Maria Geryk center, John Musante left
The race between the town's two highly prized thoroughbred greyhounds for Best In Show employment contract continues, although now there will be a five-year lull.
Actually six years, since the School Superintendent's is good for five but if the Regional School Committee does nothing in the fifth year it automatically continues for one addition year.
And our Regional School Committee is nothing if not "do nothing."
Not really a photo finish since School Superintendent Maria Geryk wins by a length, with a salary of $147,000 vs Town Manager John Musante's $142,100. Although in solidarity with a tough budget year Ms. Geryk decided to forgo any raise of cost of living adjustment in the coming year.
Ms Geryk's salary is only about 10% higher than the runner-up employee in the schools, ARHS Principal Mark Jackson at $135,000. While Mr. Musante is more like 45% higher than #2, Assistant Town Manger David Ziomek at $97,904.
If the committees who make these contract decisions (Select Board for Town Manager, Regional School Committee for Superintendent) really wanted to make the top dog responsive to the consumers who fund these high paying jobs, perhaps they should come up with a matching fund strategy:
Half the annual salary is guaranteed and the other half has to be raised by private donations, presumably by satisfied consumers. Set up an indiegogo program, or put a Paypal donation widget on the town and school's website.
Heck, I would give them a couple bucks. Maybe.
I would like to see Maria G's salary based upon the success of the schools she is running. She looses for each kid who goes to jail, and gets a bonus for every kid who graduates from college/trade school AND lands a good job. It's called "pay for performance" and what is she afraid of?
ReplyDeleteOn a more serious note, why is "just cause" not defined?
Maria G can stay as long as she wants, because there are SC members, with their respective political followers, who have staked their reputations on her success. So reality will be altered as long as she's here......which is for as long as she wants.
ReplyDeleteShe is the most untouchable public employee in Amherst.
Ms Geryk made two important errors early in her service as SI- she hired Mike Hayes as MS princ and Beth Graham as curriculum director, even though both lacked the experience and skills needed for those positions. For whatever reasons, both are gone and replaced by staff who appear to be an improvement. Hopefully, Ms Geryk is quickly learning. The test (for me) is what plan is produced to improve Math (across all grades) and Science (elementary, where currently it is AWOL) and then how the plans are implemented and assessed. It should be relatively simple to assess whether the implementation leads to improved student learning (and hopefully families will have access to that data).
ReplyDeleteIf you don't like the job she is doing opt your kids out of the Amherst Public School system, I did and don't regret it a bit!
ReplyDeleteI didn't opt out and I don't regret it a bit.
ReplyDeleteThe Superintendent's new contract was signed by her on April 12th. Why are we only hearing about it now?
ReplyDeleteI understand that contracts are negotiated in executive session, but couldn't there/shouldn't there still have been some public process for people (parents/students/staff/teachers) to provide input and feedback before the Superintendent's contract was extended, especially for such a long time. Many parents I've talked with are not happy about the district being under her "leadership" for at least another 5 or 6 years and would have liked the chance to weigh in before the contract was finalized.
What happens with Maria G.'s contract if the K-6 regionalization occurs with Leverett, Pelham, and maybe Shutesbury? This seems like a time when the current contract terms and length could be re-negotiated.
ReplyDeleteWhat a failure. Just shows that anyone can do anything in this country if they have people who bet the farm on hiring them and now can't go back and fix the biggest mistake they made in hiring her in the first place.
ReplyDeleteEnrollments down in ten years and from what I'm hearing a lot more will be leaving soon because of her tenure.
Walter has weighed in....
ReplyDeleteDidn't MG undergo a comprehensive performance review at the end of her first year? I believe public input was requested. I wonder why Walter did not respond then to the request for public input. Nor did all these parents who converse with Walter about unhappy they are with her Leadership.
ReplyDeleteAnon 11:12, you wrote:
ReplyDelete"Didn't MG undergo a comprehensive performance review at the end of her first year? I believe public input was requested."
I think you are right, public input was requested then. However, shouldn't public input be requested EVERY year as part of the evaluation of the superintendent. The annual review of the Town Manager's performance includes public input; the superintendent's annual performance review should too.
I learn more, and dislike more, about Ms. Geryk's leadership style the longer she holds her position.
Anon 2:11, can you tell us more about what things in MG's leadership style that you don't like?
ReplyDeleteThe MariaG cake is baked and no amount of public input will make a difference.
ReplyDeleteShe will leave when she decides to leave and not before.
Was there any evaluation of the success of all the new initiatives? Any closing of the achievement gap? Improvement of math scores in different grades and subgroups? How did the SC evaluate her progress? What markers? What results is she expected to deliver over time?
ReplyDeleteYou tell me. Were you paying attention during the SC's evaluation? Did you request they consider these points you find important? Why you askin' me, you can find that out for yourself... Lazy Lucy.
ReplyDeleteI thought that Maria G will be evaluated this spring based on the priorities that were set this fall by the School Committee. Mike Morris presented the framework for the Superintendent's evaluation at an SC meeting in Sept 2012(http://www.arps.org/files/SuperintendentEvaluationProcess.pdf). Then, there was a mid-year progress update given by Maria G to the SC in Jan 2013 (http://www.arps.org/node/4351). The end of year evaluation is prepared by the SC by June 2013. The eval framework laid out by Mike M doesn't seem to include any public comment/feedback from anyone outside the SC. Hopefully, there will be the opportunity for some.... I think it would have made sense too to have public comment before Maria G's contract was renewed.
