asked by Dr. Gandara to fill in and represent him in his absence. The strong positive relationships they have formed in this capacity have led to increased support for Sweetwater in our community.
Therefore… While we are sure that Ms. Janney and Dr. Carberry would be excellent principals (Karen was the ACSA California Secondary Principal of the Year and nominee for National Principal of the Year), we feel that their talent, expertise and experience will far better serve the district as Assistant Superintendents.
Because of all the above, we are asking people to express their displeasure and concerns in a positive, professional manner by emailing, calling or meeting with the members of the Board of Trustees. Please request a reply when emailing. If you are unable to get an appointment, a phone call or if your email is not read, there are further steps that can be taken. In addition, strong support is requested at the next Board meeting, currently scheduled for April 20, 2009.
We are asking the Board of Trustees to think carefully about how they are representing the voters that put them in office. The overwhelming dissatisfaction with Dr. Gandara, and increasingly with the Board, is indicative of the poor communication, secretive decision-making, and untrustworthy actions by Dr. Gandara. As a Board are you loyal to him, or to the best interests of the students and the district. Consider his motivation and all decisions in light of his recent efforts to leave this district. Is his goal for the good of the district or to promote his own powerbase?
Karen Janney's demotion is outrageous. I have known her for many, many years, and she is the epitome of what an ideal administrator should be. Carberry I don't know, only through a very bungled situation at Rancho del Rey Middle, where a campus security official was threatened with graphic descriptions of what the student would like to do to him (the campus security official). The student was expelled following a complete investigation and following all procedures, his parents complained, and Dr. Carberry jumped into it and reversed the expulsion. The student returned to RDRM. Can you imagine what a terrible example she set for other students? In my opinion, the faster she leaves such a post of power, the better. Karen Janney has been terribly wronged, however.
Morale is low all over the district. People are scared. They don't want to sign a petition to rescind the demotions, as they are afraid of repercussions. Some have boldly signed in the middle of a blank petition. They don't want their names to stand out. When talking about any sensitive issue, staff looks around to make sure all is "safe." As Peggy so eloquently stated, Karen Janney is an amazing asset to our district. If she can be demoted without warning, we are all at risk! Unity is power. Knowledge is power. Let's stay tight and keep informed!
"Please note: All management staff reassigned at the last Board meeting were female and close to or over 50 years old. Conversely, several men had position changes that were promotions, or resulted in an increase in salary."
I will ask a question that is on the minds of many. Out of those men promoted how many of them were also Latino or of another "underepsented" ethnic group???
I pose this question, as a Latino myself. Is our district trying to play Mexican "mordida" style politics? No puedes jugar con nosotros!
4 comments:
Overview:
Background:
On March 9, 2009 the Board of Trustees of the Sweetwater District voted to terminate the contracts of Karen Janney and Dianna Carberry, Assistant Superintendents. Both were assigned, provisionally, to principal positions in the district, a demotion and (eventual) reduction in pay.
Key Points:
➢ This action was taken in closed session, on a closed session agenda that did not specify that action would be taken on these positions.
➢ The closed session agenda specified action on 1 principal position only,
➢ Due to the lack of information in the closed session agenda (either the posted agenda or backup information on Board Docs) the public was not given an opportunity to have input into this major decision.
➢ No reason for the termination and reassignment was given, to the public or the Assistant Superintendents, except for “a lack of confidence” in them.
o This decision was never discussed with Dianna or Karen, and in fact they were not notified until 4:00 and 4:30 on the afternoon of the Board meeting.
o Each Assistant Superintendent had only 1 completed evaluation in the last three years – a violation of their contract which called on Dr. Gandara to do annual evaluations.
o The one evaluation that was done was completely positive
o Neither had been given any indication from Dr. Gandara, either verbally or in writing, that he was dissatisfied with their work. No assistance plan was given, therefore they no opportunity to rectify any concerns Dr. Gandara may have had.
o This all seems to be in direct contrast to Dr. Gandara’s frequently used phrase – “if an employee does not succeed the first time, your superintendent will pick them up, dust them off and put them back on the their feet to try again”.
o If the superintendent had a lack of confidence in Karen and Dianna why did he assign Karen the task of exploring and getting agreement from the community on a Common Calendar for our district and our feeder districts to be presented to the Board– one of his goals, and why did he assign Dianna to be his duty officer in his absence up until Jan 09?
➢ The termination and reassignment is not connected to the reorganization of the district and is not a cost saving measure. The two positions remain on the recently approved reorganization chart. Although Dr. Gandara stated that the positions would not be filled until the budget is resolved, the savings is all smoke and mirrors since Karen and Dianna will continue to receive their salaries.
➢ Karen and Dianna are both highly respected by their colleagues and peers throughout the district and the community, as evidenced by the outpouring of support they have received since Monday night.
