PART 2: Into The Thick Of Things With Margie Sherratt
Veteran AUSD Educator and past Alameda School Board Member, Margie Sherratt, sees her interim appointment through the lens of a wealth of past experience and contemporary insights.
In an interview that took place not long before she entered into the Alameda City Council Chambers on January 9th for her first School Board meeting since leaving as its President in 2015, Sherratt provided key perspectives on the province of School Boards and some of the challenges the lie ahead during her current tenure.
Sherratt grasps that structural distances exist between school board members, a school district’s administration, and with the daily doings at the school site level.
Sherratt is aware that School Boards largely rely on District provided information, especially as it pertains to financial figures, student enrollment and attendance numbers from the District or as to “where we are with our teachers.”
School district staff and administrators are often key, sometimes filtered sources of information presented to School Boards, and individual board members are rarely, if ever, in a position to have a finger on the pulse of day to day school operations or on school community member concerns or perceptions related to their students.
“What we mainly are is as an oversight entity, making sure that the finances and the schools themselves are up to par, “ she said.
Sherratt indicated that the essential function of School Boards should not typically involve them when it comes to handling the micro matters — a parent concern about how a student is being taught or treated in a classroom, for example– that are properly the province of a site or district administrator.
“Say there’s a parent that says to the Principal, ‘this teacher just isn’t doing what my kid needs; this teacher isn’t doing it correctly.’ Hopefully, the principal will work through that. If the parent still isn’t satisfied, that parent would go to the Assistant Superintendent or the Superintendent.
“The school board is more over-arching. What is tough, sometimes if, say the teachers are wanting a raise,” said Sherratt, who has served on both sides of that common divide in districts.
If the teacher workplace or compensation matters presented at the School District level do not prove workable or if resolution is not found, “then they go to the School Board. They’ll say, ‘Well, what are you going to do? Are you going to fix this for us? What’s going to go on’? “
And those kinds of ‘how public taxpayer dollars are being spent’ matters are precisely what School Boards, acting as independent entities of mostly elected members, are supposed to handle.
The macro-cosmic aspects of a School Board member’s having a ‘finger on the pulse’ –or in many cases, ‘the purse’– differs markedly from ground level aspect in what Sherratt recalls as her favorite, lasting achievement as an educator –one that falls directly into the wheelhouse of a school Principal as opposed to a School Board member.
“Having been been at Alameda High School as Head Counselor and as Principal, I came to really understand and value the students, the teachers and everyone around there. I was able to have a pretty well defined school: of what was going on, needed, of what was working, of what wasn’t working. I had my best handle of what was going on during those years.”
Sherratt considers herself as having been an “open door Principal,” meaning a school leader who freely welcomes and encourages staff, students and parents to bring their thoughts and concerns into the room –literally—a leadership style and philosophy that is not necessarily standard operating procedure with all site leaders, some of whom can be termed as isolated or “top down” in approach.
Sherratt, again hearkening back to her days in school site leadership, also underscored the shortcomings that arise in an institution that involves multiple different teachers or para- professional staff.
“There are bound to be some areas that aren’t as strong as others, or teachers who teach differently or teachers that have been there for a number of years and who will do whatever they want to do, other than doing what they should be doing. “That was rare; that was rare, but there were a few of them, ”she said.
Sherratt knows that education has changed in a number of fundamental ways since she served in the classroom, a site office and even on the School Board, especially with the advent of digital communication modes.
“It’s definitely different in many ways than when I was there. You’re not sitting and talking with someone. You’re sending them a message, as opposed to having a one to one conversation.
Sherratt stated frankly, given how long it has been since she last ran her own classroom, that she may not be correct when she notes that ‘computerized conversations’ as opposed to in-person ones profoundly change the school communication interface.
Tech modalities are more likely to depersonalize the dynamic, and open the gates for more ‘incoming’ messages requiring more time and energy being expended to respond and provide the ‘outgoing.’
With the advent of text messaging, for example, one now typically inquires about going out to dinner with a message of, “ ‘Wanna’ come?’ You’re not going to pick up the phone and talk to them. That’s a lot of what must be going on in schools today, ” with respect to communications within schools and with school communities at large she said.
“I don’t mean that it’s right or wrong, it’s just different,” she said, later indicating that she still believes that School Board members should be willing to having ‘old school’ personal conversations with constituents about various matters that might be on their minds.
