Directors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Directors make sure that district priorities are moving forward and successfully implemented across schools. They work with individual principals who report to them, Yes but they also work at the Cluster level..

Finally, a Director speaks up when someone writes their position should be eliminated.

This still sounds much lower priority than reducing class sizes via hiring front line teachers

So all 211 principals should just report directly to the superintendent?

No to the Associate Superintendent

There are like 4 or 5 Associate Superintendents. So they are each suppose to supervise and support 50 schools, operate at the cluster level, manage reporting and compliance within their division, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Directors make sure that district priorities are moving forward and successfully implemented across schools. They work with individual principals who report to them, Yes but they also work at the Cluster level..

Finally, a Director speaks up when someone writes their position should be eliminated.

This still sounds much lower priority than reducing class sizes via hiring front line teachers

So all 211 principals should just report directly to the superintendent?

This is exactly what folks don’t understand. Bureaucracy exist because of scale.

All understand, you're not the only one even if you think you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Directors make sure that district priorities are moving forward and successfully implemented across schools. They work with individual principals who report to them, Yes but they also work at the Cluster level..

Finally, a Director speaks up when someone writes their position should be eliminated.

This still sounds much lower priority than reducing class sizes via hiring front line teachers

So all 211 principals should just report directly to the superintendent?

No to the Associate Superintendent

There are like 4 or 5 Associate Superintendents. So they are each suppose to supervise and support 50 schools, operate at the cluster level, manage reporting and compliance within their division, etc etc.

There are three associate superintendents over the school directors: McGee, Jones, and Campbell. That's 70+ schools each.

[Anonymous]

Peter Moran is the Chief over that department.
Three OSSI Associate Supers - McGee, Jones, Campbell
One Wellbeing Associate Super - Monteleone
Directors who each have 2 clusters.

My understanding is that the expansion of directors was because teacher job satisfaction and retention (which then translates into student experience) was declining and the decision was made that principals need support in being better leaders. I actually think it was a strategic decision to invest in school improvement by focusing on principals.

From what I've heard from teacher friends, your principal basically makes or breaks your experience as a teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peter Moran is the Chief over that department.
Three OSSI Associate Supers - McGee, Jones, Campbell
One Wellbeing Associate Super - Monteleone
Directors who each have 2 clusters.

My understanding is that the expansion of directors was because teacher job satisfaction and retention (which then translates into student experience) was declining and the decision was made that principals need support in being better leaders. I actually think it was a strategic decision to invest in school improvement by focusing on principals.

From what I've heard from teacher friends, your principal basically makes or breaks your experience as a teacher.

The problem is, directors need to be more than "coaches" and providing "support." We need directors to be a check on the principals because as you correctly point out, a bad, incompetent principal can wreak havoc on a school community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Peter Moran is the Chief over that department.
Three OSSI Associate Supers - McGee, Jones, Campbell
One Wellbeing Associate Super - Monteleone
Directors who each have 2 clusters.

My understanding is that the expansion of directors was because teacher job satisfaction and retention (which then translates into student experience) was declining and the decision was made that principals need support in being better leaders. I actually think it was a strategic decision to invest in school improvement by focusing on principals.

From what I've heard from teacher friends, your principal basically makes or breaks your experience as a teacher.

More directors were added to reduce the workload.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Peter Moran is the Chief over that department.
Three OSSI Associate Supers - McGee, Jones, Campbell
One Wellbeing Associate Super - Monteleone
Directors who each have 2 clusters.

My understanding is that the expansion of directors was because teacher job satisfaction and retention (which then translates into student experience) was declining and the decision was made that principals need support in being better leaders. I actually think it was a strategic decision to invest in school improvement by focusing on principals.

From what I've heard from teacher friends, your principal basically makes or breaks your experience as a teacher.

The problem is, directors need to be more than "coaches" and providing "support." We need directors to be a check on the principals because as you correctly point out, a bad, incompetent principal can wreak havoc on a school community.

Agree. So eliminating them won’t help. It would just add more responsibility to less people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Peter Moran is the Chief over that department.
Three OSSI Associate Supers - McGee, Jones, Campbell
One Wellbeing Associate Super - Monteleone
Directors who each have 2 clusters.

My understanding is that the expansion of directors was because teacher job satisfaction and retention (which then translates into student experience) was declining and the decision was made that principals need support in being better leaders. I actually think it was a strategic decision to invest in school improvement by focusing on principals.

From what I've heard from teacher friends, your principal basically makes or breaks your experience as a teacher.

More directors were added to reduce the workload.

What schools need are not more "coaches" they needs more able hands doing the work in the schools. Should be 2 co-principals and an assistant principal in ES. The MS and HS model had Assistant Principals by grade or alphabetically which seemed to work.

[Anonymous]

One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

Which one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

Which one?

Don't be messy. This is an anonymous forum for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

None of them are that young. The youngish ones all had at least 5-10 years experience as a principal before being hired as director.

[Anonymous]

A lot of them look young to me but that's because I'm old.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

None of them are that young. The youngish ones all had at least 5-10 years experience as a principal before being hired as director.

The chief, Peter Moran, is probably the youngest of them all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the directors is so young I really wonder how he got his job?

None of them are that young. The youngish ones all had at least 5-10 years experience as a principal before being hired as director.

The chief, Peter Moran, is probably the youngest of them all!

Pretty sure Christophe Turk is the youngest.