THE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT
Arthur J. Townley
The office of superintendent
of schools is generally regarded as the preeminent position in American public education. This view has not always prevailed.
Public schools existed in the United States for approximately 200 years before
the first superintendent was appointed, and a number of years passed before the
majority of districts appointed persons with this title.
Griffiths (1966) described
three stages in the development of the superintendency. These three stages
include the years 1837 to 1910, 1910 to 1945, and 1945 to the present. In the
first stage, a superintendent's major responsibility was supervision of the
instructional program. Analysis of the duties of the early superintendents
reveals little or no responsibility for business management, school buildings,
or finance. Superintendents considered themselves as scholars responsible for
working with teachers, rather than as the schools' chief executive officers we
envision today. However, by the end of this first period, the phrase school's
chief executive officer began to appear. Responsibilities were changing to
reflect the shift from a rural, agriculturally based society to an increasingly
urban, industrial society.
During the second phase of
development, from 1910 to 1945, the superintendent assumed the responsibilities
of a business official. He, or the female who rarely occupied this position,
became the executive officer of the board of education. Business operations
became the primary focus, with particular emphasis on efficiency of operation.
During this time, formal training for the superintendency was initiated by
universities and professors of educational administration gained prominence by
training professional administrators. Columbia University, the University of
Chicago, Stanford, and Harvard were the most influential institutions in the
training of superintendents. Thousands of aspiring superintendents enrolled in
these and other universities. The view of the superintendent as businessman
reached its peak about 1930. However, as the Great Depression nfolded, the public became disillusioned
with business leadership. As a consequence, the nation called for more
democratic administration in private as well as public organizations, including
schools.
In its third stage of
development, 1945 to the present, the superintendency continues to evolve.
However, its clearest attribute is shared leadership. The superintendent shares
leadership with professional organizations. State legislative bodies exert far
greater control and influence over schools than in previous decades. This
second half of the twentieth century has also seen extensive control of schools
through judicial rulings of state and federal courts. By the same token,
control of schools by local boards has diminished as unions, pressure groups,
and external government agencies have usurped their traditional powers.
During this third period,
priority in training superintendents has been focused on developing an
understanding of the uses of political power and the skills needed to share
authority with competing groups. Superintendents are now expected to build
coalitions for education reform. According to a recent survey, the average
tenure of superintendents is approximately six years (Education Week, 1988).
Ornstein (1990) found in a recent survey of the nation's 100 largest school
districts, that 24 percent of districts' chief executive officers were new
superintendents. The tenure of superintendents is in peril. This reality has
been particularly evident in large urban districts (Griffiths, 1966).
Although the year is open to
debate; Louisville, Kentucky, is generally credited with appointing the first
school superintendent, probably in 1837. The population of the city was 17,600;
school enrollment was only 716. Ten teachers were responsible for the 716
students. Teacher organizations of the 1990s would not be pleased with a
teacher-student ratio of 1 to 70+ (Griffiths, 1966).
In California, San Francisco
was the first district to appoint a superintendent. The position was created in
1852, with a student enrollment of 1,399. Los Angeles followed suit in 1854,
with a student enrollment of 127 (Griffiths, 1966).
The first superintendents
were teachers. The common practice was to appoint the best teacher as
superintendent. There was no consistent pattern in the title of the man or
woman who was named to this position. At various times, the person selected to
head the school district was designated visitor, manager, treasurer, or
headmaster. Of the many possible titles that could have been chosen for the
chief executive officer of American schools, the word superintendent emerged as
the best. Combining the Latin words super, meaning over, with intendere,
meaning direct attention to, seemed to fit the needs of boards of education
when they decided to employ someone to oversee and direct the operations of
schools.
Modern day superintendents
may look back at the first superintendents with nostalgia and envy. School
districts were, for the most part, small. It would not have been a difficult
task to personally know all staff
members, and in many communities,
most parents and influential community leaders. In the days before advanced
technology, a superintendent would not have had to cope with computer
technology, a car phone to which board members have access at all times, fax
machines, and the multitude of reports, accountability documents, and other
societal advancements that complicate the position today.
However, even in this early
era the superintendency did not enjoy universal support or lack for conflict.
Wilson (1960), in his book The
Modern School Superintendent, lists several indicators that life was not
smooth sailing for the early superintendents:
1. Many voices were raised in objection to the position
of superintendent. Economy-minded
citizens expressed the opinion that a superintendent has not been needed in the
past and is not needed now.
2. Local board members were often anxious to eliminate
the task of personally supervising the schools on one hand, but were also
jealous of giving up the task. Cries of one-man rule were often heard.
3. Teachers and principals often did not support the
superintendent and subverted the position in many ways. In many instances,
teachers and principals continued to have open access to board members and
showed littlereluctance to oppose a directive they did not like.
4. Lack of a clearly defined role for the superintendent
often resulted in conflict between the superintendent and the board or
individual board members.
5. The early superintendents rarely had formal training
in management or leadership skills. Universities did not attempt to provide
specialized training for the superintendency until long after it had been
established.
6. Major problems faced by the first superintendents
were board expectations that were difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.
These expectations were even more inappropriate in the face of reluctance to
provide compensation commensurate with responsibility.
A school district
superintendent in the 1990s could look at this list and confirm that--despite
the passage of
150 years--not much has changed.
