Special Education writing on the wall of School District 158's Associate Superintendent Terry Awrey's office. (Click to enlarge or look below.)

Maybe the analogy alluded to in the headline is off base.

It looks like job descriptions. This is the left hand side of what you see above. (Click to enlarge.)

It’s difficult to tell what went on in Huntley School District 158’s Associate Superintendent Terry Awrey’s office the day this whiteboard was covered with special education notes.  There seem to be job descriptions.

This is the right hand side of the white board seen on top. (Click to enlarge.)

Perhaps some readers can figure out what is going on.

Perhaps it provides an insight as to why so many special ed administrators have left District 158 in such a short time.

Unlike questions about the January 11th resignation letter of Cheryl Kalkirtz, which I am still waiting for District 158 to produce, there can’t be much question this is the real thing.

So, tell me, folks in the know, what’s going on here?

Lazy River at Wisconsin Dells Kalahari Resort approaching a waterfall.

Over the weekend while our family was in the Wisconsin Dells (son and buddy in water park, father reading novels, wife visiting with family), the following comment on this article about Cheryl Kalkirtz’ resignation letter arrived.

I thought it might interest more people than those who take the time to go all the way back to the article to check on new comments.

It might even help District 158 reply to a recent Freedom of Information request I filed.

Don Drzal and Kim Skaja want everyone to believe that what they and Burkey have done is honest and true, and everything Cal and Cheryl have said is fabricated to make them look bad. They claim parents who believe anything other than what comes from the district are stupidly following garbage.

Lets take it one step at a time to see what seems most reasonable.

#1

A. Kim, Don, and Burkey sate that Cheryl lied on her resume by claiming she had an endorsement she didn’t really have.

or

B. An entire room of people including one board member and two parents were there when she told Smith that her endorsement was pending.

#2

A. Cheryl had to leave her position, because the district is required by law to have special education run by someone with the correct endorsement. Having her leave her position was legally required.

or

B. This was just an excuse to get rid of Cheryl for refusing to go along with unethical requests made by Burkey such as refusing to reallocate special ed grant money to other areas. Cheryl wasn’t required to hold this endorsement just as the previous director wasn’t. There isn’t a legal reason for the head of special ed to carry the endorsement in question in district 158 just as confirmed by the State Board of Education.  [See this article, as well.]

#3

A. Kim, Martin administrator (opinions shared on Huntley Neighbors with a pseudo-name) say it is impossible for parents to know of the negative information found in Alward’s personnel file, because it does not exist. She has been an outstanding employee who is respected by her peers and superiors.

or

B. The information that has been seen, being identical to that found Alward’s personnel file is legitimate. Including, but not limited to identifying her falsifying gas mileage, changing curriculum without approval, and non-collaborative decision making.

#4

A. Burkey told the truth when he stated that Cheryl’s attorney had not been in contact with the district, and any documentation stating otherwise is fake. He did not lie in regard to the FOIA, because if he did lie it would be grounds for dismissal of his position. Because he did not lie, that is not an issue.

or

B. The first contact made by Cahill and Associates on Feb 2, addressed to Dr. Burkey, faxed to his fax number and transmission of receipt attached is valid. So are the other letters and responding correspondence from Mr. Anthony Ficarelli, 158 attorney, dated Feb 3 and Feb 9 as well as phone consultation on Feb 18, and Burkey did lie when he stated otherwise. Burkey should be investigated and pending proof of the above statements, he should be terminated from his position.

#5

A. Cheryl didn’t turn in a letter of resignation on January 11, and any letter with that date was written after her termination on Feb 1.

or

B. Cheryl handed out 5 copies of her resignation letter to various employees. Several of those copies were shared other employees after January 11, but prior to Feb 1. Employees heard Burkey discuss the copies “original” letter of resignation, and witnessed his hostility at being unable to find it. Because of this original letter or resignation, Terry Awrey met with Cheryl on January 22 in a collaborative meeting to develop a plan on how to address these issues as part their agreement to try to work out the underlying reasons that forced her to write her letter of resignation in the first place. The 3 pages of bullet points that were discussed at this meeting are available and have been viewed.

#6

A. Teachers are happy with administration, they aren’t overworked or under supported. They haven’t been threatened into keeping quiet about any issues, because they feel comfortable speaking with their administration. Parents have bullied the special ed department and have forced them to quit.

or

B. Teachers and other employees have contacted numerous parents, thanking them for helping them. They have stated that they aren’t allowed to discuss any of their concerns for fear of punishment. Administration, teachers and therapists have contacted parents, explaining how they were bullied to keep quiet about the district breaking the law by not meeting IEP minutes and excessive workloads. Some were forced to quit due to lack of support by district administration. They left 158 taking jobs in other districts, because 158 forced them to put money over the needs of the children of district 158.

