“You are not allowed to wear that shirt standing next to the enemy of public education, we are a body corporate, you do not represent this board!”

"As an individual board member, you have no authority,  we are a body corporate, you are only a board member when the board is in session"

The Utah School Board Association (USBA) has indoctrinated new school board members into believing that they do not have authority outside of a convened school board meeting.

See blog link to new board member orientation process:
What Really Happen at the December 1, 2012 -USBA Orientation

In the picture above, I am standing next to Representative G. Hughes, following a press conference this past summer.

After I posted this picture on Facebook, several school board members told me that I could not wear a shirt identifying myself as a school board member because as an “individual” I have no authority. They went on to say that I cannot wear that shirt, standing next to Rep. Hughes of all people, he is the enemy of public education”

USBA did a presentation to the Salt Lake City School Board this past Monday and again repeated the mantra “as an individual you have no authority…we are a body corporate”.  The board president reminded everyone, “that is state law”.

This amendment will help clarify that false indoctrination:

“Notwithstanding a local school board’s status as a body corporate, an elected member of a local school board serves and represents the residents of the local school board member’s district, and that service and representation may not be restricted or impaired by the local school board member’s membership on, or obligations to, the local school board.”

HB 250 Local School Board Amendments — Draxler, J.

This was the subject of in the Legislative Task Force on Education in August 2013.

Here is a short version of what occurred:

Article Follow Up: School Board Maverick Stirs Teacher Debate at Legislature (Tribune)

Here is a more in depth account on the hearing:

What Really Happen at the August 27, Task Force Meeting? (video)

Soon after winning the election in 2012. Columnist John Flores wrote an excellent article explaining where a school board member’s proprieties should be placed:

New School Board Members Can Make A Difference (Deseret News)

There are multiple examples throughout this blog, documenting the constant assault leveled at the authority of an elected member of the school board, all in the name of “body corporate”.  I’ve cited a couple of silly ones above.

Local school boards are important and powerful institutions of our society. They manage and determine the quality of education our children receive, set policy, levy taxes and spend our tax dollars. However, now some seem to have abdicated their fiduciary responsibilities to administrators. Local school board members are elected to serve the people, not the institution. (Jessie L. Bonner, AP)

By John Florez , Deseret News
Published: Saturday, Sept. 14 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

If Utah’s local school boards were graded, they would get an F, or at best an incomplete. Some seem to suffer from chronic public absenteeism and don’t do their homework.

When the law went in to effect requiring schools be given a grade for their performance, there was an immediate outcry by school administrators, teachers and some parents for its unfairness. Noticeably absent were the voices of local school board members, the ones responsible for overseeing schools. It speaks volumes about what’s wrong with Utah’s educational system. Local school boards are important and powerful institutions of our society. They manage and determine the quality of education our children receive, set policy, levy taxes and spend our tax dollars. However, now some seem to have abdicated their fiduciary responsibilities to administrators. Local school board members are elected to serve the people, not the institution.

Utahns are strong advocates for local control, with elected school board members being closest to the people. Yet few of us know the name of our local school board member. Bright and dedicated people run for school boards; however, once elected they are briefed and intimidated by professionals who quickly “educate” them as to the complexity of education and succumb to the language of the enterprise — collaboration, communication and partnerships. As a former school board member, I was briefed on board protocol calling for getting along, cooperating, being “family,” and discouraged from speaking out on my own and voicing the concerns of the people I was elected to represent.

Though board members are elected to represent their districts, in many instances they quickly become isolated and insulated from any criticism from the public, so taxpayers never know where they stand on issues. Board meetings often become show and tell, where board members listen to professionals as to what they do, rather than what they are supposed to deliver — well-educated students prepared to succeed in an ever-changing world.

As Senate President Wayne Niederhauser and House Speaker Rebecca Lockhart have pointed out, “School Grading is a transparent and easy-to-understand accountability system that focuses on outcomes instead of inputs … We believe such a system is necessary for teachers and administrators to focus their efforts, for parents to understand what’s happening at their children’s schools, and for board members and lawmakers to evaluate policy changes and reallocate resources effectively.”

