Count to Five
I’m writing immediately after the Cambridge School Committee vote on the Superintendent search process – and Cambridge Day already beat me to the punch, with their article “David Murphy Named Permanent Superintendent for Cambridge Schools in Unanimous Final Vote.” However, here are my brief observations and summaries:
The seven public comments ranged from incensed to supportive. Fellow School Committee candidates Jess Goetz, Lilly Havstad, and Luisa Santos all made great points, including:
Jess Goetz suggested that the School Committee members explain their votes (which they did). She also suggested that the School Committee start thinking now about how to mitigate this situation and maximize superintendent effectiveness, especially regarding structuring the incoming superintendent’s contract. What clear bench marks can be transparently set so we can all hold the superintendent accountable together? And which experts do we already have in-house that we can rely on more heavily to help with the gaps in the candidates resumes?
Lilly Havstad suggested making leadership training mandatory for both the incoming Superintendent and the School Committee as a whole (Harvard offers a course for $633!). She suggested that open-meeting law is intended to increase transparency (not close it off).
Luisa Santos stated that the public at large is watching as these events unfold. [As well they should.]
Here’s my own comment as a whole:
I was recently asked my opinion about Interim Superintendent David Murphy. This is what I told the person who asked me:
David Murphy is the antithesis of a smooth talker. He is a rumpled, many-clause-uttering, bad-shoe-wearing, operations nerd. He's a lawyer with deep educational institutional knowledge. He's occasionally brusque, especially over email. He can be overconfident, uses the word synergy to excess, and has introduced the phrase "unforced error" into my own lexicon due to the number of baseball metaphors he has used in School Committee meetings.
He also has moral courage. He genuinely works to lift up talent when he encounters it. He has grown as a listener -- a thing I can personally attest to, as I was one of the people...uh...providing feedback. He does what he says he's going to do, and he's gotten more actual effective work done in the last fifteen months than I've seen from pretty much anyone else since I moved here in September 2019 (especially regarding both advanced learners and students negatively affected by our admissions policies).
He is, as far as I can tell, genuinely, profoundly, truly centering the kids in every action his administration has taken. What is more, I believe that both the schools' principals, as well as the central administrators largely trust him. This is a profound sea change in the culture of CPSD, under-managed -- and therefore divisive -- at least since the departure of Superintendent Salim.
And if I were on the School Committee now, I'd happily vote for him. He'd be a finalist in any search, no matter how well or poorly run. By the way, regarding starting the search over again -- the only way I'd think that was a good way forward was if there was genuinely a lack of viable candidates. And I just -- you know, I just think that moral courage + teamwork + effectiveness is rare, anywhere in the world. I'd hold onto that.
The mayor then allowed the members to speak.
José Luis Rojas: MURPHY
The process could have been better, but the process did net qualified candidates.
David Weinstein: MURPHY
Echoed the thanks that Simmons gave to Christo & Dr. Turk. Acknowledged that the process could have been better but feels it was equitable. He appreciated learning more about all of the candidates.
Rachel Weinstein: MURPHY
She was also very, very frustrated with the process. She mentioned that the CEA declined to participate in a dedicated teachers’ forum. She felt that Murphy, as an internal candidate, was best positioned to hit the ground running.
Caroline Hunter: SANCHEZ
Her choice is based on Sanchez’s understanding of outreach for parent engagement in practice. [AMC note: I absolutely agree with Vice Chair Hunter that Ms. Sanchez seems to be excellent in this area, and I’d love it if she could come to work here in the future.]
Elizabeth Hudson: MURPHY
She disagreed with the calls to restart the process; she said these calls never outlined a plan to find a new interim or a definition of what they wanted. Her specific priority was that CPSD has a middle school where 6% of low-income students are meeting expectations, and she feels that this is an urgent and necessary problem to fix.
Richard Harding: MURPHY
Regarding the process: the School Committee tried to protect candidates’ requests for secrecy. Regarding the candidates: He felt that Murphy has demonstrated the capacity to build relationships with School Committee members, which is a necessary part of the job – and was a difficult task in the wake of Dr. Greer’s tenure. Harding also mentioned that Murphy is willing to lose the job to do the right thing, and that deeply matters to him.
Denise Simmons: SANCHEZ
She said that the School Committee worked a lot harder than was visible to the public, because they were trying to maintain the integrity of the process. She wanted to thank Ms. Christo (the School Committee’s executive secretary); the city of Cambridge’’s solicitors’ office, the Donovan Group, and the Equity Process. She deeply appreciated both Dr. Garcia’s and Ms. Sanchez’s experience as educators; this was her single most important priority in choosing a superintendent; Murphy was neither her first nor second choice.
So in the end, five School Committee members chose Murphy. They then unanimously voted to confirm him as Superintendent. After briefly discussing next steps regarding contract negotiations, the School Committee adjourned early.
More soon, and thanks!
—amc
