The SCEA releases Sumter public forum summary

For the past two weeks, I've been waiting diligently for the Sumter Item to publish its coverage of the Sumter parents' and educators' public forum. Feedback from ones who attended the event said that the Item covered the event, but that its reporter left halfway through, after conversation turned toward a critique of the Item's coverage.

Specifically, it seems that the Item covers abundantly the administration's perspective but offers slim pickings for those straining to hear parents' and educators' points of view. I'm no expert on the Item's coverage, but its regular readers commented heavily here and here and here and here and here and here.

Perhaps to prove the point of its critics, although it reprinted the administration's written responses to individuals who spoke at the January 23 board meeting, the Item hasn't published anything about the public forum. Which is sad for several reasons, the greatest of which is that reportedly a good number of Sumter parents and educators spoke up and shared a lot of pertinent information, aired some searing and painful grievances, and pleaded for answers. One would expect that a hometown newspaper would cover such a meeting with gusto.

But one would be wrong. For the past couple of weeks, it has been as if that conversation never occurred.

Until today, that is -- and the news has come not from the Item, but from the South Carolina Education Association, which sponsored the event. A summary of the conversation has been posted at the association's website, and it reflects in great detail many of the notes sent here after that evening.

Parts of the summary are long and dense. But its introduction quotes SCEA President Jackie Hicks saying, "Goal 1 is to listen to you, to collect information, and to summarize that information. Goal 2 is to hear from you what actions you want to see taken during the coming months and years."

During the next two hours, a number of important issues and concerns surfaced, were clarified in detail, and were documented for future action. Out of this dialogue came the following digest of questions and comments, as voiced by parents and educators alike. The particular sources of these were not necessarily identified during the forum and are not identified here, as some of the attendees remain fearful of retribution in their workplaces. Instead, as president of the state's largest association of education professionals, which includes superintendents and other administrators, certified school district employees and education support personnel, Jackie Hicks presents these questions and concerns on behalf of those attending educators and in collaboration with those attending parents.

Which likely means that, under the rules governing the Sumter board's meetings, no response will be offered unless parents and educators raise specific issues and questions from it, then wait for the administration's responses in writing -- which, obviously, will now be published online by the Item, since the Item has established that precedent.

I'll keep watching for that.

So here it is:

COLLABORATIVE BALANCE
Sumter School District is in a period of significant transition. Hiring a new superintendent alone would have required a period of transition. Consolidating two school systems alone would have required a period of transition. But the combination of a consolidation and a brand-new administration demands that the entire community take special care to participate in a collaborative balance throughout this transitional period.

Parents and educators want Sumter School District to succeed and to see their community thrive. They want to participate in a collaborative balance through this period of transition, but their participation is being impeded. While School Improvement Councils appear to be functioning, Teacher Advisory Councils have been diminished during this school year. Only one teacher representative per school is allowed to participate at TAC meetings, speaking for only three minutes, with a requirement to submit questions and responses for prior approval. Parents and educators believe this does not allow for an open dialogue and exchange of information and ideas, and it does not represent a collaborative balance with the district.

Good point. In a balance, no one voice has an outsized influence, and no voice is minimized. Everyone has a role to play -- including parents, educators, administrators and elected leaders.

CONSOLIDATION
Consolidation of the Sumter School District is an accepted fact, but its impacts have not yet been fully realized and a period of transition continues for both parents and educators. One of the advertised benefits of consolidation was to be an elimination of duplicative positions, facilities and work, ultimately resulting in a reduction in personnel positions and associated facility costs, and a savings to Sumter County taxpayers. Yet there is no sign that duplicative positions, facilities or work have been merged. Instead, costly new administrative positions have been added at the district office.

Questions:
(1) Can the board demonstrate that it has merged positions, facilities and work, to save taxpayers revenues as promised?
(2) If so, what is the total savings from consolidated positions, facilities and work?
(3) What is the total cost of new positions created since the effective date of consolidation?
(4) As the superintendent's contract is a public document, can it be made public?

The Sumter School District's website doesn't offer information of this sort, so far as I can tell.

PARENT SUPPORT FOR EDUCATORS
Parents of students enrolled in the Sumter School District support their public schools and support the education professionals who serve their students in those schools. Parents have declared that Sumter's public school teachers inspire them and their children daily with optimism and a drive to reach and serve every child, regardless of their circumstances. They agree that public education is the most critical element for healthy communities. They understood that consolidation would be a period of transition, and that the transition would include "bumps" or missteps. But they assert that the condition of their school community has not improved through the period of transition, but has instead worsened.

As a result of their concern, interested parents organized themselves and continue to meet and communicate under the name of "Sumter Education Task Force." These parents are conducting their own outreach throughout the community, which included outreach to educators, and outreach for aid from, and collaboration with, The SCEA. These parents are making themselves aware of what educators are experiencing professionally and economically. They are aware that educators in Sumter have had no increase in compensation in recent years and, in fact, are losing income without a cost of living adjustment. They know that restricted supply funds force instructors to supply classrooms from their own resources. They know that salary stipends for coaches, club advisors and others at the school level have been cut, and teachers advised to take a percentage of organizational accounts to make up the difference, while they believe stipends at the district office continue to be paid.

Parents want public education to be at the forefront of Sumter County's priorities, and they want more to be done to preserve the professionalism of Sumter's classroom instructors and education support personnel. They recognize that anxiety throughout the education community has reached a fever pitch, and those who attended the January 23 board of trustees meeting observed the tension and anxiety apparent at that event.

I've never heard of asking educators to take part of the salaries out of student organization accounts, but that's what some correspondents reported after the Monday night conversation. One characterized it as "stealing from students" and chose to forego the stipend.

The next segment, titled "Discipline and School Safety" clearly engendered some angst.

To educators outside Sumter: Do these described conditions sound familiar to you, in your own school districts?

Discipline and school safety have surfaced as major issues of concern to parents and educators. Parents and educators agree that no one should have to enter classrooms, hallways, gymnasiums, locker rooms, bus stops, common areas or any other spaces on school property in fear of what may happen to them there. Parents state that their desire to know their children are safe is their primary reason for considering to remove their children from the Sumter School District.

Many parents are hearing reports from their children, across grade levels, that published discipline policies are purposefully being ignored. Among other things, they report that unruly students are being allowed to verbally assault teachers and menace other students without fear of discipline or expulsion. Unruly students are heard to describe the discipline policies and referral forms as just "a piece of paper."

Parents have learned that administrators are instructed not to intervene to stop student fights, and they are "mortified" that children can be attacked and not protected by adults.

Parents and educators agree that sufficient monitoring of student behavior is not the issue, as professionals are posted throughout schools during school hours. Rather, the issue is full implementation of published student discipline policies. Rules and policies are stated in a student handbook. A discipline test was administered at the beginning of the school year, and students were required to earn a perfect score on these tests to demonstrate knowledge of the published policies.

There is a general awareness among students and educators that some students attending their schools engage in violent criminal activity and in drug trafficking, and have been charged and convicted of these offenses, of which some school resource officers and others are aware.

There is likewise a general awareness among students that school administrators have been ordered not to discipline, and especially not to expel, some students or groups of students defined by race, gender or other descriptors, and that the rationale for this order is to reduce the district's discipline rates. A specific rumor has circulated that the district office has ordered school administrators to reduce discipline cases by 15 percent across the district.

