Superintendent found in Washington

HOT SPRINGS - Thursday evening, the Hot Springs School Board conducted interviews for the position of superintendent.

The event was conducted over the course of the afternoon and well into the night. From 3:00pm to 4:00 pm in the library, there was a light, open meet-and-greet with the public and the four applicants. Discussions were held about athletic departments, where the applicants come from, their prior experience and the budget in relation to other school programs.

Thom Peck, one of the applicants and the superintendent in the Charlo School District, explained his reasoning for applying to Hot Springs. “I think small communities are really really important and provide the best opportunities  for kids, so I want to stay in a small community.” He then described how he is very familiar with the community and would love to become part of the Hot Springs town. Peck went on to say that, with Hot Springs’ School’s recent emphasis on every student graduating and finding a career, “I’ve always told kids is, the one thing that no one can ever take from you is the one thing you will never lose, your education.” Peck said that educating children makes for a strong, healthy community.

As the applicants and public continued to mingle, the applicants continued to provide their backgrounds. “It’s been a progression. I’ve been in education for 26 years. I’ve been a teacher, high school principal, elementary principal, and just the opportunity presented itself and I wanted to see how well I do,” said Kelly Moore, the recent Dixon Elementary School principal. Another applicant, Michael Perry, explained how he is a superintendent for two small schools in Washington State near Davenport. He explained how he wants to move back to Montana, where he is from originally, and to be back with family again.

At 4:00pm, the event turned to more official business. In a forum open to the public, five school board members held an interview for each of the four applicants. Administrative personal sat amongst the board, but remained silent during the interviews.

Questions were asked that ranged from how each applicants prioritizes programs based on budget and how involved he or she would be in budget decisions, to each applicants’ feelings on technology and or change.

Kelly Moore was first. He felt that it would be his position to oversee the budget and to maintain constant communication with board members. He felt the most important role of the superintendent is to focus on the students’ needs. By doing that, he could create a system and augment it so that it would be tailored to each class’s needs.

When Moore was asked about technology and change, he said that the school must progress with technology and utilize it. He said that cell phones, which have been the bane of many teachers existence, could be used in classes, with oversight.

Peck was the next applicant to be interviewed by the board. His key points included communication, which he emphasized was the main role of a superintendent; to be visible as much as possible.

When asked about how he would handle the day-to-day tasks of a superintendent, he stressed visibility. He said that paperwork and emails were not his strong suit, but loves to be out there with the students. He remarked how every morning he loves to start by visiting the kindergarten classes and work his way up to all the high school seniors. Peck then said the afternoons and weekends are reserved for paperwork.

Peck’s view on technology was that technology is something that must be learned, but it is useless unless the key fundamentals of an education are still taught.

Hiring people and work ethic were Peck’s strengths, as he put it, and paperwork and procrastination were what he said were some of his weaknesses.

A candidate who came from a slightly different background, one that was more business oriented, was Erica Allen. She felt that the school could use a strong PR program to increase community awareness of the school’s happenings, but also to bring in more volunteers and opportunities for the students.

Another strong suit of Allen’s, on which she dwelled most heavily, was problem, crisis and emergency assessment. She described that in order to prioritize, categorizing each event into an order can create a time frame in which things should be handled and how.

She felt that she was goal driven, a learner and collaborator, but often tried to take on too much instead of delegating work. And as a partner with the board, she described the role of a superintendent as someone who monitors the budget from day to day and informs the board of the expenses.  

The last applicant to be interviewed, after hours of intense questioning of the other three candidates, was Michael Perry.

Perry had very strong opinions about many of the questions asked of him during his interview. One response that obviously pleased the crowd and the board members was his view of what the role of the superintendent’s job, and what would be his goals. He felt that, “policy is guidance,” but there must be, “dedication to education over policy.” Perry described that above all else the fostering of a child’s intelligence and learning should precede policy, if that policy hinders the student’s growth. He also felt he must be a intermediary between the school and the board to create a unified whole.

Another strong point of Perry’s interview was that he believed in the training of teachers in up-to-date technology. He said, “It is time to get caught up.” Perry described that though technology is great, it is useless unless the teachers were confident in it.

Another key point of Perry’s interview was his strong emphasis on analyzing what students want to do when they graduate, and then augmenting or changing the curriculum to still meet state requirements, but foster growth in a student’s interests. Perry said that a top down approach would be vital in accomplishing this, and he would be committed to the administration, who in turn helps the faculty guide students into paths of career building achievement.

Once the interviews were completed, the public had to leave the library as the administration and board deliberated over who to pick as the next superintendent.

The public was asked back into the library when the board had discussed the candidates. Last thoughts and words were heard from the public and teachers, who stayed to hear the interviews. By this time the board had almost made their decision, but had still not come to a definite choice. Two Student Government Association (SGA) members, who, along with other SGA members, interviewed the applicants earlier in the day, gave their opinion as to who they believed should be the next superintendent. Their pick was Moore. The two SGA members voiced that they felt he was the most easy to communicate with and that they believed he would be the most involved with the students.

Overall, the consensus was for Perry, and the board declared he was their pick. And after some discussion, a vote was held between the five board members and Perry was the pick. The school administration was only able to voice their opinion to the board as well.

Terms of his contract were discussed publicly and a decision to offer Perry a two year contract and a salary of $70,000 a year was agreed upon. He accepted.