“I can’t imagine that if someone wants to sit down with a Board Member, that they wouldn’t have an opportunity to do so, ”she said.
While those types of conversations might include a parent’s demands or advocacy for how to cover or not cover a curricular issue, especially thematic content that has been the focus of the so-called “culture wars” in public schools, Sherratt referred back to established protocols.
“I would not be the first person that they would go to for that sort of thing,” she said.
“I would probably be the last person when they had gone through the steps of the School District” as aligned with state content frameworks.
“What I would do if I had a parent that didn’t like something that was being presented in a classroom, about what they’re reading and what they’re being taught is indicate that it still goes back to the principal and the School District and then, if needed, then some decision from the School Board.”
Sherratt agreed with the characterization that the AUSD board is not like some whose membership is the product of outside agenda driven groups who use their political influence to elect or get appointed members who will advance their socio-political dogma.
“Never, never. That’s to my mind, not something that AUSD has ever done, “ she said.
When it comes to the centrality of teachers as the ‘frontline purveyors’ of classroom teaching and learning, Sherratt well knows that “teachers have a huge position,” and must take on the highly demanding, complex and varied roles that embrace a number of professions all rolled into one.
Teachers must be life coaches, quasi parents, behavioralists, counselors, psychologists, security providers, role models, instructors, organizers and much more in an insatiable environment that can consume all that teachers can deliver and then some.
“They always had to do it” said Sherratt adding that for AUSD teachers. The jobs are pretty well done. They meet high expectations 85% to 90% of the time.”
How AUSD does so well in the face of salaries and benefits that are not top tier compared to many districts in the area is not lost on Sherratt who well knows the long-standing dilemma when it comes to attracting and retaining teaching talent.
“We are not a district that’s rich, and (others) pay more. I know that the teachers union is going to ask for more, and we as a school board are going to have to figure out what we can do, and that’s up to Superintendent Scuderi also.
The teacher’s union is fighting back a bit more now, and trying to get a better level of pay and benefits. It feels to me that we are a little bit behind the times, and money is hard.
We’re all aware of it. We just don’t know exactly how far we can go,” she said in recognition of the ever-present financial issues which public schools face in an environment of inconsistent state revenues, anti-public education forces and overall tax fatigue, especially in California.
Part of the budgetary issues she and AUSD will soon face will be involved with the March election ballot results on a Replacement Parcel Measure Tax that seeks to combine and replace two prior measures passed by voters in 2016 and 2020.
FOR DETAILS ON THE PROPOSED, REPLACEMENT PARCEL TAX CLICK HERE:
Should the measure not gain over 66.6667% of the vote on March 5th, — the supermajority hurdle required by California law for local tax measures — AUSD will face up to $24 million in cuts, about 15%, to a budget that runs just over $154 million.
“We can’t let that happen. That’s what the Board’s reason is for undertaking (the new parcel tax consolidation proposal); the education of kids and keeping our teachers,” said Sherratt who remembers similar past struggles during her tenure in the schools and on The Board.
To examine full text of the proposed Parcel Tax and arguments in favor and opposed, click here:
If the measure passes, it will not result in an increase to existing district revenues.
Despite the many uncertainties which lay ahead, with her great depth and breadth of experience, Sherratt knows enough to know what she doesn’t know, at least not yet.
“I certainly will listen and learn the first month or so. I’m pretty quick at figuring things out and seeing where we’re doing well and seeing what’s going on here or there and figuring out what needs to be done and whether we can vote for it.
When it might come to matters of difference between Board Members, District Officlals or others who differ on what decision to render, Sherratt again draws upon her wealth of experience and on her even-keeled, amiable and results oriented personality.
“ I don’t mean this in a show off way, but I seem to have the ability to listen to say ‘I understand what you’re saying, however, this is not going to work in this way we need to redo a bit. ‘ Usually that kind of works,” she noted.
And, as would be apropos after a long look at her return to The School Board, Sherratt went back to her core tenets and the learning she gained as a classroom teacher got the final say.
“Whatever you’re trying to do is not going to last long, unless we come together. It’s not the subject, it’s the way in which you teach towards the way you come together,” she said, providing a fitting exclamation point at the tail end of the interview.