The story so far…
The Clayton County school system lost its accreditation in 2008 in part because of a dysfunctional school board. The district regained accreditation in 2011 but the school board has yet to fully shake reports of in-fighting, micromanaging and outside influences. School officials this week approved a letter responding to concerns that were noted in a warning letter sent to the district in September by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS).
In one of its first acts as a new board, Clayton County’s school board approved a letter written by the interim school chief addressing an accrediting agency’s concerns about how the nine-member board operates.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has obtained a copy of a draft of the letter Clayton is sending to The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) responding to concerns SACS expressed about board in-fighting, micromanaging and grandstanding.
Interim superintendent Luvenia Jackson’s three-page letter says the board has “worked hard” to set policies to ensure the board is run professionally. It also assures the agency it has taken steps, including getting outside help, in its search for a permanent superintendent.
SACS should receive the letter Wednesday, well before the Jan. 15 deadline it set, Jackson told The AJC. The response comes just a few months before a team from SACS visits for a review to determine the district’s accreditation status. That review is set for April 14-17.
The board approved the letter Monday in an 8-1 vote after a round of vigorous questions and concerns about why SACS did not specifically name the people or events that sparked its concerns.
“I was a little testy because there were no facts,” said board member Charlton Bivins. “We’ll be acting on innuendos and third-party responses.”
“I tried my best to hold my tongue,” said board member Jessie Goree. “I’m going to be nice and not throw anybody under the bus. But the one person who has been thrown under the bus was me. I’m a person who believes in following policies but am continually accused of doing otherwise. Right now we’re in a good situation with our superintendent. Maybe some of your eyes were opened and are seeing I’m not the bad guy.”
SACS prompted outcry from the community after president and chief executive Mark Elgart sent a warning letter in September to departing school superintendent Edmond Heatley. Elgart’s letter cited divisive behavior on the school board and influence from outside groups. He also worried that the board may not be capable of mounting a proper search for a new superintendent.
The letter was prompted by reports the agency had received about the school board’s actions. It’s not clear who made the reports or what specifically was reported.
The head of the local educators group praised Jackson’s letter and called Elgart’s warning letter a “premature” response to a school system’s efforts to establish its direction after its restored accreditation.
“I don’t think having a difference of opinion is necessarily in-fighting or dysfunctional,” said Sid Chapman, president of the Clayton County Education Association. “You’re under such scrutiny, you don’t want a (warning) letter every time. It leaves panicky, negative feelings.”
Elgart attended several public forums last month to try to quell rumors that the school system was in jeopardy of losing its accreditation again. SACS took Clayton’s accreditation in 2008 but restored it in 2011.
Jackson said crafting the proper response - and getting the board moving in the right direction - has been on her mind from the moment she assumed the helm of the 51,000-student school system several months ago.
“The board has to stop beating up itself and recognize it’s time to move forward,” Jackson said in an interview after Monday night’s board meeting where two new members, Mark Christmas and Judy Johnson, were sworn in. Jackson read the entire letter during Monday’s meeting.
“The Clayton County Board of Education has established polices that define board responsibilities, conflict of interest, code of ethics, relationship with the superintendent and staff and board meetings and agendas,” the letter said. “These policies provide clear direction for the whole board and individual board member conduct as well as possible actions to be taken if policies are violated.”
About the Author