Today over 14,000 men and
women serve as school superintendents in the United States. There is no doubt
as to the need for this
leadership position. Even the most militant unions have come to accept its
importance (Wirt, 1990). Wilson (1960) argued that proof of the arrival of any
group is its decision to organize. If that is the case, the superintendency
arrived before the close of the Civil War. At that time the National
Association of School Superintendents was formed, with representation from nine
states and 20 cities. This organization affiliated with the National Education
Association in 1870, then changed its name to American Association of School
Administrators (AASA) in 1937 (Wilson, 1960). It currently boasts a membership
of over 18,000, one of the largest departments of the National Education
Association (personal communication, January 8, 1992).
What are the characteristics
of school superintendents? The American superintendency is largely dominated by
middle-aged, Caucasian males, as has been true throughout the history of the
profession.
Sex. In a national survey of the urban superintendency in
1951, 99.4 percent of the respondents were male.
Thirty years later in 1982,
despite major changes in career opportunities for women, a survey of a sample
of
American school
superintendents revealed that 98.8 percent were male.
Age. In a survey in 1923, the median age of
superintendents was 43.1; in 1982, the median age was 48.7.
Ethnicity. Data on race were not gathered before 1971, but from
1971 to 1982, the percentage of minorities in
the superintendency remained
virtually unchanged at 2.1 percent (0.8% black, 0.8% Hispanic, 0.2% Native
American, 0.1% Asian-Pacific
Islander, and 0.2% other).
Family. Ninety-two percent were married; 87 percent reported
that their social status was higher than that
of their parents. A large
majority reported rural and small-town backgrounds, although an increasing
number came from suburbs and large cities (Cunningham & Hentges, 1982).
The American Association of
School Administrators (AASA) collects demographic data on administrators,
including superintendents,
approximately every ten years. Several trends were discovered in their 1980
survey:
1. Superintendents reported a slightly higher turnover
rate than in the previous ten-year period and areduced length of time spent in
the superintendency as a career (a mean of seven years). The averagelength of
service in any one superintendency was estimated at 5.6 years.
2. There was evidence of increased tension between
superintendents and school boards, with about one respondent in six reporting
that he or she had left the previous superintendency because of conflict with
the board.
3. Fewer superintendents said they would choose the
profession again if given the chance (although half would still have done so).
4. Superintendents viewed their role as growing in
importance and status as a career.
5. Superintendents reported that conflict is a built-in
element of the job, and that the environment is filled with tension.
6. As many as 75 percent of all superintendents will be
eligible to retire by 1994 (Cunningham & Hentges, 1982).
Unlike most states, the
California Legislature has placed a number of responsibilities for the
superintendent in statute. The major provisions are as follows:
Secretary and
bookkeeper. The governing board
of any school district may employ a person not a member of the board to act as
secretary and bookkeeper for the board. This responsibility is typically
assigned to the superintendent. Duties include the following:
1. Certify or attest to actions taken by the governing
board whenever such certification or attestation is required for any purpose.
2. Keep an accurate account of the receipts and
expenditures of school monies.
3. Make an annual report, on or before the first day of
July, to the County Superintendent of Schools in the manner and form and on the
blanks prescribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction.
4. Make or maintain such other records or reports as are
required by law (Education Code §35025 & §35250).
Additional powers and
responsibilities. In addition to
the superintendent serving as the secretary and
bookkeeper for the board,
responsibilities are also described in the following excerpts from California
law:
1. Act as chief executive officer of the governing board
of the district.
2. Prepare and submit to the governing board of the
district, at the time it may direct, the budget of the district for the next
ensuing school year, and revise and take other action in connection with the
budget as the board may desire.
3. Subject to the approval of the governing board,
assign all employees of the district, employed in positions requiring
certification qualifications, to the positions in which they are to serve; this
power to assign includes the power to transfer a teacher from one school to
another.
4. Determine that each employee of the district in a position
requiring certification qualifications has a valid certificated document
registered as required by law and authorizing him or her to serve in the
position to which he or she is assigned.
5. Enter into contracts for and on behalf of the
district.
6. Submit two reports during the fiscal year to the
governing board. The first report shall cover the financial and budgetary
status of the district for the period ending not earlier than October 31 nor
later than December 31. The second report shall cover the period ending March
31 (Education Code §35035).
Employment term and
qualifications. In addition to
containing job responsibilities, powers, and duties, a
number of Education Code
sections pertain to employment of the superintendent.
No person shall be eligible
to hold a position as city superintendent, district superintendent, deputy
superintendent, associate superintendent, or assistant superintendent of
schools unless he or she is the
holder of both a valid
school administration certificate and a valid teacher's certificate (Education
Code
§35028).
However, the subsequent code
section grants authority to a local board to waive credential requirements
for the superintendent.
"A local governing board may waive any credential requirement for the
chief
administrative officer of
the school district under its jurisdiction" (Education Code §35029).
Any district superintendent
of schools may be elected for a term of no more than four years. The governing
board, with the consent of
the employee concerned, may at any time terminate, effective on the next
succeeding first day of July, the term of employment of, and any contract of
employment with the superintendent, and reelect or reemploy the employee on
those terms and conditions as may be mutually
agreed upon by the board and
the employee, for a new term to commence on the effective date of the
termination of the existing
term of employment (Education Code §35031).
This same code section
contains a provision for notice to the superintendent should the board determine
not to renew the contract. In the event the governing board determines the
superintendent is not to be reelected or reemployed upon the expiration of his
or her term, he or she shall be given written notice thereof by the governing
board at least 45 days in advance of the expiration of his or her term.
