In a recent Sun column I suggested the D99 school board should pay serious attention to the public outpouring on behalf of Andy Klamm, the North High science teacher and tennis coach who school administrators are recommending be denied tenure.
The D99 board will vote on the matter at its March 15 meeting at 7 p.m. at South High School. An e-mail circulated by parents indicates the agenda item described as “a resolution authorizing notice of dismissal to non-tenured final year probationary teachers” refers specifically to Klamm and will require a roll call vote of the board.
This is appropriate, given the substantial support for Klamm from students, parents and teachers. After all, the board in this case — as with all district personnel matters — is the court of last resort.
In the vast majority of cases, school boards routinely take the administration’s recommendation on which teachers to cut loose and which to award with tenure. But Klamm’s case is different: The stakeholders are demanding to be heard on the sort of teacher they want in their school.
Any parent will recognize that it’s exceedingly rare for dozens of Downers Grove residents to agree so completely on a teacher’s effectiveness. In fact, I can’t recall ever hearing this sort of consensus on any tenured teacher over the last dozen years my kids have attended Downers Grove schools.
“This isn’t controversial at all,” Claire Marich, a DGN mom told me. “There aren’t 50 people on one side and 50 on the other. It is with one voice that the community is speaking here.”
The question is whether the community will be heard.
I’ve observed our local boards for years and there are dramatic differences in how they respond to the voice of the people.
Both the village council and park board routinely hear from the public and, on occasion, respond affirmatively to the input they receive.
Even when they chose not to — as in the village council’s recent decision to suspend Heritage Fest or the park board’s decision to approve cell phone towers in parks — our elected officials feel compelled to explain their decision, often at considerable length.
Our local school boards operate differently. In the first case, there are generally few residents who attend meetings and even fewer who address the board. In no case that I’m aware of has public fervor significantly impacted a decision by one of our school boards.
In large part that’s because most school board members embrace the role prescribed by the Illinois Association of School Boards, an interest group. They hire the superintendent. They set policy. They don’t micromanage.
Unfortunately, they also don’t initiate. And they generally are loathe to reject the recommendations of the administration.
In a town like ours, with competent, dedicated and level-headed top administrators, that generally isn’t a problem. Unless or until a situation like the Andy Klamm case sparks the interest and concern of so many.
Like it or not, the Klamm situation is raising serious questions, and the repercussions are likely to extend beyond this particular incident. Many parents are wondering whether the schools they support in myriad ways are open to their input. Teachers are questioning whether they want to spend their careers in a climate of compliance. And the DGEA is asking the administration to clarify its definition of an “excellent teacher.”
Then there is the administration, which seldom experiences such scrutiny over its decisions.
Come Monday night, the D99 board also will on display as members decide Klamm’s fate. Residents will want to see whether the public outcry has impacted members’ deliberations — whether in this case they see themselves as servants of the administration or as the public servants they were elected to be.
I love your article. We as students and our parents appreciate such supportive and compassionate reporting on behalf of Mr. Klamm. I and hundreds of other souls are praying that the Board of Education makes the right decision and votes to award him the tenure he so deserves.