Would Guilford County Schools Superintendent Maurice "Mo" Green be a good choice for Wake County's next schools chief?
In a blog post Wednesday in the Greensboro News & Record, editorial writer Doug Clark writes that Green says he has not "officially" been contacted about the Wake County job. That would make sense as Wake is holding off until after next week's election results, where three board members are running for state office, before beginning the superintendent's search.
"I would be surprised if there weren't at least unofficial feelers from Wake County," Clark writes. "Green would be high on any larger system's wish list. He's provided steady leadership here since his arrival four years ago, earning consistent support from his board as well as community respect.
The Wake County position would be a plum, except for one thing — its school board, which is highly partisan and more than a little troubled."
Last week, the Guilford County school board extended Green's contract to 2016, the maximum length permitted. That's generally a sign that the school board has a lot of faith in the superintendent.
The school board offered Green a 3-percent annual raise, but he turned down the extra money for the fifth straight year. The News & Record said that's effectively cost Green $40,000 in salary.
Board members also tried to get Green to accept a 1.2-percent raise, the same percentage employees received this year, but he declined.
While Green has gotten high marks in Guilford, the fact that he's not a career educator could hold him and other similar candidates back in Wake. Green was the school board counsel for Charlotte-Mecklenburg schools before being named that district's chief operations officer and later deputy superintendent.
Members of the school board majority had pointed to Superintendent Tony Tata's lack of K-12 experience when he was fired.

Comments
Don't be surprised
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:21 — occum_sharpeif Ann Clark from Charlotte is our next superintendent. She is a lifelong educator with both liberal leanings and ties to the Broad Foundation. Best of both worlds for a divided board.
I need Virginiadare, SatchHH, Realistic, StepByStep, clearthinke
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 10:47 — snordoneand several others of you - you know who you are - to watch this video.
You need to understand what the education reform movement is really about.
You need to understand who the people are behind the movement.
You need to understand that they will not back down until every child in this country has access to the education and support they need.
copy and past the following into google and watch the viemo.com speech:
viemo.com michael johnston the best speech ever about education
scroll down, the video is at the bottom
I listened to the speech,
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 16:23 — virginiadareI listened to the speech, which was indeed inspiring. Then again, I know as well as anyone that the majority of teachers, administrators, and other educators perform inspiring feats each and every school year. I am not convinced that the reform efforts such as value-added measures used to evaluate teacher effectiveness and privatizing public schools would result in improvements. And I am still having a very difficult time understanding how people like you who claim to want to help each and every child, no matter their race or economic level or other challenges, can side with someone like Chris Malone who made a robocall saying he wants to get "good" children out of failing schools, so presumably he wants to leave "bad" children in those schools. I'm sure he would consider most of the kids that Johnston was talking about in that speech to be "bad". And you vouch for Tadesco, who wanted to create high-poverty, racially-identifiable schools. That is not a recipe for giving those students a better education, nor is cutting funding even more, as he has advocated. Not to mention his other extreme, tea party ideas.
(Should be "Vimeo.com" rather than "viemo".)
When did I side with Malone?
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:25 — snordoneI never talk to him, I don't know what his opinion is on anything. I refuse to get into that garbage and ignored those posts because it is all so stupid. I don't care if they had an affair just like I did not care if Clinton had an affair.
John did not try and create racially identifiable schools, he laid out a plan that was a controlled choice plan. I think he called it a smart choice plan, but it was definitely not a neighborhood schools plan. He worked with Anne McLaurin to create schools that would take a holistic approach to caring for children with health clinics in schools. He understands the limitations of these communities and knows that schools are the ideal place to offer access to everything from healthcare to job training for adults. Busing kids to schools 20 miles away does prevent high poverty schools but it is really hard for kids to assimilate. Of all the low income kids at Leesville NONE participate in the 20 clubs at the school because of transportation. In Wake Co if a child does not have their immunization record they can not come back to school until they have their record. One of our kids in our afterschool program missed 3 days of school until his mom could go to sunnybrook rd and get a copy of his records. This system has been horrible for ED children in a million ways.
And yes, John's plan and Tony's plan was the way to give children a better education because the focus shifted away from making a child's demography their destiny to making schools accountable for educating ALL children.