The argument that disciplinary actions have been curtailed in order to reduce the district's discipline rate is being taken seriously because the superintendent's previous employer, the Atlanta Public Schools, widely publicized its success at reducing its reported discipline cases in recent years.

Parents and educators want to know that students and professionals who work in Sumter School District are safe from harm, and that no professional should be intimidated, pressured, or fear losing their employment for reporting violations of published discipline policies by students and by administrators. Signs posted in the schools advise students to report incidents of bullying and other misbehaviors to educators, but both parents and educators feel that the adults have nowhere to turn when the bullying occurs to them, either by misbehaving students or by district administrators who refuse to address these issues. Educators are concerned that principals can no longer defend them.

Questions:
(1) How has the administration addressed discipline during this school year?
(2) Is it true or false that the district leadership has ordered school administrators not to expel any particular students or group of students, defined by race, gender or any other descriptor?
(3) What specific communications or instructions, written or verbal, regarding student discipline have been issued by the district office to school administrators?
(4) Will the district superintendent and board chairman state unequivocally that there has been no order, nor is there any expectation, that discipline cases will be ignored in order to reduce such cases by 15 percent, or by any other specific percentage?
(5) Will the Sumter Board of Trustees consider adopting a "whistleblower" policy that protects school district employees from punitive action when they report violations of published board policies regarding student discipline? If so, will the board allow an independent committee of parents and educators to draft the policy, with input from the board attorney?
(6) Will the Board of Trustees state publicly its support for the professionalism of its teaching workforce, and its respect for school district employees at the school level?

After reading this, I can think of some more questions of my own.

Is there no state law to protect education professionals from convicted criminals in their workplaces?

What is a district's obligation to notify educators that violent criminals are enrolled in a school?

If it's a matter of weighing a minor student's right to attend school against everyone's else right to safety, don't we have alternative schools for this very purpose?

Does Sumter not have an alternative school?

And does not South Carolina provide educational opportunities for juveniles in its penal system? I believe it does; there are certainly teachers who teach incarcerated minors.

What liability does the district bear if a student or educators is assaulted, or worse, by a student who has already been convicted of a violent crime? Could not the district face liability as an accomplice? Has this happened anywhere?

I am especially gratified to see it suggested that an independent commission be allowed by the board to draft a "whistleblower" policy. If one doesn't exist in other districts already, Sumter can be the leader in this case.

In fact, without regard to a school board's decision, what stops parents and educators from drafting their own policy and lobbying to have it codified by the legislature? Who in their right mind would oppose protecting individuals who expose misbehavior?

The next two segments, "Restricted Communication" and "Threats and Intimidation," reflect a large portion of the commentary left by correspondents to earlier notes about Sumter.

RESTRICTED COMMUNICATION
Communication, and the restriction of it, represents a fundamental issue of concern for Sumter parents and educators.

Educators say they have been told unequivocally not to contact or speak to district office staff, district board members or the district superintendent. They've been told not to contact the state department of education unless the matter concerns their own re-certification.

It may still be true that teacher salary schedules posted online do not accurately represent compensation, and ones seeking clarification cannot find clear answers. At least one instance of miscommunication, or lack of communication, caused financial challenges for school district employees, when the new paycheck schedule of the merged district was not clearly communicated to everyone.

THREATS AND INTIMIDATION
Parents and educators believe that threats and intimidation against professionals, whether initiated or tolerated by the district administrators, have no place in Sumter School District. They observe a growing atmosphere of fear among educators, including school-based administrators, in their school system.

It is alleged that at least one educator's employment has been threatened for emailing the district office for information about the payroll schedule.

It is alleged that educators have been warned not to approach district administrators or elected officials.

It is alleged that at least one educator has been warned about having "a target on my back" for speaking out about educators' concerns.

Parents and educators do not want their school district to engage in or support negative behaviors, including intimidation and threats, toward school district employees. School district employees have suffered several consecutive years without pay increases, and have been subject to furloughs, and have been forced to purchase school supplies out of personal funds, and have had restrictions placed on their instructional supplies, including copying, at school.

Educators are fearful of losing their employment, or of having effective departments and teams divided, in retaliation for raising these important issues. Parents and educators agree that these professionals do not deserve to be treated as if they have no value to the school district.

Why should a professional educator not be allowed to communicate with his or her employer, for whatever reason? Are we not adults? And professionals? With credentials that qualify us for the work we do? Have we no rights?

This is, I must repeat, reflective of the underlying ideology in South Carolina's right-to-work-for-less and related laws. Workers, regardless of their professional credentials, continue to be treated in our state as second-class citizens. If what is described by these speakers is accurate -- and I'm curious to learn if these described orders were actually issued in writing -- it suggests we haven't learned much in the past three centuries about recognizing and honoring humanity in one another.

If my paycheck isn't delivered on time and I suffer economic consequences as a result, do I not have a right to understand when the district will deliver my paychecks in the future, so I can avoid future economic consequences? Should I be fired for asking simple questions of the administrators who have the answers? How absurd.

And do we all not, as a matter of basic American civil rights, have a freedom to speak without having our employment status dangled precariously before us?

Professional educators across South Carolina have suffered quite enough at the hands of a miserly legislative majority, predisposed against public education and educators for ideological reasons. They don't need additional dangers, toils and snares to threaten their well-being and livelihoods from their district office. Thankfully, there are a good many school districts, and administrators, who treat professionals professionally.

Now, although "Sweet 16" once looked like the major issue among folks in the district, it apparently was just one side of an iceberg -- still significant, but not the whole magilla.

SWEET 16
Classroom instructors are subject to mandatory evaluation under ADEPT. Implementation of the new evaluation model, Sweet 16, has inspired tremendous anxiety among Sumter's educators, who see the model as redundant and unnecessarily stressful. Some of the stress stems from knowing that anyone can walk into a classroom at any time to conduct the detailed new "audit" or evaluation; under the best of circumstances, unannounced visits cause disruption to a class, no matter how unobtrusive visitors may attempt to be. In addition, documents used to introduce the model contained numerous errors, which didn't inspire confidence in educators who are subject to the new "audits."

Comments made by presenters and widely reported among educators ("We will coach you up or coach you out") were interpreted as unnecessarily antagonistic and threatening, rather than collaborative or constructive. A rubric associated with the model wasn't delivered to some educators for weeks after its introduction, though they sought and requested the document from their direct administrators.

Underscoring this anxiety is the awareness that Sweet 16, in its present form and as presented to Sumter's educators, does not exist and has never existed elsewhere in the United States. While research may exist to support various pieces of the model, and while the component parts of the model may sound appealing and represent best practices generally, the model in its packaged form has never been implemented, tested or studied.

As many parents and educators have conducted their own research, and have asked for aid from state and national agencies to understand the model's origins, they have concluded that the model is not a legal mandate representing state or federal law, and that it may represent an experiment whose purpose they cannot determine.

Further, district office representatives have stated in media reports that Sweet 16 will not be used for the purpose of evaluating instructors, yet the structure of the new "audits" purposefully evaluates instructors.

Finally, although Sweet 16 was promoted as costing nothing to the district, the staffing for Sweet 16's required "audits" represents a substantial cost. Many staff members who were not originally hired to conduct "audits" and evaluations under the new Sweet 16 model are now doing this work, which leads to several questions.

