Editor’s Note: This group of stories on public education in Tulsa feature curated material from CityNewsTulsa.com and City Sentinel Tulsa, the conservative print publication of the city.

Analysis: In this meeting, Interim Superintendent Dr. Ebony Johnson assumed her new role. She got off to a great start. I observed seven positive changes at the Tulsa Public School Board meeting on Monday, September 18, 2023. 

The first change appeared on the consent agenda. Perusing the online agenda before the meeting I discovered a link to the full encumbrance report and read a clear explanation of “encumbrances”. I clicked on it and to my surprise and delight, up popped the encumbrance report. Someone made a decision FOR transparency, good choice!

Later, during a staff report given by Chief Financial and Operations Officer Robles, the public learned that he will be adding information to the encumbrance report. A huge win better governance and further transparency with clarity.

Second, the board members held healthy discussions especially during the two Action Agenda items and the Goal Monitoring Report. 

I label the discussions healthy because, for the greater part of the time, board members expressed clear differences of opinion without disparaging contrary opinions. I believe such discussions lead to better solutions while building the relationships essential for continued board effectiveness. 

In addition to representing their specific constituents, each board member has something unique and valuable to add to the board’s decision making. It might be good for each board member to try to focus on the valuable thing(s) the others are adding, rather than focusing on the things they do not like about the other board members.

Third, I noticed a positive change in the behavior of two specific board members. I applaud Board Member Susan Lamkin (my representative) for asking an important question about changes in the number of openings at the PreK level. I applaud Board Member Diamond Marshall for listening to discussions with dignified politeness and for adding information regarding the impact of dyslexia on learning. 

This is all good news dear readers. Questions that bring out more useful information, respectful listening and pertinent additional information move the board in the direction of increased effectiveness. 

Fourth, Board President Stacey Woolley apologized and corrected a procedural error (voting before all the board questions were satisfactorily answered) by calling for the vote again. I have never seen this happen before and acknowledge swift, and I believe, accurate thinking on Board President Woolley’s part. Kudos!

Fifth, the level of information provided in reports and answers to questions appeared higher and more directed to the goals established by the State School Board on August 24, 2023 (finances, literacy, getting schools off the F list). 

Sixth, there were several ideas for positive community participation in an effort to improve TPS, including:

1.  Convincing parents that chronic absenteeism is a real problem that they could impact.

2.  Inviting parents to engage through their school’s PTA.

3.  Supporting the Men of Monroe.

4.  Inviting all of us to volunteer for Reading Partner’s.

5.  Inviting the City of Tulsa to help with providing Wi-Fi in underserved areas.

Seventh, Dr. Marshall asked (as she has before) for a portfolio on vendors to better be able to evaluate vendor quality before voting on accepting them. To her credit I saw Dr. Johnson writing herself a note as she listened to the request. That’s a very good sign.

I don’t want to leave you with the impression that everything was perfect and that there are no more changes that the board needs to make for optimum effectiveness. It is a process after all. A few examples follow.

During the Goal Monitoring Report there was one serious “derailment” when Board President Woolley berated Board Member Ashley about her factual accuracy regarding the percent of students on IEPs. I missed what triggered that outburst and note that later President Woolley acknowledged that she got off track. Board members might benefit from taking a few deep breaths when they feel their emotions taking control.

The initial discussion during that same report got off to a rocky start as tempers quickly flared over (1) calling the goal a part of a strategic plan and (2) questioning what that goal had to do with reading.  It got back on track with the help of Dr. Johnson (see details below).

Readers are encouraged to watch the meeting online to see if your opinions of the progress match or differ from mine.

Meeting Summary: The meeting opened with a skillful flag ceremony proudly presented by the Central High School Junior ROTC. All board members were present and Dr. Laverne Ford Wimberly (a former TPS Interim Superintendent) was in the audience cheering Dr. Ebony Johnson on. 

The Board moved swiftly to the Consent Agenda since there were no corrections to the agenda, special presentations, or minutes to be approved. Dr. Johnson followed the new standards of reporting on the questions submitted by board members before the meeting and responded to current board member questions with the help of the TPS staff present for that purpose. Hooray!

Board members asked several pertinent questions during the meeting, one of which required staff research. Board President Stacey Woolley called for the vote on the Consent Agenda before that question was answered. The Consent Agenda passed unanimously. Afterwards the staff member answered the pending question. I was pleasantly surprised to hear Board President Woolley apologize and call for a re-vote considering the new information before the board. Good job Board President Woolley!

