Olsen Sees Mixed Results At Assessment

Westford’s School Committee had one agenda item on Monday night, but the annual evaluation of Superintendent Bill Olsen was such an important topic that the Committee felt that it was worth devoting the entire night toward.

The Superintendent’s evaluation was separated into two parts: Olsen’s performance, which was further separated into six sections, and a three section analysis of how well he was able to accomplish his annual goals.

Outside of Arthur Benoit, who could not attend the meeting, all of the School Committee’s members graded Olsen on each section with a grade of “exceptional,” “proficient,” and “Needing Improvement”

In the performance portion of the evaluation, Olsen received “exceptional” or “proficient” scores in each category with the exception of two cases.

The first came from Erika Kohl, who expressed concerns with Olsen’s organizational practices, citing what she called a “hole” of accountability during the food safety scare earlier in the year as well as documenting policies regarding food items, although Kohl noted that was already on the right track to improvement.

Olsen’s second “Needing Improvement” score in the performance portion of the evaluation came from Margaret Murray came during an assessment of Olsen’s communication practices.

In this instance, Murray also noted the food safety concerns regarding the facility formerly known as the Barn, drawing concern that the School Committee was not notified before the public, media , and local health authorities became involved.

Like Kohl, Murray saw Olsen’s frequent positive messages, such as the sharing of thank you letters,as a plus. However, she believed that the positive from these positives had to be brought into balance with controversial issues to give the School Committee a fuller picture of the district as a whole.

On the Goals portion of the evaluation, Olsen did not do as well, a fact that he readily admitted due in large part to inclement weather during the year.

With the first goal, establishing a performance rubric of effective institutional practices, the Committee generally thought he did well with the exception of Murray, who believe that the more complex portions of the rubric remained unaccomplished.

However, on the goals of developing a model that would help gauge various student progress metrics, half of the board looked for improvement on the issue, believing that the goal had been continuing for several years without much to show in terms of results.

Likewise, Olsen did poorly on the goal of developing a systemwide model for accelerated learners, with all committee members rating the Superintendent as fully or partially in need of improvement with the exception of Angela Harkness, who put Olsen at proficient.

Due to the high marks in his performance section and the low marks in his goals section, the Committee unanimously voted to give Olsen $2,000 of the maximum $4,000 bonus allowable in his contract, although the Superintendent made it clear that he welcomed the constructive criticism such as the comments that were given during the evening, thanking the committee for the time they put into the assessment.

“Not everything’s always perfect, sometimes things I do will go wrong, and I need to hear about it,” said Olsen. “Everything you said was constructive in nature, and I appreciate it.”

Below is a list of Olsen's scores on the assessment. Detailed explanations of the scores are available to the public from the district at request.

Olsen's Scores In The Performance Section

Olsen's Scores In The Goals Section