#7

A. The district has lost so many members of the special ed department, because the parents bullied them into quitting. Others left because the district underpays, and they found more lucrative positions in other districts.

or

B. The employees left because they realized they would never be able to do their jobs properly in 158. As had as they tried to make the district change, it became apparent that it never would. They left to go to districts where they could make a difference. Despite confidentiality agreements, they have shared a lot of information about what they think is wrong with the district and who is really calling the shots in 158.

#8

A. The district has been honest about everything. Parents and Cal Skinner have worked hard, falsifying documents, placing items in personnel files, spreading conspiracy theories, and managed to get employees to support them in this lie for no reason other than to discredit the district for their own twisted agenda.

or

B. Burkey lied, cheated, and deceived the children, school board members, and district 158 teachers and parents in an attempt to cover up his unethical behavior. The 158 BOE follow the 158 administration blindly, refusing to investigate any of the claims by parents. They have refused to even consider the evidence that was delivered to their doors prior to agreeing to the separation agreement between the district and 158. They had almost all of the evidence to prove Burkey lied, but refused to even consider crossing him. All documents are not only legitimate but provable, and none of the board members have admitted to even seeing it.

Whose been deceived? It seems obvious to anyone who is outside of the school board’s circle.

Cheryl Kalkirtz

The headline is from the third sentence of a January 7th letter of recommendation written by Terry Awrey.

He was Cheryl Kalkirtz’ boss while she was employed at Huntley District 158.

The entire letter is below.

On January 11th, Kalkirtz submitted a letter of resignation offering to end her employment on June 30th at the end of her employment contract.

On February 1st, Kalkirtz departed Huntley under circumstances one could describe as

• “unusual,”
• “mysterious” or
• “unexplained by the district,”

your choice of words or phrases.

Could it be a majority on the board of education and likely Supt. John Burkey didn’t think having “a proven professional” who “has earned the respect of the Administrative Team” was reason enough to keep Kalkirtz employed through the first year of her contract?

Or was something else at work?

What other on-the-job-performance-related qualities did Kalkirtz boss praise her for?

If you read the letter below (click to enlarge), you will see Associate Superintendent Awrey writing:

“I find her to be highly intelligent, motivated and committed
to the educational success of each and every child.”

This hardly seems like a list of reasons for Kalkirtz to be no longer employed.

Did Awrey have any reservations about Kalkirtz?

It certainly doesn’t seem so from what he wrote:

“I recommend Mrs. Kalkirtz without reservation.”

Of course, getting praised by the number two guy in an organization does have its limitations.  The basic  one is that one is not in charge.

So who decided that Kalkirtz needed to no longer be employed as a proven, well respected Huntley professional who is highly intelligent, motivated and committed to the educational success of each and every child?

Huntley principals and other administrators may take note how you, too, could be highly praised one day and be thought of apparently very differently soon thereafter.

The phrase “we would never do something like this” takes on a different meaning when you look at in the context of Cheryl Kalkirtz employment.

So far, no good-reason explanation has been advanced for why board members and Supt. Burkey didn’t allow Kalkirtz to finish her contract, which ended until June 30th.

Huntley has done so in the past for other next step higher up administrators.

What happened can probably be found filed in a locked file cabinet in the office of Lauren Smith, Director of Human Resources under “Employee Morale – Bad.”

How can you have so many fair-minded, public-spirited, caring, well-meaning individuals as top administrators and board members and have this happen?

Maybe someone can answer that question.

Join Huntley School District 158–where you can be exceptional administrator or employee one week and no-longer-employed a few weeks later.

Remember.

It’s all for the children.

Cheryl Kalkirtz at a town hall meeting on special education shortly after being hired.

The original opening sentence of yesterday’s Daily Herald’s article on former Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz read,

“Recently released documents show a former special education director in Huntley Unit District 158 overstated her qualifications on her job application.”

For some reason, it changed to

“Documents obtained recently by the Daily Herald paint a contradictory picture of what transpired when a former special education director in Huntley Unit District 158 applied for her job last year.”

You might think this is the real reason behind Kalkirtz’ leaving Huntley School District 158.

Au contraire.

There is far more to it than an employment application, which Kalkirtz may not have personally filled out.