Questions:
(1) When staff members are redirected to conduct "audits" or evaluations under the Sweet 16 model, is their previous work no longer being done?
(2) If their previous work is still being done, who is doing that work?
(3) Is "auditing" the best use of these staff members' time, given the skills for which they were originally hired?
(4) Are all of these staff members qualified to "audit" or evaluate classroom instructors?
(5) Can all documents related to Sweet 16, from "audit" or evaluation forms, to rubrics, PowerPoint presentations and other materials, be posted online for review by educators and parents, as soon as possible?
(6) Can all research supporting the Sweet 16 model in its present form, as introduced to Sumter educators and to which they are now subject, be posted online for review by educators and parents, as soon as possible?

"We will coach you up or we will coach you out."

In order to become an educator in South Carolina's public schools -- unless one slips in through Teach for America or another side door, directly from the private sector -- a body must have graduated high school, graduated from an accredited college or university, and earned a teaching certification. In order to continue teaching in our schools, this professional must suffer through a torturous first few years, then maintain his or her certification through regular coursework, seminars, trainings and other educational opportunities every several years.

And that's without pursuing advanced degrees; if a body chooses to improve his or her credentials and career earning potential, they must earn a masters degree, and perhaps a terminal degree in their field, from accredited colleges and universities.

None of which is a cakewalk.

So I understand perfectly the offense taken by educators who are told, "We will coach you up or coach you out."

How about, instead, helping educators and parents to organize behind a movement to demand sufficient funds from the legislature to guarantee every child access to a great education? And how about addressing the root problems that stymie a family's ability to support a child's education: unemployment, poverty, poor nutrition, domestic violence, lack of access to books and other literacy resources, and lack of access to early childhood education?

How about, instead of threatening educators with, "We will coach you up or coach you out," you say to educators, "We will support your work, come hell or high water, and demand that those in positions of power treat you with the respect you deserve." It's only speculation, but I bet that would guarantee you a workforce that would follow you to the ends of the earth.

But there's more:

TRANSPARENCY AND RESPONSIVENESS
Parents and educators alike believe their community and school district are strong and have tremendous potential that can be realized through collaboration. But they are frustrated at what they interpret, in their words, as a lack of transparency and responsiveness, an attitude of condescension and superiority, equivocation, secrecy and restricted communication. They say that district leaders are not listening to them. They say that district leaders have not given them straightforward answers to direct questions, especially but not exclusively around the new teacher evaluation model.

(For example, they have asked for research, not jargon that supports the Sweet 16 package in the form that it was presented to Sumter County instructors. From so many existing models of instructional evaluation, why was this model developed and chosen? And is it truly useful to give students the option of choosing serious writing or drawing a picture?)

The recent decision to invest sole authority to negotiate and finalize deals regarding property sales on behalf of the board and district was cited as one example of a "power grab" that doesn't reflect the will of the community and which illustrates a "code of secrecy, a veiling of the district office." All of these examples leave parents and educators interpreting that district leaders "do not care" what others think and feel.

FINANCIAL PRIORITIES
As Sumter County taxpayers, parents and educators are asking for clarity regarding the district's financial priorities and policies. There is a perception that in a time of financial strain, the only members of the community suffering cuts to resources are educators and their students. While perception may vary, it is reality that the board of trustees approved a budget granting the district's highest-ranking administrators lucrative salaries and benefits. As one parent noted, "The superintendent is driving a new Jaguar. How am I not supposed to be offended?"

Questions:
How do these reflect a consistent set of priorities and policies?
(1) Educators were delivered a 40-page document to introduce and begin implementation of Sweet 16, yet copying for their classroom instructional needs has been curtailed.
(2) Supply funds to educators were taken, then reduced amounts were given, while district administrators have negotiated large salaries, taken well-publicized travel and used district funds to buy food and other goods for district office purposes.
(3) Educator positions were threatened with reduction without implementation of a furlough; yet new district administrators were added to oversee implementation of a new teacher evaluation model.

The superintendent has stated to school-based educators his opposition to stipends for coaches, band directors and club advisors.
(1) Are stipends still being paid to coaches, band directors and club advisors?
(2) Is it true that coaches, band directors and club advisors were told to take a percentage of their stipends for this year from student organization accounts?
(3) Are stipends being paid to district office staff members and/or to board members?

Is that true? A Jaguar?

I acknowledge that choices are choices, but it's hard to ignore a Jaguar.

Here's what Wikipedia says about the economic landscape of Sumter:

The median income for a household in the county was $44,167, and the median income for a family was $48,970. Males had a median income of $41,083 versus $37,162 for females. The per capita income for the county was $45,657. About 13.10% of families and 16.20% of the population were below the poverty line, including 23.60% of those under age 18 and 16.40% of those age 65 or over.

Just sayin'.

INFLUENCE OF BROAD FOUNDATION IDEOLOGY EVIDENT
During the process of researching the new teacher evaluation model and the superintendent's unqualified support for it, parents and educators have made themselves more aware of the Eli Broad Foundation, the Broad Institute, the Broad Superintendents Academy and its graduates. Parents in Sumter have been in contact with leaders of parent groups in other cities and school districts where Broad graduates now lead, or temporarily led, their districts.

Additionally, they benefited from reading Diane Ravitch's "The Death and Life of the Great American School System." They agree among themselves and with Ravitch that they oppose the Broad philosophy of dividing teachers and communities, and of instituting top-down, management-oriented school administration.
Parents and educators are concerned about the change in their community's culture since the introduction of this mode of thinking. Thanks to media coverage of Broad graduates and their records in other cities and school districts, they recognize that the cultural changes they observe occurring in Sumter have occurred in those other places too.

From their research, dialogues and observations, they conclude that the new teacher evaluation model, the perceived effort to reduce reported discipline cases, the restrictions in communication and the consolidation of power at the district office are reflections of the top-down, command-and-control tactics advocated by the Broad Institute. They question whether these tactics and this philosophy of school administration is the best and most appropriate one for Sumter School District.

Sumter Item opens online poll on "Sweet 16"

As of this morning, the Sumter Item's online front page features a poll on "Sweet 16," the complex new teaching evaluation instrument implemented this year across Sumter County public schools.

The poll addresses "Sweet 16" directly and by name:

What's your stance on the implementation of the SWEET 16 in the Sumter School District?

I'm a teacher and I'm for it
I'm a teacher and I'm against it
I'm not a teacher and I'm for it
I'm not a teacher and I'm against it

In accompanying text drawn from the district's website, however, it is acknowledged that the model's "expectations align with National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and ADEPT, the state "system for assisting, developing and evaluating professional teaching," two different, previously-existing evaluation tools.

These expectations align with National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and ADEPT, the state "system for assisting, developing and evaluating professional teaching," according to the S.C. Department of Education web site.

