February 5, 2015 Yesterday | received a call from a DCS Department head, She was calling to relay that today, one of the faculty in her department is resigning, and giving two weeks’ notice. She described this faculty member, a female, © Worked at OCS 7 years Covered all areas, because certified in several areas Ran the gardening program and taught environmental science ‘© Received needs improvement on evaluation «Expressed discomfort and fear in the work atmosphere and with the ED ‘* Second member of Dept to resign mid year ‘The dept head went on to describe the APC process as she perceived it. She described the time that the ‘Academic Affairs committee had spent on the decision making process. She gave @ couple of examples “of what teacher/student progress/projects were missed because of the meetings necessitated by the time spent. On Tuesday, 2/3, there was another Acad Affairs meeting in which the ED “spoke and spoke and spoke for 45 min’. Finally, when given a chance, the committee expressed their reasons for their ‘choice. The dept head did not agree with the reasons that the ED wants to hire an alternative to the ‘Acad Affairs’ choice. She described her reasons for choosing the person, and discounted some of the student input; citing the critical need for curriculum development that will attract more HS students. She stated that the APC’s curriculum experience was far more important, and having this task taken care of by someone very experienced will allow more time for student interaction with successful faculty who are very well-liked and appreciated by students ~ these teachers have been given so much extra responsibility helping fill the role of the APC that they have spent less time with students, (“I have hardly been able to see and meet with my __Club, due to all of these meetings”) “The dept head went on to say that the ED cited lack of energy by the applicant Acad Affairs chose. She explained that the ED cited a lack of ‘energy’ seen by the students, also. She stated, “the curriculum specialist does a lot more than talk to the kids; s/he does not need to ‘shout and hop around”. The dept head went on to say that the ED expressed doubt in their choice’s tech skills, which the dept head disagreed with. “The dept head further described the process of replacing the faculty member that resigned in January. She explained that the candidate the ED heavily favored the most was one with no classroom ‘experience. She urged patience, and a new hire was found who has been teaching at Norland. She pointed out that the ED sent a memo to parents of students of resigned faculty member, without any consultation with the dept head, who felt that there were inaccuracies in the memo, regarding who is covering the class. ‘Ab memo 02-05-15,