Apparently reporter Jameel Naqvi knows about Cheryl Kalkirtz’ resignation on January 11th, but you can’t tell it from the Daily Herald headline (which editors, not reporters usually write).  Here’s the original headline:

Ex-Huntley Dist. 158 special ed. chief pumped up job application

Here’s the revision:

Question Ex-Huntley Dist. 158 special ed. chief pump up job application?

What Supt. Burkey did comment on in the article relative to Kalkirtz’ resignation was,

“Burkey said the brief statement was the only letter Kalkirtz submitted.” (emphasis added)

If so, I wonder about this letter, which McHenry County Blog has obtained a while back:

It’s addressed to Superintendent John Burkey.

And to school board members.

Could it be that Burkey doesn’t read letters of resignation from top administrators?

Or doesn’t remember?

We know several board members received copies of Kalkirtz’ January letter of resignation, weeks after she had departed.  They were hand delivered to board member’s homes.

Apparently Burkey didn’t pass along Kalkirtz’ resignation letter, addressed also to board members, when Kalkirtz submitted it on January 11th.

If I were on a school board, I’d certainly want to see a letter like this.

Especially with all the controversy about Special Ed.

Below is Kalkirtz’ January 11th letter of resignation with print large enough print to read.

Burkey apparently begged Kalkirtz to stay with the district after she first met with Associate Superintendent Terry Awrey.

They two met with Supt. Burkey to discuss Kalkirtz’ resignation.

After imploring her to stay, Kalkirtz agreed.

A few weeks went by.

Days after Burkey got a new three-year employment contract approved by the board, Burkey apparently decided to have Kalkirtz leave abruptly, rather than her continue through the school year, as she proposed in her January 11th resignation letter.

It’s an interesting way to treat a professional who resigns and commits to finishing out the school year.

When you read the original letter, the Daily Herald’s headline comes across as quite a smear job on Kalkirtz.

Will the Daily Herald take Burkey to task for being less than truthful when he said there was only one resignation letter when there were two?

We’ll see.

The Daily Herald seems to be making a big issue about whether Kalkirtz was truthful.

Will they now hold Burkey to a lower standard?

Or ask why Burkey apparently didn’t check out Kalkirtz’ credentials before hiring her?

Superintendent John Burkey and Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz in happier times.

Maybe Burkey did and thought that, if she were going to be receiving her endorsement soon, then that would be okay, as Burkey did with the Assistant Special Ed Directors who also were required by state law to have their endorsements when they took their jobs.

It looks as if Burkey recommended several people for jobs that required endorsements, got the board to approve them and, then, after Kalkirtz submitted her January resignation letter, singled her out.

After all, none of the people running Special Ed in any school district that belongs to SEDOM, the Special Education District of McHenry County, needs to have a Special Ed Director certification, because the SEDOM Director Kathy Wilhoit’s endorsement is sufficient.

If this isn’t what happened, Burkey can set the record straight the same time he admits there was a previous resignation letter.

When you read Kalkirtz’ original resignation letter below you can understand why Burkey might want to say the letter never existed.

You might also understand how it came about Kalkirtz departed Huntley.

There’s one thing administrators and board members should know about confidentiality clauses; they don’t apply to when the documents are already beyond someone’s control.

Lots of people with the district talked about Kalkirtz resigning when it happened on January 11th.  The grapevine gushed out news about it.

People outside of board members and administrators not only had a copy of Kalkirtz’ January 11th resignation letter, but other documents as well prior to any agreement being entered into between Kalkirtz and the district.

Below is the text of the January 11, 2010, resignation letter from Cheryl Kalkirtz:

January 11th, 2010

Consolidated School District 158
Board of Education Members
Dr. John Burkey, Superintendent
650 Academic Drive
Algonquin, IL 60102

I am providing you with this letter of resignation, upon the completion of my contract for the 2009-2010 school years, for your approval as I have selected to look for other employment at this time. I would like to cite some particular examples for my decision to not stay with the district, also offering artifacts, correspondence or concrete examples for my departure, as an experienced administrator who has persevered at a district with many changes or dis structure that was placed before her.