I appreciate you watching the video. There are 2 different groups of people - education reformers who want to preserve public education and reform a very destructive system, and those who would like to move away from public schools all together. I am in the former, not the latter. I would put John in the former too. I don't know about some of the others, but there probably is a mix of opinions.
.
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:36 — Bob_SconceSorry. No need to post things twice. Nothing to see here. Move along...
So...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:09 — Bob_SconceI'm also in the former camp (wanting to reform the public education system, not get rid of it), but I think it does need competition from outside, if for no other reason than as a strong incentive to reform. Now that the cap on charter schools has been lifted, I think we have the source of that competition.
Charter schools are public
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:50 — woodstockCharter schools are public schools, so I am not sure that provides the necessary competition for authentic reform.
Well...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 23:08 — Bob_SconceThey're not traditional public schools and are well out of the reach of the folks in charge of the traditional public schools. Personally, I'd like to see them given more flexibility -- in part, don't require them to use the NC Standard Course of Study. They can only do so much when they're handicapped with the same curriculum that traditional public schools are forced to use.
Healthy competition?
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 03:14 — Dove314How would that be a healthy competition if you give all the advantages to one group, I.e. charter schools?
?
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 10:54 — Bob_SconceThe competition is between two systems: one with centralized, top-down control; the other with decentralized parent-oriented control.
It's interesting that you'd say that charter schools have "all the advantages." For one, charter schools can't float bonds to build their school buildings. They can't say "We're only going to accept students who live in this geographic area." They generally don't have cafeterias or nice athletic facilities.
In competition, different competitors have different advantages -- your complaint amounts, approximately, to the Charlotte Bobcats not wanting to play the Lakers because "it's unfair that the Lakers have Kobe Bryant and we don't."
in my opinion decentralization is key
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 13:47 — snordoneYou can look at UNC vs NCSU as an example of this. UNC flows its indirect funds to the department in which it was earned. This give departments money to hire, purchase equipment and empowers those who brought in the money in the first place. And that saying is true - it is easier to earn money when you have money.
NCSU on the other hand keeps all its indirect funds on central campus, funds flow minimally to the department, and this does not help the departments to be major money earners. There is no incentive to hire strong earners and there is no incentive to remove those who do not perform.
UNC out earns NCSU. These environments are night and day. Probably a fair comparison would be Fox Rd vs GCP KIPP.
So I agree that Charters are 1) competition and 2) give us insight into how to manage a school for the purpose of learning, not adult gratification.
Charter schools get far less
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 09:41 — shearertwCharter schools get far less funds per pupil than traditional public schools so can you explain what you mean by "if you give all the advantages to one group, I.e. charter schools?"
In this case
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 12:25 — Dove314In this case, referring to curriculum and autonomy as per Bob's note about "public schools needing competition" above. If you effectively isolate curriculum innovation to charter schools, then student achievement in successful charter schools will, by definition, out perform a county-based public school system which, for jsut one example, cannot decide to forego serving a hot lunch while simultaneously enabling more field trips.
So...
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 12:53 — Bob_SconceIf you want to allow local school districts to follow other curricula, I'm behind you. By and large, I think the NC SCOS is an abomination. (And the Fordham Institute agrees with me -- they regularly give it D and F ratings.)
I'm not sure what the curriculum has to do with field trips and lunches. My impression is that charter schools don't take many field trips because they don't have access to school buses.
You are correct that the traditional public schools are hobbled with all sorts of rules which have been pre-set for them. (Of course, many supporters of those schools don't see those rules as "hobbling" -- they see them as a benefit.) But, let's pretend that empirically, we can determine that those rules hurt the public schools ability to serve their students. In that case, the correct response is to free up the public schools, not try to impose those same harmful rules on charter schools out of some perverted idea of fairness.
