Superintendent Selection in Tennessee - The Case for Appointed District Leaders | Page 2

Taking Note February 2012 Appointment Enables Accountability Most school boards rely on a corporate governance model. An elected board makes high-level policy, investment, and financial decisions, delegating day to day management of the organization to a qualified chief executive officer who reports to the board. The chief executive officer, or superintendent, is charged with administering the board’s policies and meeting performance goals. When the administrator fails to meet his or her goals, he or she loses the job, and the board selects a replacement. This model makes sense for businesses, and it makes sense for public school systems. The appointed director of schools i s accountable to an elected board of education. If a school superintendent is not serving the needs of students in the district, the elected school board can take action more promptly than the next election. A superintendent should be able to focus on one thing— making schools successful. - Governor Bill Haslam, Tennessee Newspaper Network, February 14, 2010 Some proponents of electing superintendents contend elections serve as effective mechanisms for accountability. However, an ineffective superintendent may serve for years until he or she stands for reelection. Appointed superintendents are accountable to their boards and have strong incentives to work in a collaborative fashion with board members. In contrast, the election of superintendents may lead to deference by a multi-member board to the decisions of a single administrator who is held accountable only once every four years. This kind of fractured governance inhibits effective management of schools and carries strong potential to negatively affect school personnel and, ultimately, the quality of classroom experiences for students. Presumably, a return to the elected superintendent model in Tennessee would be accompanied by a restoration of the division of personnel powers between the board and the elected superintendent that was characteristic of that governance structure before EIA’s passage. Under that model in Tennessee, the elected superintendent’s personnel powers were limited and subject to board approval and concurrence. The elected superintendent was empowered only to make recommendations to the board on hiring, transfers, and dismissals. With the exception of granting tenure and dismissing tenured teachers, the appointed director of schools, much like the CEO of a business, Page 2 has the authority to make these personnel decisions. A return to elected superintendents would restore a system in which the primary person responsible for advancing the academic progress of the school district would lack the authority to determine the personnel needs to accomplish that goal. Appointed Superintendents: A Best Practice in State Policy Only Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi currently have laws enabling local districts to elect superintendents. Across those states, 147 of the total 355 (41 percent) districts elect superintendents—a total representing less than 1 percent of the more than 14,000 districts nationwide. In Mississippi, the state with the highest number of elected superintendents, a review of the 65 county districts in which superintendents are elected finds the state designated 34 (52 percent) as on Academic Watch, At-Risk of Failing, or Failing by 2009 standards. Forty-seven of the 84 districts (57 percent) with appointed superintendents rated as Successful, High Performing, or Star status.iv An analysis conducted at the University of Alabama of the effects of elected superintendents on student performance found “there is no statistically significant difference in outcomes when either the superintendent or the school board is elected to the post.” At the time of publication, 35 out of a total 110 examined districts elected superintendents in that state.v Without more compelling data to indicate electing superintendents may be tied to significant benefits for student achievement, a governance change to a model such as Mississippi’s or Alabama’s would be ill-timed for Tennessee, especially during a time of many other substantial changes in policy and practices in this state. Distinguishing Board and Superintendent Roles and Responsibilities Boards of education and school superintendents should have distinct, equally necessary roles in the public education system. According to the Education Commission of the States, “school boards represent the educational values and priorities of the members of their communities, including students, school system employees, parents, business leaders, civic leaders, and taxpayers.” They also “provide stewardship and direction for public education in a community.” Complementing the essential work of school boards, “superintendents are school districts’ education leaders, as well as their chief executives, responsible for managing and administering district operations.” Electing superintendents would blur lines of responsibility and authority for decision-making in districts. The table below compares a variety of roles and responsibilities performed respectively by school boards and superintendents.vi Taking Note Superintendent Selection in Tennessee: A Brief History February 2012 Roles and Responsibilities of School Boards and Superintendentsvii SCHOOL BOARD Hire, evaluate, and, when necessary, replace when necessary, replace superintendent Conclusion States have recognized the appointment of superintendents reflects the needs of districts and students to have an effective governance model that enables swift accountability. Opening superintendency to election would invite political patronage and distract district leaders from the essential task of improving student achievement—and it would do so during a time when Tennessee must focus on this task more than ever before. The state should maintain its system of elected school boards retaining the right to recruit, select, and, when necessary, replace directors of schools. This approach is best for district governance, and it is best for promoting student achievement in Tennessee. SUPERINTENDENT Hire, evaluate, and, principals and central office staff Adopt vision for the Lead process of district Page 3 incorporating central office, principals, teachers, and staff in setting vision for district, in partnership with board Adopt and create Ensure district-wide measures for districtwide academic content and academic content and performance standards are performance standards The State Collaborative on Reforming Education (SCORE) collaboratively supports Tennessee’s work to prepare students for college and the workforce. We are an independent, non-profit, and non-partisan advocacy and research institution, founded by for mer U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. met along with providing incentives for progress and consequences for failure to meet standards Set financial goals, Complete reports on district monitor finances, and spending and student ensure accurate financial achievement measures reporting to the public Approve annual budget Develop annual budget that that reflects district reflects district needs priorities Approve appropriate Recruit highly effective vendor and/or consultant principals and teachers and agreements hire non-faculty personnel Approve plans for Assist low-performing renovating and building schools in their facilities improvement i Tennessee Newspaper Network. February 14, 2010. Tennessee School Boards Association. (2009). Standing firm in support of board-appointed superintendents. Retrieved from http://www.tsba.net/getdoc/c2f5b28c-c788-4dc9-91a8-07bc3ff248d8/TSBA_Appointed_ Superintendents_Issue_Brief. ii Evaluate and develop Implement strategies ways to improve to involve parents and effectiveness of the board community members in the district Mississippi Parents Campaign. (2011). “Appointed versus Elected Superintendents.” Retrieved from http://www. msparentscampaign.org/mx/hm.asp?id=ApptSuperintendents. iii iv Mississippi Department of Education and SCORE calculations. Hoover, G. (2007). Elected versus appointed school district officials: Is there a difference in student outcomes? University of Alabama. Retrieved from http://www.cba.ua.edu/assets/docs/efl/WP07-08-03.pdf. v Education Commission of the States. (2002). The roles and responsibilities of school boards and superintendents. Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/41/26/4126.pdf. vi vii Adapted from ECS, 2002.