Nine months ago, when Walter G. Amprey emerged as a finalist for New York City's top schools job, the prospect of his leaving Baltimore brought an outpouring of support and pleas for him to stay.
Praised as a man with a mission and, more importantly, the vision to resuscitate the failing schools, the Baltimore schools superintendent had won over countless converts among lawmakers, civic leaders, parents and teachers. They expressed considerable relief when the superintendent withdrew from the New York race to remain in the city where he grew up and graduated from public schools.
You could forgive Dr. Amprey if he looked back now and savored the memory of such popularity.
Today, as he begins the final week of his third year at the helm, he finds himself the object of mounting criticism and doubts.
His harshest critics question his ability to rebuild schools that haveshown little or no improvement in student performance, attendance and dropout rates during his three years. Detractors say Dr. Amprey's failure to build consensus and his insistence on expanding an unproven school privatization venture have eroded confidence in him.
But his defenders suggest that while protests have garnered attention, a much quieter majority cheers him. Dr. Amprey has insisted on change, though it hasn't come as quickly or as smoothly as he would like.
By the end of what has come to be known as "hell week" at North Avenue headquarters, the charismatic superintendent spoke of healing and restoring a sense of purpose. "It's definitely been my most tumultuous week," he said.
"I think that trust has to be built up. . . . I think there could be long-term damage if we didn't recognize and take advantage of what's happening here. If we're not sincere here in what we doing -- if we're just doing something to just go through the motions -- then it's going to show in long-term damage."
In the past week, Dr. Amprey has seen sentiment against him spill over into protest from the central administration to City Hall, from Baltimore's streets to a sweltering auditorium at Patterson High. In a four-day span:
* Hundreds of teachers, their fellow union members and parents marched on City Hall, chanting, "The superintendent must go!" They accused the superintendent of trying to break the union's will during bitter contract negotiations by sending all 10,000 school employees a letter warning of a "considerable number" of layoffs and reassignments.
* More than 400 students walked out of Patterson High to protest Dr. Amprey's plan to let a Maine boarding school known for discipline run their East Baltimore school.
* Leaders of a proposed Waverly-area school to be run by teachers and parents stormed out of a packed hearing when Dr. Amprey and the school board refused to tell them whether their school would receive as much money per student as those run by Education Alternatives Inc.
* Unions, teachers, parents and community leaders demanded a halt to expanding the city's school privatization venture, saying it diverts millions from other public schools to an unproven experiment. The target: EAI, the for-profit Minnesota company that came under criticism last week when it admitted overstating scores on computerized tests at its "Tesseract" schools.
* The 8,500-member Baltimore Teachers Union called for Dr. Amprey's resignation, then pledged to withdraw the demand after a late-night summit arranged by the mayor between Dr. Amprey and union leaders. The next day, the truce collapsed, BTU President Irene Dandridge told reporters, a claim that surprised Dr. Amprey.
"We're in the middle of change, and it's difficult and it's hot," said Councilman Carl Stokes, D-2nd District, who heads the council's Education Committee.
Inevitably, the questions about the superintendent's leadership of the 113,00-student school district have been magnified by the sparring between Mayor Kurt L. Schmoke and his declared rival, Council President Mary Pat Clarke.
Just as inevitably, given the vocal opposition, the questions came with bewildering frequency. Will the mayor rein in the superintendent? Has Dr. Amprey become a political liability? Is the damage to relationships with administrators, the union, teachers and powerful civic groups irreparable?
Or, as others would suggest, does the opposition simply represent a resistance to wrenching, but necessary, change and a union-led effort to preserve the jobs of even the most incompetent teachers in failing schools? The answers, of course, depend on whom you ask. But few longtime school system observers would dispute that Dr. Amprey's tenure has reached a critical crossroads.
"It was inevitable that Dr. Amprey's extended honeymoon would come to an end," said Jeffrey Valentine, vice president of the Greater Baltimore Committee.
"Walter is doing some tough love to the school system. People need to be told what they need to hear whether they want to hear it or not."
On the other hand, critics complain that Dr. Amprey not only has failed to share his vision for reform but has shown an unwillingness to consider other opinions.
"Possibly the rest of the community feels what we feel -- total exclusion," said Carol Reckling, a volunteer leader and former president of Baltimoreans United In Leadership Development, a church-based activist organization.
Mrs. Clarke says Dr. Amprey comes across as a man "on a solo mission."
"You have to foster change, not foist it," says Mrs. Clarke. "You have to be able to share your vision to mobilize the community."
Even Mayor Schmoke, who says he is "impressed with Dr. Amprey's vision and direction for the schools," acknowledges that "some aspects of the vision are not clearly understood by all the shareholders."
For her part, Ms. Dandridge said of the protest and other public opposition: "I think it was something that had to happen; we could not have continued the way we were."
Nothing has galvanized, polarized, inspired or drawn wrath more than the role of Education Alternatives. An experiment in school privatization that started with nine schools two years ago now stands at the center of a war, with millions of dollars, a test of the union's clout and perhaps the future prospects of the company at stake.
On Friday, Dr. Amprey said he would "rule out" spending millions more in city money to give EAI management of three additional schools. Then, Saturday, he backtracked, saying many parents, teachers and community leaders in Sandtown-Winchester wanted EAI to manage the three elementary schools and that he could not stop the expansion if the school board favored it.
EAI provides just one example of Dr. Amprey's looking to outsiders for help turning schools around. Sylvan Learning Centers provide tutoring in schools; the Efficacy Institute of Massachusetts trains teachers and other school staff to raise expectations of children; and Marriott Corp. took over cafeterias in nearly 30 schools this year.
But Dr. Amprey says those high-profile efforts sometimes tend to overshadow more significant reforms. Among them, he says: the broad move toward school-based management, an effort to remake school security and comprehensive career and technology education.
Mayor Schmoke maintains the school system is in transition, not turmoil. In the past month, as contentious talk has begun to turn on whether Dr. Amprey could present a dilemma for the mayor, Mr. Schmoke reaffirmed his support of the superintendent, a man he says who is committed to dramatically changing the city's dismal schools.
"I am firmly convinced that public education needs competition if it's going to be successful," he said. "I'm against educational mediocrity."
The mayor, who faces a potentially bruising challenge by Mrs. Clarke next year, admits he fully expects to have to defend his promise of revamping the city schools and making Baltimore "the city that reads."
Political observers say Mrs. Clarke, who hopes to unseat the mayor in next year's election, is the first elected official to make a public case against the expansion of EAI. She says every city school should be given the same money per student as those run by the firm.
The superintendent's leadership style and his embrace of EAI could be potentially politically damaging for Mr. Schmoke, especially since the unions have made clear that they oppose further expansion.
DTC Still, the mayor has shown an ability to distance himself and emerge unscathed from other controversies surrounding members of his cabinet.
Said Mr. Stokes, "Dr. Amprey is not a liability today, but if he pushes for an expansion of [privatization] and gets it, it will cause tremendous repercussions for the mayor."