When the APS Board of Education was deciding who to promote to Superintendent, did they ask the prospective superintendents about their intentions with respect to an honest administrative accountability audit?
If not, then why not?
If they did, then why did they promote one who was willing to stonewall?
Unless that is their intention as well?
stonewall; to refuse to answer or cooperate,
to resist or rebuff, to engage in delaying tactics
fyi; The leadership of the APS enforces a code of ethical conduct upon students. Students are taught that stonewalling is unethical, and therefore unacceptable.
The leadership's example stands in diametric opposition, and in blatant disregard of the contrary message they are sending.
The leadership of the APS have simply abdicated as the senior role models for 89,000 students in the APS.
How can they simply except themselves from accountability as role models?
No comments:
Post a Comment