The Civic Council recommends a working group of business, nonprofit, philanthropic and higher education volunteers to develop criteria for the new superintendent.
Not once in the editorial do they advocate for teachers and parents participating in the superintendent search though they do make several dubious claims.
It gets old writing the same thing over and over.
How many times can I sound the alarms about privatization, explain how ridiculous Teach for America is, point out Gary Chartrand's associations, or how often the Times Union's editorial board is wrong. I feel like I am stuck in Groundhog's Day.
Here I go again.
The editorial implies Vitti saved us, not true. It also implied he knew what he was doing, which is also not true, his leadership style was to throw spaghetti against a wall to see what stuck.
The editorial implies the philanthropic community has only been involved the last few years, not true, though recently they started telling the district how to use the money.
The editorial says TFA is a good thing, not true.
The editorial says we must listen to the civic council, only they can save us, both not true and dangerous.
If only we had an editorial board that was interested in what the district's teachers and the parent's of out students thought rather than the so called city's elites, maybe then we would see some real progress.