At the 5 August 2025 meeting of the Minneapolis Public Schools Board of Education, Board Chair Collin Beachy announced the results of the Board’s evaluation of Superintendent Lisa Sayles-Adams.
The
summary provided by Beachy is given below as readers scroll on down this
article.
Readers
note as you assess the evaluation that the categories for rating Sayles-Adams’s
effectiveness have little to do with academics, the main reason for the
existence of schools:
The only
category pertinent to academics is Goal A, having to do with literacy.
The
district’s switch from Benchmark Advance to University of Florida Literacy
Institute (UFLI) reading curriculum, touted as being aligned to the Minnesota READ Act and the currently in-vogue phonics-based Science of Reading, will
likely in fact have little impact on raising literacy levels, even on students
at levels PreK through grade 3; the
UFLI curriculum is not superior to Benchmark Advance, which provided adequate
phonics training while featuring substantive subject area readings. Further, beyond grade 3, no phonics-based reading
curriculum is likely to boost student reading levels, given the lack of
emphasis on knowledge-heavy, broad subject area focus in the curriculum as
actually delivered in the classrooms of the Minneapolis Public Schools; only such a curriculum would give students
the broad knowledge and sophisticated vocabulary to become masterful
readers.
Given
that Superintendent Lisa Sayles-Adams has trained in academically insubstantial
programs under intellectually lightweight education professors, produced such a
wretched dissertation (see my related articles on this blog), and demonstrates
no interest in academic subject area knowledge, her rating for Goal A should
have been, “ineffective.”
Goal B
concerns culturally responsive counseling and mental health; the rating of “effective” may be merited, but
the category has nothing to do with academics.
Goal C
concerns preparing pathways for Education Support Professionals and other staff
members to become teachers. The
Minneapolis Public Schools does not provide the necessary training for broad
and deep subject area knowledge acquisition for such teacher aspirants to become
effective teachers; thus, Sayles-Adams
should have been given an “ineffective” rating in this category.
The
rating for Lisa Sayles-Adams in category D, pertinent to input from district
staff, parents, and students so that they feel “heard, valued, and respected
through implementation of the climate framework,” is the most farcical of
all: this is the control-freak
superintendent who oversaw the sham “Listening Sessions” (see pertinent blog
articles) of spring 2024 and maneuvers in every setting to limit negative
criticism. Beyond deserving an
“ineffective” rating in this category, Sayles-Adams should be terminated in her position as superintendent
for such maneuvering, and for her mean-spirited actions and lackluster
performance in general.
Thus,
this incompetent iteration of the Minneapolis Public Schools Board of Education
is doubly culpable in issuing the 2024-2025 academic year performance rating
for Lisa Sayles-Adams >>>>>
>>>>> The categories have little to do with
academics, the delivery of which is the main mission of a public school system.
>>>>> The ratings given are with one possible
exception unmerited in the extreme.
Given
below is the statement that Chair Collin Beachy read at the 5 August 2025
meeting >>>>>
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Summary
of Evaluation of Minneapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lisa Sayles-Adams for
the 2024-2025 Academic Year
“On June
24th, School Board met in a duly noticed meeting that was closed meeting
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 13D.05, to conduct the evaluation of the
Superintendent for the 2024-2025 school year.
In
accordance with that same statute, this summary of the conclusions regarding
the evaluation is being provided now, at the Board’s next open meeting
following the closed meeting.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The
superintendent’s evaluation was conducted on four goals:
>>>>> Goal A: Provide leadership and strategic vision to
ensure students receive standards-based core literacy instruction
>>>>> Goal B: Provide leadership and strategic vision to
ensure equitable student access to culturally responsive counseling and mental
health services
>>>>> Goal C: Provide leadership and strategic vision to
strengthen pathways and reduce barriers for talented and diverse MPS employees
and potential employees to become teachers; and
>>>>> Goal D: Provide leadership and strategic vision to
ensure all district staff, parents, and students feel heard, valued and
respected through implementation of the climate framework
Each
evaluation area was assigned a potential rating of ineffective, developing,
effective, or highly effective.
>>>>> On goal A, the Board determined that the
Superintendent received a rating of
effective.
>>>>> On goal B, the Board determined that the
Superintendent received a rating of effective.
>>>>> On goal C, the Board determined that the
Superintendent received a rating of effective.
>>>>> Finally, on goal D, the Board determined
that the Superintendent received a rating of effective.”
No comments:
Post a Comment