The instructional activities, materials and resources are ready prior to lesson start and are appropriately aligned to the grade-level lesson objective.
The lesson standard is clearly visible and is effectively communicated to all students. The lesson objective is aligned to the grade-level standard.
The teacher reviews students' understanding of the previous lesson to make connections to current instruction.
The teacher demonstrates his or her knowledge of the subject matter by effectively modeling what students are to know and be able to do. The teacher applies and connects what was taught to real-life situations.
The variety of learning activities and teaching strategies reflects the teacher's understanding of students' needs, strengths, special interests, learning styles and required learning time.
With grouping strategies, the teacher assures that students are provided with opportunities to be group leaders, facilitators, decision leaders, peer tutors and peer leaders.
The skills, concepts and content are appropriately aligned to state and local performance standards and are taught at appropriate levels of complexity.
A variety of technology is used to engage students in lesson-related activities.
Connections are presented within and across content areas by the teacher and students.
The teacher maintains a well-managed learning environment that fosters equity, diversity and fairness.
The teachers formally and informally assess students' level of understanding during the lesson.
Questions go beyond simple recall and require students to think, synthesize, evaluate and conclude. Students are required to explain their responses and answers.
Re-teaching activities are provided for students who need additional instruction.
Students are informed as to how well they followed directions, completed tasks and were likely to achieve the lesson objective.
Homework and follow-up assignments are differentiated to meet the varying needs and strengths of the students.
A review of the lesson objective, feedback regarding students' understanding of what was taught and a preview of the next lesson is provided.

The Item has not set a clear deadline for responding to the poll.

"Standing ovation" for teacher's perspective at Sumter meeting

Early feedback from tonight's Sumter Board of Trustees meeting reports that Jackie Hicks, president of the SCEA, carried the perspective of Sumter's classroom professionals to the table, a perspective that earned applause and a standing ovation from approximately 200 parents, educators and others. Writes one commenter tonight,

THANK YOU JACKIE HICKS for coming to our board meeting to say what we can't. The applause and STANDING OVATION tells you all you need to know about what's happening. Please stick with us through this, I think it takes a teacher to understand what teachers suffer. I don't know many of us who can afford to represent ourselves and risk losing our job. Thank you to the SCEA for representing us all.

But it's also clear that many more speakers like Hicks are necessary to continue bringing attention to educators' concerns.

Only one speaker on the public participation list spoke in favor of "Sweet 16," the complex new teacher evaluation instrument. Others reportedly drew attention to expenses on the district's credit card, including one "at a truck stop in Manning on New Year's Eve." Though the questions were raised, no answers were offered in response.

And one parent delivered copies of the educators' comments left at Educating South Carolina's blog posts on "Sweet 16" for board members.

Still, there's no indication that the board will respond publicly to what it heard. If the Sumter Item reports on the event, it'll be recapped here.

In the meantime, feel free to post your own feedback to what was said and heard, what you'd like the board to take into consideration, and what action you hope to see the board take.

UPDATE:

I attended tonight and was amazed at the indifference given to obviously conerned parents - who, I might add, showed the patience and restraint of Saints. When we leave this earth, our lasting legacy will be the children we raise and leave to run this country. Granted, education MUST start in the home, but educators see, interact with, and mentor our children when we cannot. How can they gain parental assistance if they cannot even gain the respect or trust of the administration? Dishonest, unethical, and narcisitic attitudes will not solve our problems. We collectively must forge on to win the day. National attention (Oh, say Bill O'reilly) might be able to cut through the spin zone to make an impartial observation. Here, however, I believe that will be hard to do.

Questions about "Sweet 16" draw impassioned responses

Clearly, there's a deep well of emotion beneath the imposition of the new teacher evaluation model, "Sweet 16," on Sumter's education professionals this year. A note that attempted to root out some information and chase some rabbits toward answers earlier this week drew several responses from readers, including one from the editor of the Sumter Item.

If one subscribes to the old saw that for every person who complains, there are ten who wanted to but didn't, and another 20 who would if they knew how, then more than a few people are unhappy with what they're seeing and feeling in Sumter County.

Anonymous #1 writes,

Thank you so much for this public acknowledgement of what Sumter's educators are going through. One full semester has already been wasted on Sweet 16. Tax dollars and valuable time that should have been spent actually educating our students instead of practicing circus act audits. I pray that the school board will soon admit the error of their choice. The Item is obviously not interested in investigative reporting. Maybe The State or one of the Columbia TV stations will come to Sumter and start looking into what is going on. It's not pretty!

I didn't for a moment wonder why Anonymous didn't post under his/her own name. I've known many, many educators over many, many years who are bonafide experts in their subject areas and outright geniuses at teaching knowledge and skills to children, but who also have enough common sense to understand that life -- especially life in a small Southern community -- is a political matter, in the sense that people with power influence what power without power get to do. I felt precisely the same during my years in the classroom; it's a fool who invites the ire of a principal or a superintendent.

At the same time, none of us checks our expertises and our passions at the door when we get to work. We see, hear, smell, taste and touch what goes in in our classrooms, our worksites and our livelihoods, and we develop deeply-rooted opinions about these things.

After all, we didn't grow up in our communities, go off to college and earn degrees, jump through hoops to earn state certification and more hoops to keep certificates current, then subject ourselves to teaching and working in buildings of various quality, under circumstances of various stress, with children and parents who bring various challenges, in communities with various habits and traditions, all for nothing. Educators aren't missionaries or martyrs and shouldn't be treated as such, but we understand clearly that some things can be changed and others must be tolerated.

We value our profession and our livelihoods. So in the vast majority of challenging instances, we swallow our opinions or share them only with spouses and family.

Understanding these things, I didn't question for a moment that a reader chose to comment anonymously.

Anonymous #2 responded to the questions and answers I'd surfaced about the Broad Foundation and its influence on our public education system, because this correspondent has been pondering the same issues for a while. This writer, however, added more information to the dialogue.

Check out Parents Across America. They have many articles about the Broad Academy and the Gates Foundation and the havoc they have done to school districts nationwide. Teachers from Sumter have been asking for help since August when this was shoved down the throats and then were furloughed for 2 days at the start of school with the expectation that many would work over the weekend to catch up before students arrived. Teachers have been doing the research and sending the information out to people but the public and the board seem to want to put blinders on instead of dealing with the situation.

Furloughs to begin the year? Expectations that professionals would pick up the slack over their own weekends? And that educators themselves have been raising questions in hopes that someone would pick up on their concerns and address them?

From my earliest years, I recall hearing a successful man say that the secret to his success was this: He attended to the needs of his employees. Happy employees are productive ones, he said, and my young ears took that to heart. Conversely, I have seen in case after case since those days, unhappy employees -- men and women suffering real emotional pain over their work -- are not only less productive, but they're less healthy. They get less rest, and they burn out quicker.

I have, on occasion, seen these things happening and wondered if that result wasn't precisely what an administrator or supervisor desired from the start.

Anonymous #3 raised the specific issue of the school board's choice of the new administration, and he or she cast that choice as a "mistake." If that is a consensus view, it behooves the board to consider it. If a majority of diners concluded that a new chef and his sous chefs were turning out stomach-aches rather than satisfactory meals, the restaurant owners might reasonably revisit their personnel decisions.

Thank you for this article. It is urgent for everyone in Sumter, especially our school board, to realize that a huge mistake has been made. Virtually every decision made by this new administration has been hurtful to teachers and many decisions have made administrators' jobs more difficult. It is the students will will pay the price for this if something is not done to turn the tide. Sweet 16 has added unbelievable work and stress on educators, and no satisfactory explanation has been given to justify it. The reasons given simply do not hold water.

This correspondent introduced another couple of concepts: Administrators as well as classroom professionals have concerns and may be swallowing their opinions out of self-preservation. Does, in fact, this new instrument add "work and stress" to educators generally? And given that educators have long labored under tedious evaluation systems, is the addition of a new one justified?

The questions raised by these readers are not unreasonable.

Anonymous #4 hopes for a school board that is "logical and well-read." Would that all school boards were logical and well-read; some of them are. But this reader has apparently seen concerns brought before board members, or the board collectively, that haven't been given a full airing, or a reasonable response.

