Watertown HR committee agrees to keep pursuing a director of curriculum and instruction, with a coordinator plan as fallback

At a Watertown Unified School District human resources meeting, committee members directed HR staff to continue an aggressive search for a director of curriculum and instruction while preparing a coordinator model as a fallback if qualified candidates do not appear.

HR staff (S4) told the committee the recruitment previously failed and that board leadership had asked staff to pause and recommend whether to restart a director search or reclassify the role into one or more coordinator positions. “We will be rolling out, an interview or recruitment activity, the 1st week of August,” HR staff (S4) said, calling early August the “sweet spot” to line up new hires for the school year.

Committee members discussed trade-offs. A committee member (S1) framed the options as hiring a director, restarting recruitment for a director, or shifting the role under teaching and learning with separate elementary and secondary coordinators. “What I would prefer is I would prefer to have a director of curriculum instruction,” that committee member said, while acknowledging the district could pivot to coordinators if the candidate pool was insufficient.

Several members raised concerns about continuity and workloads if the district moved from a single director to coordinators. Committee member (S5) worried the coordinator route could create a “fall off” in services; others countered that strong systems and team alignment could prevent gaps. HR staff (S4) noted license and scheduling differences and said the district has flexibility in contract days (examples cited included 261, 220 and 211 days) and could negotiate terms to attract candidates.

Members proposed an accelerated timeline: post now, review applicants through an August cutoff (committee discussion mentioned August 10), and, if no suitable director emerges, implement a prepared coordinator Plan B. HR staff (S4) said the district would bring a timetable and next steps back to the committee. On contracts, staff advised that two-year administrative contracts are standard because first-year review and renewal deadlines limit the amount of performance data available, though a shorter initial contract could be used in some cases.

The discussion also covered stakeholder input: members asked that teachers and building leadership be consulted about whether coordinator roles would provide adequate coverage and that internal candidates be considered. HR staff committed to returning with a posting plan and recommended classification language for the committee’s next meeting.

The committee did not take a formal vote on classification at the meeting; instead it gave staff direction to move forward with a director search while preparing a coordinator alternative if necessary. The committee closed the meeting after roughly 35 minutes.