Monthly Archives: June 2007

Lewisville Elementary and Mr. Snow

26 Replies

The science teacher at my youngest son’s school, Mr. Snow at Lewisville Elementary, has been suspended with pay for alleged misconduct.  We got the automated call from the school at about 4:30 this afternoon and I just saw the notification in the Winston-Salem Journal’s afternoon email alert (article here).  No details were provided with the phone message other than that the school is participating with the sheriff’s office in the investigation.

This is the second time this year that Mr. Snow has been accused of misconduct.  The charges last fall were dropped after the authorities couldn’t find any support or proof of the allegations.  As I wrote here I wasn’t too pleased with the school’s initial handling of getting the word out the last time through, but I think they’ve learned their lesson because this time they seem to be getting the word out quickly and consistently.  One thing I’d like to know is when the allegations were initially made.  The last time we didn’t hear from the schools until a week after the allegations were made and the sheriff was called.  It will be interesting to see what the gap between allegation and parental notification was this time.

On the plus side the school reps went out of their way to say they are already working with the sheriff’s office so we know where they are in the process.  Unfortunately, because we’ve been through this already we know that the school system can’t tell us anything until the sheriff has investigated. Given the sheriff office’s performance in recent school cases let’s hope they get this thing investigated soon and thoroughly.

FYI, the phone’s already started ringing and the early take is that someone has it out for Mr. Snow.  I know it seems awful suspicious when any teacher is accused twice (where there’s smoke there’s fire, and all that), but let’s just say that those people familiar with the school have reason to think that there might be a reason that Mr. Snow would be accused.  As I said the last time, I don’t know Mr. Snow personally but I do know the people who are defending him and I trust their judgment. 

I just hope this somehow works out in such a way that the folks involved come out as unscathed as possible and that the truth is found.

Cream of the Crop?

Leave a reply

Over at Freakonomics they’ve posted an interesting item from one of their readers on the subject of military officer promotions.  Here’s an excerpt:

Officers rise through the system without relevance to merit; promotions
are based on the length of time the officer has been in the system. (Up
to the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel, anyway — to make Colonel you have to
have done more than serve time.) Enlisted men are subject to a
completely different rule: you see them studying for months, mastering
the contents of a book this thick (makes gesture, thumb and fingers
about three inches apart).

To be an officer you must either have been to one of the military
academies or to college. Because promotion is not based on merit, smart
officers get frustrated and leave for jobs where they can make better
money; less able officers have every reason to stay, since incompetence
is no impediment to career advancement. Since the effect of the system
is to retain the least able, it perpetuates the elimination of the
able: the norm is for smart young officers to find themselves reporting
not to superiors like themselves (the ablest left early in frustration
at the stupidity of the system), but to superiors who a) were not
frustrated by the system and b) feel threatened by clever subordinates
… And that’s how we get the leadership of our defense services.

They ask for input from other readers to see if this is in fact an accurate representation of the military system today.  My guess is that they’ll find this a somewhat simplistic portrayal of the system that is, unfortunately, closer to true than not.  Of course this problem isn’t unique to the military, as anyone who grew up in the DC area could tell you.  There’s a reason a lot of us who were the children of civil servants decided not to follow our parents into the government.  We heard way too many stories about "idiots and a-holes" who’s rise through the ranks seemed to the defy the gravity of their incompetence.  Sure the job security and benefits are great, but how many people want to work for or with a brown-nosing, sniveling incompetent?

Okay I’m a little cynical about the federal government, but I think there’s plenty of reason to be cynical and I’m willing to bet the Freakonomics boys will find as much cynicism regarding the military.   

Member Blogs Create New Issues for Non-Profit Managers

1 Reply

Cara Michele Forrest is a member of the Homeless Prevention Coalition of Guilford County and also happens to be a blogger whose blog, Chosen Fast,
deals mostly with her advocacy for the homeless.  A link to her blog
was included in her profile on the HPCGC’s member page, but now that
someone has complained to the president of the coalition about her blog
they’ve decided to remove the link.  Cara Michele shares the email
exchange between herself and the Coalition’s president Karen Bridges here, but I’m pasting most of it below for convenience:

—– Original Message —–

From: Cara Michele
To: Karen Bridges
Cc: Mike Weaver ; Travis Compton ; Nancy McLean ; Craig Thomas ; Elizabeth Hedgecock ; Shanna Reece
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 4:57 PM
Subject: Re:

Karen,

The only place that my blog is linked on the HPCGC web site is on
the member list. My blog is my web site for the homeless advocacy that
I’m involved in. Other members have their web sites listed, as well. Is
my web site the only one that is a problem? What was the nature of the
complaint? If you want my web site removed from the member list, then
you can remove it and provide an explanation for why you’ve chosen to
do so.

