About Me

My photo
1970 graduate of Hemingway High, Hemingway, S.C. 1973 graduate of Francis Marion College, Florence, S. C. (History - B. A.) 1973 Human Relations Award (Chesterfield County School District, S. C.) 1981 M. Ed. (University of S. C.) 1982 Teacher of the Year (St. James Middle School, Myrtle Beach, S. C.) 1988 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Conway Chamber of Commerce) 1989 South Carolina Governor’s School Teacher Recognition Award 1991 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Horry County) 1992 Most Inspirational Teacher Award (Horry County) 1992 South Carolina U. S. History Teacher of the Year (D. A. R.) 1992 South Carolina House of Representatives Award for Outstanding Achievements 1993 Teacher of the Year (Socastee High, Myrtle Beach, S. C.) 1993 Horry County District Teacher of the Year 1993 South Carolina Honor Roll Teacher of the Year 1998 Wellman, Inc. Golden Apple Award 2000 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching) 2003 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching) 2004 Joseph B. Whitehead Educator of Distinction Award 2005 International Baccalaureate Shuford-Beaty Award (Excellence in Teaching)

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Hoodwinked Board (Mar. 28, 2011)

Monday, March 28, 2011
Horry County Schools
District Office
Conway, S.C.



Members of the Board:




Superintendent Gerrita Postlewait hoodwinked the Horry County Board of Education into giving her its authority over finances, curriculum, operations, and district policy in June of 2000.  Postlewait used her popularity, charm, and intellectual skills to guide the Board in a new direction to focus on student learning outcomes, termed “ends,” while getting members to shift real power to her over day-to-day operations - the “means.”  Although our district has achieved much in the interim, the ends do not justify the means.  Parents and citizens should be outraged that their responsibility to decide what is best for their children in their public schools is still in the hands of one person - the superintendent.  The public should demand that their traditional and legal rights to make critical decisions through their elected Board representatives be reinstated.

Postlewait cleverly maneuvered the Board to buy into the idea that its traditional role was outdated and that members should not be “micromanaging,” a buzzword for inappropriate meddling.  They were convinced that they had a more important task than tending to their constituents’ concerns.  What they needed to do was concentrate on student accountability measures and not dirty their hands with the daily affairs of the district.  What they did not know was that this was a nationwide strategy to get boards of education out of the means, in order for superintendents to lead change and reform public education along lines that would be more sustainable for both ideological and business interests, especially technological.  The current board is also in the dark. 

In 1997 the Superintendents Leadership Network, sponsored by the BellSouth Corporation, asked how superintendents could gain the power and authority to lead school districts, when boards of education were continually interfering with their various initiatives to sustain reform efforts.  It decided to promote a corporate strategy, John Carver’s Policy Governance, and give boards of education a different purpose for existence, one that would be perceived by board members as meaningful and important.  This redirection of board members’ work would make them feel better, keep them busy, and most importantly would allow superintendents virtual free reign.  This new direction would put boards in charge of setting goals for student achievement and superintendents in charge of all the means of achieving those objectives.  It would encourage superintendents “to identify and develop those partnerships and other collaborative arrangements that will enhance the installation of the innovation and develop strategies to protect the innovative effort from distracting forces from inside or outside the existing system.” (Schlechty Center, Louisville, Ky.) 
 
Tax-supported public education took a long time to catch on in the United States, partly because of the widespread belief that families would be turning over control of their children to the state.  To help alleviate this fear, boards of education were established as parallel democratic institutions to ensure that board members would act as trustees of parents and represent their desires for the education of their children.  What once was true is no more.  Boards of education are being viewed as barriers to school reform and are increasingly being bypassed.  Outside forces are taking over, including technological and other business interests, and citizens are losing control over public education.

It is simply wrong in a democratic-republic to put these matters into the hands of one person - the superintendent.  The Board needs to reassume its traditional and legal responsibilities and cooperate with the superintendent in the management of the district’s major operations by returning to traditional governance.  Citizens, through their elected representatives, should decide what is best for their children in their public schools.



  


Sincerely,

Bobby Chandler


722 Pine Drive
Surfside Beach, S.C.  29575






No comments:

Post a Comment