No Confidence Whatsoever: The Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Leadership of a Superintendent in a Large Suburban School District

Parent Coalition

The parent organization, the Parent Coalition of Davis County, states as its mission, “improving performance and responsiveness of Davis County Public Schools,” performing as a sort of watchdog group. The parent organization hosts a Listserv that posts announcements regarding the district. Soon after Fleming was announced as the interim superintendent, the Listserv published a link to her doctoral dissertation. Only one person commented on the link, saying, “The dissertation, which was produced at our flagship state university, has numerous punctuation, syntax, and grammar errors. I guess it must be easy to earn an Ed.D. nowadays.” In addition, the parent group was critical of the initial administrative changes. In particular, the group noted that Mr England was not officially listed on the district website as an employee, prompting accusations of secrecy. In August 2021, the Parent Coalition Listserv reported, “It looks like Dr Fleming is doing business as usual. She is unilaterally hiring her friends and playing politics with the appointment of Mr England. This stinks of nepotism. Citizens of Davis County, beware!”

Parent–Teacher Organization

In addition, stakeholders were concerned about the pandemic crisis and how to return students to school. The White, liberal leader of the district parent–teacher organization was skeptical of plans to keep students safe as the district worked on returning students back to schools. In December 2021, she was cited as stating:

Parents are essential to Davis County Public Schools’ success. Our children have been out of school dealing with remote learning for over one year and a half. Our voices have not been heard in key decisions. Our children are not guinea pigs. We are not following what Science is telling us. Our kids are not safe in school, and we should not rush to return them without a guarantee by the school system that they will be safe.

Black and Indigenous People of Color Parent Coalition

Conversely, the local National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and an organization called the Black and Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) Parent Coalition were adamant that a plan to return students to school was essential for BIPOC students’ success. The president of the local NAACP chapter and the president of the BIPOC Parent Coalition, Black and Latinx advocates, respectively, jointly released a press statement in December communicating the following:

The preponderance of research is clear: Black and Brown children have suffered the most during this pandemic. Over the course of the past year and a half, we have seen a deterioration in the quality and care for Black and Brown children. It is critical that Davis County Public Schools return students and staff back to school no later than January 1, 2022. We cannot wait any longer. Dr. Fleming has been in her role for the last 6 months. We need a plan to return students to school. If the district is serious about equity, it will work with deliberate speed to give students, particularly our most marginalized students, in-person instruction.

Teachers’ Union

While the parents’ group might have had some concerns about Fleming’s initial appointments and the timeline for reopening schools, the liberal, White vice president and president-elect of the county teachers’ union, Mrs Bowen, said she was looking forward to a “fresh start” with Fleming. This narrative ended quickly as Dr Fleming discussed the need to return students and staff back to in-person learning. The teachers’ union had a rocky relationship with administration under the former superintendent, struggling to finance a new contract. Teachers’ union leadership often criticized the former superintendent of lacking communication and transparency. As the system began discussing plans to reopen schools, the teachers’ union expressed a desire for accountability. Mrs Bowen commented:

Our implementation plans, quite frankly, have been nonexistent to disastrous. It is unfathomable to me that the district is considering reopening schools. We have not seen any plans to ensure the safety of teachers and students. We continue to beg to be at the table with senior administration and the board as key decisions, which affect our 14,000 employees, are decided. We adamantly oppose any plan that does not ensure that our members will be safe. Teachers are more stressed than ever, and if we do not get this right, we will not only have a mass exodus from our classrooms, we will worsen our ability to recruit new teachers to our district.

Davis County Association of Administrators and Principals

Similar to the teachers’ union, the Davis County Association of Administrators and Principals (DCAAPs) also communicated initial optimism in Dr Fleming’s tenure. Dr Blackwell, a 12-year former high school principal and DCAAP president, publicly commented:

As a former Davis County principal, we are optimistic about supporting one of our own. The last administration, led by someone who did not understand Davis County’s culture of collaboration, severely strained relationships with DCAAP. We hope Dr. Fleming brings us back to our roots of respect, communication, and collaboration.

Behind the scenes, though, Dr Blackwell began communicating directly with the Board of Education about concerns she had with Dr Fleming’s initial hires in her administrative reorganization of the system. Dr Blackwell reported “unqualified” and inexperienced leaders were selected by Dr Fleming in key roles at the detriment of the school system. Furthermore, Dr Fleming appointed her direct reports without consulting with DCAAP or the teachers’ union leadership. In an email sent to the Board of Education president, Dr Blackwell explained:

It was a slap in the face to the hardworking, more experienced leaders within our district, once again, not have the opportunity to apply for senior executive positions through a collaborative process. If we are going to be a truly great district, we must have experienced, stellar leadership in every administrative position, especially in senior leadership. Dr. Fleming has already failed her first test with her unilateral appointment of “her” people. We demand that the positions be re-advertised and appropriate people be placed in roles to stabilize the school district and work in a true collaborative fashion.