The grading system has shown the need for changes in our educational governance. Currently everyone — legislators, the state board, district boards and schools — and no one is responsible.

As a consequence, there is much finger pointing; school districts blame legislators for school problems, lack of money, a multitude of regulations and needless reporting systems.

As legislative leadership renews education’s governance structure (SB169), instead of simply giving school districts more money, they ought to consider having the state contract with local school districts for established education outcomes and monitor for results. This would give school districts greater flexibility and require school districts to publicly show local people the results of their decisions. Once the public sees who is responsible for how their schools are managed, they can vote board members out or keep them in. Board members should be elected for two-year terms.

Once board members remember they are elected to serve the people, not the institution, stop looking for scapegoats, start evaluating their policies and reallocating resources, they will find great support from their local citizens.

Link To Original Article

A Utah native, John Florez has been on the staff of Sen. Orrin Hatch, served as former Utah Industrial Commissioner and filled White House appointments, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor and Commission on Hispanic Education. Email him atjdflorez@comcast.net

Michael Clara, left, takes part as a new member of the Salt Lake City School Board at their offices in Salt Lake City Tuesday, January 8, 2013.
Brian Nicholson, OKespa–ol

By John Florez , Deseret News

Published: Saturday, March 2 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

Sometimes the cover up is worse than the problem. School boards often appear to avoid dealing with serious policy matters.

At Salt Lake school district meeting last week, board members were listening to a presentation by their staff regarding the district’s Student Achievement Plan. One of the presenters noted a correlation between student achievement and teacher effectiveness, which prompted newly-elected board member, Michael Clara, to ask why schools in the west side area he represents have a disproportionate number of “ineffective” teachers. The presenter replied that it was, “One of our big problems with our distribution system for teachers, is that we have a lot of new teachers in west side schools every single year … ” She went on to point out that the west side students may not be “ … with the most effective teachers … we need to do something to turn around that very pattern that you can see … as a district, I really hope we have the will and resources to carry this process forward.”

Later in the discussion, the cover up seemed to start. A seasoned board member jumped in and said, “You cannot take teachers in a school of primarily children who don’t speak English at home … and compare them to a school in another part of the … district where practically all the children were raised speaking English.” The board vice president tried to move the discussion and just wanted the presenters to continue on. The district superintendent attempted to end the discussion by saying the presentation was about student assessment, not teacher evaluation. The presenter got the message and stopped talking about teacher effectiveness. However, Mr. Clara pointed out that student achievement is related to the “quality of instruction” and wanted an answer, but never got one.

The whole discussion points out one of the reasons our schools are faltering: school board members are discouraged from discussing critical issues, such as why some students in some school neighborhoods may not be doing as well as those in different neighborhoods. The presentation raised the question about a pattern of disparate treatment that was ignored, which shows how a school board appears unwilling to tackle the serious problems it is elected to solve. The culture created throughout public education boards seems to be one of getting along with each other rather than working in the public’s interest. And they made “rules” to make sure nothing happens.

School board members are elected officials sworn to do their duty; however, they are quickly “educated” by district administrators as to how to “get along with” other board members. Elected officials are supposed to represent the interests of their constituents. Democracy requires openness, public debate and working in the public’s interest. Officials must exercise their duty as policy makers in overseeing that all students receive a quality education and be sure administrators carry out their directives. Often it seems it’s the other way around.

Since Mr. Clara tried, and never got an answer to the question as to the correlation between student achievement and ineffective teachers in different school neighborhoods, he was prompted to file a civil rights complaint with the U.S. Office for Civil Rights, alleging a pattern of discrimination and a violation of the district’s policy of equal opportunity.

Let this be a wake up call for all school board members. They have a duty to be stewards of one of our most important institutions and to represent the people — not the institution.

Copyright 2013, Deseret News Publishing Company

Link To Article

If 65 percent of children entering school this fall may end up in careers that haven’t been invented, why do lawmakers think evaluating teachers annually will improve education?

According to a MacArthur Foundation study, 65 percent of students in today’s classrooms will be doing jobs that have not yet been created. So why do lawmakers want to evaluate teachers based on a system that is teaching kids for a world that no longer exists? Today’s students may not be doctors, lawyers, genetic counselors or app developers. “Even those digital-age careers will be old hat. Maybe … (they’ll be) … plying a trade none of us old-timers will even recognize as work,” according to Cathy N. Davidson, co-director of the MacArthur Foundation (“Education needs a digital-age upgrade, New York Times, Aug. 7).