ReplyDeleteI think it would have made sense too to have public comment before Maria G's contract was renewed.
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of info do you think the SC may have heard that would have changed their decision?
Is there something they don't know that would have caused them to undertake another national search?
So the contract was renewed before the June evaluation? Does that make sense to anyone?
ReplyDeleteYes, it does make sense.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm not telling you why, you have to do your own homework.
You can't just become interested in a topic the day Larry posts about it and then expect everyone's gonna spend their time catching you up.
You toy with us, All Knowing One.
ReplyDeleteI don't "toy". Promise.
ReplyDeleteIt appears like up to three anons and Walter (surprise, surprise) are unhappy with the job Superintendent Geryk is doing, enough to post about their discontent here on Larry's blog.
ReplyDeleteI guess we'll see if there is an outcry in the form of letters to the editor in the Bulletin this week, but if this is all the squawking we're gonna hear, it seems clear that most people support the job Superintendent Geryk is doing.
Of course, we haven't heard from Ed yet, to find out whether or not he approves of the job She is doing.
These days I would not put to much stock in Bulletin letters.
ReplyDeleteWhy is that, Larry?
ReplyDeleteLooked at their number of reads per story lately?
ReplyDeleteNumber of reads per story in the Bulletin you mean? I don't read the bulletin online. I read the old fashioned verdion.
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting because you're here talking to me in the newfangled way.
ReplyDeleteBut since you're now online mosey on over to their current online edition and notice their #1 story only has 600 reads and #10 has 159.
Notice also that "Letters/Commentary" does not even register.
And remember, these days over half of Americans get their news on line rather than the "old fashioned" way.
Why do you think the UMass Daily Collegian just went to a 4-day print schedule (dropping Friday).
I read a ton of news online but i read the bulletin the old fashioned way. I also read several blogs online. I just choose to read local news in the paper way. No reason to jump all over me.
ReplyDeleteIs it true that the guy that Catherine Sanderson brought onto the School Committee (Rob Spence,) to form a voting block against MG, voted with no argument to extend Geryk's contract for 6 more years? Wasn't/Isn't Spence one of the founding members of Amherst Committee for Excellence, along with Catherine Sanderson? (Does ACE still exist?)
ReplyDeleteQuite a turn around. I believe Spence voted originally for that guy who made comments about ignoring people or neglecting people or disregarding people that don't agree with you or something like that. Wait... it was "shun". I can't remember his name, he is the guy who was suing the last school system he worked for when he applied for the Supt. job in Amherst.
Oh well, all water under the bridge now.
I would hardly call that "jumping all over you."
ReplyDeleteAs Sargent Friday never actually said "Just the facts."
If you don't like the job she is doing opt your kids out of the Amherst Public School system, I did and don't regret it a bit!
ReplyDeleteThank you, because there are boat loads of us out here on the waiting list trying to opt in, thanks to the school choice initiative Geryk put in place
Since school choice only brings in $5,000 per school choice student annually, and Amherst spends $17,000+ per student annually, bringing in more school choice students doesn't seem like the best deal for Amherst to me. Nice that families in other towns are benefiting though. Did anyone else notice that the two families that the Amherst Bulletin recently profiled for the district's Family University initiative for ELL students both live outside of Amherst and school choice in?
ReplyDeleteso you see a $12,000 gap, do you?
ReplyDeletewhat a simplistic analysis.
It's not a $12,000 gap per student, but I'm not sure it's the great deal that school administrators make it out to be. Some of them have said that school choice allows the district to help neighboring communities. Why should that be a goal of Amherst schools, especially when there are problems here that deserve more attention?
ReplyDeleteSome of them [school administrators] have said that school choice allows the district to help neighboring communities.
ReplyDeleteReally? Which administrators said that? And please be specific: who, where, when.
Why should that be a goal of Amherst schools...
ReplyDeleteWho said that was a goal of the Amherst schools? Again, be specific.
I guess the question is how does school choice for elementary students help current Amherst students? We have school choice at the regional level and so do lots of other schools. Why is this portrayed as a special "initiative" of the superindentent and how does it benefit our students? Are there good strong results from the other initiatives launched in the past 3 years? What are they? No position here, just questions that I hope the school committee has asked and cam answer, as well as administrators.
ReplyDelete...but I'm not sure it's the great deal that school administrators make it out to be...
ReplyDeleteobviously you're "not sure", you don't have any information but "$12,000/$5,000", you have no empirical data and no anecdotes to demonstrate your discontent with the initiative. you're here trying to put words into people's mouths, and to complain about something you have no clue about. How could you possibly be "sure" of anything?
go learn about the School Choice initiative and then get back to me here.
Why is this portrayed as a special "initiative" of the superindentent...
ReplyDeleteIt has been portrayed that way by me, a cowardly anon nitwit, here on Larry's blog. Who else portrays it that way? Do I represent some sort of authority to you?
Are there good strong results from the other initiatives launched in the past 3 years?
Why the last three years?
I am glad that you are concerned with how the evals are going to go and what they will be evaluating, but this is the wrong place to ask those questions. You should direct your concerns to the SC members. Anyway, here's that link around the eval process again and perhaps it will aid you in more fully formulating your questions/expressing your concerns to the SC.
http://www.arps.org/files/SuperintendentEvaluationProcess.pdf
Praying that the weird, creepy anon isn't a school district employee.
ReplyDeleteI would not take that bet.
ReplyDeleteYou're a betting man, are you, Larry?
ReplyDeleteNo, actually I'm not. Pretty vice free theses days.
ReplyDelete