----

##  The Superintendent in an Age of Accountability. ERIC Digest.                 

To outsiders, the role of the school superintendent has always been             a little mystifying. Most people can explain that the superintendent            is the ultimate "person in charge," but what superintendents                    actually do remains vague. 
In truth, superintendents themselves               may sometimes wonder. Their once imposing authority has eroded                  considerably in the last several decades. State and federal                     policymakers have not hesitated to impose major mandates on                     districts, and a variety of special-interest groups have become                 assertive about advancing their agenda through the schools. Parents             and teachers are more inclined to demand a seat at the                          decision-making table, and a growing number of charter schools are              public but not fully answerable to the district. Most of all,                   standards-based accountability has made reform not just the                     trademark of progressive superintendents but a minimum expectation              for the job. 
How are superintendents responding to their changed              environment? What leadership strategies are they using? Is the                  superintendency in a state of crisis, as some assert, or is it just             adapting to fit the times? This Digest examines those                           questions. ARE SUPERINTENDENTS AN ENDANGERED SPECIES?The                  language of crisis pervades many discussions of the superintendency,            and at first glance it would be easy to agree. Paul Houston,                    executive director of the American Association of School                        Administrators, says, "The job is impossible, the expectations are              inappropriate, the training is inadequate, and the pipeline is                  inverted." 
Houston cites a number of trends that have made                    district leadership so difficult: changing demographics and growing             diversity, a fragmenting culture, deregulation in the form of                   vouchers and charter schools, decentralization of power, and                    increased accountability with no additional authority. 
As the                 complexity of the job has increased, so have fears of a dwindling               pool of qualified leaders. Bruce Cooper and colleagues (2000) found             that almost 90 percent of the superintendents they surveyed agreed              that "the applicant shortage represents a crisis in the                         superintendency." The Institute of Educational Leadership has                   portrayed the urban superintendency as a merry-go-round with an                 average tenure of less than three years (Task Force on School                   District Leadership 2001). 
This seemingly grim assessment does not            tell the whole story, however. Other studies have indicated that the            average tenure of superintendents is at least five years, even in               supposedly volatile urban settings (National School Boards                      Association 2002; Thomas Glass and colleagues 2000). While almost a             quarter serve less than three years, the majority appear to have a              reasonable amount of time to make an impact on their districts. 
In            addition, surveys reveal a district leadership cadre that is largely            confident and committed, if sometimes frustrated. For example, 69               percent of superintendents in a Public Agenda survey agreed                     that "with the right leadership, even the most troubled school                  districts can be turned around" (Steve Farkas and colleagues 2001).             Glass and colleagues found that only 6 percent of their sample said             they derived little or no satisfaction from their jobs. 
Houston               probably speaks for many when he observes that the superintendency              is less a job than a calling. The opportunity to "shape the lives of            children in profound ways" is powerful compensation for all the                 frustrations. HOW DO SUPERINTENDENTS LEAD?How do                          superintendents navigate through the leadership maze? Arguing                   that "conflict is the DNA of the superintendency," Larry                        Cuban (1998) says that superintendents struggle to create coherence             out of the numerous and sometimes incompatible goals that the public            sets for schools. Expected to improve the system, but lacking direct            control over the classroom, "most district administrators have to               create their own personal cause-effect models and rely on                       luck." 
Cuban notes that superintendents must fashion a solution               out of three sometimes-conflicting roles: instructional, managerial,            and political. As instructional leaders, they bear ultimate                     responsibility for improving student achievement. As managerial                 leaders, they have to keep their districts operating efficiently,               with a minimum of friction, yet taking risks to make necessary                  changes. As political leaders, they have to negotiate with multiple             stakeholders to get approval for programs and resources. 
All the              roles are apparently necessary. Susan Moore Johnson (1996) found the            same three themes in her indepth study of superintendents, as did               Nancy Nestor-Baker and Wayne Hoy (2001). The latter study also found            that superintendents spent the most time thinking about the                     interpersonal dimensions of their political and managerial roles,               especially in dealing with the board. 