The bullet points as below, generally describe my reasons for not choosing to remain at District #158 next year:

• The administrative design for the Office of Special Services from day one has required a different structure, as experienced cabinet members could have prevented so much change, and even one assistant director’s resignation during this school year, as that administrator has still not been replaced.
• I started the school year, needing to rapport build with a new office staff, who I was encouraged not to trust, causing disharmony in our immediate office setting. Still, we grew as a family, office staff are extremely dedicated and loyal, and I have observed trustworthiness and professionalism.
• I would mentor 3 new assistant directors to oversee the district’s special education populations, with a disproportionate structure for supervision responsibilities. The cabinet has heard my ongoing concerns regarding themes of our office and has not always included me with problem-solving strategies.
• I have represented reports, to the best of my ability, with other cabinet members either changing reports on the fly or have been asked to change reports sporadically, without ensuring accuracy in the completion of reports that I would need to represent formally.
• Communications to my superiors, verbally or via e-mail, have not always been acknowledged, as a new administrator to the district, regarding decision-making for my department.
• I was unable to participate in staff development, or have a leadership role for Special Services staff to have Institute Day opportunities to meet throughout the year, as past practices periodically allowed for this. I was not even formally introduced to the district by my superiors at the district’s opening Institute Day, and neither was my new administrative team from the get go.
• Fiscal data has not been collaborative.
• Curriculum and assessments for special needs students have been authoritarian style versus collaborative, and I have found that the Curriculum Director has required my providing her with reports about curriculum and criteria for establishing curriculum for the near 1,400 students who we represent, versus recommending curriculum according to her expertise and background or being advised to adopt programs that may or may not be successful for our students, due to former animosity between herself and my predecessor.
• Caseloads and workloads for staff have been an ongoing struggle, as workloads for Special Education Staff became a legal requirement last spring into this fall with the state board of education, with my coming onboard to a new district. This fact has been a thorn in the office of Special Services throughout the entire year and relationship building has been limited during an average work day, as my administrative team has been limited for addressing many of the workload concerns. Finally, this winter, the district is establishing committees to follow through with workloads, represented by the Human Resource Office, respectfully.
• District wide initiatives, such as RTI that leads to special education eligibility, PBIS, action-planning, the District’s first Parent Advisory Committee for Special Education, managing data with different fiscal databases, and strengthening special education compliance without an IEP database, has been a difficult and unique process, with a redeveloped administrative Special Services Team and a strong need for more clerical support, when compared to the other offices in our district. Morale has been an ongoing concern, additionally. All of the points listed are important to me, as how I am publicly perceived as a public school administrator.

As I have touched upon several concerning areas, as listed, please know that my original enthusiasm and intended dedication has always remained sincere and proactive, amidst the many changes placed before my office and programs.

To turn so many known obstacles around in such a short period of time, also with directives from my superiors to change how we function as an office with so much frequency or lack of communication, administrative guidance has been unclear, limited toward me for opportunities to understand the direction of how leadership wants me to interchange with understanding future designs or new directions for the district via long term goals.

In conclusion, my predecessor, from what I have heard, experienced all of these concerns and articulated these similarities to her superiors during her tenure with the district.

Respectfully, I will miss the collaborations and relationships that I have developed through our district and our Special Education cooperative and I hope that the district learns from an experienced district level administrator who tried to positively persevere at a district that needs to reconsider their foundation for professional learning communities for all of their stakeholders.

Huntley School District Supt. John Burkey and Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz in happier times.

Yesterday I showed you the terse resignation letter of Huntley School District 158’s Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz.

As you can see from this article, District 158 seems to have a difficult time keeping such employees.

But, back to the question:

Does the Huntley School District need a full-time “certified” Special Ed Director?

My research says it doesn’t.

It doesn’t even need the part-time one it recently hired.

The reason is because Huntley School District 158 is a member of SEDOM, the Special Education District of McHenry County, and its Superintendent, Kathy Wilhoit, has the necessary “endorsement.”

Superintendent Wilhoit wrote,

“Regarding requirements, if a district has a full time special education administrator, that person must have a state director of special education endorsement.  If the position only works with special education part time, the endorsement is not required.“All districts who are members of a special education cooperative operate under the director of the cooperative as the state approved special education director.”

Indeed, Wilhoit told me she signs all the state grant applications.

So, it appears that Kalkirtz’ leadership abilities could have been utilized with no problem from Springfield by just changing her title.

That still leaves the question of why there was a parting of the ways.

The rationale used to appoint a part-time Special Ed Director was that she had the proper “endorsement.”

As you can see from Superintendent Wilhoit’s statement, that was not necessary.

Even though Karen Aylward’s appointment as Interim Director seemed to run into problems when it was discovered she did not have the endorsement, Wilhoit’s endorsement would cover for her with only a title change.

Any of the three parts of the May 2009 memo may be enlarged by clicking on it.

A May 2009 memo to Huntley District 158 from the State Board of Education should have made that clear. In part, it reads:

The above regulatory citation at 23 IAC 226.800(g)(3) also requires that “Each school district, or the cooperative entity of which it is a member, shall employ a full-time director of special education…” (emphasis added)

I did notice that all of Huntley’s “Assistant Director” of Special Ed job titles were changed to “Coordinator” after I pointed out the day of the meeting, citing state law, that all Directors and Assistant Directors have to have an endorsement for Director of Special Education.

