There have been several pieces of legislation recently regarding how our local school districts governing bodies are chosen. Currently most all of Mississippi's county school district superintendents are elected not appointed. While on the surface this may sound acceptable, a closer look at the way effective school administrations are organized begs to differ.
First let's go over some facts. Mississippi has 152 school districts. Of those districts, 65 elect their superintendents. The United States has over 17,000 school districts nationwide, with only 165 using electoral means to choose a superintendent. The remainder of the 17,000 districts select their superintendent by allowing the local board of trustees to appoint the superintendent. Only two other states (Alabama and Florida) allow for the position of school superintendent to be chosen by an election.
Accountability is one of the main concerns driving the push to make all superintendent positions appointed. How can a board of trustees hold a superintendent accountable when they do not have the power to replace him in case of chronic underperformance? The elected school superintendent works less hand-in-hand with his board of trustees by design , since in effect he answers to the electorate and not the school board.
Mississippi children suffer from certain school districts that under-perform year after year, despite a rash of measures by the Mississippi Department of Education to help them improve. Some of these districts have elected superintendents, which leads to a hamstrung board of trustees, unable to make the critical personnel decisions at the top necessary to hold the person responsible for the performance of the district accountable. A situation like this would be unthinkable in the private sector.
Another major reason for the role of superintendent to be appointed is to expand the field of eligible candidates. For a person to be a eligible to run for the office of superintendent he or she must reside in that district. This severely narrows the field of qualified candidates. The superintendent position is a professional position, requiring advanced education experience and degrees. It is not a position to be filled by anyone who can get majority vote, but by the most professionally qualified. It makes sense to elect positions such as alderman and supervisors, but not school administrators, due to the professional nature of the position. Often times, the best person for the job may be found across county or even state lines. For instance the Tupelo Public School District prospered when they hired North Carolina native Richard Thompson.
Blowback for this proposal comes from elected superintendents who fear for their jobs. When in actuality it will be a help to them provided they are doing their job. Currently they have to find a balance between being an educator and a politician, in effect robbing from them the necessary time and energy required to be a professional educator. They will no longer have to be an educator who doubles as a politician, or in some dismal cases a politician who doubles as an educator. Some of our severely underperforming districts reside in our poorest areas of the state where jobs are scarce. Unfortunately sometimes these schools lose focus of their purpose, and are viewed more as a source of employment for the community rather than a place of education charged to ensure the future success of the children of the community they serve. The idea of having their feet held to the fire frightens them, but the Mississippi Department of Education and all educators statewide have a job to do and it must be done if we as a state are to rise above our current economic status. That is for certain.
Lawmakers Thursday were debating a Senate bill that had been amended in the House Education Committee. The amended bill would require all superintendents, appointed or elected, to be removed from the office if the district has low-performing schools for two consecutive years. If the superintendent is elected, his office converts to an appointed position.
ReplyDeleteOf how about:
If the superintendent is appointed, his office converts to an elected position.
Or how about: If the superintendent is black, his office coverts to a white.
Or: If the superintendent is white, his office coverts to a black.
Or how about: If the superintendent is a woman, her office converts to a man.
Or: If the superintendent is a man, his office converts to a woman.
Or how about: All lawmakers who don’t support education be removed from office if the district has low-performing schools for two consecutive years.
Bounds said the state currently has 15 districts that meet the criteria in the bill. Of those, five have elected superintendents. He said appointing superintendents widens the field of candidates since some districts have difficulty finding someone willing to run for the office.
That means that 10 are appointed. OMG!. Twice as many appointed meet the criteria.
That is not the point. The point is to enable the school boards to hire and fire the superintendent based on performance. This is supported statewide by educational leaders like Hank Bounds and Claude Hartley.
ReplyDeleteJust look at what the rest of the country does. Only 165 of 17,000 districts in the USA have elected superintendents.
And your point is that the authority given to the school boards to hire/fire will provide a better situation. Please compare the achievement performances of appointed/elected in the state of Mississippi. In addition, 10 of the 15 districts which fit in this failing category have appointed superintendents. If firing the super doesn't work, then you can fire the local school board/state supt./state board/state legislators/..OMG!
ReplyDeleteAs in most arguments there are many factors that lead to the complicated results. The elected superintendents are from county unit systems with different situations.
Yes, the accepted philosophy of an appointed superintendent with an elected board is generally the prevailing structure, but it does not insure miraculous results.