Advertisement

Editorial: Hillsborough School Board remains divided

 
Published June 24, 2016

The process of reviewing the annual job performance of the Hillsborough County school superintendent has little remaining meaning, as supporters on the School Board engage in self-flattery and opponents settle personal scores and put their petty agendas ahead of the students. This doesn't help a large bureaucracy that has faced many of the same problems for years and that is struggling like other public school systems to develop more appealing options in this era of school choice.

School Board members gave superintendent Jeff Eakins high marks for his first year on the job in reviews submitted over the past few weeks that exposed the nagging emptiness of the evaluation process. Job reviews serve two purposes: to assess in the short-term an employee's strengths and weaknesses, and to chart over the longer haul his promise with the organization. In the case of chief executives like Eakins, the evaluation is also an opportunity to assess whether an institution is moving forward. But these reviews have become more about public relations for the board and superintendent than an honest assessment of where the school district stands.

Not surprisingly, Eakins won the strongest marks from the same four board members who voted to fire his predecessor in 2015. Several of those board members had been after MaryEllen Elia for years, and in praising Eakins they sought to legitimize their vote in removing his predecessor. In contrast, Elia's supporters gave Eakins his lowest marks, calling out a "spin zone" in the executive office. The board clearly is still wallowing in the shadow of Elia's ouster, which is coloring expectations for the leader of the nation's eighth-largest school system.

Of course, Elia's job reviews also were political statements, which reflects the root problem: Board members have been more focused on being right and in the majority than in addressing the problems that have plagued the district for years. The board has complained since 2010 that top administrators have stonewalled their requests for information. Concerns over racial disparities in education and discipline have existed for years. Breakdowns in the transportation department still have not been resolved. And board members say the district still has a problem with morale and communications.

But none of those perennial complaints kept Elia and now Eakins from earning high marks on their evaluations. It seems the superintendent's priority should be to keep board members in the loop. There is no immediacy on the board about finding solutions, and no serious attempt to use the job evaluation process to raise expectations for specific results.

Eakins entered the job under tough conditions, and to his credit he has tried to move the board beyond the acrimony and focus on student achievement. But the board needs to provide stronger direction and a greater sense of urgency. The annual job reviews are an appropriate place to do it.