It would be nice if the School Board were as logical and well-read as you are. Unfortunately anyone who brings any of these concerns to the new Board is given lip service and rationalizations. Also, the attitude of some Board members is very condescending as if we lowly educators could not possibly understand the importance of such red tape as sweet 16 and all that goes with it. If we educators question decisions being made or those we fear may come, we are told we must not support public education. I believe that is a propaganda technique taught in our schools. The bottom line is that the constant micromanagement by the new district leaders is making this school year the most stressful year that many educators in Sumter have ever had to endure.

This is what I have observed and come to accept as gospel truth: No classroom professional or education support professional enters their profession to become wealthy. With that motive removed, I conclude that these choices of livelihood arise from a collision of passions for subject areas, for the practice of teaching children, and for the intrinsic motivation that comes with developing expertise over time. Few who despise teaching stay in the field; there are too many other alternatives to it. So to be told that one doesn't support public education because one doesn't support a particular board decision or policy is offensive to the sound mind. Such a machination is symptomatic of disease.

This reader surfaced another dangerous word: Propaganda. This is truly frightening; throughout history, propaganda has been the tool of unscrupulous powers to divide psychologically and to destroy psychologically. It isn't a word to be used lightly. So when an education professional uses it to describe circumstances occurring within the profession, I take this as a red flag, and especially so when I see on its heels the words "micromanagement" and "most stressful year...ever."

To the reasonable ear, these voices seem to represent a vast pool of untreated pain. Is there no one in Sumter able or willing to recognize this pain and move rapidly to alleviate it?

Anonymous #5 concludes that alarms haven't yet rung loud enough.

Our school board and public in general needs to wake up at the totalitarian structure that has been put in place. Our teacher forums are restricted now, people are silenced at board meetings, we are told we are not allowed to contact the State Department of Education, to "be careful" about calling our Board members because there WILL BE consequences, and it goes on and on. It sounds a lot like a "culture of fear and intimidation" the Atlanta teachers talked about. All the while, we have 2 new assistant superintendent positions that have not existed before (both making well over $100,000)and every teacher has been furloughed 4 days. Additionally, several district office personnel took a trip to China. Although I have heard that China paid for it (not sure if that is true), it still does NOT look good for our "leaders" to be galavanting in the Chinese countryside when we (the ones responsible for the actual instruction of students) are sitting home on a furlough day. True leaders understand you roll up your sleeves and take your lumps the same as your people have to...unless you have an elitist view of leadership like Eli Broad, Randolph Bynum, and other cabinet positions at our District Office.

Look at the words: "Totalitarian" -- which fits perfectly to the previous reader's "propaganda." "Restricted." "Silenced." "Not allowed to contact..." "Consequences." Is this Poland? A gulag? North Korea?

It seems clear that Kafka would have no difficulty acclimating himself to Sumter today.

And this reader raises a perfectly good question of budgeting: Expensive new positions at the district office, and international travel to China, while furloughing classroom professionals? It echoes Governor Nikki Haley's $180,000-plus junket to Hotel de Talleyrand in Paris while the state suffers double-digit unemployment. Perception is reality; what doesn't look good probably isn't good.

Anonymous #6 declares "chaos."

Honestly, a reasonable person has to ask, of South Carolina's several-dozen school districts, would many professionals say that their high schools are in "near total chaos"? In any such district where this would occur, isn't it reasonable to ask why a professional would conclude this?

The high schools in Sumter County are in near total chaos. The Sweet 16 system is bad enough, but the district has seen fit to silence, bully and intimidate anyone who dares speak out. Teachers are told, in no uncertain terms, that they are not permitted to speak to board members, nor can they address the district superintendent directly about anything. The district staff has told principals that suspension of disruptive students is not permissible. Students are running rough-shod over teachers and are grossly disrupting the learning environment for those who want to learn. School administrators will not back teachers up with effective discipline because they have been been throttled by the district admin9istration. Teachers are disheartened and suffer emotionally on a daily basis under the yoke of oppression under the policies of the new superintendent. District administrators routinely lie to teachers and school level administrators and then respond by intimidating any teacher who dares to research the facts that would counter the lies. Leadership is totally absent in this new district administration and the children and professional staff are suffering. The Sumter School District Board needs to face the music and end this debacle NOW. If not the Board, then local media and community leaders need to stand up and force a change. Silence on these problems in the school district on the part of the local newspaper is deafening. CHAOS is the only word in the English language to describe what is going on in Sumter.

Words matter, and these are painful words: "Silence, bully and intimidate." "Not permitted to speak." Building administrators are "throttled by the district administration." "Disheartened." "Suffer emotionally." "Yoke of oppression." "Routinely lie." These are words and phrases that would be perfectly applicable to life in a concentration camp; they shouldn't represent the observations of professionals in a school district in South Carolina in the twenty-first century.

And these two conclusions: "Leadership is totally absent," and "the children and professional staff are suffering."

Strip away the specifics, look only at the common language and themes employed by seasoned education professionals, and the reasonable person may conclude that pain is being felt, damage is being done, and no one is yet taking seriously these concerns.

Later anonymous comments refer specifically and generally to the note left by Graham Osteen, editor of the Sumter Item. Candidly, it was heartening that Mr. Osteen commented, because it means that he is aware, or is being made aware, of the concerns of Sumter's education professionals. I take him at his word -- and appreciate it very much -- when he writes, "I admire teachers and want them to succeed on every level." In this, Sumter's education professionals and Mr. Osteen have a mutual goal to work toward.

In his comment, Mr. Osteen made two suggestions that warrant additional emphasis. One is that, to paraphrase in part, solving problems or helping to bring about changes "will take speaking out publicly about problems in a specific way and letting the chips fall."

Anonymity as a tool for self-preservation in a small Southern community has already been mentioned. All of us can cite multiple examples of retribution for daring to speak up and out, even against blatant injustice. We are where we are. But nothing stops the Item from inviting readers to submit specific questions for its education reporters and editors to ask of the district's leadership. Does it matter that they are submitted anonymously? Such questions, invited and received at the Item's website or through some other venue, might have their answers posted at the same website. What harm is there in asking questions, even if the source remains anonymous? We're talking about our friends and neighbors, the people we see at the drugstore and the grocery store and in Sunday school.

Initiating such a practice would acknowledge that the Item has a tremendous power that individual classroom professionals -- even groups of such professionals -- don't have: The power of newspaper editors and reporters to hold public officials accountable for their decisions.

Of course, nothing requires this of the Item, but nothing prevents it. Indeed, it might lead to richer, fuller coverage and greater readership among educators.

Mr. Osteen's second suggestion is more powerful: "Wholesale change would require the election of a new school board, because the board votes are what ultimately matters.....if people feel strongly enough about the need for change, they will organize and vote for it...." His logic is crystal-clear, and it represents an invitation to do what Eli Broad has done with billions of dollars and a massive organization, which is to take control of the public education system.

Who could oppose having education professionals governing the education professions? Attorneys govern their own professions, as do medical professionals and others. Total up Sumter County's education professionals and their families, and parents of children enrolled in Sumter's public schools, and you likely get to an electoral majority. All that's needed are candidates and organized campaigning. Surely there are some knowledgeable retired educators who would cherish the chance to extend their service to their profession, and who understand first-hand the concerns of classroom professionals.