On to Public Comment before the Action Agenda, board discussion and votes. Yes, I know we haven’t seen this often because we rarely have items on the Action Agenda! I have always applauded this order of business – public comments before board discussion and voting. I just haven’t gotten to see it enough. 

There were two Action Agenda items: retention of special counsel and continuation of “current application and registration software from SchoolMint Inc.” through June 30, 2024.

The public commentor asked why the board was considering retaining “special” legal counsel. Of course, he knew he would not get a reply as he spoke, so he urged the board members to ask the question before they vote. He had asked a couple of board members before the meeting and neither had any idea why this was being considered.

Is it typical to place action items on the agenda without any prior board involvement or do some (not all) board members have prior involvement? In any event, the thorough discussion revealed that the special counsel was to help ensure the retention of local control over TPS operations. A careful reading of the written “Rationale” provided with the agenda item also revealed that information. Rationales are, I believe, written in what I call “legalese”. I suspect that is necessary for legal clarity.

The board discussion revealed knowledge that the danger of an OSBE (Oklahoma State Board of Education) “takeover” remains, if progress on the three OSBE goals are not made. Takeover, as used here, means replacing elected board members with citizens appointed by the OSBE to make management decisions. Schools would continue to operate as usual should this ever happen.

The discussion also tried to reassure members and the public that OSBE requirements are not shifting and that TPS is dedicated to retaining local control. The vote was five “Yes” to two “Abstain”. The abstentions were from Dr. Jerry Griffin and E’Lena Ashley.

The second item passed by acclamation after an informative discussion letting everyone know that the planned new application and registration software is not currently successfully “talking” with TPS’s student information system called PowerSchool. There will be no extra cost to TPS while this problem is resolved.  I am so happy to see finances repeatedly highlighted in this board meeting.

The next item on the agenda was a Goal Monitoring Report. The report covered interim Goal 3.2 which tracks the percentage of 10th-12th graders who meet the assessment requirements for enrolling concurrently in college and career tech courses from postsecondary institutions. Students who score at least 510 on reading or math on the PSAT or SAT are generally considered to be academically ready for the rigor of college level classes. Naturally the goal is to increase the percentage.

This was a lengthy presentation with a board discussion at every step of the way. It began with Dr. Jerry Griffin reminding everyone that TPS really does not have a “strategic plan”, rather it has a set of goals. This clearly frustrated Dr. Marshall and Vice President Croisant. It resulted in Dr. Marshall pointing out that the goals are a contract with the public who worked together with an earlier board to set them up.

My observation, having heard this discussion before, is that it is a matter of terminology: goals versus strategic plan. Dr. Johnson, using an academic or instructional tone of voice and vocabulary, pointed out that we have a celebration here since the goal is on track. She added that the goal being discussed is about top tier students and that TPS is working to see to their academic needs as well as to the needs of struggling students.

In my opinion, she was not grandstanding or commanding, rather she was persuading. With that the Board moved on to discussing the results and how TPS could do better.

During the discussion we learned a great deal about the support provided to the students through Khan Academy. In my view, Khan Academy is an excellent resource for anyone wanting to “learn things”. We made note that the college bound assessment tests have their flaws (as do all tests I might add). We heard the good news that various schools are gently and successfully nudging students to enroll in higher level classes by creating education plans that include such classes. You cannot succeed if you do not try!

The evening’s staff report was a Budget Summary Report during which we learned of the plan to provide regular updates with readily available financial information to the board and the public who attend board meetings in person or online. We also realized that there is more money available than planned due to continued vacancies in staffing. Tulsa needs more teachers.

There were four citizen comments.

1.  A teacher pointed out the difficulties caused by large class sizes. Her 3rd grade class has 29 students.

2.  I talked about the importance of students’ self-beliefs.  If you believe you can, you are most likely to succeed.

3.  A foreign language teacher opined that foreign languages (including Chinese) and the arts are as important as STEM classes.

4.  A parent told us about the successes of her child through the efforts of social emotional learning (SEL).

The board meeting concluded just before 10 pm with a brief Interim Superintendent’s Report. She provided us with a bit of her background that led her to her current job. She plans to share her 100-day plan in which she focuses on academic outcomes and parental and community involvement.  She noted that there is work to be done to educate and graduate 34,000 children. I say AMEN to that!

