Collierville Schools board tables director-of-schools evaluation instrument after members ask for clearer grading and language
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Board members asked for more granular scoring, clarified personnel-reporting language and requested a revised draft agreed with the superintendent before final approval; the item was tabled for a special-called meeting.
Board member Miss Gibbs questioned a draft director-of-schools evaluation instrument Wednesday, saying the scale in the document was too binary and urging the board to add more descriptive scoring and language derived from board policy. After discussion with staff, the board agreed to request revisions and tabled formal approval until members can review a revised draft and the superintendent and board reach agreement.
The board’s exchange centered on the instrument’s scoring and source language. “It says that it was predicated on policy 5.802,” Miss Gibbs said, and noted the draft used a rating labeled 5 for excellent and 1 for needs improvement with no intermediate categories. She asked for added descriptions for intermediate scores so a rating that is not a 1 or 5 would have defined meaning.
Mr. Marshall, a district staff member present during the discussion, agreed to prepare revisions. Board members also asked staff to consider restoring or adding language tied to the superintendent’s personnel authorities that appears in district policy—specifically language about assigning and transferring employees and reporting those actions to the board for information and record.
Board members emphasized process: any final evaluation instrument must reflect board policy and be agreed to by both the board and the superintendent. The board discussed circulating a revised draft and holding a special-called meeting to approve a final document. The item was not finalized and was tabled.
The discussion included several procedural clarifications: board members may consult with Mr. Marshall to propose concrete edits, the revised draft will be distributed to the full board and the superintendent, and a special meeting may be necessary to adopt the instrument once there is agreement.
The board did not take a formal recorded roll-call vote to adopt the evaluation instrument at this meeting; instead members agreed to have staff prepare revisions and bring a new draft back for consideration.