Editorial: The buck stops with the school board | March 3, 2017 | Mountain View Voice | Mountain View Online |
NEWS ALERT:Arrest made in stabbing death of teen girl nearly 40 years ago

Mountain View Voice

Opinion - March 3, 2017

Editorial: The buck stops with the school board

The school community can take some comfort in the fact that the Mountain View Whisman School District's plunge into an ill-thought-out pilot math program was only a $149,000 fiasco, as opposed to one with a half-million-dollar price tag. Although the original contract proposed to the school board in December included the higher figure to pay for the problem-riddled Teach to One digital course, the district saw the writing on the wall, pulled the proposed contract off the agenda and negotiated a new agreement with the company that designed the program.

This story contains 534 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe

Comments

Posted by Gary
a resident of Sylvan Park
on Mar 3, 2017 at 9:39 pm

Gary is a registered user.

It is far worse than you know. Stay tuned.


Posted by Board of Trustees
a resident of Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Mar 7, 2017 at 1:24 pm

Why do we need to settle for such an inexperienced Superintendent? We are paying him a full salary.


Posted by Thanks Kevin & Voice
a resident of Shoreline West
on Mar 7, 2017 at 6:51 pm

Thanks to Kevin and the Voice! This has really been community-based reporting at its best!!


Posted by Oversight?
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Mar 8, 2017 at 3:39 pm

Given what is described below, why does Rudolph still have a job?

The bad choices made at the beginning of the program's launch were then exacerbated with the decision to keep the increasing complaints and concerns of parents and teachers from the school board, whose members apparently weren't paying attention to the developments unfolding with a radically new math program.

Superintendent Ayinde Rudolph's decision to try to hide increasingly troubling developments during the five months the program was in place — problems highlighted in emails the Voice obtained through a state Public Records Act request — was a huge blunder. It took a small army of parents to wave the red flag in the school board's collective face, and by then, confidence in district administrators and the elected officials who are supposed to be overseeing them was badly damaged.

Rudolph also blundered in not vetting Teach to One beforehand by bringing teachers and parents into the process, leaping headlong into a program that has little or no record of use, let alone success, in districts comparable to Mountain View Whisman.


Posted by Steven Nelson
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Mar 27, 2017 at 3:04 pm

The decision to allow this sort of "Contract" signing by the Administration, without Board review ("the buck") is being currently debated as public policy at Board Meetings. The Chief Administrative Officer (Superintendent) is proposing an Administrative Regulation (AR)- that not only keeps the system first adopted in late 2015 (4:1 vote) but also allows MOUs for site usage (Memorandum of Understandings) to be signed by the Administration - for 5 year terms!

This proposed new AR is delegating more contracting power to the Administration than it now has. It is also, by it's wording, specifically encouraging the use of "Consent" agenda to approve these items, with neither Board or public discussion.

the price of good government, is eternal vigilance,

SN is a retired Trustee of the MVWSD


Posted by Steven Nelson
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Mar 27, 2017 at 3:17 pm

ahhhh The legally specific terms "review" and "ratification" bite again. The delegation of authority, as the TTO problem showed, makes it important, as the Voice Editorial notes, to make clear exactly what "ratification" means (spending over $88K) and if the power, at this time, should even be delegated at all! IMO the Administration clearly misused the authority that had been delegated to them. Very clear, even though President Gutierrez and Superintendent Randolph, second part of 'apology' state that nothing was done wrong.

The only slight light I see (and it is pretty dim) is that Dr. Randolph now has apparently read the CA Dept. of Education regulations on the adoption process for NON-STATE APPROVED curriculums, and has publicly stated that he understands how it would apply to Eureka Math 2 (the second version of the Math that MVWSD properly vetted/piloted and the Board voted to adopt a couple years ago).


Posted by spelling counts
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Mar 27, 2017 at 3:19 pm

Randolph = "Rudolph"


Posted by Taxpayer
a resident of Old Mountain View
on Mar 27, 2017 at 5:17 pm

And the sad thing is that the board thinks they have a chance of passing the new parcel tax. Why should we pay for this kind of bungling?

I had hopes for the new board, but they just seem completely clueless. Greg Colodonato is the only person who demonstrates any willingness to immerse himself in the issues and ask probing questions.

And Rudolph is just a disaster.


Posted by Stan
a resident of Bailey Park
on Mar 30, 2017 at 9:38 am

Last comment is right on. Look up school board meeting videos online at the district's website. Trustees qualify for full-time employee benefits. They are not just volunteers.


Posted by Interested Observer
a resident of another community
on Mar 30, 2017 at 11:51 am

@Stan: please state the "facts" correctly. The trustees receive a monthly stipend that they can then choose to put towards paying for the district's benefit program - if they want it. They need to pay the balance between the stipend received and the cost. So, the trustees DO NOT receive the full benefit package.


Posted by Interested Observer
a resident of another community
on Mar 30, 2017 at 11:52 am

@Stan: please state the "facts" fully andcorrectly. The trustees receive a monthly stipend that they can then choose to put towards paying for the district's benefit program - if they want it. They need to pay the balance between the stipend received and the cost. So, the trustees DO NOT receive the full benefit package.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Mountain View Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.