Our “prayer before the meeting group” was small but mighty.  We invited everyone present to join us. The prayer was not about politics, but about God blessing and guiding the work of the School Board.  We prayed for the board as a whole and drew names to pray for the specific board members and the Interim Superintendent.

Readers, steady progress is being made. I look forward to watching the OSBE meeting on September 28th at 9:30 am on their Oklahoma State Department of Education Facebook page. It will be the first time TPS reports to the State Board per the accreditation agreements.  Further reports to come.

Contributing Editor, David Arnett

,Positive Changes at TPS Board Meeting
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.

Editor’s Note: This and several stories on public education in Tulsa curate material from CityNewsTulsa.com and City Sentinel Tulsa, the conservative print publication of the city.

News/Analysis: As I write, the monthly meeting of the State Board of Education remains in session. They are in the Public Comment portion of the agenda. The decision all TPS was waiting for has been made.

The board unanimously honored the accreditation status that was recommended by the accreditation committee with a few key additions (I paraphrase from my notes since this is not yet published by the state board).

• First, provide professional development in the science of reading.
• Second, report monthly progress in person to the State Board.
• Third, present a corrective action plan to get schools off F status.
• Fourth, develop, publish, and execute financial internal controls.

The board added that other school systems are ready to share successful programs with TPS and that TPS will not be allowed to fail.

The accreditation decision was proceeded by General Counsel Brian Cleveland briefly outlining the board’s concerns about Tulsa Public Schools. They included financial controls, unimproved reading scores over a number of years, and not readily providing requested information to board members.

Superintendent Walters added his concern over financial issues being blamed on just one person, over blaming poverty for lack of academic improvement, and over lack of transparency with board members.

Next, the four TPS Board members, (in ABC order: E’lena Ashley, Susan Lamkin, Dr. Jennettie Marshall, and Stacey Woolley) who attended this State Board Meeting were given an open opportunity to speak if they wished.

Dr. Marshall said, “last night we took our step forward to future”. She expressed her support for incoming interim superintendent Dr. Ebony Johnson and asked for state board grace as TPS works to turn things around.

Ms. Ashley expressed her support of Dr. Johnson, desire for local control, concerns about financial controls, and interest in hearing more conservative voices.

Ms. Woolley agreed that TPS must accelerate change, requested a moratorium on state board attacks on TPS, and asked that the truth about the percent of failing Tulsa schools be told.

Finally, a robust discussion between the state and Tulsa board members ensued. That discussion included reading deficiencies, Tulsa’s strategic plan, Tulsa’s challenges making academic progress, examples of Tulsa’s successes, and a suggestion to create more aspirational goals. When asked, Ms. Woolley stated that Tulsa records show that 37% not 65% are failing schools.

Now for a few of my opinions.

On the plus side, I was pleased that the State School Board:

• accredited TPS with deficiencies.
• laid out a rigorous set of demands to motivate hard work toward improving academic results, transparency, and financial controls.
• had a public discussion with the TPS board members who were present before voting on the accreditation.
• provided those TPS board members with the opportunity to present a comment prior to the public discussion.
• made all their comments and asked all their questions in a, at times quite firm, but always calm and polite tone of voice.

On the negative side, I was concerned that the State School Board

• did not find a larger meeting room to allow more constituents to attend the board meeting.
• did not provide an area with a TV and live feed so that people who drove to OKC to participate could see and hear what was happening at the board meeting.
• did not hear the time limited public comments that pertained to the accreditation standards division before acting on those decisions.

State Board members appeared to be of one mind: that TPS can and must do better and might benefit from consulting other schools in Oklahoma for additional ideas about how to maximize learning to read with students experiencing poverty and/or having English as a second language.

More than a few will be watching. Time for the Tulsa Public School District to deliver.

Contributing Editor, David Arnett

,TPS Accredited with Deficiencies
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.

Editor’s Note: This and several following stories on public education in Tulsa curate material from CityNewsTulsa.com and City Sentinel Tulsa, the conservative print publication of the city.

State Board of Ed to Vote on TPS Accreditation: Numbers Don’t Lie and They Don’t Look Good For Gist

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters and the State Board of Education are no longer ignoring the underperformance and mismanagement of Tulsa Public Schools (TPS). Unlike the previous administrations, it appears that standards under the law will be more equitably enforced over all school districts. Emotional arguments and political affiliations are out, data is in, and children appear to be this administration’s first priority.

