What really bothers me about this story? It's the fact that she is the wife of the Scranton School District's superintendent, William King.
Yes, you read that one correctly: she ultimately reports up to her husband.
Please do tell me: Outside of a family-run business (which, apparently, the Scranton School District now qualifies...), when is it ever appropriate to have one spouse report to another?
How do we know that principals do not court favor with Mr King by treating his wife with kit gloves?
How do other teachers know that Ms King's classroom assignments, number of students, and the like are not influenced by her husband (or people wanting to court favor with her husband)?
How can taxpayers be assured that Ms King is worth the salary we pay her when clearly she has direct, regular and personal access to the district's key decision maker?
What inside information has Ms King received that she has been able to use to better her career?
The answer to all of the above questions is unqualified WE DON'T KNOW. And that is the problem. This whole situation is a MESS and speaks loudly to why taxpayers have little confidence in the operations of the district.
As for me, I'd like to see two things come out of this:
- To the Scranton Times - Please publish an organization chart showing the relationships between Scranton School District employees and current/former district administrators/leaders. I think the visual would be shocking.
- To the Scranton School Board - Please do the RIGHT THING and pass a real anti-nepotism policy. Yes, in such a policy, on occasion a good teacher may not get a job due to a family relationship. So be it. However, under the current situation, just as many good teachers DO NOT get jobs because THEY ARE NOT related to someone of influence. In the end, the talent argument in favor of nepotism (just saying that makes me feel, well, filthy) doesn't hold water.
I'm not holding my breath for either to happen.