How to Fix Our City Schools

Great Principals, Superintendents, and Board Members

In the last newsletter, I outlined six first steps for transforming low-performing urban schools into great ones. They included developing principals into “true” instructional leaders and hiring great superintendents. Since these steps are so crucial, in this edition, I will provide additional details and context and discuss the critical role of school board members.

Part 1: Principals as Instructional Leaders

Many principals see themselves as instructional leaders. They visit classrooms, complete required observations and evaluations, attend training sessions, and regularly monitor the halls, cafeteria, and bus arrivals and departures. They may even occasionally lead workshops, read to students, or teach lessons. Unfortunately, the NAEP achievement data tell us that these efforts are not enough.

A few years ago, during a break from a weekly staff meeting, I cornered one of our regional Assistant Superintendents about what seemed to be aberrant data for one of the schools he supervised. At the time, except for a small number of schools “west of the park,” the test scores of the public schools in the District of Columbia were very low. The school in question, however, was not “west of the park.” In fact, more than 90% of the students at the school qualified for free or reduced price meals. Yet, year after year, the school’s average scores were among the highest in the district.

In my typically diplomatic fashion, I asked the Assistant Superintendent if the school’s high scores were legitimate or whether he thought they might be suspicious. Without hesitation, he answered, “The school is an oasis in the community!” When I asked for details, he gave all the credit to the veteran principal. She was tough but fair; developed her own curriculum materials; trained her staff; administered formative assessments purchased with school funds; and devoted much of her time to visiting classrooms. “A superstar principal,” he concluded.

For many years, I foolishly thought that these isolated great schools were simply the result of the rare skills, character, and/or “charisma” of the principals who possessed some kind of supernatural powers that resulted in higher student achievement. The reality is that “superstar” principals do not have supernatural powers. They simply behave in ways that result in students being successful.

In my last newsletters, I described the practices of two elementary school principals in Austin ISD (Texas) whose schools were recognized as national Blue Ribbon Schools – Graham Elementary and Blackshear ES. I became familiar with the practices at Graham Elementary after two long visits to the school and lengthy discussions with the principal. I wanted to visit the school for one reason. It was a large elementary school (N=807) with a large number of students who qualified for free and reduced price meals (96%) and a large number of English Language Learners (56%), yet the students’ achievement scores (like the school in DC) were consistently among the highest in the district.

As the retired (former) Graham principal recently told me, his school was not great because he had magical powers; the school was great because of the “system” he put in place. Specifically, the teachers were given wide latitude regarding implementation of the core curriculum but the implementation of the mandatory skills “stop-gap” program, daily application and problem solving sessions (“bridge resources”), and the daily reading activities (including daily reading homework) were closely monitored by the principals.

These principals also visited classrooms, completed required classroom observations and evaluations, attended training sessions, and regularly monitored the halls, cafeteria, and bus arrivals and departures. But, more importantly, they were actively engaged in the instructional program on a daily basis. They not only led training sessions and occasionally taught lessons but personally monitored the implementation of the three mandatory “programs” (mentioned above), closely monitored students’ progress, and met with students who were not succeeding. That is what “true” instructional leadership looks like and what is required in urban elementary schools where many students arrive in kindergarten with large skills gaps. It is not enough to just tell teachers and students what is expected or say you have high expectations. High expectations must be modeled and monitored daily.  

I should add that, in these schools, the goals were not just academic. They also included building positive relationships between the adults and students, developing a school-wide sense of pride in the students’ hard work, growth, and accomplishments, and fostering positive social behavior. These may seem like obvious goals that every school wants to achieve. But, in great schools, this work is intentional just like the academic program.[1] In great schools, the leaders build a culture of high expectations, pride, success, and accountability that includes all three of the critical aspects – academic, social, and emotional.

Part 2: Great Superintendents and School Boards

I am certain when school board members evaluate the candidates for superintendent of their district, they closely consider all or most of the following characteristics: prior experience, work ethic, knowledge, confidence, character, temperament, and communication skills. And, of course, these are important factors. However, while they are important, they should be minimum expectations.

