This document has been formatted for printing from your browser from the Web site of the Illinois Association of School Boards.
COPYRIGHT NOTICE -- This document is © copyrighted by the Illinois Association of School Boards. IASB hereby grants to school districts and other Internet users the right to download, print and reproduce this document provided that (a) the Illinois Association of School Boards is noted as publisher and copyright holder of the document and (b) any reproductions of this document are disseminated without charge and not used for any commercial purpose.
Illinois School Board Journal
November-December 1999
Why superintendents work in a revolving door
by James K. Walter and William L. Sharp
James K. Walter is associate professor and program coordinator of the educational administration department at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi. William L. Sharp is professor of educational administration at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.
Can you imagine taking a job knowing the odds are that you would be released from your position in less than three years? Can you imagine the trauma of losing your job, or the effect it would have on your family? Can you imagine the expense involved in moving to another community? Can you imagine the frustration of not being able to see your vision and mission fulfilled? These drawbacks -- the "revolving door" syndrome -- are now a very real part of the modern superintendency.
Most superintendents come to the job with high hopes and great expectations. They have chosen their profession because they want to serve the community and make a difference for the students in the district. Certainly, board members aspire to hire competent superintendents and move their district forward. Board members realize that unnecessary problems which result in negative publicity create unhappy citizens and school patrons. Oftentimes, this scenario ends in lucrative buy-outs for superintendents who have run afoul of the board for whatever reason. But more and more frequently, boards and superintendents have problems ending in superintendents' resignations or terminations. Research indicates that the national average tenure of a superintendent is 2.8 years. And let's face it, without longevity there is no stability, and little can be done in any school district. Along with that problem there is the issue of attracting educators to aspire to be superintendents.
The authors worked with the Illinois Association of School Administrators to examine longevity of superintendents across the state of Illinois and to determine why some superintendents were successful in terms of longevity in the same job. Successful was defined as maintaining the same superintendency for at least ten years. Interestingly, of the 905 districts in Illinois only 110, or 12 percent of the superintendents, matched that benchmark.
These superintendents were surveyed in an attempt to find out why they were so successful. Here are the top twelve activities cited by at least 90 percent of the responding superintendents as important to being successful.
Believe in what you are doing.
Maintain good relationships with teaching staff.
Be willing to 'rock the boat' when necessary.
Demonstrate competency in fiscal affairs.
Be flexible on the job.
Have a fair method of being evaluated by the board.
Attend school functions.
Demonstrate competency in curriculum.
Nurture administrators' good ideas.
Give orientation to newly elected board members.
Make an effort to understand each board member and to obtain their views.
Establish good communications with each board member.
Realistic assessment
What does this mean in terms of the need to increase the pool of possible superintendents and keep the quality ones in place? It is important for board members to attract superintendents who strongly believe in the public education system. Superintendents must strongly believe in what they are doing and boards should recognize the benefits of having a superintendent who is willing to stand up for his or her beliefs, even if it means some disharmony between the superintendent and the board.
School boards should develop a formal, written, structured, and realistic method of assessing the competencies of the superintendent regarding fiscal issues and instruction. Such an assessment will prove beneficial both in fairly evaluating the sitting superintendent, as well as in the selection of a new superintendent when necessary.
This will contribute to the stability needed in the superintendency over time to create more effective learning possibilities for the students. This assessment process will also aid in establishing better, more productive working relationships with the board and superintendent, since each will better understand the roles of these matters.
The superintendent needs to be able to maintain a flexible posture on the job. Such a posture will nurture good relationships with the teaching staff as well as with the board. An important component is effective communication between the board and the superintendent, including understanding each other's roles and responsibilities.
There is no doubt the profession of the superintendent is fraught with peril. Because of contentious relationships between boards and superintendents there are more vacancies; but, unfortunately, there are even fewer applicants willing to accept the risky position as chief education officer of the district. There are also concerns about the quality and experience as the applicant pool dwindles.
We would all agree that a job with such importance and impact on a community needs quality educational leaders. We would also hope that these leaders would be allowed the stability to not only implement educational innovations, but to remain long enough to see the results. Vision and mission must be allowed to be brought to fruition. School boards and communities cannot afford to continually return to "Square One" and start over. The educational needs of the children are far too great.
School boards must strive to attract quality educational leaders with the skills necessary to perform the job. To establish positive working relationships and appropriate roles and responsibilities, boards need to:
realize the board's role is policy-making.
realize the board's role is not to micro-manage the day-to-day operation of the district.
support the superintendent's effective plans.
maintain positive, honest, forthright communications.
cooperate among themselves.
In short, school boards should set and communicate realistic expectations, hire the best person for the job, and then have the good sense to let the superintendent lead the district without fear of being pushed out the revolving door.