That is, of course, a direction to take for the long term. Meanwhile, how might we determine whether these few anonymous readers have made valid points, and if their perspectives represent a consensus view?

What about having a simple poll question posted at the Item's website and inviting all comers to answer: Should the decision to implement a complex new evaluation instrument, and the "audits" and related activities, be rescinded while parents, educators and board members seek input from the public -- through a series of town hall meetings and other venues -- to determine what new instrument, if any, is necessary?

Leaving such a poll open for a week would likely be sufficient.

No, there's probably no way to prevent someone from voting multiple times, but it certainly demonstrates that the Item is listening for input from educators and parents.

In the meantime, here's an invitation from Educating South Carolina: Educators, if you have specific questions that you wish the Item would ask of appropriate district leaders, elected or otherwise, feel free to post them here. Be brief. Be specific. Be respectful. We'll invite the Item to use them as, and if, it will.

Here's to fostering meaningful dialogue and seeking to help educators -- and students -- succeed on every level.

Educators in Sumter: What does "Sweet 16" mean to you?

Is it a birthday party for a 16-year-old girl, a social spectacle to draw everyone's attention?

Is it a bag of empty calories, coated with sugar or chocolate, to create a lot of activity but really making you sluggish?

Is it part of March Madness, a stage in a process of elimination?

In Sumter, thanks to a new superintendent with an interesting record, it's the new instrument being used to evaluate instructors and schools. It looks a lot like ADEPT, given all the "performance dimensions" and "teaching expectations," and given that these "dimensions" and "expectations" are all cross-referenced with ADEPT and the model promoted by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

(Which makes me wonder: If teachers satisfy the "dimensions" and "expectations" of the "Sweet 16," which is cross-referenced with the evaluation model given to national board certification candidates, shouldn't these teachers collect the same state stipend that's given to national board-certified teachers? Just a thought...)

When a teacher in Sumter emailed to ask if I'd heard of this "Sweet 16" scheme, I was clueless. An education professional there shared the new administration's powerpoint -- a hefty, 33-slide monster larded down with tightly-packed text, which is precisely what experts say one shouldn't load onto a powerpoint presentation -- and I've read and re-read it carefully, leading to substantial eye-strain. I don't recommend it to others.

But I certainly understand now the consternation of education professionals in Sumter who will now be subject to it. To put it mildly, the Politburo couldn't have done a better job. For example, each "element" of each "performance dimension" "expects" each teacher to "exceed expectation." Might Joseph Heller have been consulted in its creation?

Shouldn't one expect a professional to "meet" expectation, and reward the professional for exceeding it? What's to reward if your expectation is that every professional exceed expectation?

As foolish as the whole thing sounds, I wonder if it actually represents a sinister motive. As I read the thing, there is an exceedingly narrow path to meeting all the dimensions, elements and expectations; there's only one way to get it all right. But there are innumerable possibilities to fail.

Demand that a professional juggle four balls, recite the Gettysburg Address, blink the lyrics to "Singin' In The Rain" in Morse code AND pedal a unicycle, all while standing on her head and smiling, and I suspect the professional may miss a letter or two of the Morse code when she gets to "I'm happy again!"

Candidly, it sounds like a plan invented by a middle-manager to subjectively fire teachers.

A natural question occurred to me: So where did this plan come from? That's when this became interesting.

Here's Mary Porter, who is not a teacher in South Carolina, but who sheds a little light on Sumter's new "Sweet 16":

I am a chemistry teacher at a low-income public school which has been horribly impacted by Broad's interference.

The "Broad" in question is California billionaire Eli Broad.

Although Broad admits he doesn't know anything about how to teach, the business model he imposes on public schools demands that his "trained" administrators come into our classrooms and force us to follow "standards-driven" teaching practices, supposedly to raise test scores. My district can't provide working heat, light, or running water for my under-equipped lab, but we pay hundreds of thousands to the consulting businesses he promotes. The real drive behind his manipulations is the marketing plan for the useless "services" and products provided (at public expense) by his for-profit entrepreneurial "partners."

Edu-business entrepreneurs hide under a layer of fake non-profits set up by "philanthropists" like Broad and Gates. Broad brags he's "not beholden to public opinion", meaning that, because of his wealth and the political power it buys, he is not accountable to the public. Believe me, Broad won't increase my pay at all. I get up at 5:30 every morning to dedicate my life, a day at a time, to teaching real chemistry. My students go to nursing schools, universities, state colleges and community colleges. When they enter the military, they do well enough on the ASVAB to qualify for specialist training. None of that is due to Broad's business model, though, and I won't promote his agenda. So my administrators have to decide that I'm not a leader.

Another educator, Michael Fiorello, notes the origins of Broad's fortune:

It's revealing that Broad earned the first of his many fortunes building gated communities and subdivisions in white-flight suburbs of Southern California. Originally named Kaufman and Broad, the company is now known as KB Homes, the stock of which is a major part of his foundation's endowment. So, a fortune created by federally- subsidized housing inequalities is then channeled into a tax-exempt foundation that funds the dismantling of the public schools and creation of a separate-and unequal education system. It's almost like a perpetual motion machine, as designed by Mephistopheles.

And Ms. Porter completes the picture:

The other half of his fortune came from his AIG stock - yes, he made another killing on those same defective mortgages, as AIG bundled them into derivitives. He donated most of his AIG stock at its peak to his own privately-controlled education foundation, which dumped the stuff. By the time the crash came, he was out and we educators are trapped under his billions. He also rebuilt New Orleans for Bush - you know how that went.

The housing stock is worse than underwater, now. He brought in cheap drywall from China for his developments, and the walls are now exuding toxic hydrogen sulfide gas which corrodes the wiring and poisons the occupants. The problem surfaced first in Florida, because of the heat and humidity. It's hard to say how many houses are affected, because of course he lies to evade responsibility, but the number keeps going up.

So Eli Broad, according to people who have considered his background, is a business tycoon who is successful at amassing personal fortune.

Is he an educator? No. Even he says he isn't.

Earlier, he’d explained his interest in the way school systems are run: “We don’t know anything about how to teach or reading curriculum or any of that. But what we do know about is management and governance.”

“We’re often accused of having too much influence in education,” Broad said. “I’m not sure how you’d restrict that.”

Yet Broad is heavily involved in education through his nonprofit organization, the Broad Foundation, which trains school boards and administrators -- not in curriculum or instruction, but in management.

What does this have to do with Sumter's "Sweet 16"? We're getting to Sumter, but we have to stop in Georgia first.

With a student population of about 3,000, Pebblebrook High School is the largest high school in Cobb County, Georgia, located just northwest of Atlanta in the community of Mableton. It's home to the county's only performing arts magnet program.

But during the school year of 2004-05, a new principal and the high school's journalism teacher clashed over the school's student newspaper, an award-winning production managed by student reporters and editors. We know this because of what happened at the end of the school year, and because dozens of email communications between the principal and the teacher were made public.

The stories of the involved parties differ: The principal said he had to make budget cuts, and the journalism teacher said the principal had balked at the newspaper's content and at being questioned by students. A reasonable person reading the emails could conclude that the principal was clearly irritated that the newspaper didn't cast him, his decisions and the school in a favorable light -- they weren't "cheerleading" -- and that he delayed meeting with student reporters for as long as possible.