This wasn’t the original plan, as evidenced by the planned personnel changes that were in the original board packet.

What did come out was Supt. John Burkey’s having to admit the lengthy amount of time that it takes for the State of Illinois to review and approve a Director’s endorsement.

This pretty much debunks any implication or cover that Cheryl Kalkirtz had to be let go or had to resign from the district because she didn’t officially have a director’s endorsement yet.

Maybe the real reason will come out later.

Kalkirtz’ on the job performance was well respected and Burkey publicly pretty much ruled out any inappropriate behavior on Kalkirtz’ part.

It is entirely possible and looking more and more likely every day that Kalkirtz did everything right, disclosed everything up front about not officially having a Director’s endorsement and was performing admirably in her job every day. For whatever reason, parents were told she had that endorsement.

So what’s left?

Is it possible Burkey got more than a little irritated that Kalkirtz was a professional who was good at advocating for her special services students.

If that’s not how a superintendent really wanted someone to perform in that position, it might be like having two tectonic plates awaiting a breaking rupture.

So far, there has been no tsunami bigger than the one that hit Hawaii. But you can bet similar swift underground waves are still bouncing around the District 158 basin.

It is so unusual for a middle level school administrator in Illinois to leave in the middle of a school year contract, that barring death, indictment or felony arrest.  It’s safe to describe what is now publicized as a resignation was apparently the result of an an internal power struggle, which Burkey won.

Whether the students will end up on the winning side remains to be seen.

When I filed a Freedom of Information request for board emails, I saw no indication that Burkey had informed board members prior to the resignation.

Based on people talking about how Burkey begged Kalkirtz to stay in January and then, weeks later, he accepted her resignation, you may want to wager an abrupt turn occurred.

Coincidentally this apparently happened after Burkey got his new three-year contract.

Cheryl Kalkirtz resignation letter of February 1, 2010.

It is short and to the point:

I, Cheryl Kalkirtz, resign from CSD158 immediately.

I thought I got a favorable response, but last weekend I went looking for the information that the council folks had already received and there was nothing to be found.

Crysal Lake City Council

Asking City Manager Gary Mayerhofer about when it might happen, I was told that staff was ready, but waiting for direction from the council. Based on that representation, I didn’t ask again during the public comment section. If by the next meeting I attend it is not up, I shall, as you would expect, make mention of it again.

In any event, the Huntley School District was the web site I pointed to as what I hoped Crystal Lake would emulate.

But outside of the board packet’s posting, the Huntley School District is no model of transparency, even though outgoing School Board President Shawn Green represented as such.

Why would I say that?

While McHenry County government has been known to reply to a Freedom of Information request in less than 24 hours, the Huntley School District tends to take the pretty much the maximum amount of time allowed by law.

And, in the instance of my search for anyone employed by District 158 with a Special Education Director qualification, as defined by the Illinois State Board of Education, the term “dragging of the heels” is too mild to use.

On Monday, February 8th, I asked for the following:

“One document for each person having a special education director endorsement on their administrator’s certificate, as verified on the State Board of Education web site.”

The same day, FOI Officer Lori Woods replied,

“Are you requesting a copy of their certificate?

“If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.”

My reply:

“I really don’t care if it the certificate or something referring to the certificate. “

Woods:

“Okay, thanks.  I’ll get working on that ASAP for you.”

My reply:

“The basic question is whether anyone in the district has a certification to be a special ed director.

“I can’t find one.”

On Friday, February 12th, I received this reply from Woods:

“The response to your FOIA regarding documentation of Special Education Director endorsement is attached.

“If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.”

That certainly is within the five-workday returned turnaround time, but consider the answer from Human Resources Director Lauren Smith that was attached:

The parsed word response of Huntley Human Services Director Lauren Smith. Note that it took her only nine minutes to formulate her answer. Click to enlarge.

Huntley School District Human Relations Director Lauren Smith

“I am not clear how to move forward on this request. Based solely on the question, I cannot provide a document for all persons with an endorsement as a special education director.”

Smith’s parsing of my words reminds me of President Bill Clinton’s:

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

Being the persistent type, I filed a new Freedom of Information request on Friday, February 12th, saying,

“It seems to me that my Special Ed certification request was pretty clear, clear enough to ask the IL AG’s office in an appeal and get a letter sent to District 158 the way one was recently sent to Grafton Township officials.  Instead, for a very brief time (I do not promise to wait 5 days, just to delay until the thought of an appeal enters my head again), let me give you another chance with the re-wording of the question you see below:

“I request all documentation provided by the Regional Superintendents Office or State Board of Education that evidences each district employee who holds or has held a Special Education Director endorsement during the 2009 – 2010 fiscal year, including any employee who was employed by the district in FY 2009 – 2010, and any certificate or copy thereof of in possession of the district that evidences the referenced employees’ holding or having held the referenced endorsement.