I am reminded of an interview response given by one of the most charismatic and articulate superintendents I have worked for (although certainly not one of the best). He had many years of experience in the district and had recently been hired as the superintendent. Shortly after being hired, a local newspaper reporter asked him about his priorities for his first year. His answer went something like this: “Well, for the first year, I am going to listen and observe before I rush into making any decisions.” I know that sounds like a reasonable, politically astute answer. But, as it turned out, six years later he was apparently still listening and observing. More to the point, he had just been hired to run one of the largest failing districts in the country and he had many years of experience. Now, he was sitting in “the big chair.” And, he didn’t have one thing he desperately wanted to do to improve the district? Not one? You have to wonder what qualities the board was looking for when they hired him.

Urban superintendents don’t need more data and they don’t need to wait a year to understand the priorities. Many of their students are years behind when they arrive in kindergarten and many fall further and further behind each year. Many of their students “graduate” high school with few marketable skills, more than 20% drop out, and less than 20% will “persist” and graduate from college. What else do they need to know?

For anyone who has read my previous newsletters, it should not be surprising that I would add the following “characteristics” as minimum requirements. Every urban superintendent must:

1.     Understanding that for their district to be successful, every child must master the “basic” literacy skills and the majority must be “proficient” in math and reading by the end of 3rd grade;

2.     Appreciate that many of the children they serve arrive in kindergarten with large gaps in word fluency and auditory comprehension that must be immediately and successfully addressed;

3.     Recognize that to prevent students from falling behind, teachers must know how to and have the resources (including time) to successfully differentiate lessons and provide students tiered supports when they are needed; and

4.     Understand that the district’s teachers and administrators are their most valuable and vital instructional resource and unless they are expertly trained, it will be impossible to transform their failing schools into great ones.

These are not priorities board members should have to probe candidates about. They are the obvious priorities that should be “top-of-mind” and paramount for any viable candidate. Unfortunately, they rarely are. In part, this may be because so few superintendents have experience at the elementary level.[2] Whatever the reasons, superintendents’ failure to recognize and address these priorities is the primary reason they are never achieved.

It is the job of the school board to effectively manage and supervise the superintendents they hire – including setting goals, establishing targets, and holding them accountable. Unfortunately, two of the best superintendents I have worked with were “not renewed” because of personal and/or “political” differences with school board members. They were both smart, charismatic, articulate, confident, honest, experienced, and tireless, and had the “political” courage to make unpopular decisions when they believed they were in the best interest of children. However, neither were able to stay in the job long enough to create long standing change.

It should not be surprising to anyone that charismatic, smart, confident, experienced, honest, hard-working superintendents are going to have strong views on how things should be done. In fact, I know from personal experience that if you are going to change their minds or sell them on a new idea, you had better be prepared for a vigorous “debate.” Ironically, while both these superintendents could be “difficult,” they were also among the very few bosses I ever worked for who would listen to different points of view and didn’t see new ideas or disagreement as threats.

Over the years, I have managed a number of “difficult” people and sometimes they almost wore me out. An astute friend once asked about one of my direct reports, “Is the juice worth the squeeze?” Ninety-five percent of the time the answer is yes. You don’t fire your best employees because they are arrogant, emotional, stubborn, unfriendly, argumentative, secretive, strange, miserable, and/or annoying. (That is particularly true in large urban school districts where it is often a challenge to recruit highly qualified employees for difficult, demanding and, sometimes, highly technical positions.) Unless their behavior is illegal, unethical, or so extreme as to damage the work culture, firing your most capable staff members usually isn’t in the best interest of the organization. Rather, it is in those cases where the managers must be at their best.

Naturally, school board members can also have strong personalities. Generally, they are smart, confident, successful, and assertive individuals – exactly the qualities that helped them become school board members… and not unlike the qualities of most superintendents. Again, if districts are going to have strong leaders, it is not only critical for school boards to hire great superintendents, it is equally important that they effectively manage them after they are hired (even if they are “difficult”). To do that, board members may have to help superintendents navigate through local “politics” when there are conflicts or missteps and, occasionally, they may even have to set aside their own political and parochial interests (at least, temporarily).