When things came to a head, the principal blocked publication of the student newspaper, cut its funding from the budget, and cancelled future journalism classes. In response, the student journalists opened a weblog, posted all of their content -- including the dozens of internal emails -- there, drew the attention of the Atlanta-area major media, and sought legal support from a First Amendment legal services organization in Virginia.

However, in June 2005, before that issue was resolved, that principal was appointed "Area Assistant Superintendent in the Cobb County School District, the second largest district in Georgia with over 106,000 students in 113 schools." In this new position, the former principal would oversee "17 schools, over 19,000 students, 1,500 staff members, and a $120 million budget."

The contentious former principal and powerful new Area Assistant Superintendent's name was Randolph Bynum.

Very soon, the Atlanta Board of Education was undergoing training in "leadership strategies" offered by a nonprofit organization based in Los Angeles, California. Its press release, dated June 27, 2006, announces that the newer members of Atlanta's board were among the 29 board members from 11 urban school districts across the nation trained by the organization. The focus of the training, the release states, was "how to improve school board governance in order to achieve dramatic increases in academic performance for all children." The training lasted six days and was delivered in Park City, Utah.

The organization that trained these school board members was the Broad Institute for School Boards.

The administration of Cobb County schools must have been satisfied with trainings delivered by the Broad Institute in 2006. In 2007, Area Assistant Superintendent Randolph Bynum attended the Broad Institute's separate training program for superintendents, called the Broad Superintendents Academy. Though it is not a degree-granting organization, the Broad Superintendents Academy announced that Bynum "graduated" as part of its "class of 2007."

Within a year, in August 2008, the Broad-trained Bynum was promoted again: This time, he became Associate Superintendent for High Schools in the Atlanta Public Schools, "a district with over 49,000 students in 103 schools." The Broad Superintendents Academy was so proud of its "alumnus" that it published a press release on the announcement.

Bynum had clearly landed a plum role in a significant location. During the past decade, Atlanta Public Schools had earned a reputation for stunning improvement in student achievement, reflected in tremendous gains in student test scores.

That was Atlanta's reputation, of course, until the spring of 2011. In the span of a few weeks, celebrated superintendent -- indeed, national 2009 Superintendent of the Year -- Beverly Hall announced her resignation, and state authorities announced findings of a massive investigation into a widespread cheating scandal. Two of its conclusions, as reported by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: "A state investigation found former Atlanta schools superintendent Beverly Hall and her top aides either ignored or destroyed evidence of test cheating across the district." And, "Area superintendents silenced whistle-blowers and rewarded subordinates who met academic goals by any means possible."

It got worse.

Superintendent Beverly Hall and her top aides ignored, buried, destroyed or altered complaints about misconduct, claimed ignorance of wrongdoing and accused naysayers of failing to believe in poor children’s ability to learn.

For years — as long as a decade — this was how the Atlanta school district produced gains on state curriculum tests. The scores soared so dramatically they brought national acclaim to Hall and the district, according to an investigative report released Tuesday by Gov. Nathan Deal.

In the report, the governor’s special investigators describe an enterprise where unethical — and potentially illegal — behavior pierced every level of the bureaucracy, allowing district staff to reap praise and sometimes bonuses by misleading the children, parents and community they served.

The report accuses top district officials of wrongdoing that could lead to criminal charges in some cases.

The decision whether to prosecute lies with three district attorneys — in Fulton, DeKalb and Douglas counties — who will consider potential offenses in their jurisdictions.

For teachers, a culture of fear ensured the deception would continue.

“APS is run like the mob,” one teacher told investigators, saying she cheated because she feared retaliation if she didn’t.

The voluminous report names 178 educators, including 38 principals, as participants in cheating. More than 80 confessed. The investigators said they confirmed cheating in 44 of 56 schools they examined.

The investigators conducted more than 2,100 interviews and examined more than 800,000 documents in what is likely the most wide-ranging investigation into test-cheating in a public school district ever conducted in United States history.

And just as Atlanta's meteoric test scores had attracted national attention, so did its scandal.

The 55,000-student Atlanta public school system rose in national prominence during the 2000s, as test scores steadily rose and the district received notice and funding from the Broad Foundation and the Gates Foundation. But behind that rise, the state found, were teachers and principals in 44 schools erasing and changing test answers.

One of the most troubling aspects of the Atlanta cheating scandal, says the report, is that the district repeatedly refused to properly investigate or take responsibility for the cheating. Moreover, the central office told some principals not to cooperate with investigators. In one case, an administrator instructed employees to tell investigators to "go to hell." When teachers tried to alert authorities, they were labeled "disgruntled." One principal opened an ethics investigation against a whistle-blower.
...
"The [Atlanta] teachers, principals and administrators wanted to prove that the faith of the Broad and Gates Foundations and the Chamber of Commerce in the district was not misplaced and that APS could rewrite the script of urban education in America and provide a happy, or at least a happier, ending for its students," writes the AJC's education columnist, Maureen Downey.

By the time the state's findings were announced and the media spotlight burned on the district office, Atlanta's Associate Superintendent for High Schools was already gone, having just left town. On April 25, three hundred miles to the east, WLTX in Columbia reported this news:

The consolidated Sumter School District board has approved Randolph Bynum as the first superintendent the new school district has ever had.

"We want to have community schools in the farthest areas of the county to be along the same lines as mainstream Sumter schools," explains Ernest Frierson, a former board member and one of the residents at Monday night's meeting.

His concern was heard from others who stood at the podium, as well. Their meeting was held near Mayesville, a more rural area of the county. "One of the things that concerns us is that we have a lot of Pre-Kindergarten to 3rd grade children in that community who have to travel a long distance to be educated," Frierson says. He's hopeful the new superintendent will address those concerns.

Not all members of the board agreed on hiring Bynum, the final vote was five to two. But, it was a decision Chairman Larry Addison was pleased with.
...
Bynum is currently Associate Superintendent in Atlanta. Addison and others felt he's up for the challenge of bringing the two districts together. Of course, along with the help of those already in place. Says Addison, "We've got two good districts with a lot of good talent, a lot of good people."

The contract that the board approved will begin July 1st. It's currently a three-year contract with Bynum earning $175,000 a year.

Nice work, if you can get it. While other high-level administrators in Atlanta knew their secret activities were about to become public knowledge, Bynum had landed a choice escape from the taint of a cheating scandal -- and he happily told the Sumter Item of his glee.

Randolph Bynum was excited to learn he would be the first superintendent of the Sumter School District. "If you had been in the Bynum household last night, there were two people but it sounded like 50," he said Tuesday morning. "It's a fulfillment of a dream for me to be part of an outstanding community like Sumter."

Respectfully, it strains credulity to suggest that one who had been an associate superintendent in one of the nation's largest school districts at a time when it outshone the nation in improving test scores had "dreamed" of becoming superintendent in a much poorer district with a much lower profile, many fewer students and fewer schools, and where

The median income for a household in the county was $44,167, and the median income for a family was $48,970. Males had a median income of $41,083 versus $37,162 for females. The per capita income for the county was $45,657. About 13.10% of families and 16.20% of the population were below the poverty line, including 23.60% of those under age 18 and 16.40% of those age 65 or over.

We might speculate that part of the excitement was knowing that the Sumter Item has a fraction of the resources of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, so the wattage of media scrutiny of its schools superintendent is naturally much dimmer.

Bynum wasted no time announcing his resignation to the Atlanta media, who noted the coincidence of his leaving alongside the Atlanta superintendent and other administrators.

