Is it too soon? Maybe.
As everyone now knows the allegations against Dr. Horton have resulted in Federal indictments, and as a result he has submitted his resignation which has been accepted. Nice try, but some in the public are calling for board members to resign, suggesting those who voted for Dr. Horton are culpable for this outcome. It is as if they feel the root problem lies with the individuals, that they themselves elected, holding board positions.
The problem is far greater and a new batch of clowns on the school board will fix nothing.
Let's start with the Acting Superintendent, Dr. Norman C. Sauce III.
Is he a potential Superintendent, the secret sauce, or is he just a Great White Nope? If you guessed the latter, you see a problem, one that will not be fixed by the board, no matter who holds the seats. This problem is institutionalized. Educational doctrine states that Black students perform best when they see positions of leadership filled by Blacks. There is no claim this performance level is adequate, just better, but this has been institutionalized, and urban school superintendents are overwhelmingly if not exclusively Black. Is a full meritocracy a solution? Perhaps, but politically it is an unacceptable solution, suggesting the top priority is other than highest educational performance.
Not buying it? Consider Carstarphen. She had to go. Despite performance exceeding any who came before or after she was shown the door. Do you have a credible explanation other than the obvious?
Glad we got that out of the way.
Now to the pipeline. Where do we get superintendent candidates? Not just the executive search firms, but what system produces these candidates? Certainly some of it is a component of each and every school system in America, as they set the parameters of what they want and what they will accept. It is also the educratic institutions that control the agenda, the narrative. Certainly unions (and teacher organizations) are a part of this, but so are those who teach, train, certify and accredit systems and individuals. What isn't happening is a clearly articulated set of skills and capabilities of school leadership, at the top, and at the lower levels as well. So why should we expect the next candidate to be substantially better than previous candidates? Bear in mind, Michael Thurmond is one of the very few highly capable leaders DCSD has ever had and it is noteworthy that he is not a product of this system. He was not squizzed out of that pipeline. It simply is not clear how we find the next Michael Thurmond. We are more likely to find the next Dr. Horton.
As for the board, the fact is the board not only will not fix our longstanding issues with superintendents who cannot long endure, but they cannot. They are structurally prohibited from exercising any control over operations other than hiring, firing and accepting resignations of superintendents. In fact, should they step out of line, the accrediting agency will step up and step in to defend the administration against the board. And it has been proven that should this occur, board members will be removed. Mom with a calculator, dad with an attitude...it doesn't matter. The board has one employee, the superintendent and bypassing that one employee is verboten. This is the same structural defect crippling Dunwoody and the other Porter-dales.
So, if the board members don't matter then what about your vote? Well, by extension, it doesn't matter either. Not only is the board serving a largely ceremonial role, even when they have a vote for approval of an administration initiative the superintendent knows he only has to please, to convince, a simple majority. Not only do you elect the relatively powerless, once elected, their power, their influence, is greatly diminished.
Is this situation hopeless? Yes. Yes it is. Expect more of the same.