“A simple ‘We have no record of any such evidence that a Special Ed Director Endorsement has been held by any of our employees during Fiscal Year 2009-2010′ will suffice, if that is the situation.” (Emphasis added.)

Seven days later, I received this reply:

“The response to your FOIA for Special Education Director endorsement is attached.

“If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me.”

Now, Human Resources Director Smith has discovered,

It took twelve days to get this answer. Click to enlarge.

Very interrresssting.

“Upon review of certified staff members, including administrators, there is not an employee as of this date with a Director of Special Education endorsement.”

Ver-r-r-r-y in-ter-r-r-r-r-es-s-s-t-ing, as the Laugh-In Nazi would say.

Not that I think Green had any knowledge of the games his staff was playing, but I would point out this answer was received the day after Green praised the district’s transparency.

It was not received before I got fed up at not having receiving a timely answer to my question of February 8th, though.

I would suggest the kiddie games evident above are unworthy of a local government aspiring to be known as a “model of transparency.”

= = = = =

The 800 number of the Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access folks is 877-299-3642, by the way.  Complaints may be filed by email.  The email address is PublicAccess@AtG.State.IL.US.

Lauren Smith, Chief Human Resources Officer, emailed parents who were in on the interviewing, the document at the bottom of this article.

Candidate # 1's background and certifications, according to District 158. Click to enlarge or go to the bottom of the page and read the entire report.

Candidate # 2. The entire report is at the bottom.

Candidate # 3. The entire report is at the bottom.

As you can see to the left, the District represented to parents that Cheryl Kalkirtz already had her endorsement for Special Education Director.

This was the administration’s document and the district’s representation.

There was no footnote of “pending,” “applied for” or “based on applicant’s application.”  (See bottom of this article for the all the information supplied parents.)

Administrators were telling parents before hiring Kalkirtz that Kalkirtz had the Director endorsement.

Karen Aylward apparently also made such a representation to parents for herself at the August Parent Advisory Committee meeting.

What is more interesting is how the job description that was used to hire for the position omitted any requirement for an endorsement for Special Ed Director.

Reprinted below  is the job description that was used last year.

You have to wonder

• Why parents were told in writing that Kalkirtz had her endorsement
• Administrators apparently omitted the requirement from the Director job description.
• Why Supt. Burkey and top administrators thought it was acceptable to show parents that Aylward had a Director’s endorsement when it turns out she doesn’t.

Meanwhile knowing this, Burkey is quoted in the Daily Herald today,

“The director of special education does have to have the director endorsement,” Burkey said. “We would only hire someone if we believed they had those qualifications.”

Really?

Shouldn’t the law be quoted correctly in a newspaper?

You can go to the applicable state law

ISBE 23 ILLINOIS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 25.300 SUBTITLE A SUBCHAPTER b SUBPART E: REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CERTIFICATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPERVISORY STAFF

and read

g) Nothing in this Section is intended to preclude the issuance of a provisional certificate under Section 21-10 of the School Code.

(Source: Amended at 34 Ill. Reg. 1582, effective January 12, 2010.)

The District 158 job description for Special Education Director last year is reproduced here in four sections. Click on any section to enlarge it.

So when the Daily Herald quotes in a February 18th article,

“”The district cannot lawfully employ someone in this position who does not have this certificate,” state board spokeswoman Mary Fergus said.”

Fergus apparently forgets about provisional certificates.

The newspaper could have been fairer to Kalkirtz and its readers by pointing this out.

The allowance of a provisional certificate could hardly be more plain.

When she was selected last year, administrators and parents thought Kalkirtz was the best overall candidate and the board gave her a one year contract. They hired her.

Mere mortals cannot put themselves into Supt. Burkey’s mind, of course.

We do know that District 158 told parents that Kalkirtz had the endorsement in question and we know that there is an exception under the law for a “provisional certificate.”

And we know that the requirement for the “endorsement,” now being trotted out as the reason Kalkirtz is no longer with the district, was not important enough to include in the job description when she was hired.

We do not, however, know the motivations for Kalkirtz’ leaving the district.

Neither do we know the motivations for Burkey’s current behavior.

