The selection of a candidate to fill the latest vacancy on the Conway School Board is being hailed for its "transparency." Certainly that appeared to be the intent of the board chair, who devised the process, and I think most of the other members were anxious to be forthright about their reasoning and choices. The discussion about candidate qualifications did seem sincere, although in one instance I wondered if a stated reservation did not betray greater knowledge of an unmentioned disqualification.

Perhaps it was only a coincidence, or an accumulation of circumstances, that led to a conclusion reflecting a gender bias that has become increasingly conspicuous at SAU 9 and on the Conway board. The last search for a superintendent began with a panel composed largely of women. If I recall correctly, all the staff members on that committee were women. (Why school employees should be allowed to choose their own boss mystifies me, but in SAU 9 the governing board seems subordinate to the administration, contrary to tradition.) That selection committee predictably overlooked whatever men applied for the job, falling hopelessly for an utterly inexperienced woman who quickly demonstrated how unqualified she was for so public and potentially controversial a position.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.