The school board needs to get a clue. Unfortunately, they are unlikely to under the leadership of Blakley or Gutierrez before her. The big message here is people don't want to work for Superintendent Rudolph or his crony Assistant Superintendent Ghysels. The two of them have already provided plenty of fodder for the papers with their foibles, missteps, arrogance and know-it-all attitude. The Board is equally clueless to how the vast majority of teachers, staff and parents view the current administration. November can't come fast enough.

It's clear we need new Trustees and ultimately new district leadership.

No sane administrator wants to work for Ayinde and his cronies.

Done with this board and the district leadership...way too dysfunctional! Not good enough for our children and our community

Amazing that in a community as thriving as ours, we have such an inept group of Trustees and District leadership - pushing out good school leaders in favor of their cronies. This is just sick. When is enough enough?

Bringing in outsiders is not per se "dysfunctional". Neither is having some "short term turnover".

There have been a number of Principals in the last 16 or so years, (three administrations) that have only lasted one or two years. 'We tried it out, the fit to the position just didn't work out' { IMO biggest administrative mistake was a 2 year , 'commuter superintendent ] Graham had a short timer, Bubb had a short timer, Huff had two short timers, and that is just in my own 1/5 of MVWSD!

Superintendent Rudolph cannot 'control' those who decide to leave administration. [his workplace environment can, OF COURSE, influence ] As we saw with the recent Graham principal change, perhaps he can't even 'suggest it's time to retire' for an old district hand. Board members (or even Presidents) do not exercise executive (CEO) powers, they cannot hire or fire principals. [ There is a very strong-arm way for them to Vote to Reduce a specific principal's salary when a "personnel action" come up for a Board Vote, there is no MVWSD principal's union! ]

Hey Steve,

Why don't you save commenting for when you actually have something to say?

And speaking of "dysfunctional", note that it was YOUR behavior on the board which led to that term defining the board.

Ultimately, that led to the hiring of Rudolph. No competent administrator wanted the job, but he knew a dysfunctional board was perfect for his purposes. He has been able to repay his debt to his mentor Peter Gorman (well actually we pay the bill for that to the tune of $57,000 per year), hire all the fancy consultants he wants and turn our district into his own "support my cronies" network.

Anyone not in on the game is fired or leaves in disgust of their own accord.

@District Insider / perhaps you need to come out, into the light? Inside, in the dark, it is hard to see. (and you chose to hide)

There were 72 applications to MVWSD to replace Goldman. About 1/2 had competent school administrative backgrounds that were of interest to the Trustees. We based our decision on the formal input of the community & staff on 'what they said they wanted'. We used our professional consultant, a very experienced administrator from a large Texas school district, to vet more than a dozen finalists (some were experienced California district-level administrators)

@District Insider? Did you not get who you wanted? Too bad for you. The 'sour taste' in your mouth is evident.

QED

Thank you Ms. Dillman for the leadership you provided. Ms. Dillman continued on the former principal's support of teachers and student life. Under the last two principals, each year Crittenden got stronger. I hope it continues the positive trend.

I wish Ms. Dillman well.

Ms. Dillman is a total rockstar. If you knew her you’d know her decision was personal and has little, if anything to do with our district or it’s leaders. There’s simply more to life than work and she eludes to that in her letter. Her feelings are mixed because she loved this job and her staff and she loves her family back home. She was pretty clear about that in our last conversation shortly before the end of school. The Crittenden family has lost a great leader. But the fact is that this school district is fantastic at hiring good leaders. So, I’m confident that we will find someone new to lead our school who will be just as fantastic as Ms. Dillman. I have participated in previous hiring sessions for this district and the applicants are always fascinating candidates. I’d love it if the next person comes from the network of some of our current administrators or principals. Break out your Rolodex and call all your friends who might be interested in working in our great district and living in this great California weather. Two months is a pretty short time to grab a great principal so we’ll need all the help we can get! Eesketit!

This is an interesting development. Principal Dillman certainly appeared to get along very well with the Rudolph regime, cannily supporting his insane new 8-period middle-school schedule against the better interests of the children. But perhaps in the end she didn't want to take the responsibility for the consequences of this decision. By the time the test scores start plummeting, she'll be long gone. That's what I call leadership!