Atlanta Public Schools has lost another high-ranking official: Randolph Bynum, the city district's associate superintendent for high schools, was named this week as the new superintendent of schools in Sumter County, S.C.

Bynum officially starts July 1. APS's deputy superintendent for instruction, Kathy Augustine, was picked last week as a lone finalist to lead the suburban DeSoto Independent School District in Texas. Both of their departures coincide with that of Atlanta Superintendent Beverly Hall, who will leave the district June 30 after a 12-year tenure.

And just that quickly, the cheating scandal in Atlanta broke wide open, and news of the state's findings reached Sumter, leading the Item to publish this note:

The Atlanta Public School system has been making headlines for a cheating scandal, which led some Sumterites to ask if the new superintendent of Sumter School District was involved.

Randolph Bynum said neither he nor his two new cabinet members also from that school system, Cassandra D. Dixon for chief teaching and learning officer and Lisa M. Norman for chief curriculum and accountability officer, were involved.

It's a brief note, not quite the same as hard-hitting investigative reporting, but let's look at it carefully.

The Atlanta Public Schools enrolled 55,000 students, making it smaller than our Greenville Public Schools (70,210 students) but larger than Charleston County Schools (about 42,000 students). Students enrolled in the newly-consolidated Sumter school district totaled about 16,400 as of its December 8, 2011, report to the state Department of Education, which means that the Sumter consolidated district is comparable in size to Lexington-Richland District 5, which ranks 16th in the state by student population.

If Dr. Penny Fisher, superintendent of Greenville's schools, has a "Cabinet," I cannot find mention of it on that district's website, although she has an organizational chart that certainly reflects the needs of a 70,000-student district. Likewise, I cannot find any evidence that Dr. Steven Hefner, superintendent of Lexington-Richland District 5, claims to need one; nor can I find evidence that a district of Lexington-Richland 5's size needs a detailed organizational chart. Maybe it has one, but it isn't advertised online.

Yet Bynum has not a "leadership team" or even "administrative team," but a "Cabinet." That's fine. People use different words to mean the same thing. Presidents and governors have Cabinets and superintendents have administrative teams, but what does it matter that a superintendent likes to call his administrative team a Cabinet? It's word choice. It's a small thing.

And does it matter that Bynum differentiates between a "Senior Cabinet" of seven administrators and an "Expanded Cabinet"? Of course not. Still, the words are there on the superintendent's organizational chart, prominently placed on the district website.

Which was established and circulated on July 11, ten days after his arrival.

And which includes the names Dixon and Norman, who are presumably the Cassandra D. Dixon and Lisa M. Norman named in the Sumter Item, the two Cabinet members that Bynum brought with him to Sumter as media scrutiny illuminated the cheating scandal of that city's school system.

Further, they are presumably the same Cassandra Dixon and Lisa Norman whose names appear on the title slide of the administration's powerpoint presentation co-introducing (with Joan Sagona and Cornelius Leach, respectively) the complex new evaluation tool called "Sweet 16" to Sumter's classroom teachers.

It would seem that Sumter's recent consolidation and need for a new superintendent, and the willingness of Sumter trustees to hire the new superintendent's Atlanta staff alongside him, were fortuitous circumstances indeed for a new superintendent and two of his seven "Senior Cabinet" members. Can it be that the district office on Wilson Hall Road has a "Cabinet Room" now?

And did the Atlanta Public Schools use "Sweet 16" before the new superintendent and his aides brought it to Sumter? Is it a product of the Broad Foundation, in part or entirely?

Sumter is truly a wonderful place to live and work. Unless, now, you're an education professional who teaches, and you're now subject to "Sweet 16."

The Sumter Item, understandably supportive of its new school district and hopeful for its new superintendent, published an introductory message from Bynum on August 14. After re-reading the email correspondence of Bynum and the Pebblebrook High School journalism teacher in Mableton, Georgia, from 2005, one can't help but imagine that Bynum would have appreciated the same acquiescence from student journalists then that he's receiving from Sumter's mainstream media today. In it, he did not mention "Sweet 16."

The Item did publish a note on September 16 announcing the introduction of "Sweet 16."

SWEET 16 is not a birthday party Sumter School District is planning.

Systematic Way to Ensure Effective Teaching 16 is an instructional audit system aimed at improving professional development by observing 16 elements of classroom teaching. According to paperwork in the board packets, the "framework enhances the skills of classroom teachers to direct the new work of standards-based learning in order to lead the state in improving student achievement."

Let me translate: No Child Left Behind taught teachers to "teach to the test," no longer to teach to educate. Since the implementation of NCLB, however, new research (especially by an analyst named Robert J. Marzano, whose work is now the flavor-of-the-year in several states) has shown that "an effective teacher enhances student learning more than any other aspect of schooling that can be controlled."

So the new goal, thanks to NCLB, which is still in effect, and the work of Marzano, is that we have to make every teacher fit a predetermined definition of "effective," then make that teacher teach to the test.

Voila! Improved student achievement -- accomplished by tough-as-nails administrators with minimal resources and a teaching workforce judiciously weeded and beaten into submission.

Except that, as classroom educators understand, that isn't how children learn.

Google "Sweet 16" and "teacher evaluation" and you'll discover that the program exists only in Sumter County, South Carolina.

Google "Robert J. Marzano" and "research" and you'll find that Marzano himself, underneath all the gobbledygook, only identifies nine "essential instruction strategies for effective teaching."

In market economics, buying a nine-piece product and repackaging it as a 16-piece product is called inflation; this is a concept that business tycoons understand, which suggests that there's a thick slice of Broad Foundation philosophy sandwiched together with Marzano's strategies in "Sweet 16."

Are Sumter County's teachers about to suffer under a hyped-up evaluation system that the board of trustees didn't know they were buying, and don't really understand?

This is a lot of information to digest, but here are some questions to ponder:

What kind of influence will the Broad Foundation and Broad-trained administrators seek to impose on a developing rural and suburban district like Sumter?

Did the selection committee of the board of education know all of the information that is publicly available and easily accessible on the internet about the new superintendent before choosing him? If so, how did they plan to respond when the baggage from Mableton and Atlanta arrived on their doorstep?

Should those who cover education for the Sumter Item get in touch with education reporters from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution to better understand the new superintendent's history and style? And to better understand who was imported alongside him?

Should a fuller discussion of a complex and unique new evaluation tool be conducted in public before it's implemented, especially if it's designed to replace existing evaluation systems and subjectively remove educators from their livelihoods?

Should Sumter's classroom professionals and parents find out more about the Broad Foundation's philosophy and history in public schools, and about their new superintendent and his Cabinet, and about the origins of "Sweet 16," the complex new teacher evaluation tool that their board of education has agreed to impose on them?

Should educators and parents in other school districts pay close attention to what's happening to their counterparts in Sumter, to be prepared when the same phenomenon occurs under a different label in their own communities?

NOTE: For educators who've arrived at the post for the first time, a follow-up to it is found here.

To those who have posted responses and who have wanted to post responses, be aware that you're not alone -- and that educators across South Carolina, and now outside the state, are becoming aware of your circumstances. The best solution will come when educators feel free to organize themselves, supported by parents and community leaders, and take charge of our education professions, as is the case already in many other states.

Teaching is the most important job in America, and our state and communities should move heaven and earth to ensure that the knowledge, experience, commitment and passion of education professionals is respected, supported and rewarded, every day.