Why is curriculum innovation
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 12:43 — shearertwWhy is curriculum innovation isolated to charter schools? If traditional public schools start getting their "behinds" handed to them by charter schools (more than they are already), then they (public schools) will be forced to make better decisions regarding the curriculum they use and whom the force to use it. If the state forces public schools to use something that is causing them to fall behind charter schools, that will put pressure on those Reps to do something about it. If they don't, they'll get voted out (eventually). If they don't get voted out, charter schools will just keep growing and growing making public schools even less relevant. Either way, more kids are getting a better education because of it. Also, you can stipulate that charter schools provide hot lunch to ED students if you want.....I don't support that but you can do it. You'd also need to give them the funds for that "free lunch".....bet you wouldn't like that. As far as I know, there's nothing in our US Constitution that says you must provide a free lunch at public school. I don't think the state has to participate in that program if they don't want to. If that's what is dragging down public education (and I don't think it is) then we should stop it. The problem with you guys (who resist public education reform) is that you think EVERYTHING has to stay the way it is now. There is NOTHING sacred about public education as we know it today. EVERYTHING should be on the table for change. The only way to force that to happen is through competition.
...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 18:47 — SideburnsI find it so ironic that you - a supporter of a policy that labels and targets certain types of children for reassignment - would question Malone using the word "good". You and your team have labeled children in this county for decades. Too many poor kids makes a school "unhealthy" - too many black kids makes a school "failing" - too many "rich" kids makes a school "elitist". You and your GSIW friends are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.
GSIW sent out their newsletter this week - all peaches and cream about an assignment plan that is going to be passed in just 5 weeks. But that's not rushed - because diversity busing is on its way back. And rumor has it that Martin wants to be the next supt. I'm sure Yevonne is working that deal too.
that is pure insanity
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:28 — snordoneI mean really insane. It won't happen, none of them like him. They all see him for what he is.
...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:47 — SideburnsNot sure that's true. Evans & Kushner are absolutely googly-eyed around him. Not sure about Hill or Sutton. The rumor came from a very credible source.
Is it really possible for
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:45 — woodstockIs it really possible for someone to be so "googly-eyed" that they would not be aware of how Martin is perceived by the public? He's a nutjob of the first order. Anyone who listens to that guy for more than 30 seconds -- during which he will use the word "I" approximately a dozen times -- understands this.
Public perception is totally irrelevant
Mon, 11/05/2012 - 01:13 — FSandYOUNow that the N&O, and this blog, are going to adopt the pay to play mantra, and go dark for most, there will be absolutely no concern for the public to know anything until after it happens. This blog has been one of the biggest thorns in the side of school board(s) and this school system for years and now that it will go behind the payola curtain, I bet there are some happy board members and school system folks who will care even less about public perception.
...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:53 — SideburnsAs if the Dems on the Board are concerned with public perception.
Is all of Martin's
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 20:05 — woodstockIs all of Martin's harrassing behavior at NC State finally catching up with him? Is he being "asked" to find a new job?
Martin the next Super?
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 19:57 — FSandYOUBest laugh I had all day. Thanks!!
I bet staff won't be
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:46 — woodstockI bet staff won't be laughing if this turns out to be true.
...
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:15 — SideburnsI wish I was laughing.
God help us
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 20:53 — Bob_SconceI think I read something in Revelation about that happening just before the apocalypse.
Have you asked Malone what
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 17:05 — jenmanHave you asked Malone what he meant? I'm not trying to be snarky, just saying that before we start speculating on what he must have meant by that comment we should probably ask him. Partisan groups are of course going to exploit something like that for their own gain but that doesn't mean we have to be stupid enough to fall for it.
It was poorly worded and I don't think anybody is clear on what he meant by it.
Seemed to be pretty
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 18:10 — virginiadareSeemed to be self-explanatory to me, and he made the statement in a robocall to people he wanted to vote for him, so he must have thought it was pretty clear. I'm surprised you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. I think it was stupid of him to make the statement if it's not what he meant, not stupid for us to misinterpret it. We shouldn't have to ask him.
Benefit of the Doubt
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 21:30 — jenmanWe will never get anywhere if we don't cut each other some slack every once in a while or give each other the benefit of the doubt. Nobody is perfect and people often say things that don't come out the right way. I'd rather give somebody the benefit of the doubt and find out I'm wrong than crucify somebody for something that came out the wrong way. Life would be a lot more pleasant if more people did that.
Fear not
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 19:56 — FSandYOUreform is finally coming to NC. It's especially coming to pathetic Wake County with its outdated and backwards thinking "it's all about the kids" Hill & Gang school board.
This reform will be called McCroy!
I listened to the speech,
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 16:24 — virginiadareDuplicate
Why would they do that?
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 10:58 — FSandYOUThat would mean taking off their blinders and we know that ain't gonna happen.
