| Anthony Amato |
Last night, the public got a chance to question the finalists for Kansas City School District superintendent. So it's as good a time as any to check in on KC's last superintendent, Anthony Amato.
After less than a year, Amato was pushed out, leaving a lot of arguing behind. Were his key programs just canned plays he always implemented? Was he a decisive leader willing to do what needed to be done to turn Kansas City's schools around or just an asshole who couldn't work with anyone? Based on the reporting we did, it seemed like the latter. And it's looking more and more like we were right.
After leaving his job here with an ungodly severance package, Amato took over Stockton, a school district in California. And just as in Kansas City -- and everywhere else he'd worked -- he immediately announced that the district would implement the Success For All reading program. According to the Stockton Record, the program is being phased out because Amato didn't bother to get it approved by the California Department of Education (but did it anyway). Shocker. Which means the $6 million the district sank into the program was totally wasted, as was the academic year they spent training students on the program.
Amato said he was disappointed and maintained that the program helped students. But considering his history, we have no idea how he can be so sure the program actually works, because he can never have it in place or keep his job longer than nine months.
Showing 1-5 of 5
If you want to know what Amato has been up to visit the following site
http://savestocktonunified.blo...
Thank you for following up on Amato. There is definitely more to his story in KC, details that will never reach the public. He fooled a lot of people here, and worked his way into a job in Stockton. I have a feeling there will be more to his story, should anyone have an interest to continue the follow up. Too bad Joe Robertson, who had the same facts, wouldn't do the essential investigative journalism to uncover the truth.
I neglected to mention that the Pitch did a standup job on the issues I'd mentioned. How can a paper with perhaps 1% of the budget of the Star do a better job?
I have to agree with the previous poster.
The press, save for the Salina Journal, sat on its collective butt when State Board of Education member Connie Morris was ripping and running with taxpayer money. It sat on its butt when Patricia Kilpatrick was the legislative analogue of Phill Kline. It sat on its butt during the legislative for-profit prison wars. It did a crappy job on corruption in the MO legislature, congressional delegation and executive branch.
Surely the Star, even though its parent corporation's bottom line has tanked in the last year, can do better than this. "He said," "she said," is not journalism. There's simply no excuse.
like
dislike
