In March, the TUSD Board decided not to renew the contract of Rex Scott, the principal of Catalina High. Because the vote was taken in the discussion of the issue occurred during executive session, the reasons for the decision aren’t public, but it was clear at the time that a significant factor in the vote was the school’s D rating with the state.
The new state scores are out, and Catalina High earned a C for the 2013-14 school year. Scott did a detailed analysis of the numbers and found the biggest gains came from the lowest scorers in general and the ELL students in particular. The state changed its way of computing the scores, but according to Scott, even under the old system, Catalina would have moved up to a C.
If the old formula the state used for calculating high school letter grades had stayed in place, Catalina still would have been a “C” and would have earned 103 total points. That is a 15 point gain over two years and a five point gain from last year, when the school was at 98 points. . . . The thing that makes me proudest is that the kids who received a great deal of our time and attention this past year (sophomores who failed both AIMS Math and Reading as 8th graders) played the biggest role in helping the school to earn a “C.” Their needs were a consistent area of focused, substantive efforts by our staff and those endeavors on their behalf were a large part of our school improvement plan.
Congratulations to the students, the staff and those members of the community, parents and others, who have supported the students and the school.
And some shame goes to the TUSD board which voted 4-1 for Rex Scott’s non-renewal, with Kristel Foster the only dissenting vote. I’m sure they had their reasons for the lopsided vote, but according to the Star article that came out at the time, the school’s state score was the major reason for the vote of no confidence for Scott.
At the time, Superintendent H.T. Sanchez predicted with some certainty the school would not earn a C this year; he was clearly wrong. And board member Cam Juarez implied that renewing Scott’s contract would be lowering the bar for the school rather than expecting it to improve; clearly his statement was premature, since the school did improve based on the measure being used by the district and the state. I agree that it’s wrong to lower expectations for students and schools and assume there will be no improvement, but it’s also harmful to make negative assumptions about what the students will accomplish before the results are in. I’m sure the school’s staff and students were stung unnecessarily by the inaccurate and apparently baseless assessment of their potential growth.
I wrote about Rex Scott’s nonrenewal when it was first announced and mentioned then that I’m a friend of his and have a great deal of respect for his ability, his positive attitude and his work ethic. I probably wouldn’t devote a post to the school’s rise from a D to a C otherwise. A dozen other TUSD schools moved up as well. But he and the school deserve special vindication and validation, and very possibly an apology.
This article appears in Jul 31 – Aug 6, 2014.
Doesn’t a public body (such as a public school board) taking legal action an executive session (such as voting to not renew contracts) violate the State’s open meeting laws?
Fishbert, my statement was incorrect. The vote was during the public session, but the discussion of the issue happened in executive session, so we don’t know what kind of discussion there was around the issue. I have corrected the post.
That’s great news. Sad to see Rex didn’t get fair hearing – heard he was real good man – my son’s going to Catalina next year and the school is always fighting this negative academic stereotype, which many feel is unfair considering demographics and the school having large new immigrant population that is still adjusting to English and the USA.
While discussing personnel issues needs to be private, the vote against Scott is certainly not the only issue where the public heard little or no discussion. I will tip my hat, though, to Kristel Foster’s objection–it was a rare moment of voting against the tide for her and she deserves credit for it. Comments about “lowering the bar” were simply nonsensical. They just bought into the “school reform” movement’s insistence that the level of the bar, and the expectations themselves are somehow what makes a difference to achievement which simply does not hold water. As the article states, what makes the difference is believing in the kids enough to work your tail off with them in order to improve their understanding of the material. Scott did not himself receive the benefit of the doubt on expectations and Marana got a terrific principal because of it. Moves like this demean TUSD in the eyes of the public, judging from the comments I heard while walking in the neighborhood around Catalina later that week.
I have often criticized TUSD for treating the public like mushrooms, but the process they followed in this case was the correct one. The vote had to be taken in public, but the discussion was properly done in executive session. Public bodies may go into executive session for only a very few reasons. Discussions of personnel matters is one of them. I wonder whether the bullying issue of a few years ago…where parents accused Scott of failing to appropriately discipline students who had bullied their child (as in not calling the police to charge the bullies with assault) … had anything to do with this decision.
If “the biggest gains came from the lowest scorers in general and the ELL students in particular'” is accurate, Scott had achieved remarkable success…before being booted.
Using results of standardized tests to make personnel decisions – absent the context of the school’s demographics – is a fool’s errand whether the mandate is NCLB or it’s rebirth as the Common Core State Standards. Making those decisions in a district that borders itself on failing is even more misguided.
We will have to wait to see how well Catalina High students fare on the next round of tests under its new management. Hopefully the school will continue to improve or at least hold steady, consistent with the district’s average score of a gentleman’s “C.”
A gentleman’s C is sufficient if you are the scion of a wealthy Harvard grad. For a school district the size of TUSD it results in the diminished chances of a meaningful economic revival in Tucson and a continuation of the city’s status quo as a low wage backwater our most able graduates flee in search of better opportunities.
Just missed a B by 3 points by the way!