Besides, Kevin, Jim and Suzie are in control, what could go wrong!
they are temporary and will not matter
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 11:06 — snordoneafter November 6th. So then at that point the public needs to understand reform and work with the changes. It is also important to see the difference between reform and destructive things like vouchers.
More reform information: The preliminary results from the Gates Foundation show that 3 things were effective at determining a teacher's effectiveness - test scores, student surveys and being evaluated by a highly effective teacher. The student survey had 36 questions, of those 5 really seem to matter (from an article in the Atlantic):
Of the 36 items included in the Gates Foundation study, the five that most correlated with student learning were very straightforward:
1. Students in this class treat the teacher with respect.
2. My classmates behave the way my teacher wants them to.
3. Our class stays busy and doesn’t waste time.
4. In this class, we learn a lot almost every day.
5. In this class, we learn to correct our mistakes.
This is where even people
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 22:25 — woodstockThis is where even people open to reform lose their way with the public. When before the discussion even begins options like vouchers -- that puts control in the hands of citizens rather than bureaucrats -- are discounted, it automatically dilutes the breadth of potential reforms and highlights all the politics involved.
Question
Sun, 11/04/2012 - 12:55 — lferreriDid they attempt to determine whether the teacher's subject knowledge correlated with student learning? There's an ad running on TV (I forget who is running it) saying that a teacher's level of knowledge is the most important factor in student learning and advocating for increased spending on teacher education in specific subject areas. If they surveyed only students, I'm not sure they would have been able to measure this and it does seem important.
John Modest
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 08:59 — snordoneis a better name to throw into the hat.
He gets it. He knows how to turn around schools (i.e. he has actually done it). He knows what matters and he won't consider the kids in SE Raleigh 'urban blight.'
Mo Green?
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 05:53 — willynillyLOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Check VERY carefully.
What's wrong Bob_Sconce?
Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:11 — paulastamNumerous postings on your part make it clear you detest "career educators" (and public education it seems) yet you have repeatedly stated recently that you will vote (or rather voted) for an alleged adulterer (Your GOP buddy Chris Malone). Your priorities are messed up: 'Educator? Dump ASAP. Adulterer? Must promote to higher office and vote in to the General Assembly'. Odd, very odd....
Why do you despise teachers anyway? They have an amazingly complex job and are underpaid for it versus professionals with comparable college backgrounds and they must contest with hypocrites such as you that pummel them for being "career educators". We should be thankful for our public educators that have devoted their lives to our children and NOT mocking them as you do Bob_Sconce!!!
Paula, "Independent, Fair & Speaking Up for MY Kids."
?
Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:22 — Bob_SconcePaula, why do you insist on transparently mischaracterizing everything I say?
I do not detest career educators or teachers in general. I think when somebody has spent a career teaching students, they are likely very good at it. Further, the job conditions and pay for teachers are often less than ideal, they often work long hours at home after working an entire day at school, and they deserve respect for that.
My issue, though, is with career educators as superintendents. Teaching programs do not prepare teachers to deal with billion dollar budgets or all of the administrative duties that go along with the superintendent's position. It's silly to say "Congratulations! You've taught High School English for 15 years. Now, we're going to put you in charge of the district's data analysis." Besides, our schools need reform, and education reform NEVER happens from people who have spent their entire career in education.
Where did I mock career educators generally? (I admit having mocked individual ones.)
admin programs
Fri, 11/02/2012 - 07:00 — SatchHHIt would be hard to find a teacher jumping from the classroom to superintendent. Most go through the ranks of principal, etc. They do get training in budgets, adminstration, etc. that go along with leadership (e.g. superintendent) positions, so your argument is flawed at the core (or just deliberately misleading). I don't see how it is better for a non-educator to be put in the superintendent's position. Take someone like John Tedesco, running for the top position in the state. What budgetary experience does he have? What substantive administrative duties has he performed? Are you counting Tea Party speeches as some sort of leadership experience? The closest thing to reform we'll likely get from him is his support of the legislator gutting education budgets. He's a joke being played on our citizens and I just hope people get the joke before election day. Oops, BS, you already voted for JT, didn't you? Uh oh.
So...
