Fire the superintendent. Or don’t. But FWISD has to get moving on change — now | Opinion

Everyone is talking about the future of the Fort Worth school district, it seems.

That includes the school board. The problem is, they aren’t letting the rest of us in on their conversation.

Trustees convened behind closed doors Tuesday night to discuss the fate of Superintendent Angélica Ramsey, the chief executive they formally evaluated just two months ago. Once again, they said nothing afterward. So, while everyone from the mayor to business and philanthropic leaders are airing dire warnings about FWISD’s ongoing academic failures, the district’s elected leaders keep the rest of us in the dark about how they see it and what they’re going to do about it.

Ramsey has just under two years left on her contract, but we can’t have the school district in limbo. Trustees have two realistic options: invest in Ramsey by extending her contract and backing her plans to retool the district or fire her immediately, even if it means paying her out.

Getting rid of Ramsey would buy the trustees time, which seems to be this group’s go-to play. It would give the board a chance to reset, gather consensus on what the district needs and pursue it.

Here’s the problem, though: Who wants this job? Who wants to step into a maelstrom of declining enrollment, fights over school closures, systemic budget issues and nine bosses who can’t decide what they want in a community crying out for change?

A new superintendent would inherit years of dysfunction in a time when everyone’s going to want quick, remarkable fixes that probably aren’t possible. When we’re talking about an enterprise of nearly a billion dollars a year that can’t teach kids to read or do math, the problems run deep.

If the board fires Ramsey, the rest of the academic year, at least, will be given over to a nationwide search. With luck, a new CEO will be in place for the start of the 2025-26 year. That person will want to bring in his or her team, surely modifying an administrative revamp that Ramsey already spent months on.

What happens on major pending issues, such as whether to close or renovate middle schools with dwindling student populations? What do we tell the parents of thousands of kids who lose yet another precious year of learning, many of whom are already dreadfully behind?

We hope board members are grappling with these difficulties, not just the politics of the situation. But then, how can we know, when they won’t talk?

Perhaps there’s an interim leader to be found, someone with the experience and clout to defuse tensions and start the district down the right road while trustees hunt for a permanent replacement. Anyone have former Dallas superintendent Michael Hinojosa’s cell number?

In the long-term, trustees must prioritize a plan for significant improvement. Ramsey’s attempt at a strategic plan fell flat with some, in part because it was seen as insufficiently ambitious. It should include crisis steps, such as immediate intervention for students at risk of never mastering the ability to read.

Help is available. Mayor Mattie Parker accelerated the conversation about the FWISD crisis last month with a letter, signed by dozens of civic, business and philanthropic leaders, calling for meaningful and lasting change to address the district’s basic academic failures. The signees have publicly committed themselves to help, and that includes foundations willing to spend money to tackle the district’s biggest academic problems.

The state must do its part, too, by boosting districts’ budgets and revising accountability measures to ensure the most accurate assessment possible of student performance.

No lasting turnaround can be done quickly. The main thing is to be honest about the depth of the problems and identify key steps to fixing them.

We can’t say whether firing Ramsey is the right decision. What we can say is that replacing her will be difficult, especially for those who will by definition have made a bad hire just two years ago. Why should we expect the trustees to do better this time?

Voters should be thinking about firings, too. Five board seats are on the ballot in May.