In the 1989-1990 school year
California had 1,010 school districts ranging in size from a small, rural
district
in northern California with
a student population of 32 students to the large, metropolitan district of Los
Angeles with a student population in excess of 800,000 and more than 600
schools. All but the very smallest of these 1,010 districts has a
superintendent (California Public School Directory, 1989). Education Code
Section 35026 states, "The governing board of any school district
employing eight or more teachers may employ a district superintendent for one
or more schools and may delegate to the district superintendent any of the
duties prescribed for in Section 35250", which reads, "The governing
board of each school district shall fix and prescribe the duties to be
performed by all persons in public school service in the district."
Even though the job title of
the Superintendent Principal Teacher of Alpine district with its 32 students
may not be the same as that of the Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School
District, the range of responsibilities and the job requirements are very
comparable. Each governing board has responsibility to develop a specific job
description for the superintendent; a description that is usually contained in
an employment contract. Regardless of the details, every superintendent is
responsible to a board of education. Every superintendent has overall
supervision responsibilities for the district's budget, personnel, and
instructional program.
During the calendar year
1990, 105 California school districts announced an opening for the chief
executive
officer (Job Information
Survey, 1990). The announcements varied greatly as to compensation, size of
district, and socioeconomic settings, but job requirements were strikingly
similar. An analysis of the qualifications, competencies, and skills expected
of applicants by boards of education helps define the position of
superintendent.
California presents the
paradox of requiring an administrative credential to serve as an assistant
principal,
principal, or assistant
superintendent, but not for the superintendency. Nevertheless, each job
announcement posted in 1990 required an administrative credential. All the
districts called for a master's degree; only a few required a doctorate.
However, several larger districts listed a doctorate as desirable.
Experience requirements
varied with the type of district announcing the vacancy. California districts
use a
variety of organizational
patterns. For example, elementary districts may contain grades kindergarten
through sixth, or kindergarten through eighth. To accommodate children who
leave an elementary district, high school districts have matching
configurations with grades seven through twelve, nine through twelve, or other
patterns to receive students leaving the feeder elementary districts. In
addition, there are unified districts that
encompass all grades from kindergarten through twelfth.
The experience required of
superintendent candidates reflected the grade pattern in the districts. The
elementary districts commonly required teaching and administrative experience
at the elementary and middle school grades, whereas high school districts
included secondary teaching experience as a job requirement. A common statement
among unified districts was that preference will be given to candidates with
service at elementary and secondary levels. All districts, except for the very
smallest, included a prerequisite for site level experience as a principal.
Larger districts included a requirement for district level experience as an
assistant superintendent.
Problem-solving skills
appeared near the top in every job announcement. Problem-solving is the primary
and most time-consuming task of the leader in any organization. Eventually all
major school problems will reach the superintendent's desk. It can be estimated
that within a typical day, a superintendent will be asked to solve as many as
fifty problems. The scope of problems ranges from minutiae to those that
literally deal with life and death. Within one hour, a superintendent may meet
with an irate parent who is dissatisfied with the way a principal solved a
minor discipline problem--and be called to the scene of an accident where
children have been injured or killed.
Lippitt (1969) identified
six basic elements of problem-solving. The steps in this model are illustrated
in
developing the district's
annual budget.
School boards recognize
outstanding communication skills as a necessity for the school district's chief
executive. Indeed, this qualification was listed in every job announcement. It
has been estimated that an administrator spends approximately 90 percent of his
or her time attending meetings and keeping appointments, writing letters or
reports, or participating in some other form of oral or written
communication (Konnert &
Augenstein, 1990). Leaders communicate at all times, and the more effective the
communication, the more effective the leadership (Bennis & Nanus, 1985).
Probably no executive in
private industry is required to communicate with so vast and diverse a range of
individuals and audiences as
a school superintendent. A typical day might include the following activities.
Note the individuals and
audiences involved.
7:30 a.m. Meets with the local service club, whose
members represent the business and professional community.
8:30 a.m. Spends a few minutes with the secretary
dictating letters and planning the next board agenda.
9:00 a.m. Meets with the Assistant Superintendent for Personnel and an attorney to prepare for a scheduled negotiating session with the teachers' union.
10:15 a.m. Travels to the Transportation Department to look at a new bus just delivered to the district; spends a few minutes with bus drivers and mechanics in small talk and hearing comments on the merits of the new vehicle.
10:50 a.m. Visits an Advanced Placement Senior
English class at the high school to discuss censorship and freedom of the
press, as requested by the students.
12:00 noon Eats lunch in the high school faculty room
and engages in several conversations, some of which are professional in nature,
while others are more personal chats about movies, vacation plans, or other
topics of interest.
1:05 p.m.
Meets with Superintendent's Cabinet, which includes assistant superintendents
and principals. The superintendent chairs the group and leads discussion of a
number of important topics on the cabinet agenda, including preparation for
student graduation exercises, tentative plans for implementing year-round
education, and a request from the local assemblyman for a list of the district's
educational priorities.
3:00 p.m. Attends and testifies at a grievance
hearing; set because a custodian has filed an age discrimination complaint
against the district.
4:00 p.m. Returns to the office to answer a dozen or
more phone calls from a variety of constituents, including parents, board
members, local business owners, and several staff members. The superintendent
dictates requests for letters of reference and starts developing agenda items
for the next board meeting.
