750+ substitute openings in APS alone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone refers to HR problems all the time but never specifics. What are the problems there?



A few of APS HR’s blunders:

- Messed up the board certified teachers’ pay bonuses – paid everyone in group A the amounts that should’ve gone to group B, and everyone in group B the amounts that were due group A. Then it took three separate tries (complete with surveys, of course) to be fixed.

- Not moving on substitute applications. Retired APS teachers report being told that they will have to have background checks, fingerprints, and in-person and interviews to sub.

- Over the last few years, APS has put a lot of energy and effort into name changes — focusing on whether it should be “Personnel”, or “HR, and now there is “Talent Acquisition” too. Overall, totally on point with the APS trend of paying more attention to how things look and what they are called than to how they work or don’t.

If this is really happening, it's really pathetic. APS teachers have already been through this when they were employed there, and are probably the best bet for solving the sub problem. FCPS used to pay retired FCPS teachers extra as an incentive to sub...don't know if they still do.

[Anonymous]

I met someone this week who has been waiting to start the process to be a sub for FOUR MONTHS. They applied and haven’t heard back. They are an education student (senior). What a waste!
Meanwhile classes are doubling up or teachers can’t attend special ed meetings because there are no subs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have heard from multiple sources that hr doesn’t act on sub applications they get. Until they fix the hr problem it won’t work

Everyone refers to HR problems all the time but never specifics. What are the problems there?

A few of APS HR’s blunders:

- Messed up the board certified teachers’ pay bonuses – paid everyone in group A the amounts that should’ve gone to group B, and everyone in group B the amounts that were due group A. Then it took three separate tries (complete with surveys, of course) to be fixed.

- Not moving on substitute applications. Retired APS teachers report being told that they will have to have background checks, fingerprints, and in-person and interviews to sub.

- Over the last few years, APS has put a lot of energy and effort into name changes — focusing on whether it should be “Personnel”, or “HR, and now there is “Talent Acquisition” too. Overall, totally on point with the APS trend of paying more attention to how things look and what they are called than to how they work or don’t.

Yeah. I’m beginning to understand that Duran is running APS like FCPS. Meaning he wants lots of middle managers and layers of bureaucracy between himself and the teachers/children/parents he is serving. He is over hiring at this level and not understanding that the beauty of APS is that it needs to be sleek and responsive with 3-5 high schools. It should not be overrun with higher ups because it is not necessary. Sad to see that go because as a system gets bigger it gets less responsive and less nimble.

I know this unpopular here, but I do think some of the Syphax hiring is good. APS has been a confederacy of schools for too long, with separate but unequal fully accepted by past sups (looking at you Murphy). Also, there are just so many more mandates from self, state and federal over past few decades, of course there have to be more middle managers to handle them. And my guess is each mandate has some vocal constituency, e.g., ESL from the lawsuit or SpEd under NVD's time. There is some goodness in centralization. Yes, there is more bureaucracy and I agree I don't want to see it keep growing forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have heard from multiple sources that hr doesn’t act on sub applications they get. Until they fix the hr problem it won’t work

Everyone refers to HR problems all the time but never specifics. What are the problems there?

A few of APS HR’s blunders:

- Messed up the board certified teachers’ pay bonuses – paid everyone in group A the amounts that should’ve gone to group B, and everyone in group B the amounts that were due group A. Then it took three separate tries (complete with surveys, of course) to be fixed.

- Not moving on substitute applications. Retired APS teachers report being told that they will have to have background checks, fingerprints, and in-person and interviews to sub.

- Over the last few years, APS has put a lot of energy and effort into name changes — focusing on whether it should be “Personnel”, or “HR, and now there is “Talent Acquisition” too. Overall, totally on point with the APS trend of paying more attention to how things look and what they are called than to how they work or don’t.

Yeah. I’m beginning to understand that Duran is running APS like FCPS. Meaning he wants lots of middle managers and layers of bureaucracy between himself and the teachers/children/parents he is serving. He is over hiring at this level and not understanding that the beauty of APS is that it needs to be sleek and responsive with 3-5 high schools. It should not be overrun with higher ups because it is not necessary. Sad to see that go because as a system gets bigger it gets less responsive and less nimble.

I know this unpopular here, but I do think some of the Syphax hiring is good. APS has been a confederacy of schools for too long, with separate but unequal fully accepted by past sups (looking at you Murphy). Also, there are just so many more mandates from self, state and federal over past few decades, of course there have to be more middle managers to handle them. And my guess is each mandate has some vocal constituency, e.g., ESL from the lawsuit or SpEd under NVD's time. There is some goodness in centralization. Yes, there is more bureaucracy and I agree I don't want to see it keep growing forever.

I actually agree with you. I also think the extra days off they are getting are a good benefit for retention (though I think they should work a few of them so we can actually get in touch with them. Maybe give them half of spring and winter break? Im at a 9-4 school and it can be difficult if I need to talk to someone on the phone.

[Anonymous]

I do agree that some adult oversight is necessary. Until very recently principals had way too much free reign in their little fiefdoms.

[Anonymous]

free rein

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have heard from multiple sources that hr doesn’t act on sub applications they get. Until they fix the hr problem it won’t work

Everyone refers to HR problems all the time but never specifics. What are the problems there?

There are no real specifics to be had. They just don’t follow up. And it’s not just on sub applications—it’s new hires too. The breakdown can happen at different places in the process but basically it comes down to needing HR to do something move the hiring process along and it just doesn’t happen unless someone complains or is really on top of them. There’s only so much following up administrators can do. It’s been this way for at least a decade and everyone knows it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do agree that some adult oversight is necessary. Until very recently principals had way too much free reign in their little fiefdoms.

Source or examples?

[Anonymous]

NP here. I have one example: Staffing. Principals used to have a lot of flexibility, for better or for worse, in where they put teachers and how they used their number of personnel positions. It seems to be more tightly controlled now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I have one example: Staffing. Principals used to have a lot of flexibility, for better or for worse, in where they put teachers and how they used their number of personnel positions. It seems to be more tightly controlled now.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I have one example: Staffing. Principals used to have a lot of flexibility, for better or for worse, in where they put teachers and how they used their number of personnel positions. It seems to be more tightly controlled now.

This

Yes. And APS used to be loosey-goosey with how many administrators (ie, asst. principals, program supervisors) were assigned to each site/program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I have one example: Staffing. Principals used to have a lot of flexibility, for better or for worse, in where they put teachers and how they used their number of personnel positions. It seems to be more tightly controlled now.

Couldn't it be a good thing to give principals flexibility so they can best target positions to areas of need?

[Anonymous]

In theory, sure. In practice? It leads to people doing things like… Decreasing the number of art or music teachers at a school in order to put people on a pet project, often with minimal interaction with children, creating jobs that serve a superintendent’s pet project like, let’s say, trying to win an award for the district.

[Anonymous]

In theory, sure. In practice? It leads to people doing things like… Decreasing the number of art or music teachers at a school in order to put people on a pet project, often with minimal interaction with children, creating jobs that serve a superintendent’s pet project like, let’s say, trying to win an award for the district.

Let's say the Baldrige award?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

In theory, sure. In practice? It leads to people doing things like… Decreasing the number of art or music teachers at a school in order to put people on a pet project, often with minimal interaction with children, creating jobs that serve a superintendent’s pet project like, let’s say, trying to win an award for the district.

Let's say the Baldrige award?

Or building/architecture awards? And publicity tours?? Soooo many tours.