The following are my notes from the Supporting All Employees
– Classified Advisory Committee meeting we held on Wednesday, February 8, 2012.
From a variety of sources, including our recent survey of
classified employees, we have identified a number of potential focus group
participants throughout the District. One
of the discussion topics at the meeting was how to engage individuals that
indicated an interest in participating in focus groups. Additionally, how do we find others that
would like to be involved but are not yet aware of this initiative? Because many sites have very few staff
available to carry on the work, many individuals are unable to leave their work
location during the work day. Some may
be available in the evenings or on weekends, but that does not work for all due
to other commitments.
Advisory Committee participants came up with several ideas
on how to engage potential focus group members.
As a result, initially I plan to connect with representatives from the
various collective bargaining units (CBUs) that represent classified
employees. Only one CBU was represented
throughout the entire meeting on 2/8. I
will share some of the ideas that the group came up with and proceed from
there.
How to engage potential members of focus groups
-In-person
-Digital – MyPay-like prompt – survey
-Stipend
-Provide statistics
-Town hall type meeting
-Webinars
-Word of mouth
-SAA meetings
-Incentives
-Phone calls (sample size)
-Union representatives
-TV station (KLCS)
-Kiosk (suggestion e-mail box)
We also asked the participants at the meeting to discuss
what we should address with our focus groups.
We started with five recommendations that the Teacher Effectiveness Task
Force developed, and which we aligned to the classified service (see presentation from the 11/3/11 Advisory Committee meeting).
We asked participants to address that section, out of the five areas of recommendation,
which had the highest priority from their perspective. Participants broke into groups to discuss the
various topics. Based on the notes, we
will go back to the Advisory Group to ask them to prioritize and frame the
discussion with focus groups. These
notes are the starting point. Additionally,
many participants agreed that there are many interrelated components within
these areas.
Evaluation/Multiple Measures
-Engagement with students, parents, teachers
-Can evaluation be expanded (more categories)?
-Need relevant, update form that encourages
feedback
-Mandatory annual evaluations (for real!) (Does
the constant churn make all of this less relevant?)
-What would help supervisors provide feedback and
utilize the probationary period?
-Can we make the disciplinary process less
tedious and lengthy?
Career Pathways/Differentiated Compensation (Recognition)
-Gift cards – merit pay could end up being
divisive
Tenure/Probationary Period
-Too long/too short?
-Is it viewed as part of the selection process?
-Only meaningful if administrator takes time to
give feedback for performance improvement
Support Mechanisms
-Shadowing
-Training - technical (i.e., computer skills), customer service
-U-Tube-y employee training videos
-U-Tube-y employee training videos
Legislation
Too early to determine – will wait to see the direction in
which we are moving and consider related legislative and policy issues.
Towards the end of the meeting we began discussing
competencies and their role in our subsequent classified evaluation, but also
their role in the entire classified career cycle. We are working toward building a list of
competencies that are applicable to all classifications within the classified
service (currently, there are approximately 1,100 classifications). We ran out of time before we got beyond an
introduction. The group is very
interested in this part of the work. We
will likely work toward creating a framework, similar to those that the
District is beginning to use for teachers and school leaders. This process will probably take several
months as we work through various iterations and seek feedback from various
stakeholders.
Finally, our proposed next meeting date was Wednesday, March
28. However, the group is anxious to
begin the work on developing our list of competencies. It is not only important what those competencies
are, but also how we communicate them.
We will consider the culture that the District is working to create when
defining and communicating competencies.
Therefore, here is a link to a brief survey with some potential meeting
dates toward the end of February. If you
plan to participate in the next Advisory Committee meeting, please complete the
survey and return it so that I can schedule the next meeting on the most
convenient date. Please keep in mind
that this work will probably take place over the next few months.
1 comment:
With all the conversations among American educators, parents and policymakers as to how public education is conducted around the world, perhaps we should find out how classified 'educators' function in other developed nations.
We've been hearing breathless praise for astounding student achievement in Finland, Korea, Japan, Malaysia and elsewhere for many years now, so let's take a closer look at the role classified employees there -- and elsewhere -- play in the success of school systems internationally.
If we are truly committed to enhancing our ability to nurture, evaluate and utilize everyone who contributes to the academic success of American students, however, we must stop making excuses for why this or that process will not work here. We've seen far too many educational trends come and go, with no lasting, demonstrable results to show for these "flavors of the month" save for an endless procession of studies, blue-ribbon panels, legislative hearings and highly paid consultants.
If we agree that we need real solutions, we have to be ready to admit to ourselves that we DON'T always have the answers, and that we CAN learn some valuable lessons from educators who don't necessarily speak English.
Post a Comment