7:00 p.m. Attends a Parent-Teacher Association
meeting at one of the elementary schools and is asked to make a few comments
about district plans for year-round schools. At the break, the superintendent
exchanges information with two board members and a number of parents about
several issues, particularly the year-round school. During this discussion,
some individuals express enthusiasm for year-round schools, and others express
strong opposition to the program.
As the schedule
demonstrates, a superintendent is engaged in almost constant communication with
a wide variety of individuals and audiences. He or she must be able to move
smoothly from discussing freedom of the press with gifted students and a highly
educated teacher to discussing the merits of energy conservation devices on a
new bus with mechanics. The effective superintendent is able to adapt his or
her language to the audience and has finely tuned listening and speaking
skills.
All the 1990 job
announcements placed high priority on development of board policies as a major
skill requirement. The function of the board of education is to legislate; and
the job of the superintendent, to
serve as the executive
officer. The California Education Code also clearly establishes responsibility
for legislation, as recorded in board
policies, as a duty of the board of education.
When a board adopts policy,
it acts as a lawmaking body. The board's policy provides direction for
educational priorities of a community. Policies provide a historical, written
record of board decisions and
enable a staff to adopt a
proactive, rather than a reactive, posture. For example, a clearly defined
policy
regarding employees who have
an infectious disease will enable the administrative staff to act promptly and
consistently, should such a situation arise.
Numerous sections throughout
the Education Code require the board of education to develop policy. As the
state legislature has become more prescriptive in its directives to local
school districts, it has found requirements for board policy an effective means
of monitoring compliance. In many instances, the
Education Code also requires
a local board to review a given policy annually; a process that increases the
likelihood of compliance. For example, each California board is required to
adopt a policy certifying
personnel who may evaluate
the teaching staff. In addition, the board is required to annually review and
re-certify this policy.
It is generally agreed that
policy setting is the most important function of the board of education.
However,
it is equally clear that the
superintendent has responsibility for developing policy for consideration by
the board. If ever a superintendent needs to be proactive, the development of
board policies is a case in point. The time when the board, staff, or community
is engaged in a controversy is not the time to develop a policy to handle the
situation. Rather, problem areas need to be anticipated and policies adopted at
a time when the board, community, and staff can address an issue calmly and
without undue emotion. A superintendent often identifies
potential areas of conflict
and policy needs through professional reading and contacts with superintendents
in other districts.
In California, several
resources, including consultants, are available to assist in the time-consuming
task of
drafting board policies. The
California School Boards Association has staff members who specialize in
developing model district
policies. For a modest fee the policies are furnished to districts as they are
developed to meet new legal requirements or newly emerging issues in California
schools. This
association and others also
review a district's policies to ensure that they are up-to-date and in
compliance
with legal requirements.
Each 1990 announcement for a
California superintendency contained a statement regarding the importance of an
excellent relationship with the governing board. Some of the announcements
included statements similar to the following:
The skill of maintaining
excellent relationships with and confidence of the board is probably the
highest priority for a superintendent who wishes to maintain his or her
effectiveness and leadership in the district.
Four hundred sixty-eight
California districts announced a vacancy for the superintendency between 1986
and 1989 (Giles & Giles, 1990). These figures suggest that ten percent or
more of California districts seek a superintendent each year. The study found
that 20.5 percent of superintendents left their current positions to accept
other superintendencies, while 15.8 percent took lesser administrative
positions. Another 18.4 percent resigned for planned voluntary retirement,
while 6.6 percent were reported as having been forced to take an unplanned,
involuntary retirement. Approximately one-third (38.7 percent) left the
superintendency entirely because of disharmony between the superintendent and
the board. Every effort needs to be made by the superintendent and governing
board to maintain effective working relationships. Several suggestions for
maintaining excellent working relationships include:
1. Represent the
board's will. As spokesman for
the board, the superintendent may have to present board
policies or regulations with
which he or she disagrees. Once a superintendent has made a recommendation
as professionally and
forcefully as possible, it is incumbent upon him or her to carry out the
board's decision in a straightforward and effective fashion.
Under no circumstances
should the superintendent indicate that something is being done because the
board mandated it. Occasionally, the superintendent must stoically accept
criticism for board direction or policy. Nevertheless, any doubts about the
policy should not be publicly discussed or displayed. Any different action runs
the risk of loss of confidence by the board.
2. Carefully plan the
board agenda. The effective
superintendent must be skilled in researching and planning the board agenda in
great detail and in the most thoughtful manner. Concerns of all board members
should be addressed with great sensitivity to issues and personalities
involved. Lack of attention to detail in the agenda, or poorly written items,
may lead to discord and disharmony among board members and concern about the
competency of the superintendent. The entire board agenda and support materials
should be delivered to board members well in advance of the meeting.
3. No surprises. Effective boards and superintendents establish an
agreement of no surprises. Nothing makes a board member as upset with the
superintendent as hearing at the supermarket that a popular
principal plans to resign,
or that there was a student demonstration at the high school.
The effective superintendent
utilizes every communication avenue to keep the board informed of all
significant or sensitive
issues in the district. The phrase, "Notify the board before they hear it
from someone else," should be posted in every superintendent's office. Superintendents
should be aware of the issues and
decisions that may cause
controversy and alert board members so they will be prepared for the inevitable
phone calls. When things go
wrong, critics claim surprise and disclaim responsibility on grounds that they
were not informed.
4. Remember who is
boss. California superintendents
serve at the pleasure of the board. The effective superintendent needs to keep
in mind that board meetings should be conducted by the board president
with participation by the board.
There is an old adage: If board meetings are drama, then the board president is
the star. It is the task of the board president, not the superintendent, to
move through the agenda with proper participation by other board members and
the public. However, many superintendents meet with the board president prior
to each meeting to review the agenda and discuss strategies for managing
difficult items (Bisso, 1988).
There are a number of clear
danger signs in the superintendent-board relationship:
1. Weak board rapport. The perception that a superintendent is not working
in harmony with the board is a
clear danger sign. If the
board believes that the superintendent is not open to criticism and not
following board policy or instructions, the superintendent's tenure is probably
in jeopardy.
2. Lack of staff
respect. A staff that is not
supportive of the superintendent results in loss of confidence by the board.
The staff must have respect for the superintendent and his or her leadership
ability. If respect and support have eroded, the system loses cohesion and the
chain of command breaks down.
3. Poor communication
skills. Failure to communicate
effectively puts the superintendent at a serious disadvantage. Poor directives
lead to confusion and loss of confidence. For example, the effective
superintendent must take the most complicated regulations from federal or state
agencies and communicate these requirements to the board, staff, and community
in a manner that is easily understood.
4. Lack of evaluation
procedures. Superintendents
whose performance evaluation is given verbally or not at all stand a greater
risk of dismissal than those who have written evaluations from their boards
(Fultz, 1976).
No superintendent will
survive without exceptional human relations skills. The average citizen would
define this skill as the ability to get along with people. To put it another
way, the most important activity of a supervisor is to help people within an
organization to become as skillful and effective as possible (Daresh, 1989).
Human relations skills were
important in the past, but they are imperative today. One of the most important
skills of an executive is the ability to get along with people. Managers
generally rate this ability more vital than intelligence, decisiveness, or
knowledge of job requirements. Because of the vast numbers of students,
parents, and staff who interact with the superintendent, the ability to get
along with others is primary.
Effective human relations
skills are a prerequisite for the successful leader. An effective leader must
possess an interpersonal competence, particularly the sensitivity to understand
the effect of one's own behavior on others and how one's own personality shapes
his particular leadership style and value system (Bennis, 1970). The successful
superintendent must have a keen understanding of the culture and needs of
various individuals and groups. An angry parent may not need an instant
solution, but may only need the opportunity to
communicate his or her concerns
to the superintendent to feel that needs are being addressed. The
superintendent must be adept at building coalitions to support schools and
programs and be masterful in helping groups arrive at consensus. Finally, the
superintendent who enjoys the job, who likes students, who can turn lemons into
lemonade, who has a keen sense of humor and does not take himself or herself
too seriously, is likely to be rated outstanding in human relations skills.
Creating a Vision
School boards expect a
leader who can create a vision. A typical leadership vision statement might
indicate
that the superintendent has
a vision of where the district might go and what the district might become; with
the ability to articulate it, to incorporate other points of view, and to
decisively lead the district. School boards recognize that effective
superintendents have a personal set of values, beliefs, and expectations that
they can communicate effectively to staff and community. The superintendent
must have the capacity to move people to action, to communicate persuasively,
and to strengthen the confidence of followers (Gardner, 1989).
A study by Murphy and
Hallinger (1988) of highly effective California school districts found student
performance related to the superintendent's clearly established goals and
expectations for student achievement indicated that:
It is imperative that the
successful superintendent sets the direction and tone of the school district.
The superintendent holds a clear set of expectations that are forcefully
articulated to staff and administrators. Central office staff and principals
are held accountable for the achievement of objectives. The superintendent
models a commitment to instructional improvement and knows what is happening in
the district. The chief executive places a high priority on student achievement
and nurtures instructional improvements. As a leader in the district, he or she
is highly visible in schools and classrooms.
Each job announcement
included a requirement for understanding school finance, budgeting, and
business operations. Unless the candidate has served as a business manager or
assistant superintendent for business, this area is probably the most difficult
for the new superintendent. School finance is also an area that results in he dismissal of many superintendents. For
example, one of the job announcements included the following statement:
Presently the district is operating on a very tight budget which will require a
high degree of planning and developing a course of action to remedy the
problem. An applicant to that district is either a candidate highly competent
in budgeting and finance, or a very foolish individual.
Specific responsibilities of
the superintendent in the business arena are complex and include the major
tasks of financial planning, accounting, auditing, cost analysis, and purchasing.
In smaller districts, the superintendent is also responsible for direct
supervision of food service, transportation, and operation and maintenance of
school plants. In California, the entire gamut of rules and regulations for
school construction is often a major consideration for superintendents and
governing boards.
In preparing for the
superintendency, aspiring administrators should seek opportunities to gain
expertise in this most critical job responsibility. The superintendent's role
is to plan activities and manage resources effectively so as to achieve
district goals within available means. It is imperative that the superintendent
constantly monitor the financial health of the district and plan for the
prudent use of the district's financial resources.
Several job announcements
contained the following statement: Has a commitment to academic excellence and
an ability to lead the district in curriculum development, implementation, and
evaluation. A superintendent must maintain the role of chief instructional
leader of the district. Not only does the superintendent establish the
direction and tone of the district; the successful superintendent must also
model excellent teaching skills and demonstrate a strong interest in student
learning. Superintendents visit classrooms, monitor student progress, and hold
principals accountable for student achievement. As they manage meetings,
explain courses of action, and write recommendations, superintendents apply
teaching strategies in new settings.
The superintendent should be
a strong child advocate. Other staff members may have vested interests and be
unable to see or evaluate the big picture. For example, a high school English
teacher may be very disturbed about students missing part of the English class
to attend an assembly on drug education, or may resent funds being used to
support a strong music or athletic program. It is the responsibility of the
superintendent to assist staff in providing a comprehensive education for all
students. The superintendent is responsible for working with staff and the
board to develop specific instructional goals for the district and an
evaluation system to ensure that goals are being met.
The superintendent also has
a major role in dealing with board members in the instructional arena. Boards
rely on the superintendent to possess strong competencies in curriculum, the
area in which they typically feel least comfortable. They may also become
preoccupied with financial, business, or personnel matters, to the exclusion of the instructional program. One
technique to keep the board focused on instruction is to include a curriculum
or instruction item on each board agenda. Many superintendents schedule regular
presentations by staff and students to provide board members with an overview
of a grade level or subject area curriculum. Just as superintendents are
required to present financial reports to the board; it is crucial that they
present the board and the community with reports of academic achievement of
students.
Superintendents need
expertise in personnel management relative to the selection, development, and
evaluation of staff. Experience in collective bargaining is an additional skill
needed for effective personnel practices. Personnel management usually includes
the following components:
1. Personnel planning. The superintendent and staff should develop a plan
to meet current and future personnel needs. This task includes projecting
future student enrollment and expected turnover due to resignations and
retirements. This plan is also used to project future staffing needs. The plan
must also be
closely coupled with
projected future curriculum developments, anticipating expansion of music,
science, or other curriculum areas, or the addition of library or other support
services.
2. Recruitment. Once staffing needs have been identified, the next
task for the personnel director or
superintendent in a smaller
district is the actual recruitment of a qualified staff. Part of the planning process
should include identifying potential candidates among students and existing
staff within the district. Many districts sponsor a Future Teachers
Organization at the secondary school, encouraging young people to consider
teaching as a profession. These same young people may do their teaching fieldwork
in the district and become welcome candidates when a vacancy occurs. Another
source of potential teacher candidates is the teacher substitute list.
Principals have opportunities to observe substitutes in action and to assess
each individual's potential as a permanent employee. In addition to candidates
within the district, the successful superintendent will establish a close
working relationship with teacher-training colleges and universities as a
source for teacher candidates.
3. Selection. A strong case should be made for the most rigorous
standards of selection. Selection errors are
costly not only in effect on
students, but also in dollars spent for inadequate service, and in time
required to document the employee's deficiencies as the prelude to dismissal.
4. Staff development. Staff development is often neglected in school
districts. The amount budgeted for inservice programs is woefully inadequate by
comparison with private industry. Districts infrequently provide release time
for developing new curriculum or reviewing new instructional strategies.
Teachers are rarely given time away from the school and their students;
instead, they are expected to participate in staff development programs on
their own time.
5. Evaluation. The successful superintendent ensures that a clear,
concise evaluation program is in place
for all personnel. Staff
should be extensively involved in planning work performance objectives and developing
criteria for measuring success.
6. Negotiations. Employees in all but the smallest of California
school districts are represented by an exclusive bargaining agent. Collective
bargaining is the process of negotiating between management and
employees on the terms and
conditions of employment. Due to the complexity of the laws, rules, and regulations
regarding collective bargaining, most California districts employ an attorney
to assist in the
process. Again, except in
very small districts, the superintendent is usually advised not to sit directly
at the table during negotiations. However, as the direct representative of the
governing board, he or she must be closely attuned to the process.
One of the most important
responsibilities of the board of education is regular evaluation of the superintendent's
performance. Evaluation of the superintendent really begins with the board's
selection of
an individual to serve as
the chief executive officer of the district. The board has determined the
skills and characteristics that are important in that district. They have
chosen someone they trust, someone whom they believe will exhibit the
educational leadership necessary for the schools in that community. The board has
a responsibility to ensure success for the new superintendent; therefore, it
makes sense to review expectations and progress toward meeting those
expectations at regular intervals.
The professional
organization representing superintendents, the Association of California School
Administrators (ACSA), and the California School Boards Association (CSBA),
representing board members, strongly urge superintendents and boards to
mutually develop formal procedures for a regular review of the superintendent's
responsibilities and performance. Model contract agreements between the superintendent
and board have been developed by the two professional organizations, both of
which suggest that procedures for formal evaluation should be included within
the employment contract. The rationale for a formal evaluation includes the
following issues:
1. Meets legal
requirements. The California
Education Code requires that all certificated personnel be evaluated. Section
44660 requires the board to establish a uniform system for evaluation of the
performance of all certificated employees. Legal opinions vary as to whether
this requirement applies to superintendents. Clearly, if a district employs a
non-certificated superintendent, the code section would not apply.
2. Identifies
priorities and responsibilities.
The roles and responsibilities of the superintendent and board must be
clarified to avoid misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations. A major
function of the evaluation process should be to establish, clearly and
forcefully, both long and short range priorities for the district. For example,
should the superintendent focus on strengthening the academic pre-college program,
or should greater emphasis be given to vocational education? Clearly
established goals set by the board and superintendent will focus the
superintendent's energy and ensure effective use of human and financial
resources.
3. Establishes
accountability for carrying out district policy. Once objectives are established, the evaluation process
assists in determining how well the district is accomplishing its mission. The
evaluation process provides an excellent opportunity for both board and
superintendent to take stock of the district. At this
time, the superintendent can
share information with board members to deepen their insight into school
issues. He or she can alert the board
to potential problems before they become a crisis.
4. Provides feedback
to superintendent on performance.
The evaluation process offers a forum in which to
promote communication and
strengthen working relationships between the board and superintendent. It is an
opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses and to identify steps toward
improved performance. Should the superintendent's performance be
unsatisfactory, the evaluation also satisfies a legal requirement that the
superintendent be given written notice of non-renewal at least 45 days prior to
the expiration of his or her contract. If the notice is not given, the contract
is automatically renewed for the same length of time and with the same
conditions as the expiring one (Education Code §35031).
5. Provides a basis
for reemployment and salary increases. The formal evaluation is usually followed by renewal or termination of
the superintendent's contract. Mutually agreeable revisions or amendments are considered.
This is also the time for the board to consider a salary adjustment and to
review the mileage allowance and other benefits accorded their chief executive
officer (California School Boards Association,
1985).
There are several formal
processes from which a board may select when developing a system for evaluation
of the superintendent. This selection should be given thorough consideration by
the board, utilizing suggestions solicited from the superintendent. The system
is best developed for long-term use, as it will probably become the board's
basic format for future evaluations of the superintendent.
California School Boards
Association (CSBA, 1985) suggests five types of formal evaluation instruments:
1. Checklist. The checklist provides a specific list of activities
or functions that the board expects the superintendent to complete. The
advantages of this process are the relative ease of completion and quick
identification of
differences in perception among individual board members. Its major
disadvantages include reliance on personal judgments, ambiguity in the rating
scale, and findings that may represent opinion, rather than fact.
2. List of traits and
skills. This instrument is
similar to the checklist, but focuses on personal characteristics
of the superintendent,
rather than activities or duties. It has the same advantages and disadvantages
as the checklist. In addition, however, it may indicate that the superintendent
is the type of person the board wants without assessing progress toward
expected results.
3. Written essay. As the phrase suggests, each board member writes a
narrative listing the superintendent's
accomplishments, strengths,
and weaknesses. They also suggest areas for improvement. The president of the
board usually has the responsibility of summarizing the major points indicated
by individual members. The advantages of this system are that it forces
individual board members to do a broad assessment of the superintendent's
accomplishments (or inadequacies) and provides a rich source for discussion
with the superintendent. Its disadvantages include an unequal weighing of procedural
and personal matters, and the difficulty of synthesizing thoughts that are variously
expressed and organized. In addition, board members are sometimes reluctant to
record their thoughts on paper.
4. Management by
Objectives (MBO). This system directly
addresses a list of objectives agreed upon by the
board and superintendent. It
requires a careful analysis of district needs, usually prior to the beginning
of a school year. At the end of the reporting period, the superintendent is
responsible for providing the board with documentation demonstrating his or her
progress in meeting the objectives. The advantage of the MBO system is that it
helps clarify board expectations and provides specific priorities for the superintendent.
The disadvantages include the risk of assessing program achievement rather than
the superintendent's performance. For example, it may be difficult to determine
whether students scored high or low on an assessment test as a result of the
superintendent's performance, or for some other reason. An additional
disadvantage is that the MBO system typically calls for a significant amount of
record-keeping.
5. Performance
appraisal. A performance appraisal instrument combines
managerial job skills, personal
traits, and achievement of objectives.
The evaluation addresses both personal skills of the superintendent
and board objectives. The
advantages of performance appraisal combine the advantages of all the systems
listed above. Its
disadvantage is the extended time and effort necessary to develop and implement
the
process (CSBA, 1985).
Outside the formal
procedures, informal evaluation of the superintendent is a continual process
that occurs every day. Board members, staff, students, and the community
appraise the superintendent at each encounter. This appraisal takes place in
conversations, at board meetings, and in social contacts. Every time a board
member reads the paper, or receives a phone call from a parent or citizen, his
or her image of the superintendent grows and changes. The superintendent's
conduct at a football game, at a Parent-Teacher meeting, even in a local
restaurant contributes to an overall impression that will be reflected in
formal evaluation. An alert superintendent who possesses good human relations skills
is constantly aware of impressions received by others and is not surprised to
realize that these impressions not only play a role in effective leadership,
but also slip into the formal evaluation process.
Although the salaries of
school superintendents have increased dramatically over the last two decades,
compensation is still
considerably below that of an equivalent position in private industry. In 1990,
the New York City Superintendent earned the highest salary among chief school
officials--$195,000 annually (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 1991). The Los Angeles
Unified School District Superintendent received a salary of $164,555 in
1990-1991 (Los Angeles Times, 1991). Annual salaries for other California
superintendencies ranged from a low of $40,000 in Mattole Union School District
with a student enrollment of 107 students to a high of $102,000 in Mt. Diablo
Unified School District; then in excess of 30,000 students (Association of California
School Administrators, 1990).
By contrast, a 1989 issue of
USA Today reported that 768 business executives earned an average of $1.13
million in salary and
bonuses. With the addition of long-term compensation, fringe benefits, and
stock options, the average pay of these executives jumped to $2.03 million per
year (USA Today, 1989). If responsibilities, budgets, and numbers of personnel
are compared, the superintendent of a district with 25,000 or more students
matches a chief executive officer in private industry who receives a salary of $350,000
to $400,000. In the 16 largest school districts with a student enrollment of
100,000 or more, a salary comparable to that in private industry would fall in
the range of $500,000 to $750,000 (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 1991).