The numbers presented by the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) are difficult for TPS to defend:

TPS’s accreditation currently stands at “accredited with a warning” and the State Board of Education is slated to vote on lowering that level again on August 24th. Another demotion would put the district on probation, the last level before a district becomes unaccredited, but State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters has indicated that other options, including a state takeover of the district, are being considered.

The OSDE laid out a list of required reforms within the district’s improvement plan that focus on the following:

• re-orient finances to serve students,
• increase reading proficiency scores to the state average, and
• get TPS schools off the F-List

Despite expected pushback from TPS’s administration, the three goals outlined by the OSDE reflect a low bar for a district that spends significantly more per pupil than the state average without counting the massive amount of funds flowing into TPS schools through its non-profit partnerships. There is so much outside grant and philanthropic money entering TPS sites through outside providers and non-profits that an intermediary organization called The Opportunity Project was formed to organize services. TPS is flowing with funding and a number of community partners that other Oklahoma districts can only dream of.

TPS is a Well-Funded, Academic Failure: How Bad Is It Really?

Academic achievement was an index added within the Joy Hofmeister years at the OSDE and was supposed to be a new way to show the more subtle improvements in learning within a district or school as students were better prepared for the next grade or step within their education. Despite this new opportunity to shine for educators, the latest numbers (2020-2021) for TPS are looking dismal.

Tulsa Public Schools district academic achievement data (2020-2021 year). Walters reports TPS as currently having 24 failing schools (overall F on school report card) based on the most recent data (2021-2022). This publication found 25 F schools for TPS within OSDE’s online school report cards. 

In addition, TPS has 45 Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) school sites, a designation of ranked underperformance which provides the lowest performing school sites across Oklahoma with significant federal funds for improvement that are not available to higher performing sites. This structure could provide a disincentive for struggling schools. Think of it as the NFL or NBA draft. If you’re going to have a bad season, shoot for the bottom so you get a first-round pick, or in this case, a bag of federal money.

1. The Oklahoma Every Student Succeed Act (ESSA) plan provides for Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) schools to receive support from the Oklahoma State Department of Education. CSI schools work on a Continuous Improvement Cycle, receive federal funds to implement Continuous Improvement Plans, and are assigned a School Support Specialist. Please see our Main Page for additional resources for continuous improvement.

From the OSDE site on CSI schools and budgets for improvement: 

Most shocking within the currently performance data is that ten TPS sites have an academic achievement score of 0%. No one is prepared to move to the next educational level. Thousands of children are strapped to a school where it is statistically guaranteed they will not be academically successful despite intelligence, potential or capability.

TPS is proof that more money without administrative and instructional change will never fix public education.

OSDE Recommends Change of Leadership for TPS

In response to the state agency’s improvement plan, Deborah Gist called the process “completely un-transparent” at a press conference in July, further labeling it “a process that is being politicized for a very specific personal agenda.” TPS recently brought out the children in a “student led” forum to showcase benefits of the softer side of district services over Gist’s eight-year reign, but the numbers reflecting learning failures, embezzled funds and exorbitant administration costs (salaries) at the expense of classrooms are now impossible to ignore.

The OSDE has recommended a change in leadership for the district and the TPS school board is being forced to consider whether it is in the best interest of TPS families and children for Gist to continue as superintendent. Gist is inarguably progressive, which is all the vast non-profitocracy and political apparatus in Tulsa needs to know to support her, but what do parents of Tulsa students really know about the woman in charge of their children’s education?

State’s Highest Paid Supt Brought Experience from Progressive Educational Systems: DC and Rhode Island

Tulsa PS superintendent Deborah Gist was a policy analyst for the U.S. Department of Education, the first Superintendent of Education in Washington, D.C., and former Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education in Rhode Island. Her experience comes from the federal government and two highly progressive public education systems. Despite measurable, academic performance failures, Gist is the highest paid superintendent in Oklahoma. In an example of reverse-merit-based pay, she collects an annual salary of $286,699 (includes stipends for car and expenses).

Where Gist Goes, Grad Rates Go Up Yet Proficiency Does Not Follow

It’s not just Tulsa. Where Gist and her ideology go, a predictable pattern repeats itself. Four-year high school graduation rates go up but there is little proof of greater learning to support the increase.