The problem isn’t teachers. The problem is we have leaders who have not taken the time to understand how the world has changed. Our educational system is still educating students for jobs of the agrarian and industrial eras designed around production, grades, memorization, testing and time clocks. The new economy is driven by knowledge, creativity, innovation and imagination.

All jobs that can be automated, digitized or outsourced are gone, and the only security one has about a job is the ability to adapt, create and reinvent. Davidson says, “We can’t keep preparing students for a world that doesn’t exist. We can’t keep ignoring the formidable cognitive skills they’re developing on their own. And above all, we must stop disparaging digital prowess just because some of us over 40 don’t happen to possess it.”

This year Utah lawmakers passed a law requiring annual evaluations for all teachers, believing the reason we had declining education rates was because of bad teachers and that annual evaluations would improve public education. They have directed each school district to develop its own teacher evaluation program. Such patchwork fixes to education not only create more needless and costly regulations for schools, but also divert and mask the main problem with education — it’s an old system that has not changed to keep pace with the times.

The Utah State Board of Education will soon be rolling out its own two-year study on teacher evaluation methods that will require schools to follow conflicting regulations — one by the state and one by the Legislature. It’s an example of why our schools are rudderless and in constant chaos. The board is once again creating a top-down planning process rather than involving front-line teachers in developing a fair and meaningful evaluation system.

Our policy makers should be humble enough to take the time to do what successful leaders do if they are serious about retooling our public education for the global economy: try to understand how the world has changed and what the future might look like; educate and inform citizens about the challenges they face; share a vision of what needs to be done; and invite the public to work to seek common solutions. Imposing power and demanding things only breeds contempt and resistance and shows a lack of trust and respect for the individual.

America is experiencing a leadership vacuum where our leaders are more concerned about ideology and egos, exploiting the fear of a changing and uncertain world for their own political gain, rather than calling upon the best in people. Our nation is crying for leaders who can understand how our world has changed and pull us together as other leaders have done in troubled times.

If we know 65 percent of the children starting school this month will be doing jobs yet to be invented, how can we allow them to languish in schools we know will fail to prepare them for their new world?

A Utah native, John Florez has been on the staff of Sen. Orrin Hatch, served as former Utah Industrial Commissioner and filled White House appointments, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor and Commission on Hispanic Education.

Click Here For Link To Article

If private employers treated their employees like Utah lawmakers treat their teachers, they would be out of business and cited for violating labor laws.

Yet, we see legislators continue to blame teachers for our failing schools. They keep trying to pass laws on how to fire poor performing teachers, demand more accountability, add more needless regulations and even try to dismantle education with a thousand cuts. Such actions only serve to intimidate, demean and create a hostile work environment. Then they wonder why teachers are leaving the profession they chose because they believed they could make a difference in motivating children to love learning.

Apparently, lawmakers don’t take the time to review past studies, like the 156-page “Utah Educator Supply and Demand Study” commissioned in 2005 by the Utah State Office of Education (USOE) and the State Board of Regents. That study was undertaken to determine what to do about meeting the demand for more teachers to educate the 49 percent student growth over the next 20 years.

It said state colleges of education should increase enrollment and place more of their own students in state school districts. And that the USOE needed to help educators who left to raise families return to the profession.

Education professionals and policymakers dismissed the most important finding: that 40 percent of those who graduate from Utah teacher colleges never enter the profession and that another 40 percent leave the profession after five years. The state doesn’t have a supply problem. People are leaving because of the untenable, stressful and oppressive working conditions in schools today.

As one teacher wrote, “A student teacher from our school quit last year at Christmas (after having no support from administration) … we had an opening this year we phoned to see if she wouldn’t try again at our school. The reply, ‘Thank you, I have a job now with great opportunities to grow and a great working environment.'” Others have said they would discourage family members from going into teaching.