Maybe she was getting too close to the parents’ negative point of view of the Huntley School District’s Special Education services.

I had heard that she submitted a resignation letter which Burkey refused to accept. That was two weeks before she left. Maybe she was fed up with the lack of support from the administration.

By the way, Assistant Directors also have to have their Director’s endorsement under the same law:

“Section 25.365 Director of Special Education.  This endorsement shall be required for directors and assistant directors of special education beginning July 1, 2005.”

This is at least the second year that Assistant Director Aylward doesn’t have this endorsement as an Assistant Director.

For some reason, the Daily Herald reporter did not mention the exception in the law or the other documents in this article.

It would have been nice if the article had included

• a more complete picture of the applicable law,
• how Huntley made an exception for Kalkirtz and is
• is now making an exception for Aylward, not to mention
• what went on when Kalkirtz was hired.

Burkey appears to be treating former Special Ed Director Kalkirtz and eventually-to-be Interim Special Ed Director Aylward very differently when it comes to not having a Director’s endorsement.

One can only wonder.

= = = = =
Qualifications of three candidates for Special Ed Director emailed to parents before last year’s selection of Cheryl Kalkirtz:

Candidate #1

Positions Held

• Social Worker
• Assistant Principal
• Principal
• Experiences in both K-12 Districts and Special Education Organization

Certifications

• General Administrative
• Director of Special Education
• School Service Personnel – Social Work
• Non-violent Crisis Intervention

Candidate was responsible for the introduction and implementation of informal reading and spelling assessments for baseline instructional planning and progress monitoring of students. Other strengths/achievements include the introduction of scope and sequence documentation for grades K-12, integration of PBIS, worked on curriculum committees, participation on Transdisciplinary [SIC] Special Education/Regular Education initiative team, and the recruitment of related service personnel (speech pathologist, social workers, psychologist, and physical/occupational therapist), and on-going professional development.

Basic experience includes social work, compliance, staff evaluation, professional development and budget responsibilities.

17 years experience in the field of education, more specifically in relation to special education. Highly-qualified, candidate has earned an M.S.W. degree from University of Illinois at Chicago and a bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin. Administrative degree from Northeastern Illinois University.

Languages – French (Polite)

Candidate #2

Positions Held

• Teacher
• Principal
• Coordinator of Special Services
• Special Education Director

Certifications

• Teaching 09/10
• General Administrative
• Director of Special Education

Strengths include implementing district run special education programs addressing all levels of disabilities. Other strengths/achievements include the development curriculum, implemented regular education teams for pre-referrals, the recruitment of related service personnel (speech pathologist, social workers, psychologist, and physical/occupational therapist), and on-going professional development. Developed an active parent advisory organization.

Basic experience includes design of service delivery and curriculum, grant writing and maintenance, compliance, staff evaluation, special education identification process (from pre-identification to IEP) and budget responsibilities.

Over 20 years experience in the field of education, more specifically in relation to special education. Highly-qualified, candidate has earned an M.S.E.D. degree from Northern Illinois University and a bachelor’s degree from the Drake University.

Candidate #3

Positions Held

• Teacher
• Parent Advocate (official position assisting families during IEP conferences)
• Special Education Consultant
• Principal
• Coordinator of Special Services
• Special Education Director

Certifications

• Teaching 09/10
• General Administrative
• Director of Special Education

Strengths include educational leader for school wide curriculum. Candidate has had responsibility for the management of education and operations of educational facility and the implementation of IEP and Medicare software and management. Other strengths/achievements include the development, team, and development of RtI in multiple schools, development curriculum, providing parent support through the experience of parent advocate and special ed consultant, the recruitment of related service personnel (speech pathologist, social workers, psychologist, and physical/occupational therapist), and on-going professional development.

Basic experience includes service delivery and coordination of Special education, ESL, Gifted, TPI, and ESY. Grant writing and maintenance for IDEIA, extracurricular and community based programs, compliance, professional development, parent and community partnerships, staff evaluation, special education identification process (from pre-identification to IEP) and budget responsibilities.

Over 15 years experience in the field of education, more specifically in relation to special education. Highly-qualified, candidate has earned masters degree from DePaul University and a bachelor’s degree from the Northeastern University.

Literate in Spanish

NCLB Highly Qualified in 23 subject areas

It was under the shadow of Huntley’s Special Education Director’s Cheryl Kalkirtz’ recent unexplained parting of the ways with District 158.

Now, the district has its 3rd (albeit interim) Director in seven months, Karen Aylward.

Although Special Ed parents invest a lot of time communicating with special ed administrators, there was no explanation of Kalkritz’ absence from the man she reports to, Associate Superintendent Terry Awrey, who attended the meeting.