An article from WPRI in Rhode Island, around the time of Gist’s departure after six years as Commissioner of Education, questioned the Rhode Island Department of Education’s claim of the highest HS graduation rate ever in their history (2016 data). The article makes several points that cast doubt on whether the new graduation rate could be trusted, noting:

• Students of color, kids from low-income families and high schoolers with limited language proficiency still lagged behind their peers.
• A lot of students were dropping out.
• The student pool (number of incoming 9th graders) had shrunk.
• Schools can lower their standards just to make sure more students earn their diploma.

The article brought proof that many Rhode Island HS grads were not academically prepared as they collected their diplomas:

“This isn’t easy to prove, but we know public officials have raised concerns about social promotion and we know there is real pressure on schools to improve completion rates. One way to analyze the value of a high school diploma is to track how students fare in college. For Rhode Island, those results are mixed. The new U.S. News & World Report ranking of the 50 states places Rhode Island at No. 49 when it comes to two-year college graduation rates, which means it’s taking longer than it should for students to earn their associate degree. While Governor Raimondo’s office would say the cost of school is the primary reason students don’t complete college, it’s also worth noting that hundreds of community college students have to register for remedial courses each year.”

TPS has received ample media coverage of its increased graduation rate during Gist’s tenure, particularly by The Tulsa World. With 25 failing schools and cratering academic achievement scores, can parents trust that their TPS graduates will find success or even self-sufficiency after crossing that stage?

Gist’s Insubordination Concerning the Law and the State School Board are Nothing New

During 2022, Substack publication The V1SUT Vantage covered the fallout after TPS chose to ignore the requirements of the new law (HB 1775) which prohibited the teaching of the tenants of critical race theory within Oklahoma’s public schools:

In June, the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE), which is (was) still under Superintendent Hofmeister’s direction, found that Tulsa Public Schools had violated HB 1775 by offering a training for educators by the National Equity Project titled “Changing the Discourse”. Despite OSDE General Council Brad Clark’s conclusion that the event violated the law based on his review of documents from the training, Hofmeister was one of only two votes against taking action against Tulsa PS on the matter during a 4-2 vote of the board.

State Superintendent Hofmeister and Tulsa Superintendent Deborah Gist at 2021 luncheon.

Hofmeister called the prospect of taking punitive action against Tulsa PS for continuing to train staff in defiance of the law “an escalation that feels rather emotional”, forgetting how emotional it is for parents when schools take ideological liberties with their children.

Predictably, the OEA (teacher’s union) was up in arms about both Tulsa PS and Mustang PS being held to account with a disciplinary action of “accreditation with warning” for stepping outside the law. Unlike Tulsa PS, whose violation of HB 1775 was systemic in the form of an educator training revealed by a whistleblower, Mustang PS self-reported the actions of a single teacher as being in violation, showing that at least Mustang understands and intends to follow the law.

Gist’s Big Conflict of Interest Continues to Cast a Shadow Over TPS

Concerns over a major conflict of interest, Gist and her husband’s involvement in the management of bonds for TPS have continued to follow the district with no public resolution.

Also previously reported by The V1SUT Vantage:

Education decisions in Tulsa do not appear to be made based on robust, open discussions and the best interests of Tulsa’s children. Gist’s professional step down from more prestigious positions in D.C. and Rhode Island was explained as a homecoming, but perhaps her conflict of interest related to George Kaiser’s BOK should be more fully examined.

Ronnie Jobe (BOK Financial) and Deborah Gist (Tulsa PS Superintendent) As of 2019, Gist is married to BOK Financial Senior Vice President Ronnie Jobe. To no avail, constituents have questioned BOKF’s longstanding involvement with TPS bond management in light of Gist’s marriage (credit OCPA).

Some contracts for the district’s bond management work were reportedly found to have skipped the required competitive bidding process, going directly to Jobe’s employer (BOK Financial). And now Gist claims the $1 million found by the OSDE to have been embezzled from the district is an inaccurate and inflated number, but how would she know?

With an upcoming vote concerning the fate of TPS’s accreditation looming and the announcement of Superintendent Gist’s resignation,leadership is under intense scrutiny. In her announcement, Gist talked about maintaining local control and the excellence ofher team. Both of those points are highly contested by the facts detailed in this story.

The hysterical presentations by Gist supporters, mostly involved parents, teachers, and teacher union membersdemanding local control and local leadership are inane. The numbers don’t lie.

There will be much more to report in the coming weeks.

Editor David Arnett contributed to this report.

,Gist’s Pattern of TPS’s Failure
Click on this headline to read the full report at Tulsa Today.