Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Superintendent Search topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
JCPS reports 4,500+ responses to superintendent survey; board reviews guardrail monitoring
Summary
District staff told the board that a January–February superintendent search survey drew more than 4,500 responses. The search firm will use the results to develop a leadership profile. Separately, administrators gave an update on "guardrail 3" metrics that track inclusive decision making, teacher voice and district‑school leadership teams.
District staff told the Jefferson County Board of Education on Feb. 25 that a community survey conducted for the superintendent search received more than 4,500 anonymous responses and will inform the executive search firm's leadership profile.
The survey invited respondents to rate candidate qualities on a 1–10 scale. The highest‑ranked priorities included promoting academic achievement for all students (average score 9.2) and the candidate's ability to lead a team (average 9.3). Other high priorities included improving teacher recruitment and retention and addressing student behavior. Staff reported that 61% of survey respondents identified as White, 21% as Black/African American and that roughly half of respondents identified as JCPS parents and 45% as employees; respondents could select multiple categories.
Guardrail monitoring: staff also presented the first monitoring update for Guardrail 3, which covers inclusive decision making. JCPS described three focus areas—teacher voice and leadership, parent and staff communication, and collaborative district and school leadership teams—and said the district is increasing participation in an "Upbeat" staff survey measuring teacher input and leadership opportunities. Staff reported incremental gains in teacher perception metrics and said 49 school collaborative leadership teams have formed and are developing problems of practice for school improvement.
Why it matters: the survey and guardrail monitoring are inputs to the superintendent search and to district accountability practices. Board members asked for further details (open rates and click‑throughs for district communications; language support; and the next steps for collaborative leadership teams). Staff said the search screening committee will be fully populated by March 3 and that the search firm will present a leadership profile at a future meeting.
Ending: staff said they would continue to return with more detailed analyses and with the search firm's leadership profile in the next meeting cycle.
