Enfield Agrees to Renew Ingraham Principal's Contract With Conditions Attached

Comments

1
So we had a direction and made a decision, but then we decided to just listen to squabbling and make the angry mob happy, cause apparently we didnt know why we did it. This sounds like its going to be another awesome school administration.

Can we just fire this one now and get past the stupid drama that will come later.
2
What @1 said. You either believe in the decision or you don't, Superintendent Enfield, and when you backpeddle this hard, this fast, it's evidence that you either a) bad a bad decision in the beginning or b) are a weathervane that's going to go whichever way the wind blows.

Time to ramp that superintendent search back up.
3
Or it's also possible that she simply came to understand that she made a mistake, which is a quality of a strong leader. Just one interpretation.
4
As someone who knows this district, she made the right decision. It's up to Floe now (although the district has to provide more supports for struggling high school students).

A wise person admits a mistake and tries to correct it. Susan Enfield has done this. As you may recall Dr. Goodloe-Johnson "my way or the highway" is no longer with us and she never listened to or had concern for the views of any of the school communities.

Unless you know Ingraham or this district, don't judge from afar.
5
If it was a mistake, though, I'm more interested in the thought process that lead to her making the mistake. She very publically fired one of her high school principals and didn't really seem to have a good reason why--not one that she could clearly articulate to the public, anyhow--and whether that decision was right or wrong, how she made it and how she followed it were both clearly deficient.
6
Susan Enfield is a mealy-mouthed weasel. Just my humble opinion, of course.
7
I'm not sure what to think about this, but I never was sure what to think.

We heard a lot of reasons for Mr. Floe's dismissal, but none of them made sense.

We heard that the school had the second-worst test scores in the District, but that turned out to be untrue. The test scores aren't great, but they are, for the most part, in the middle of the pack and representative of the District as a whole. If these test scores are bad then that's true for the whole district and someone further up the chain should be dismissed as well.

We heard that Mr. Floe wasn't an effective instructional leader for his teachers, but the teachers all immediately signed a petition expressing confidence in his leadership. The facts we knew didn't reconcile with the claims from the District.

We heard that the District thought Mr. Floe had been doing a crap job for years now, but they promoted him as the person to develop and lead the new APP IB program and they promoted him to APP families to tempt them away from Garfield.

We heard that Mr. Floe was unwilling to change his role to the new vision of what a principal should do. Really? This friendly, easy-going guy was the most recalcitrant principal in the District? Really?

Then we heard that there were lots of excellent reasons to fire his ass, but the District couldn't describe them to us to protect Mr. Floe's privacy. Uh huh. After telling us all of this other stuff, now they want to protect his privacy and refuse to disclose or discuss personnel issues.

And now he gets to stay but he's on double secret probation - or something like that.

None of this really fills me with confidence or trust. None of it really diminishes my confidence or trust either. It's just more inane foolishness from the dysfunctional culture of Seattle Public Schools. Just another example of their ready, fire, aim process.