Lawmakers should take the time to listen to the frontline teachers instead of administrators and labor leaders who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo rather than advocating for children. Successful businesses know their greatest investment is their skilled employees and the need to create an environment where they feel valued, supported and rewarded; turnover of trained employees is a human and financial loss.

Professional education administrators give policymakers solutions to do more of the same — more money, more teacher training, mentoring, smaller classes, more testing and accountability. What is needed is for lawmakers to realize what business people do: invest in their people and help them succeed. If the company isn’t productive, they do a self-evaluation, rather than firing employees at the bottom of the organization.

Lawmakers should do the same. Intimidating and threatening teachers is counterproductive and a waste of tax dollars. They should look at education as though it’s their own money that’s on the line. Matter of fact, they have a higher standard to meet — their stewardship of the public’s institutions. Before they fire poor performing teachers, legislators should articulate what constitutes good performance: what is the product they are supposed to deliver? Is it process, or whether a student goes on to higher education or gets a living wage job?

Lawmakers should create a work environment where teachers can come ready to motivate students to learn. Education starts with one teacher who feels valued, supported and eager to come to work with the “fire (that) burns in my teacher heart,” as one teacher said. It’s up to lawmakers to make that happen.

A Utah native, John Florez has been on the staff of Sen. Orrin Hatch, served as former Utah Industrial Commissioner and filled White House appointments, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor and Commission on Hispanic Education.

Click Here For Link To Article

by John Florez, Deseret News

Andy Grove, former chairman of Intel, once said, “If you are not paranoid, you are out of business.” So it may be with the state school board.

American businesses have taken Grove’s advice and retooled themselves for today’s economy. Utah’s state school board members would do our state well to do the same.

In 2001, the Utah State Office of Education (USOE) commissioned GMT of America, Inc. to conduct a study to determine to what degree the USOE, “…is efficiently and effectively meeting its constitutional and statutory responsibilities.” State school board members might begin the retooling by reviewing the findings of that study as a starting point.

The GMT study found: The regulatory role of USOE was not clearly defined resulting in inconsistent enforcement of its regulatory responsibilities leaving uncertainty throughout Utah’s educational system; that it should implement a system for interpreting and informing local school districts of the requirements of state legislation; and that it lacks a method for tracking the enactment of statutes and regulations and linking them to agency operations. Most critical, it found no evidence the USOE had a planning process and accountability system, thus preventing any formal evaluation of its policies, programs and assessment of its performance.

Utah’s educational governance structure has become unwieldy with layers of legislative committees, commissions and elected officials involved in trying to oversee and manage public education that is supposed to be the responsibility of the state school board under the Utah constitution. Responsibility for the supervision of Utah’s public education has become so dispersed that it’s impossible to determine and establish accountability for results — or even determine what the system is supposed to produce.

America’s educational organizational structure was designed for an industrial era. Now, the new economy has made our old way of doing business and governmental institutions obsolete. The old economy relied on mass production of goods and services. The new economy requires quality, variety, customization, convenience and timeliness. It now must have “high performance work organizations” which will create quality jobs and require a higher skilled workforce. Today’s students were raised in a digital and social network world and our schools must be retooled to build on those experiences.

The retooling process starts with the current committed state board members taking the time to understand how the world has changed, creating a vision of what they want our educational system to become, and renewing its mission accordingly. If they won’t, who will? One of the challenges organizations face is the tendency for self-congratulation and the inability for self-examination. “Organizations go to seed when the people in them go to seed. And they awaken when the people awaken,” (John W. Gardner).

There will be those who will resist change and criticize board members for wanting to disrupt the status quo. However, in today’s environment, standing still is not an option. What board members will need is to remind themselves that change comes from outside or by leaders willing to risk trying new ideas and listening to others outside the system.

The future of our nation and our children depends upon our being able to deliver a highly educated, skilled, creative and innovative citizenry. To do less is to relegate our nation to a second-class nation. If board members don’t take a leadership role in retooling public education, Andy Grove may be right, it may be out of business.

A Utah native, John Florez has been on the staff of Sen. Orrin Hatch, served as former Utah Industrial Commissioner and filled White House appointments, including Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor and Commission on Hispanic Education. Email him at jdflorez@comcast.net.

Click Here For Link To Article