➢ The timing of this decision was educationally unsound, causing disruption at 3 school sites just before state testing and the WASC visit at Montgomery High school. At the district level the disruption comes as we are going through district wide WASC and District Program Improvement mandates.
o This lack of concern for critical district requirements reflects a statement Dr. Gandara made at a principals meeting that WASC (accreditation) and activities related to the district program improvement process should be treated as minimally important and not disrupt what the schools were already doing.
➢ Please note: All management staff reassigned at the last Board meeting were female and close to or over 50 years old. Conversely, several men had position changes that were promotions, or resulted in an increase in salary.
➢ There will be a significant loss in historical knowledge at the district level, and a loss of knowledge, expertise and continuity for on-going projects in the district. At this time in the district (WASC, Program Improvement, etc…) this is irresponsible and harmful.
o Dr. Carberry is the Principal Investigator or contact on several projects the district is involved in with UCSD, including the BioBridge project. Her loss could jeopardize funding on these, or future, projects there.
o Both Dianna and Karen have been working with SWC to coordinate Summer School programs and other services, giving additional opportunities to SUHSD students
o Karen Janney has been coordinating the implementation of the Common Calendar
o Karen Janney is one of the Internal Facilitators for the Strategic Plan and has been coordinating the implementation of, and updates to, the plan. Both Karen and Dianna are responsible for implementation of many action plan strategies.
o Both Dianna and Karen have been the lead contacts with the external entities / facilitators from SDCOE for District Program Improvement, School Program Improvement, SAIT and QEIA. All these programs have legal timelines and requirements that must be met.
o Karen Janney oversees the Academic Support Teams and other district support measures for our Program Improvement schools. Her efforts and guidance were part of the team approach that propelled Sweetwater High out of Program Improvement.
➢ The arbitrary, secretive and capricious manner by which this decision was made violates the beliefs and intent of our district Strategic Plan. In fact, recent decisions and actions by the Board and Dr. Gandara have reduced the strategic plan to a joke throughout the district and completely negated it’s potential to truly drive reform leading to educational excellence in the district
➢ Both Dianna and Karen have attended a large number of community events, and represent Sweetwater at many SDCOE functions. Frequently they have been asked by Dr. Gandara to fill in and represent him in his absence. The strong positive relationships they have formed in this capacity have led to increased support for Sweetwater in our community.
Therefore…
While we are sure that Ms. Janney and Dr. Carberry would be excellent principals (Karen was the ACSA California Secondary Principal of the Year and nominee for National Principal of the Year), we feel that their talent, expertise and experience will far better serve the district as Assistant Superintendents.
Because of all the above, we are asking people to express their displeasure and concerns in a positive, professional manner by emailing, calling or meeting with the members of the Board of Trustees. Please request a reply when emailing. If you are unable to get an appointment, a phone call or if your email is not read, there are further steps that can be taken. In addition, strong support is requested at the next Board meeting, currently scheduled for April 20, 2009.
We are asking the Board of Trustees to think carefully about how they are representing the voters that put them in office. The overwhelming dissatisfaction with Dr. Gandara, and increasingly with the Board, is indicative of the poor communication, secretive decision-making, and untrustworthy actions by Dr. Gandara. As a Board are you loyal to him, or to the best interests of the students and the district. Consider his motivation and all decisions in light of his recent efforts to leave this district. Is his goal for the good of the district or to promote his own powerbase?
Karen Janney's demotion is outrageous. I have known her for many, many years, and she is the epitome of what an ideal administrator should be. Carberry I don't know, only through a very bungled situation at Rancho del Rey Middle, where a campus security official was threatened with graphic descriptions of what the student would like to do to him (the campus security official). The student was expelled following a complete investigation and following all procedures, his parents complained, and Dr. Carberry jumped into it and reversed the expulsion. The student returned to RDRM. Can you imagine what a terrible example she set for other students? In my opinion, the faster she leaves such a post of power, the better. Karen Janney has been terribly wronged, however.
Morale is low all over the district. People are scared. They don't want to sign a petition to rescind the demotions, as they are afraid of repercussions. Some have boldly signed in the middle of a blank petition. They don't want their names to stand out. When talking about any sensitive issue, staff looks around to make sure all is "safe." As Peggy so eloquently stated, Karen Janney is an amazing asset to our district. If she can be demoted without warning, we are all at risk! Unity is power. Knowledge is power. Let's stay tight and keep informed!
You said here in your post...
"Please note: All management staff reassigned at the last Board meeting were female and close to or over 50 years old. Conversely, several men had position changes that were promotions, or resulted in an increase in salary."
I will ask a question that is on the minds of many. Out of those men promoted how many of them were also Latino or of another "underepsented" ethnic group???
I pose this question, as a Latino myself. Is our district trying to play Mexican "mordida" style politics? No puedes jugar con nosotros!
Post a Comment