The Reorganization

The district reorganization Dr Fleming implemented immediately upon becoming interim superintendent caused concerns because stakeholders did not all agree that her appointees were qualified for the positions. The hiring of the former school board member was thought to be some form of nepotism or political favoritism. Parent watchdog groups immediately began speculating about the nature of this hire and the fact that the board member, with only a bachelor’s degree, earned a salary equivalent to a first-year principal. In addition, one third of Dr Fleming’s new hires served as middle school principals, a position Dr Fleming once held within the system. There was a belief that she was hiring her “friends” and not hiring the most competent people for the positions. At the top of everyone’s concern was Ms White, Dr Fleming’s pick for chief operating officer, and Dr Black, the new chief of schools. Ms White had served as a principal and was in charge of procurement for 2 years prior to assuming the chief operating officer role. She did not have a financial background. Dr Black served as a middle school and high school principal in highly diverse communities, but she had not served in central office in primary leadership roles beyond serving as an executive director in the Office of the Deputy Superintendent under Dr Fleming.

Additional concerns were about Dr Fleming’s lack of visibility and connectivity with principals and principal supervisors. In her first 6 months on the job, Dr Fleming missed half of the principal professional learning community meetings established at the elementary, middle, and high school levels due to other priorities that emerged in the height of managing COVID-19 issues. In addition, principal supervisor positions showed a lack of diversity, with 80% of supervisors being White women in a district that was 52% White administrators, 48% BIPOC administrators, and 60% male administrators. The majority of principal supervisors had experience in middle school as well.

Furthermore, Dr Fleming decided to eliminate her old position of deputy superintendent, and instead had 14 chief-level members reporting directly to her. In hindsight, Dr Fleming shared, “I should not have eliminated the deputy superintendent role. It was extremely difficult for me to effectively supervise and manage 14 chiefs and address the politics of Davis County.” At the time, Dr Fleming did not conduct extensive searches to fill these roles. The COVID-19 pandemic had caused schools to close in March 2020, and she wanted her team in place and ready to respond to challenges as soon as possible. As a result, she directly appointed most of her senior leadership positions without broadly advertising or formally interviewing candidates with wide stakeholder input. She felt the urgency of the moment and her authority as interim superintendent allowed her to make these critical decisions to best support her leadership and the school system.

Pandemic Management

The COVID-19 pandemic presented significant challenges to the school district. Dr Fleming’s main challenge as interim superintendent during the COVID-19 pandemic was the same challenge played out around the country and indeed the world: Should schools close or remain open? The decision to phase students back into the school buildings occurred in March 2021, prior to Dr Fleming’s appointment as interim superintendent. Under the previous superintendent’s plan to reopen schools, a plan approved by the Board of Education, some students returned 4 days a week and others returned 4 days every other week. Younger students and children from schools hit harder by poverty were expected to get more in-person instruction. At the time, there was not an option for students to continue virtually full-time. Dr Fleming assumed the interim superintendent role, taking over responsibility for the execution of the return-to-school implementation plan. There was tremendous concern from many educators about their safety returning to school for in-person teaching. Yet for equity reasons, Dr Fleming disagreed and was committed to keeping schools open and returning to a 5-day, in-person school day as soon as feasibly possible.

Davis County grappled with managing staff and student absences due to COVID-19. Protocols were put in place to determine when a school would need to close due to an uptick of COVID-19 cases within a community, and teachers and principals experienced tremendous strain as they managed the day-to-day operations of schools, being prepared to close immediately in the event of local spikes in COVID-19 cases.

Within her first 5 months as interim superintendent, Fleming’s leadership team created an elaborate, three-tiered, color-coded plan that outlined the exact COVID-19 positivity thresholds under which a particular school would switch from in-person to virtual learning. The formula called for shifting schools to virtual learning if 5% of students and staff at a particular school were to test positive for COVID-19. In January 2021, after a single week in which nearly a dozen schools temporarily shifted to virtual learning because of this policy and an additional 120 out of the system’s 220 schools met the criteria for virtual learning, the school system, in conjunction with the county health department, announced it was abandoning the formula. Instead, the county said it would determine which schools should transition to virtual learning on a case-by-case basis. This change in policy, without instant communication, infuriated numerous stakeholders, including leaders of parent organizations and teacher and administrator unions.

In a letter to parents and other stakeholders, Fleming and the acting health officer said state officials had advised against using an automatic trigger or threshold to determine a shift to virtual learning. The letter said the school-by-school approach brought the county into closer alignment with how large school systems across the country are keeping schools safe amid similar pandemic-related challenges. The threshold system originally devised by the school district relied on parents reporting positive COVID-19 test results, and there was some concern that parents would underreport test results in an attempt to keep schools open to in-person learning.

Mrs Bowen, who by January 2021 was president of the teachers’ union, expressed frustration with the lack of planning to keep county schools safely operating, from her perspective. She called the school-by-school plan that replaced the threshold plan vague and confusing. “We need better communication. We need more transparency. And we’re asking to be a part of collaboration to look for solutions,” Bowen said. “We need a plan now.”

The broader context of Fleming’s school-by-school closure plan was highlighted by the parents’ advocacy group, which posted on their Listserv that Fleming had shut down the school district’s COVID-19 dashboard and, amid a state COVID-19 positivity rate of over 42%, was still planning on keeping schools open. A parent blogger on the Davis County Parent Coalition Listserv shared:

Meanwhile in Davis County, somehow Davis County Public School administrators know that there are ongoing COVID-19 outbreaks in their school communities and they are targeting individual schools for virtual learning for the next 5–10 days. How do Davis County administrators know what is going on in their schools with regard to COVID-19 while [our] county administrators appear clueless?

This post continued the theme of parents’ distrust of Fleming and her administration, especially in the context of her handling of COVID-19 school closures.