Governance changes proposed for Charlotte-Mecklenburg school district

“Our findings paint a picture of a district that is rapidly losing confidence in its board of education and central administration, is beset by a variety of divisive growth issues, and has outgrown its current management structure,” concludes a report by the American Institutes for Research.

The report was sponsored by the Citizens Task Force on CMS, convened though the Foundation for the Carolinas.

The report acknowledges that Charlotte-Mecklenburg is a successful model of a large metropolitan school district and notes that its students “have consistently outperformed their urban counterparts . . . in national comparisons of student achievement.”

But the 118,000-student district is looking at significant challenges: High school performance is mixed or flat; enrollment is expected to grow by 50,000 students over the next 10 years; and greater concentrations of poverty are predicted. Last November, voters rejected a $427 million school construction bond.

“A great public school system cannot remain a great public school system without the support of its community,” says Interim Superintendent Fran­ces Haithcock. “This task force recommendation is a very positive statement about a community wanting to support its public schools.”

According to the report, the district should be divided into three semi-autonomous geographic areas of approximately 40,000 students. Each would be led by an area superintendent, supported by an area office, and reporting to a strong districtwide CEO-style schools chief with expanded authority spelled out under a performance contract.

The report calls for the school board to adopt a formal policy limiting its actions to that of a policy board.

Currently, the board has nine members, six elected by regions. The task force proposes that that the board be reduced to seven members, six of them elected by region and one appointed by county commissioners.

It also says board members should serve rotating four-year terms designed to ensure that no more than three members are replaced at the same time.

Among other recommendations:

• High-performing schools in each area should be given “charter-like” autonomy. Schools that are low performing for three consecutive years should be redesigned as new schools.

• “Choice schools” that offer a distinctive program and enroll a socioeconomically diverse student body should be established under a fourth area superintendent.

• Large comprehensive high schools should be restructured to create small, highly focused, personalized high schools.

• Non-instructional services such as transportation, food service, and printing should be outsourced, so the district would have a stronger focus on instruction.

“In our view, the disconnect between the system and the community will not be repaired simply by a better communications plan or a set of discrete policy changes,” the task force says. “Re-engagement can only be accomplished by structural changes that enable leaders and followers, professionals and clients to form better relationships and engage in problem solving around a common vision and shared accountability for decisions.”