Board relationships are a               continuing issue for district leaders. Despite theoretical clarity              in the division of labor (the board sets policy and the                         superintendent executes it), the practical application is much more             ambiguous. Although boards accept most of their administrators'                 policy recommendations (Glass and colleagues), superintendents have             to work hard to frame issues in a way that will garner majority                 support. Whereas 93 percent of the superintendents Glass (2001)                 surveyed reported a collaborative relationship with the board, 70               percent believed the current governance structure should be                     restructured or replaced. HOW WILL THE ESEA REAUTHORIZATION CHANGE            THE WORK OF SUPERINTENDENTS?The recent ESEA reauthorization puts            federal teeth into standards-based accountability. Testing will                 become an annual event; states must define "adequate yearly                     progress" to measure success; and schools failing to meet the                   standard will face a variety of consequences. While these changes               will not eliminate the superintendent's political, managerial, or               instructional roles, they are likely to alter them in significant               ways. 
First, the new law will widen the gap between accountability            and authority. The expectations are higher and very explicit, and               superintendents will be under heavy pressure to keep districts on               track. The new ESEA does little, however, to enhance the                        superintendent's authority. In fact, the law strengthens                        deregulation by mandating various kinds of parental choice in                   schools that fail to demonstrate adequate yearly progress. In                   addition, corrective actions for low-performing schools must be                 based on "scientifically based research," adding another layer to               the decision-making process and conceivably limiting the options                available to districts. 
Second, the new law will heighten the                 superintendent's instructional role. District administrators have               typically been expected to set a tone that honors and supports                  classroom instruction, but they have often done so in ways that are             symbolic or abstract. The new expectations will require an indepth              understanding of instructional strategies, coaching techniques, and             use of data to guide decision-making (Katy Anthes 2002). This does              not require superintendents to immerse themselves in the details of             instructional planning and execution, but they must be knowledgeable            enough to hold principals and teachers accountable for effective                practice. 
Third, the new law may affect the superintendent's                  relationship with the board. District leaders serve at the pleasure             of the board, and must continually work to maintain credibility and             support. In most cases this is a highly interactive and personal                process, based more on relationships and impressions than on                    tangible criteria (Johnson). However, ESEA's "adequate yearly                   progress" standard is specific, objective, and highly visible, with             the outcome having major consequences for the district. It will                 likely play a central role in the board's evaluation of the                     superintendent. HOW DO SUPERINTENDENTS ACT AS INSTRUCTIONAL                   LEADERS?While recent reform efforts have been focused at the                school level, there is growing evidence that districts can play a               crucial role in improvement. Julie Marsh (2000) notes that the                  district is the link that connects the state, individual schools,               and the community. On the one hand, it can ignore, resist, or                   re-interpret state policy. At the same time, it is the crucial agent            in mobilizing the human, social, and physical capital needed to make            major changes. 
Johnson found that effective instructional                     leadership required a clear instructional vision but that "good                 ideas, in themselves, never carried the day." Superintendents were              dependent on principals and teachers to actually carry out the                  vision and were most successful when they could elicit commitment               from the staff. They did this by providing resources, buffering                 staff from outside meddling, being visible, engaging others in                  conversation about instruction, and empowering collaborative risk               taking. 
By focusing professional development on instructional                 issues and basing principal evaluation on instructional improvement,            superintendents can create powerful learning communities within                 their districts. Without attempting to micromanage classrooms,                  district leaders can be firm in asserting the instructional agenda              and aligning the organization to support it. HOW CAN THE                      SUPERINTENDENT'S ROLE BE STRENGTHENED?The evolving role of the              superintendent presents challenges for universities, policymakers,              researchers, school boards, and superintendents                                 themselves. 
Universities should revise preparation programs to                provide district leaders with the knowledge and skills needed to                create well-focused learning organizations. Superintendents need a              thorough grounding in the complexities of today's instructional                 leadership; a few courses in curriculum and supervision will no                 longer do the job. 
Policymakers and researchers should explore                ways to bring better balance into the accountability-authority                  equation. The radical instructional improvement demanded by the new             ESEA will require strong leadership at the district level. 