Cleave, you should be on retainer for your constant and mindless support of the district.

It's rarely a good sign when a principal resigns with only two months notice.

And while you claim it's a "fact is that this school district is fantastic at hiring good leaders", that remains to be proved. Dillman only lasted two years. Perhaps the other new hires will turn out well. I certainly hope so, but just saying how great the district is doesn't make it so.

It's pretty clear Cleave is prepping for his chance to run for school board or to get a cushy appointment. Gotta make sure he's in everyone's good graces and circles the wagons every time something goes wrong.

I understand the "Cleave doubters" when he starts to throw around the words "fantastic"! As in "fantasy" Cleave?

But his kids go to that school and he is a dedicated dad! So ... I trust his instinct on how the 'move back to the old hometown' might have come about for this Southern California educator. Two years of dedicated work by a good school administrator does not usually hurt a school, it's staff, or the students under the school's care.

I'm glad that several of Crittenden's supporters have given a good report on Dillman's work!

[disagree with 8th period = 2 electives middle school decision? Too bad. The elected community representatives + staff thought it was the best option going forward and VOTED to accept that recommendation. That's the way local representative democracy works. BCS & Summit trustees are not elected by the community, perhaps you prefer that public school model = public charter schools ]

Steve -- The majority of middle school staff do not think the new bell schedule is a good idea. The staff of both schools were surveyed and overwhelmingly they did not support an 8 period day. That is not to say that teachers did not want an elective for all students. The DO did not tell the board that the Middle School Task Force and the teaching staff did not support an 8 period day.

Nora S. -- You are right to bring up concerns about short-term commitments to the district. It is easy to support initiatives to please your boss when you don't intend to stay long enough to deal with the consequences. We have become a training ground for teachers and administrators who want to build their resumes.

Parents of MVWSD -- Your participation in our schools is much appreciated. Keep asking questions and talking to all stakeholders.

Board Members -- Get off your computers and out of the boardroom! Come to campuses and talk to teachers, parents, and students. You are hearing one side of the story in the boardroom. Come meet your constituents and hear all sides of the story.

Kevin Forestieri -- Have you ever considered doing an article that interviews each board member. You might consider asking them how frequently they are on campuses. I am not talking about graduations, cutting of ribbons, or awards ceremonies. I'm talking about real interactions with site administrators, teachers, students, and parents where board members are asking, "What can the school board do to support you? What should we know about your site? What's working? Where can we improve?" They need to see and hear at the site level what is working and what challenges each site face.

As a community, let's expect them to seek out information from all stakeholders.

I would like to see a copy of the survey that you refer to in which you state that the staffs of the school do not support the 8 period day. That is very different from my observations. Did you serve on the Middle School Task Force?

we should do our civics homework by getting that survey, a document of a public agency that is covered by the state Public Records Act (easy) -

Coladonado asked at one Board meeting for a policy of Board Member visits to school sites. NO FOLLOWUP. So that is where it sits. Why would a principal/administrator want to have a Board Member snooping around when there was an obvious problem like Teach To One:Math? This has to be BOARD POLICY. It needs discussion, it needs to be legislatively enacted (majority VOTE of the elected Board) and then the district needs to respect that their school sites are going be regularly visited, during operation, by Board members.

The HP Way. "Management By Walking Around" A Silicon Valley Tradition (even before there was Intel down in the East Whisman area and very much Silicon here)

@Steven Nelson

"Why would a principal/administrator want to have a Board Member snooping around when there was an obvious problem like Teach To One:Math?"

But Board Member Jose Gutierrez did spend a lot of time snooping around at Graham Middle School. And he was all in favor of Teach to One! He was a leading advocate of it despite his complete lack of qualifications to judge a math curriculum which should show you why we don't need Board Members snooping around on school sites.

Perhaps it would have been better for the School Board to have been better informed of Teach to One and rolled it out as a limited pilot program. Of course that would have required the Board to have questioned the decisions made by Superintendent Rudolph ahead of time, which in turn would have required the Superintendent Rudolph to be more forthcoming with the School Board.

Dysfunctional board, dysfunctional superintendent. Scary to think these are the very people that are educating our young minds. hA