Please be advised the all correspondence will be blogged.

Michele Forrest
ChosenFast.com

—– Original Message —–

From: Karen Bridges
To: Cara Michele
Cc: Mike Weaver ; Travis Compton ; Nancy McLean ; Craig Thomas ; Elizabeth Hedgecock ; Shanna Reece
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:27 PM
Subject: Re:

You are the only individual member who has a personal link on the
HPCGC website, all others are service providers. And yes, your website
is the only one that is causing problems. The HPCGC website is not the
place to share your personal opinions and thoughts, particularly ones
that are contrary to the success of the Coalition. No one’s trying to
stop your advocacy, Michele, but you need to use the proper channels.

kb

—– Original Message —–
From: Cara Michele
To: Karen Bridges
Cc: Mike Weaver ; Travis Compton ; Nancy McLean ; Craig Thomas ; Elizabeth Hedgecock ; Shanna Reece
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 5:56 PM
Subject: Re:

Karen,

I may be the only individual member who has a web site.  There shouldn’t be a penalty for that.

I am an advocate for the homeless in Greensboro. If telling their
stories and telling the truth about homelessness is “contrary to the
success of the Coalition,” then you have a much bigger problem than my
blog.

Has it occurred to any of you that I’m not the enemy? If you’ve
actually read my blog, then you know that I haven’t written about the
most damaging things that I know. I’m not your enemy. Perhaps you
should stop acting as though I am. I thought that the goal here was to
serve homeless people. Why don’t we stop the pointless posturing and
backside-covering and shananigans? I’m weary of it.

Michele

This case points up an interesting new conundrum for non-profits:
what to do when a member or volunteer has a blog, links to it and then
other constituents find it offensive?  There will always be
disagreement between the various constituencies within a non-profit’s
community but until recently there wasn’t really a platform that
individuals could use to easily get their viewpoint out there in the
public domain for all to see.  Now you have blogs (and wikis and
Facebook profiles, etc.) that individual members can include as part of
their contact info.  What kind of policy, if any, should a non-profit
have to deal with this?

Ed Cone, another Greensboro blogger, posted about Cara Michele’s dust-up
and in his post and in the comments to his post there are some
interesting points made about the appropriateness of Cara’s blog in
this case in particular, but those same points also highlight the
considerations that should be made when thinking about whether or not a
member should be allowed to link to her individual blog.  From Ed’s
post:

Bridges is correct that the Coalition site is not the place for
Michele’s personal opinions and thoughts, and if Michele was using the
Coalition site thusly the HPCGC would have a legitimate complaint.

But such is not the case — Michele merely links to her own site as
part of her personal identification, much as member organizations
include links to their sites.

Ed’s absolutely right.  While the coalition owns its own site and
should police it, if one of their members chooses to link to her blog
as her form of identification then they should honor that.  In his
comments, Ed continues:

It seems to me that there are two issues in play here.

One involves politics within the community dedicated to helping the homeless and fighting homelessness.

The second involves reasonable standards and expectations for links and other details of online publishing.

The second issue is one where common ground might more easily be
found, and one that applies in a far broader context than the HPCGC and
its members.

The politics drove the second subject into public view, but perhaps
the issue of linking can be resolved independently of the political
particulars — and any such resolution can provide a context for
addressing some of the politics as well.

Again, Ed’s correct.  Invariably non-profit’s will have members,
board members, volunteers who don’t see eye to eye and in some cases
literally dislike each other.  The key for those running the non-profit
is to create a level playing field and to treat all constituents fairly
and equitably.  Along those lines the proper approach for the Coalition
would have been to inform the complaining parties that Cara was allowed
to link to her blog because that is part of her contact information and
they are welcome to do the same.

This case is fairly straightforward in that Cara Michele’s blog is
applicable to her role on the Coalition.  It may not have been as
straightforward if her blog had been about her pets, her travel plans,
etc.  Still, as a policy it would probably be best to just say that
blogs are the same as a person’s email address or a company’s website:
it’s a point of contact and if that person wants her blog to be her
point of contact, no matter how inane that blog may be, then that’s her
choice.

Cross posted at Lowder Enterprises, LLC