School             boards should work closely with superintendents to clarify their                expectations for performance and evaluation. Without strong and                 highly visible board support, district administrators will be                   preoccupied with shoring up their political base and thus unlikely              to take the bold steps needed for transforming                                  schools. 
Superintendents should put instruction at the top of the             district's agenda. While the managerial and political dimensions of             the job will not go away, those roles should be aligned with the                overriding goal of continuous instructional improvement. 
As long              as the push for standards-based accountability remains strong,                  district leaders can expect a turbulent and stressful job climate.              At the same time, superintendents continue to find creative                     responses to the challenge. If the current situation is a crisis, it            is the kind of crisis that energizes rather than                                paralyzes. RESOURCESAnthes, Katy. School and District                     Leadership: No Child Left Behind Policy Brief. Denver: Education                Commission of the States, 2002. 6 pages. 
Cooper, Bruce; Lance                 Fusarelli; and Vincent Carella. Career Crisis in the                            Superintendency? Arlington, Virginia: American Association of School            Administrators, 2000. 51 pages. ED 443 167. 
Cuban, Larry. "The                Superintendent Contradiction." Education Week 18, 7 (September 23,              1998): 56. 
Farkas, Steve; Jean Johnson; Ann Duffet; and Tony                  Foleno; with Patrick Foley. Trying To Stay Ahead of the Game. New               York: Public Agenda, 2001. 
Glass, Thomas. Superintendent Leaders              Look at the Superintendency, School Boards and Reform. ECS Issue                Paper. Denver: Education Commission of the States, 2001. 
Glass,               Thomas; Lars Bjork; and C. Cryss Brunner. The Study of the American             School Superintendency, 2000. Arlington, Virginia: American                     Association of School Administrators, 2000. 189 pages. ED 440                   475. 
Houston, Paul. "Superintendents for the 21st Century: It's               Not Just a Job, It's a Calling." Phi Delta Kappan 82, 6 (February               2001): 428-43. EJ 621 320. 
Johnson, Susan Moore. Leading to                   Change: The Challenge of the New Superintendency. San Francisco:                Jossey-Bass, 1996. 319 pages. ED 403 653. 
Marsh, Julie A.                     Connecting Districts to the Policy Dialogue: A Review of Literature             on the Relationship of Districts with States, Schools, and                      Communities. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy,              2000. 32 pages. 
National School Boards Association. National                  School Boards Association CUBE [Council of Urban Boards of                      Education] Survey Report: Superintendent Tenure. Alexandria,                    Virginia: Author, 2002. 13 pages. 
Nestor-Baker, Nancy S., and                 Wayne K. Hoy. "Tacit Knowledge of School Superintendents: Its                   Nature, Meaning, and Content." Educational Administration Quarterly             37, 1 (February 2001): 86-129. 
Task Force on School District                  Leadership. Restructuring School District Leadership. Washington,               D.C.: Institute for Educational Leadership, 2001. 40 pages. ED 458              684. 
----- 
A Product of the ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational               Management, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene,                 Oregon  97403-5207 
This publication was prepared with funding from            the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department             of Education, under contract No. ED-99-C0-0011.  The ideas and                  opinions expressed in this Digest do not necessarily reflect the                positions or policies of OERI, ED, or the Clearinghouse. This Digest            is in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. The text of               this Digest may be viewed electronically at http://eric.uoregon.edu             EA031870.                                                                    **Title:** The Superintendent in an Age of Accountability. ERIC Digest.                 **Note:** Digest number 161.                                                           **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, 5207 University of                Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403-5207. Tel: 541-346-5044; Tel:                          800-438-8841 (Toll Free); Fax: 541-346-2334. For full text:                     http://eric.uoregon.edu.                                                     **Descriptors:** Accountability,  Administrator Role,  Board Administrator                       Relationship, Boards of Education, Elementary Secondary Education,              Instructional Leadership,  Leadership, Leadership Responsibility,                Occupational Information,  Superintendents                                  **Identifiers:** Elementary Secondary Education Act, ERIC Digests                             
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]