School board members must be well-trained, professional, politically astute, and imperturbable. If a school board cannot work with a smart, articulate, charismatic, honest, committed, well-prepared, tireless professional, the school board may well be the problem. School boards must set clear goals and hold superintendents accountable but that doesn’t require the relationship to be adversarial. Unfortunately, in my experience and to the detriment of the schools, political ambitions, egos, and personality differences are often the driving forces in the relationships between board members and superintendents.

In summary, the distance between failing schools and great ones is not as great as might be imagined. Today, teacher receive some professional development; schools are implementing RTI to some degree; many teachers want to (and may even try to) differentiate instruction; many schools employ a “balance literacy” approach that include, at least, some of the components of a science-based reading program; and so on. The problem is that, for schools to finally meet the needs of urban children, these half measures are not good enough and, at the school level, the only person who can move a school to the “next level” is an expertly trained principal who is fully committed to being a strong instructional leader.

Of course, the direction of any school district is set by the superintendent. On the one hand, by far, the most important transactions take place in the classroom. On the other, large school districts have hundreds of school buildings and thousands of classrooms. Without a great superintendent – whose primary focus is classroom instruction – turning around a failing school system simply isn’t possible. And, of course, in most school districts, the superintendent is hired and managed by the school board. In fact, school boards only supervise one employee – the superintendent. To do that successfully, school board members must be well-trained, have an effective leader, and be able to look beyond their personal biases and parochial, provincial, and political interests. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Readers,

I hope you find the information and ideas in my newsletters compelling and useful. They are informed by over 40 years of experience working with twenty superintendents, dozens of future superintendents, hundreds of senior administrators, and thousands of principals. On almost a daily basis, I listened to their complaints, hopes, doubts, excuses, and promises and discussed and debated priorities, philosophies, theories, programs, and plans. If you find the newsletters valuable, please share them with friends and colleagues. Only by informing school board members, educators, parents, and community leaders can be finally create the great schools every child and family deserves. If you have questions or comments please share those as well.

Best Regards!

Bill Caritj

President and CEO

Capital Schools Consulting Group

925 S. Prospect Street

Burlington, VT 05401

Links to recent newsletters:

williamcaritj.substack.com 

How to Fix Our City Schools

(September 16, 2022)

How to Fix Our City Schools

(September 3, 2022)

How to Fix Our City Schools

(August 8, 2022)

How to Fix Our City Schools

(July 22, 2022)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bio/Introduction

For forty years, I was fortunate to lead the assessment, evaluation, and accountability departments of nine public school districts, including six of the largest in the nation – Washington, DC, Baltimore, St. Louis, Austin, Atlanta, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA). In almost every instance, my position was relatively independent of the internal and external “politics.” As a result, I am not biased toward or against any particular theory, philosophy, or program. My only loyalty is to results.

Since “retiring” from the Atlanta Public Schools in 2021,[3] I’ve been busy working on a book, How to Fix Our City Schools, publishing a “monthly” newsletter, and launching the Capital Schools Consulting Group (CSCG). The book is part memoir and part handbook and while I am very excited about finally completing a “good” working draft, the process has made me even more acutely aware of the disappointment I feel about the failures of the last forty years and my fear that they will continue indefinitely for future generations of poor and disadvantaged children.

----------------------------------------------------------

CSCG Services

·       Data analysis and reporting

·       Board training – data analytics, planning, and goal setting

·       Executive coaching for new school board members

·       Executive coaching and support for new superintendents’ transition team

·       Planning and monitoring district reforms

·       Logic model and strategy map development

·       Major program implementation audits

---

[1] https://nationalblueribbonschools.ed.gov/j-walter-graham-elementary-2012-national-blue-ribbon-school/

[2] According to AASA, only 25% of the nation’s superintendents (and central office administrators) have experience at the elementary level. This is closely related to the shocking fact that of our nation’s 13,728 superintendents, only 1,984 (14%) are women although 72% of all k-12 educators in the country are women and approximately 75% of elementary classroom teachers are women.

Thomas Glass, 2000, Where are all the Women Superintendents? AASA, The School Superintendents Association, https://aasa.org/schooladministratorarticle.aspx?id=14492

[3] https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/accountability-chief-hired-after-atlanta-cheating-scandal-to-retire/GQSBWP445RGCNGPVHDYINEXC6Q/