Thursday, May 17, 2007

Different "Graduation Plans" courtesy of actuarial nanotech......More than beech theives

Bring CCISD selection process into light of day
The secrecy surrounding the current search for a new superintendent is indefensible. Did we learn nothing from the previous fiasco?

Friday, April 6, 2007

The selection process that will ultimately produce a finalist for superintendent of the Corpus Christi Independent School District is up and running.

On Wednesday the trustees interviewed four candidates for the post - including Scott Elliff, interim superintendent since the resignation of Jesus Chavez in February 2006.

That much we know of a certainty. It also seems safe to assume that the four individuals in question could fairly be considered the finalists from the field of 25 applicants who were being considered for the position.

However, should we at this late date be dealing in "seems" and "assume" when it comes to the process that will determine who is to lead the city's largest school district?

The question arises: Why has the Board of Trustees gone to such lengths to keep the public from getting anything more than a fleeting glimpse of the action? After all, the previous superinten-dent hunt, which saw Shoney Bria first accept, then decline the post, was grievously marred by the secrecy that surrounded it.

But - again - the board apparently believes that the releasing of names could prove ruinous for the applicants back in their home districts.

That, however, looks more and more like a smoke screen. School districts throughout the length and breadth of the nation are seeking leaders, and up-and-coming administrators are looking to move into superintendencies in larger districts.

The curtain of confidentiality is, at long last, nonsensical. More to the point, it does a disservice to the community. Consider: As matters now stand, we do not even know how many of the contenders will find favor with the trustees and be presented to the public. It could be one. Then again, it could be two, perhaps even three.

Concern for confidentiality is, or should be, trumped by another, vastly more important consideration: the public's right to know, and its right to have at least some role to play in the process.

The trustees' refusal to lay out the cards is beyond irritating; it borders on the outrageous.

Particularly disturbing is the fact that three new trustees elected last year - Carol Scott, John Longoria and Dwayne Hargis, all of whom emphasized their intent to bring new openness to the board - appear to have bought into the mum's-the-word ethos that has dominated this exercise.

To be sure, they (and their colleagues) could, and should, reverse their field - but the time remaining in which to keep this selection process from

No comments: