What Do Superintendents Do?

Nearly all public school systems in the US employ an uber-administrator usually known as the "superintendent", occasionally known as the "chancellor". These jobs are generally demanding, but offer excellent benefits and perks, sometimes including automobiles, expense accounts and early retirement packages that often outdo the actual salaries. Compensation is almost always at least $100,000.00 in a district of any size, and sometimes rises as high as $250,000.00 or even higher. That's nothing compared with what CEO's of sizable companies earn, but still not bad. The superintendent normally works in a separate office not connected with a school building, and usually is attended by a large staff of underlings, which would include secretaries, social workers, tiers of assistant administrators, service workers, grant writers, and, in the district where I live, a PR person. The assistant administrators usually likewise earn a six-figure salary. Meanwhile, each individual school, particularly high schools, will be staffed with its own small army of head principal, assistant principals (up to eight in some large schools), social workers, counselors, etc. If would behoove each of us to find out just how many non-teaching personnel are employed in the school districts in which we live. Sometimes you have to make repeated phone calls and dig for the information. The number of individuals thus employed, and their salaries, might amaze you.

And yet, with this vast army of administrative persons on duty throughout our nation, why do test scores keep falling? Why are the superintendents unable to effect the improvements necessary? If these administrators were able to produce the results, they would be worth their present salaries and much more, but by now we have all borne witness to the decline in literacy and general knowledge all about us.

It is easy to point fingers; teachers blame parents and administrators, parents blame the high taxes that force both parents to work too hard to have sufficient time for their children, administrators blame teachers and parents, and politicians add spice to the mix. Meanwhile, we all have to deal with the problems caused by illiteracy. Is it possible we have too many chiefs trying to running our schools and knocking into each other as they do so?

Generally a superintendent is hired by a school board, who review his or her background and philosophy. Superintendents are generally expected to implement a new set of policies and methodologies--which, after all, is what leaders normally do. The trend across the country increasingly seems to be that superintendents do not hold their positions very long. They are an itinerant group for the most part. Their contracts are often terminated early by disgruntled school boards, but usually a lucrative golden parachute is awarded, and the dismissed superintendent is free to seek a new job somewhere else.

So why aren't our schools doing better? And what can we do to produce real improvement?

Thanks,
Gary

Education at What Price?

Recently Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of the internet social networking site FaceBook, announced that he would be making a donation of $100,000,000.00 to the public school system of Newark, New Jersey. According to figures obtained from the groups School Watch and Excellent Education for Everyone, the Newark public schools spent an unbelievable $23,141.00 per student in the academic year 2007-08. In spite of that expenditure, student achievement remained abysmally low. Students who were unable to meet eighth grade standards were still allowed to receive diplomas through a flawed and controversial "Special Review Assessment" process. Mr. Zuckerberg evidently feels that throwing yet more money to the Newark public schools will somehow succeed where previous efforts have failed.

Many questions immediately come to mind: How will the hundred million dollars be spent? Will it hire more administrators, more consultants, more administrative assistants? Will it be spent on meaningless programs that obfuscate the real issues and mask failure? How will the effectiveness of such a large donation be assessed? In short, we need to know just how this money will impact students.

Today vast segments of our population (and not solely the young) struggle with illiteracy, have limited awareness of geography, are unable to perform simple mathematical computations, have little or no awareness of foreign languages other than what they grew up speaking, and, sadly, repeat the mistakes of history, having not learned its lessons. It was just a short time ago that a Ph.D. educational supervisor in North Carolina advocated sweeping changes in the teaching of American history at the high school level that would omit systematic study of events prior to 1877. What can we do to change this?

Yes, we still have many fine schools, but we must guard them carefully and keep a careful watch on them to make sure they are not targeted by "reforms" that would eviscerate the education they offer. We should also study not only what makes a good school, but, more importantly, what makes a good teacher. More on that soon!

What do you think?

Thanks,
Gary