“Our resolve to inspire, challenge and empower has never been stronger,” he told those gathered.

The meeting was evidently something for the administrators to “get through,” as more than one mentioned goal of ending it by 7:30 so they could get home.

One parent specifically asked,

“What’s the rush to get out of here at 7:30?”

She then said,

“We’re here, you’re here.”

Karen Aylward at a summer District 158 Town Meeting on Special Education.

Parents started asking polite questions after Aylward introduced herself as the Special Ed Director pending board approval. She repeated it three times in two brief paragraphs as if the roomful of staff and parents were unaware. Aylward when asked, confirmed she did not have an endorsement for Special Education Director.

Aylward now makes $65,383.93 as Assistant Director of Special Education for working 215 days. I haven’t figured out how much her salary will increase in the new interim directorship position.

At the meeting, a parent asked about accounting for the (Federal Stimulus) ARRA funds.  Parents bristled when Aylward pronounced,

“All of that can be FOIA’d.”

Aylward said,

“My goal is to spend it the way it is supposed to.”

A parent in the audience then asked,

“Isn’t it your duty?

Parents started asking polite questions after Aylward introduced herself as the new Special Ed Director, pending board approval. She repeated it three times in two brief paragraphs as if the roomful of staff and parents were unaware.

After another question Associate Supt. Awrey gave Aylward a gesture to move on with the agenda. That’s when Aylward said she has to stick to the agenda and questions and answers are not on the agenda.

One parent sitting near Awrey asked Awrey why he signaled Aylward to not take questions.

Awrey denied he did this, but insisted they had to stick to the agenda.

Linda Betzold

Sara DiFucci

Parents Linda Betzold and Sara DiFucci made a joint presentation on autism. One person attending described is as “an incredible performance, rich in content, holding the audience’s interest and at times making the entire room laugh.”

A loud round of applause followed their talks.

After the rendition, parents began asking questions and making comments. Parents who were new to publicly speaking out asked questions and commented.

One of the first parents commenting said how there was a “huge lack of information and communication.”

Another asked if items and notices of meetings could be included in the newsletter.  One parent pointed out how the district uses the Honeywell Emergency Alert system to notify parents how their student’s lunch card money balance is low, so why not use it to notify parents with IEP’s about the PAC meeting?

A parent described how administrators don’t want to be responsive to sensible suggestions even when they are repeated again and again. She pointed out how administrators have special ed staff members on their web site who haven’t been employed in one instance for two years and one of more instances not employed for 18 months.

A parent said,

“With all due respect (Supt.) Dr.(John) Burkey never comes to our meetings.

“It’s become a joke among parents how he runs and hides after board meetings.

“Can you find out if he will be here for our next meeting?”

Another parent talked about the staff members’ workload – caseload and said,

“Lauren Smith was driving it, but this doesn’t mean she knows what she’s talking about.”

Lauren Smith presented recommendations on Special Ed staffing to the board from a committee of administrators and teachers. Parents found out the committee members did not meet before Smith presented the committee’s recommendation to the board.

Plenty of parents talked to Awrey after the meeting for quite some time. Some parents wonder what will be passed onto the Superintendent.

Meanwhile Kalkirtz is no longer employed, even though the board has taken no action on her departure.

I’m not an expert in personnel policy.

Maybe it is customary in school districts for contractual certified administrators to leave without board action.

Seen in this Huntley School District web site photo found last week are Special Education Administrators Perry Yates, Karen Aylward, Stacey O'Dea and Cheryl Kalkirtz. Yates and Kalkirtz are no longer with District 158. Aylward has been appointed Interim Director of Special Education.

Saturday McHenry County Blog wrote about Special Education Director Cheryl Kalkirtz’ leaving the Huntley School District administrative building.

In a Monday article, it was revealed that Karen Aylward had been appointed Interim Director.

Click to enlarge.

In that article, I told of not being able to find a certificate endorsement for her to be a Special Education Director.

A person commented under the article:

“I believe that is why this is an interim position. Either Karen Aylward will be required to get her certification or it will be filled by a qualified candidate come July 1. The state can grant probational status on candidates who do not hold the correct endorsements for a period of 1 year. Which in my guess is what is happening here.”

That makes sense to me.

What is raising my eyebrows today is what you see below, presented at the August 13, 2009, Special Ed Parent Advisory Committee meeting:

Click to enlarge.

What is a “Type 75 Director of Special Education Endorsement?”

So far, neither of the Heralds have written a story about the revolving door nature of Special Education administrators in District 158.