December 13, 2010
By Rhonda Reed-Slaughter
Next school year 2011/12, James Mitchem, Jr. will take the helm as the new superintendent of Valley View Public Schools.
The District has a diverse student population of 18,000 with 21 schools. And struggles with a 50.1% low income rate (amongst students), and a drop out rate of 2.3%, which are both higher than the state average.
In addition, the ACT composite scores for high school graduates (in Valley View school system) average 19.00, lower than the state average of 20.5.
Mitchem understand the challenges, and look forward to making the necessary changes to better educate our children, and improve test scores.
We sat down with Mitchem to discuss his vision for the district, and the strategy his team will use to accomplish their goal.
According to Mitchem, his team plans to align the district's curriculum with the College Readiness Standard (CRS), in essence making the CRS the minimum standard for the district. Thus, increasing ISAT and PSAE scores, and better preparing students for the ACT.
By using the College Readiness Standard (CRS) as a minimum standard, the district will need to eliminate classes that are not rigorous enough to prepare high school students for the ACT, and college.
It appears Mitchem's strategy is already taking shape.
Moving Algebra 1a and 1b to 7th Grade
VVSD high schools will eliminate Algebra 1a and 1b from it's curriculum, and move forward with Geometry as the first official math class for high school students.
The school board is set to vote on adding Algebra 1a and 1b to the 7th/8th grade curriculum. The vote is scheduled for Monday, December 13, 2010.
Eliminating Freshman Lab Science
Since the middle school curriculum better prepare students for biology, there's no need for a freshman lab science course. The first science class in high school should be biology.
In summary, Mitchem wants to remove lower level classes, and offer students classes at grade level.
Another issue of great concern to Mitchem is the lack of systems in place to truly judge schools and administrators performance on a regular basis.
Mitchem and his team is developing a set of Formative Assessment Test in reading and math. The test will be given to students on a quarterly basis, and will predict how well a student will perform on state test.
The quarterly results will help to identify students that need more tutoring, and schools that are performing well.
As a universal test, everyone's being graded. Students, teachers, schools, administrators and the new superintendent.
Mitchem expressed the belief that everyone should be judged on performance. He accepted a 3 year contract for $199k that's strictly performance based. He moved forward with some major organizational changes that will allow more oversight and performance evaluations for most administrators.
Coordinators
* 12 positions eliminated
* union positions
* work only 181 school days per year
* Can't be evaluated since they are part of a union
Recently, Mitchem addressed the school board with a new organizational chart that list the creation of 12 new positions.
Mitchem explained in great detail his vision to have a staff that works as one cohesive unit. The new positions are all performance based, and not guaranteed a raise. The new positions will require more work days (210 days or yearly), and subject to evaluation.
There are critics of Mitchem's reorganization plan. In this economic crisis, we are faced with a dwindling revenue base, and budget deficits, his critics would prefer that he eliminate jobs, not create new ones.
Final Word
It's clear Jim Mitchem has a blueprint in mind, and know what's required to better educate our children and improve their test scores. As a parent, I look forward to the next 3 years under Mitchem's guidance, and support his plan.
Nevertheless, as a taxpayer and pseudo-government finance reporter, I have major concerns about the district's $9.8 million budget deficit. More cuts are on the horizon, and any increase in staff should draw criticism.
There needs to be some honest discussion between taxpayers, teachers union, administrators and the school board in regards to the deficit and the type of changes necessary to balance the budget.
How can we expect "very little change in the classroom" (re. teacher layoffs), and actually balance the budget at the same time? It can't be done.
The deficit issue will not be solved overnight. After all, the district has cut approximately $20 million already. But cuts are necessary. $9.8 million more.
What do you think?
Let us know what you think. What would you like to see happen?
