We're all well aware of the research leading to the development of Classroom Effectiveness Indicators. With a measure of the academic level of each student walking in the door each year, DISD attempts to measure the value-add or growth of students over a year of instruction by each teacher.

As a taxpayer and proponent of breaking the district into smaller parts so citizens and parents could actually have their voices heard, I'd be appreciative of any evidence of the value-add of layers of central administrators or even campus principals.

Have any parents/citizens had honest responses to their questions or concerns from area superintendents? Has any central administrator added to the academic growth of your child? Does your campus administrator actually bring more expertise than the best teachers on campus?

Wouldn't it be possible to eliminate all the executive directors, area superintendents, and even the superintendent's role as it now described and make budgets totally campus-based with little allowance for all these central administrators? ADP could handle payroll. Consultants/training could be chosen at the campus level based on the needs of faculty. With at least 10 or even 20 smaller school districts where central administrative jobs didn't pay particularly well, would students be better served?

Does your campus administrative staff bring the integrity and instructional expertise so that their "value-add" could be measured by student gains? Aren't all student gains the product of teacher efforts? If so, doesn't the entire model need to be re-examined?

How about a model of very small, community based schools where veteran teachers were indeed directly accountable for the quality of programs?

The only folks really being served by the size and model of delivery of DISD are central administrators and campus principals who could never garner their salaries or pensions in a free-market economy. The size of the district works against any real reform, so why the insistence on the mirage of reforming a model that doesn't deliver services to children but only serves as a ridiculously high paid jobs program for adults?