Fri, 11/02/2012 - 09:28 — Bob_SconceI want non-career educators as superintendents because career educators tend to all have the same mindset, which generally includes a reverence for "the way things are now." That's not a mindset that will lead to reform.
John was the City Manager for a city in New Jersey (I believe) before he came here. Such positions involve many of those things. And, I suspect that you gain a lot of that in 3 years on the school board. I voted for him because he has a real heart for kids. June Atkinson's heart is for status-quo education.
wow...
Fri, 11/02/2012 - 09:43 — changewcpss1....Nice way to stereotype educators. Also, "John" was indeed a City Manager in NJ, a position which he left under less than stellar circumstances (was he not asked to leave??). And - do you really think someone would gain enough knowledge in 3 years on a very contentious, politically driven board of ed to run an entire state's public education program? Really? My, what low standards you have. Well, you can certainly stick to that argument, as is your right, but personally I want more for our state's students than 3 years of service on a school board with the history this one has had since "John" took office.
Sure...
Fri, 11/02/2012 - 10:07 — Bob_SconceIt's a stereotype. But, I think it's a pretty accurate one. It's really difficult to reform any organization from the inside -- typically, it takes an outside force.
Yeah, I can think of people I'd rather have as State Superintendent -- I think Tata, for example, would probably be better than John. But, that's not my choice. My other option is June Atkinson, who has presided over the DPI for 8 years and has done NOTHING to reform that organization.
Stereotypes
Fri, 11/02/2012 - 18:59 — Dove314It takes real balls to label every member of staff in WCPSS and in the field of education as incapable of ever being a competent administrator just because they've worked in WCPSS or other school systems that aren't some select few you personally approve. By that definition, Tata will do nothing but become more and more incompetent the longer he tries to work in education as will Tedesco; every teacher should just write off advancement when they decide their college major is teaching and why bother with continuing education; principals would be better recruited from "somebody else's school system" analagous to the opposite of NIMBY, and educational research need never happen eliminating the need for data because it is all flawed.
Stereotypes are never accurate. All conservatives are not anti-women, anti-gay, anti-Fema, anti-environment/climate change, anti-abortion, anti-education, anti-tax, anti-spending, etc. All liberals are not pro-women, pro-gay, pro-spending, pro-environment, pro-abortion, pro-education, etc either. Just as not all educators are "pro-status quo", incapable of thinking beyond the status quo. We actually have considerable proof of that with the mixed opinions amongst staff within WCPSS. Nor does becoming a teacher preclude someone from having the mental chops to understand and effectively implement and manage the necessary business and administrative tasks. And also, just as not everyone who has ever been truly concerned about children has the skills to productively and realistically enact positive change whether they've been a city manager, lived in the NorthEast US, are a parent who has child in the system, or are a school principal, random administrator, or teacher.
Effective change is something everyone strives for and only some achieve in their lives whether home, work, government, or other circumstances.
you are completely right
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 08:12 — snordoneWCPSS does have some amazing principals and teachers, and I have heard many of them say they want better for the students. Most of them ignore the nonsense at the board table and in central office and do their best in the classroom. Our BOE has been and is nothing but a menace to education.
Here is the problem - they need central office support. They need professional development that has substance and is useful. At least 8% of our ENTIRE budget should be put into professional development.
They need funds to flow from the state and county directly into the classroom on a per child basis. It does not need to stop in central office. Central office can take a reasonable cut for central services (professional development, transportation, etc..), but they should not be in charge of divvying up funds.
We need to flip the 'business model' here, central office supports the classroom, the classroom no longer should support central office. Tony was trying to flip the model and would have succeeded. But that was too threatening to the 'prevent urban blight' folks who wanted full control of where the money goes and who gets the goodies.
As an aside - what kind of democrat refers to children as urban blight? It remains unfathomable that democrats are OK with children being referred to as blight. Those are not MY party values. Can you imagine Cory Booker calling the children of Newark "Urban Blight?"
who used that term "urban
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 13:32 — jenmanwho used that term "urban blight"?
perry
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 15:39 — snordonetold me that was the purpose of the diversity policy
yikes.
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:08 — jenmanyikes.
indeed
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 20:20 — Dove314Yikes indeed.
They have said it many times
Sat, 11/03/2012 - 16:49 — snordoneThey interchange urban decay and urban blight.
I remember several posts on these blogs using the urban decay term.