Original post made
on Apr 14, 2008
This story contains 520 words.
If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have
Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.
If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account,
to get your online account activated.
My complete comment was truncaed in the final edit. Complete quote is as follows:
- There is also the question of relevance -- I wouldn't take Joe McCreary (or any Los Altos principal for that matter) and suggest that they would be a great principal at an inner city school. There experiences don't translate. So when we are asked to welcome a principal from a school with significantly lower test scores, why would the board be surprised that we're skeptical? Understanding HOW to work in the Los Altos environment is critical. Joe's 1 year of experience in this environment is probably worth 5-6 years of working someplace else. We face different challenges here. Check the test results for yourself...
Please note that this doesn't mean we wouldn't accept a teacher from a lesser-scoring school. In reality, we're in the very top 1% of the state, so we'd almost have to choose someone from a lesser scoring school. But the question would be, what has the measured impact of that individual be. In this case, it doesn't seem to be trending to the positive.
In hindsight, it was best that Joe Mccreary was not extended a job offer. He was not a good fit for the community. It could be explained but would deal with personal issues that are not for public knowledge. Principals are called to be examples in all areas.
Joe McCreary is a friendly person but he was not professional in all areas and lacked maturity. He has now moved on and got a job in some other district. I am glad he was not offered the position.