Hey Y’all! In this post, I’m sharing notes from the most recent Memphis-Shelby County Schools Evaluation Committee meeting. This board continued discussing the evaluation process for Superintendent Dr. Feagins and finally agreed on the weighting of key competencies like student achievement and staff relations.

The board and superintendent are working through these important decisions as they finalize the evaluation tool by the October 25 deadline they set for themselves. Technically, they have until October 31. Below, you’ll find key insights, proposals, and updates on where things stand. Please let me know if I have presented any inaccurate or misleading information.

Before you get caught up! If you want to stay updated on the latest developments within Memphis-Shelby County Schools and beyond, be sure to subscribe to my newsletter for in-depth insights, resources, and updates delivered straight to your inbox.

And don’t forget to hop over and subscribe to my YouTube channel, where I break down key education topics, share actionable tips, and reflect on the impact of policies and decisions in our schools.

Evaluation Committee Meeting Notes

Perspective-Taking Exercise

• Tomeka Hart Wigginton facilitated a session in which two board members—Commissioner McKinney and Commissioner McKissack—engaged in perspective-taking. Commissioner McKinney had to argue from the perspective of Superintendent Feagins while Commissioner McKissack represented the board. This exercise encouraged both parties to understand the other side’s concerns and viewpoints.

Evaluation Competency Weights 

• Tomeka Hart Wigginton pointed out that the difference being debated regarding the evaluation competency weights is only 5%.
• Commissioner Murphy argued that the board needs to vote on the issue, stating that while the superintendent can make her recommendation, the final decision lies with the board. She called for a vote rather than prolonged back-and-forth discussions.
• Hart Wigginton urged collaboration between the board and the superintendent, stating that decisions don’t have to create winners and losers. She emphasized prioritizing what’s best for students, noting that “our kids are not benefiting from the divide.”
• Commissioner Murphy supported the 5% increase in the staff relations weight, noting that the staff plays a crucial role in student achievement.
• Commissioner McKissack expressed that her concern isn’t about the percentage points but the intention behind them. While she’s not advocating for punitive measures, she favors gradual and meaningful changes and is ready to move forward from this discussion.
• Commissioner Otey stressed the importance of ensuring staff feel heard and their voices are valued.
• Commissioner Huett-Garcia expressed that the 5% shift isn’t worth risking the trust between the superintendent and the board. She emphasized not wanting Superintendent Feagins to feel like the rules were being changed mid-game while acknowledging that a complete overhaul is needed. She supported keeping the weights the same and focusing on agreeing on the quantitative measures.
• Hart Wigginton reminded the board they were not creating an unfair situation but following policy and the superintendent’s contract. She urged the board not to buy into a narrative that this evaluation process is a “gotcha” moment.
• Board Consensus: Though not a voting meeting, most board members agreed to keep the competency weights the same, aligning with Superintendent Feagins’ recommendation.

Quantitative Measures Submitted by Superintendent Feagins for the 2024-2025 school year:

• Priority 1: State’s Annual Measure Objective (AMOs):
  • Grades 3-5: Increase from 25.4% to 27.4%
  • Grades 6-8: Increase from 17% to 19%
  • Grades 9-12: Increase from 24.6% to 26.6%
    • Commissioner McKinney – Expressed concern that these quantitative measures won’t provide the complete picture the board needs.
• Priority 2: Teacher Recruitment and Retention:
  • Decrease teacher vacancies and instructional positions by 1% and reduce unlicensed teachers by 2%.
    • Commissioner Huett-Garcia: Agreed that recruitment and retention are critical but highlighted that the missing piece is how the effectiveness of district leadership will be measured.
• Priority 3: Career and Technical Education (CTE) and Dual Enrollment:
  • Increase CTE program offerings from 47 to 49
  • Increase on-track students from 88.2% to 89%
  • Increase dual enrollment by 2%
    • Commissioner McKinney Called for more focus on rigorous coursework, such as ACT preparation, and pointed out the lack of emphasis on high-quality facilities and learning environments. She suggested incorporating the real estate report into the evaluation and addressing deferred maintenance programs.
    • Commissioner Coleman asked what the 2% increase in dual enrollment means regarding student progress.
    • Commissioner McKissack asked for clarification on dual enrollment and suggested that the goal for increasing enrollment could be higher than 2%.
    • Commissioner Otey: Inquired if students have the necessary resources to be successful in these programs.
    • Commissioner Huett-Garcia Asked how CTE offerings will be measured in terms of the number of students who leave with certifications that lead to high-paying jobs.
    • Commissioner Otey Further questioned how many students secure employment post-certification.
    • Commissioner McKinney: Asked how the district’s performance compares to other districts of similar size and demographics.
• Hart pointed out that real baseline data might not be available until year three.
  • Commissioner McKinney acknowledged the time needed to establish a baseline, and McKinney expressed concern about waiting too long to see movement. She emphasized the importance of setting a “North Star” and making incremental progress toward it, ensuring that the superintendent is held accountable for these changes.

Formal Evaluation Decisions that need to be made:

• Evaluation date
• Date for the superintendent to submit her self-evaluation with supporting documentation
• Date for individual board members to submit their evaluations
• Discussion on whether to hire a third-party consultant to assist with the process

Culture and Climate Survey:

• Commissioner Coleman: Proposed incorporating a culture and climate survey into the evaluation process.
• Commissioner Huett-Garcia: Supported the idea, expressing interest in using the survey to establish a baseline.
• Commissioner Otey: Agreed, emphasizing that people want to feel heard and that the survey could provide valuable insights.
• Commissioner Love and Commissioner McKinney: Both expressed their support for the survey.
• Hart: Recommended that Chair Coleman discuss a culture and climate survey with Superintendent Feagins.

Next Steps:

• Board Consensus: Though not a voting meeting, most board members agreed to keep the competency weights the same, aligning with Superintendent Feagins’ recommendation.
• The board will likely discuss the quantitative measures for the 2024-2025 priorities during the October 22 board session. It will hold a special called meeting by October 31 to formally decide the next steps for the evaluation process.

As always, I’ll keep you updated as soon as new information becomes available.

In the meantime, here are the notes from the latest board committee meeting. Be sure to sign up for my newsletter to stay informed on all developments.

I encourage you to check out my latest YouTube video where I discuss the staff relations competency, how it’s measured, and review how Dr. Feagins has been performing in this critical area so far.