Why do superintendents
receive so much less compensation than their counterparts in private industry? An
obvious reason is that the superintendent is paid from tax dollars. Elected
officials are understandably reluctant to increase salaries in the face of
continuing protests about high taxes. Often, the elected official who decides
the compensation of the superintendent earns a lesser salary. This same board
member may have little real knowledge of the requirements or demands of a
managerial position. Moreover, many California school superintendents earn more
than other public officials, including the police and fire chiefs, the city
manager, and the mayor in the same community. California superintendents of the
larger districts receive a higher salary than the State Superintendent of
Schools and the Governor. Finally, an argument can be made that most California
superintendents came from the ranks of the teaching profession where salaries
have been modest in comparison to other professions. If the superintendent's
compensation greatly exceeds the salaries paid to the highest paid teacher,
conflict and resentment may ensue, interfering with the superintendent's
ability to inspire staff with his leadership.
The superintendent is the
single most important position in the public schools. It is this individual
whose influence extends from the curriculum to the athletic field. The
superintendent affects the climate of the school district and ultimately the
very nature of the community. It is because of this tremendous influence that
it is imperative that the superintendent reflect the diverse needs of the
community and demonstrate the quality of leadership that will meet the
challenge of the tremendous changes that are taking place in California.
The superintendent must be
an effective manager without losing touch with the instructional program and the
needs of children. The successful superintendent will be someone who can
forcefully articulate a vision for the schools and then work with widely
divergent groups to bring this vision to reality. Because our communities
expect schools to be sensitive to their needs and expectations, only a leader
who has the ability to create community support for the schools and involve
others in making decisions about schools will be successful superintendents.
Bennis, W. (1970). American
bureaucracy. New York: Alpine.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B.
(1985). Leaders: Strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper & Row.
Bisso, J. M. (1988, June).
Board president: Here's how I stay friends with the superintendent. American
School Board Journal, 175(6), 38-39.
Cunningham, L. L., &
Hentges, J. T. (1982). The American school superintendent 1982: A summary report. Arlington, VA: American
Association of School Administrators.
Daresh, J. C. (1989).
Supervision as a proactive process. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Fultz, D. A. (1975,
September). Eight ways superintendents lose their jobs. American School Board
Journal, 163(9), 42-51.
Gardner, J. (1989,
February). Leadership: attributes and context. NASSP Bulletin, 514, 58.
Giles, D., & Giles, S.
(1990, Winter). Where do all the superintendents go? California School Board
Journal, 30-35.
Griffiths, D. E. (1966). The
school superintendent. New York: Center for Applied Research in Education.
Konnert, M. W., &
Augenstein, J. J. (1990). The superintendency in the nineties. Lancaster, PA:
Technomic.
Lippitt, G. (1969).
Organizational renewal. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Murphy, J., & Hallinger,
P. (1988, January/February). Characteristics of instructionally effective
school districts. Journal of Educational Research, 81(3), 175-181.
Ornstein, A. C. (1991).
Education administration: Concepts and practices. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Wilson, R. (1960). The
modern school superintendent. New York: Harper & Row.
Association of California
School Administrators. (1990). Job Information Survey. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Bennis, W. (1970). American
bureaucracy. New York: Alpine.
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B.
(1985). Leaders: Strategies for taking charge. New York: Harper & Row.
Bisso, J. M. (1988, June).
Board president: Here's how I stay friends with the superintendent. American School
Board Journal, 175(6), 38-39.
California Public Schools
Directory. (1989). Sacramento, CA: California State Department of Education,
Office of State Printing.
California School Boards
Association. (1985). Evaluating your superintendent. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Cunningham, L. L., &
Hentges, J. T. (1982). The American school superintendent 1982: A summary
report.
Arlington, VA: American
Association of School Administrators.
Daresh, J. C. (1989).
Supervision as a proactive process. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Education Codes of California.
(1991). West's Annotated Education Codes. St. Paul, MN: West.
Education Week. (1988,
January 20). Highlights of Administrator's Survey.
Fultz, D. A. (1975,
September). Eight ways superintendents lose their jobs. American School Board Journal,
163(9), 42-51.
Gardner, J. (1989,
February). Leadership: attributes and context. NASSP Bulletin, 514, 58.
Giles, D., & Giles, S.
(1990). Quest. Chula Vista, CA: Giles & Associates.
Giles, D., & Giles, S.
(1990, Winter). Where do all the superintendents go? California School Board Journal,
30-35.
Griffiths, D. E. (1966). The
school superintendent. New York: Center for Applied Research in Education. How
much top execs made in '88. (1989, April). USA Today, p. 23.
Konnert, M. W., &
Augenstein, J. J. (1990). The superintendency in the nineties. Lancaster, PA:
Technomic.
Lippitt, G. (1969).
Organizational renewal. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Los Angeles Times.
(June 7, 1991).
Lunenburg, F. C., &
Ornstein, A. C. (1991). Educational administration: Concepts and practices.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Murphy, J., & Hallinger,
P. (1988, January/February). Characteristics of instructionally effective school
districts. Journal of Educational Research, 81(3), 175-181.
Wilson, R. (1960). The
modern school superintendent. New York: Harper & Row.
Wirt, F. W., & Kirst, M.
W. (1990). The politics of education - Schools in conflict (2nd ed.). Berkeley,
CA:
McCutchan.