Are you frigging kidding me! Miller attending a variety of school functions..REALLY!! You never see her and if she does show up she stays 10 mins and slips out . What a joke.Not to mention a lie.
Lets keep going :
Her ability to lead is disgraceful at best , and bullying is not considered high standards at any level.
But the biggest news I have for you, and teachers you can use this to help yourselves.
At work today I spoke with a man who worked in Templeton in the school system while Miller was Superintendent. He stated and I will give you the short version.
1- Miller is a compulsive Liar. She will be nice to your face but don't turn your back.
2-Whenever something went wrong she would find a victim to throw under the bus to protect herself.
3- Unable to direct and guide.
4-Put the school in deep financial debt, they are just now two years later starting to come out of it .
5-Falsifying reports and lying about teachers to justify her firing them .( This would happen if you spoke up against her or her boyfriend) REMEMBER THIS NAME JOHN GRAZIANO
SMILE
He just resigned from his position at Templeton Elementary School. Was also told that if you cross him in anyway , Miller will get rid of you .
6-Threatening and bulling teachers and personnel.
You are living Templeton's fears and horrors PVRS and the only way to fight her is with the truth and you must stand up and speak it . Bacon as much as I don't like you , be warned you will be a target for her . Just like the Principal at Templeton was.
To much destruction she has left in every school she has been in .From NH to Mass.
SC do your job and open a search for a new superintendent before the state steps in and takes this school over .It almost happen in Templeton don't let it go so far that it happens here.
PVRS teachers time to visit Templeton and learn the truth.
Miller this blog will never go away until you do and you can bank on it!
LEYDEN — The Pioneer Valley Regional School District School Committee
shared its evaluation of Superintendent Ruth Miller during a meeting
Thursday, and the results are not as favorable for Miller as in 2016.
Though
she received a “proficient” rating following her first year as
superintendent, this year the majority of the School Committee found
Miller “needs improvement.”
Miller was evaluated using four
standards: instructional leadership, management and operations, family
and community engagement, and professional culture. School Committee
Chairwoman Patricia Shearer and member Robin L’Etoile compiled members’
comments, and based on their responses, chose a rating on a scale from
“unsatisfactory” to “exemplary.”
It was found Miller “needs
improvement” in 18 of 20 subcategories, and “proficient” in the
remaining two subcategories involving supervision and evaluation of
staff, and commitment to high standards of service, teaching and
learning.
Some committee members called Miller a “significant
asset to the district” who offers “competent and committed leadership”
by making herself available, attending a variety of school functions and
reaching out to parents, students, teachers, principals and town
administrators.
“The STEAM curriculum is off to a good start after support and grant writing from the superintendent,” noted one member.
“Ruth has supported development of the online courses to expand learning opportunities,” added another.
Some
members appreciated Miller’s work to align the budget process according
to state and federal mandates, and said her “budget expertise provides
(the) district with stability.”
However, others disagreed,
writing that Miller presented unbalanced and confusing spreadsheets that
often included inaccurate numbers.
“I’ve been involved with the
budget process for eight to 10 years and this was the most confusing
year ever to follow and understand,” one member commented.
Some
members disagreed with how budget cuts primarily affected the high
school teaching staff, while administrators received “hefty” raises.
Miller also “made very questionable administrative hiring decisions,”
some said, “hiring people with very little experience at the levels they
were hired for.”
Some committee members considered honesty to be
lacking, and said Miller “does not fully answer questions when asked
but redirects the issues.” In particular, though Miller said answers to
public questions would be posted on the Pioneer Valley Regional School
District website, the page hasn’t been updated since October.
A flaw in the process? Some
meeting attendees disagreed with the School Committee’s evaluation of
“needs improvement,” praising Miller for her communication with town
officials and principals.
“Her communication with our Finance
Committee has been exemplary,” said Lois Stearns, chairwoman of the
Northfield Finance Committee.
“I feel I do indeed get guidance and
professional support,” Warwick Community School Principal Elizabeth
Musgrave said. “I’m sitting here feeling dismayed to hear this rating.”
Musgrave
noted no one asked for her opinion as an administrator, though it was
not allowed by the School Committee, leading to further discussion
regarding changing the evaluation process.
“I do think that’s a flaw in our overall process and something I hope we can correct,” said committee member Sue O’Reilly-McRae.
At
April’s meeting, O’Reilly-McRae proposed expanding the evaluation
process to include input from principals, Selectboard and Finance
Committee members, parents and other community members. However, the
committee decided to push the vote on her proposal to next year.
A need for training? When
asked by School Committee member Peggy Kaeppel what will happen next,
Miller said she’ll read through the individual reports and respond at
the next meeting, which will be held June 22 at 7 p.m. at Pioneer.
However, Miller said she feels the results show “there needs to be more
understanding of the tool itself.”
“I think the committee hasn’t
had a lot of training on it,” Miller said of the rubric. “It’s not just
saying things, you have to use evidence … They did more of the
traditional ‘This is just what I’m thinking right now.”
Miller also felt some of the district’s strengths were overlooked in the evaluation process.
“Instead
of looking at the whole entire district, there seemed to be a laser
focus on Pioneer,” she said. “They made a clear message, obviously, that
I need to do something about Pioneer. But there wasn’t much mention of
the elementary schools that are all doing remarkably well.”
