Grasmick is so bad. Baltimore City schools, her partners are not performing, PG county is a wreck and Baltimore Co. is have more troubles then ever. What does she actually do to improve education? just terrible

Minter's appointment is interesting in that Dr. Alonso doesn't appear to be anxious to replace the Area Academic Officers. It's almost as though he's trying to eliminate the position via attrition. But nonetheless I wish all of them luck and hope that they can bring a little more common sense to North Avenue.

Nancy Grasmick's renewal, whether you like her or not, disturbs me because of the animosity between her and Governor O'Malley. In a few months (as the story points out), a chunk of the state school board will be replaced and there will be constant battles between the "old guard" and O'Malley's appointees, not to mention the usual O'Malley vs. Grasmick antics.

This will not bode well for schools statewide.

I, too, do not understand what Grasmick has done that makes so many people worship her (and name a building after her)? The Baltimore system has languished for the past 2 decades, and the state has allowed schools to stay on various failing "lists" for years without making them do anything other than write yet another school improvement plan. The main "fix" they tried was to give 3 schools to Edison. I suppose they do send in "specialists" with their checklists, but this does very little to change schools. Doing whatever it takes to make significant changes in Baltimore should have been her top priority, and even though it is full of political challenges, it is her job to find a way to make it work or step aside for someone else. The state doesn't know how to fix BCPSS or they would have done it years ago. And if they think they know and haven't done it, there is a lot to answer for.

You know, it is quite obvious that readers with different political leanings contribute to this InsideEd blog than to Jay Hancock's blog - lol; because I read a similar blog topic on his posts and the response there was quite anti-O'Malley.

I posted there on the subject (the topic is titled "Annapolis Democrats too eager to change the rules". Perhaps Ms. Neufeld can add a link here to Mr. Hancock's post. I find the dichotomy of opinion to be very interesting. While I can certainly see Mr. Hancock's point, I think there is a bigger issue of educational accountability that the responders over there seem to have missed. Check it out.

I find it interesting that no one can show a specific area in which Ms. Grasmick's leadership has improved low-performing schools. She has consistently done everything in her power to make sure that the good schools get more and the "not-so-good" schools get less. I can see how this plays in Annapolis but not with the average person. A teacher I have worked with went to school with her at Towson and couldn't recall her being involved in anything but social activities. What has Louis's money and politics had to do with her longevity? Maybe more than we are willing to admit. I feel that the coming battle between the new School Board and Ms. Grasmick will have nothing but bad news for all schools in the state.

Step down, Ms. Grasmick! We don't like your politics, your education theories, your wasteful ways with our tax dollars, and most importantly, what you're doing, or more appropriately, not doing, for our children.

I hope some will share my dismay at the lack of understanding there is on "the Grasmick thing."
First - the board. The membership changes each year. The Governor appoints, or reappoints, members each year. Governor O’Malley made three appointments last year and will make three (announced this week) this year. There is no new board that is waiting in the wings to engage the Superintendent on July 1. Every four years, the board has the opportunity to retain or replace the superintendent. This system was designed to minimize the direct influence of politics on the choice of education CEO. The last several boards saw fit to continue Grasmick in this role. The board is the public representative who evaluates the job of the CEO. By having these citizens make the choice of superintendent, we pray that some politician doesn’t appoint a political hack to run the schools. The progress of the state system during the past 16 years has pleased them with their choice.
Were we displeased with the state of education we would vent ourselves at the Governor who would determine if the problem was with the board or their management and act accordingly. There are laws to restrict purely political reactions or retribution for real or perceived slights. If a poor performance is turned in, then the responsible party or parties replace the performer.
Each of the counties and Baltimore City select the CEO for their systems, putting control of education in the hands of the people closest to it. In some counties, these people are elected, and in others, they are appointed. In Baltimore County, for example, there was great dissatisfaction with the system that has the Governor making direct appointments. Anecdotally, the legislature tried to enact specific legislation to make at least one Ehrlich appointment quit either the board or other employment. They also proposed a number of complicated systems that did not meet with legislative approval. If the appointments were bad or the elected choices failed to perform – vote the bums out.
The state board has the responsibility for making statewide policy. They have responsibility for meeting the Maryland constitutional requirements regarding education. They run the show. They evaluate the performance of the superintendent. Near the end of the superintendent’s contract, the make a decision to offer a renewal to an effective superintendent, or begin the process of selecting a replacement. If the decision was not made until the last month of the contract, they stand to lose and effective executive or face a period without an executive as they seek the replacement. The replacement pool will look askance at a system that does not plan for leadership transitions. In any event, this invites instability to the system, which will harm the system. Subdivision boards have similar responsibilities at their level.
Next - the superintendent. This is the CEO of the whole of Maryland's schools, not just Baltimore City, not just the core counties, and not just primary and secondary education. She works under a contract for the board. The board under Governor Schaffer, appointed mostly by Governor Hughes, selected our current superintendent. Her personal relationship with him was advantageous during his terms in office. A board consisting of mostly or all Schaffer appointees twice chose to continue Grasmick in this role under Governor Glendenning. Mostly or all Glendenning appointees twice renewed Grasmick’s contract. Which brings us to the current board, most of which was appointed or reappointed under Governor Ehrlich, and at least one-quarter of which was appointed by Governor O’Malley.
Most to comments to this blog cite a lack of knowledge of any accomplishments by Superintendent Grasmick, but then cite examples of problems with local systems. Greater understanding and information on the state system can be found here. I suggest that people check their county education website for basic information about strictly local issues.
Having looked through this information about the State Board of Education, each of us will find it easier to determine why there seems to be a different sense of the responders to this blog and the responders to Jay Hancock’s. Oversimplified, his responders are focused on the product of the entire educational system – members of the workforce. They measure the system by the quality of applicant they receive. That is different, it seems to me, from the focus of the responders here.
There is nothing to lose by opening ourselves to the other’s perspective. Additionally, too much reliance on the reports in the papers, on television and on radio, will only continue to muddle the issues. With the resources available to each person commenting here – a computer with internet access – it is too easy to become informed and to discuss issues from a position of strength, i.e., knowledge, and not from a position of demagoguery and confusion.

Nancy Grasmisk Resign Now!!!