PDA

View Full Version : Superintendent-What do they do?


Angel30
23 Jan 2007, 02:00 PM
So I was watching the news yesterday and they mentioned the Cincinnati Public Schools superintendent was up for a raise... I believe she will make $203K now...

With all the cut's in funding for schools, can someone please explain to me what a superintendent does and why do they deserve to make this much money?

Rosa Blackwell (http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/NEWS0102/701210351/-1/all)

noonan
23 Jan 2007, 02:11 PM
What Does the Superintendent Do?


The following is taken from Roles and Relationships, a joint publication of the American Association of School Administrators and the National School Boards Association.

The superintendent is the only employee hired directly by the school board and serves as the chief executive officer of the board with general supervision of the school system. The superintendent is not a member of the school board itself but serves as the professional educational adviser to the board.

The school board is a legislative and policy making body. The superintendent is hired to provide professional educational advice on policy development and implements the policies the board adopts.

The job description calls for the performance of the following duties: preparing the agenda for each meeting; preparing the annual budget for board consideration; preparing and submitting state and federal applications and reports; recommends the appointment and termination of all personnel; is responsible for the instructional program; maintains a continuous study of current problems; and determines the emergency discontinuance of school.

Other duties that are inherent in providing educational leadership for the school district includes the following: keeping board members informed about the needs of the district and about school operations and programs; providing for the continuous improvement of all facets of school district operations, especially as it relates to teaching and learning;encouraging long-range and strategic planning; ensuring that professional development opportunities are available for district employees; developing a public relations program. and to assure that all decisions are made with the best interests of students in mind.

A closing statement from the joint publication cited earlier gives school boards and superintendents guidance for the context of how both must view public schools: "Our public schools are the foundation of our democracy. They keep hope alive, and they open a world of possibility for our entire society. In fact our nation has survived and prospered precisely because it is firmly grounded in the concept of equal educational opportunity for all...Ultimately, the effectiveness of our public schools will determine our ability to sustain a free and democratic society."

$200K isn't out of line at all for a large school system. It's a great deal of responsibility and visibility. A CEO of a business of similar size, and complexity would likely earn a lot more.

euro60
23 Jan 2007, 02:14 PM
$200K isn't out of line at all for a large school system. It's a great deal of responsibility and visibility. A CEO of a business of similar size, and complexity would likely earn a lot more.
ding! ding! ding! we have a winner.

noonan
23 Jan 2007, 02:17 PM
One other thought from a business perspective, one of the worst things you can do when things are heading South is to start cutting staff and salaries just to save money. I'm not saying that Ms. Blackwell is the end-all be-all, but in my experience pinching pennies at the leadership level can end up as the proverbial "amputate the leg to cure an ankle sprain."

noonan
23 Jan 2007, 02:26 PM
I geuss I should have RTFA. Those benefits in the sidebar seem totally reasonable and the closing quote sums up my opinion pretty well.

Roger Effron, a schools consultant in Madeira, said struggling districts are adding perks to attract and keep superintendents.

"You're paying for a brain surgeon to operate and keep a patient alive and well; you're not paying for a physician to deal with a hangnail," he said.

jneale
23 Jan 2007, 02:29 PM
$200K isn't out of line at all for a large school system. It's a great deal of responsibility and visibility. A CEO of a business of similar size, and complexity would likely earn a lot more.
My beef is that a CEO is held accountable – yes there are horror stories – but they get the job because they know how to run a business – a Superintendent often times is someone who has been a teacher their entire career. Great employees don’t always make good managers & good managers aren’t always good executives.

I’m sure a teaching background helps – but I doubt it prepares someone for the skills needed to run a business.

silentpaul
23 Jan 2007, 02:32 PM
I would exercise caution when comparing public service-type jobs with the private sector. If you carry that analogy through to every government job, and actually tried to pay those jobs equivalent salaries, federal and state governments would go bankrupt almost immediately. Or, our taxes would skyrocket to the point where we'd be lucky to take home more than 10% or so of our paychecks...

noonan
23 Jan 2007, 02:41 PM
I don't think that's being advocated. It's just an example for perspective. Directing thousands of people and hundreds of millions of dollars toward the education of a community is worth the $200k and probably more.

Edit: just noticed your join date. Welcome to the boards. I like playing with electronic thingamajigs myself.

jneale
23 Jan 2007, 02:47 PM
I would exercise caution when comparing public service-type jobs with the private sector. If you carry that analogy through to every government job, and actually tried to pay those jobs equivalent salaries, federal and state governments would go bankrupt almost immediately. Or, our taxes would skyrocket to the point where we'd be lucky to take home more than 10% or so of our paychecks...

can't just make that cut on wage - true those low wages up with high benefits & unions that make them jobs for life.

I've got friends who work for the city - they may not make as much - but they've got loads of job security, nice benefits, and loads of days off (including sick time that just builds and builds.)

Unrequited
23 Jan 2007, 03:02 PM
$200K isn't out of line at all for a large school system. It's a great deal of responsibility and visibility. A CEO of a business of similar size, and complexity would likely earn a lot more.

Except when the school system is bad and getting worse.

silentpaul
23 Jan 2007, 03:04 PM
I don't think that's being advocated. It's just an example for perspective. Directing thousands of people and hundreds of millions of dollars toward the education of a community is worth the $200k and probably more.

Edit: just noticed your join date. Welcome to the boards. I like playing with electronic thingamajigs myself.


I realize that's not being advocated on this board, but it is in my state government. A committee of four just got 40% raises based on this reasoning. If this keeps up, I'm either going into government work, or leaving the country...

Edit: Thanks for the welcome. Good place to be. Still finding my voice, so to speak.

noonan
23 Jan 2007, 03:21 PM
Except when the school system is bad and getting worse.

Sure, but how much of that can you attribute to her? (I'm really asking, I have no idea.) She doesn't have control over pie-in-the-sky sales tax projections nor the ebb and flow of federal dollars, nor the government leadership that makes her district more or less attractive in which to reside. I'll grant you that part of her job is political and she can have some public influence over all those things, but at $70 an hour I expect her to care more about how to best deal with the hand she's been dealt.

Angel30
23 Jan 2007, 03:35 PM
$200K isn't out of line at all for a large school system. It's a great deal of responsibility and visibility. A CEO of a business of similar size, and complexity would likely earn a lot more.
That makes sense. Thanks for posting an answer I probably could have looked up myself! :p But, this is generating an interesting discussion (which I hoped it would).

drougan
23 Jan 2007, 03:39 PM
If this keeps up, I'm either going into government work, or leaving the country...


That's the idea. To get competent individuals to consider government jobs, raising the competitiveness of the selection process, and getting in the most qualified/best experienced people.

classicgrrl
23 Jan 2007, 08:38 PM
Cincinnati is as bad as it is because it has no huge property taxes to shore it up like West Chester.

If you really want to clean up the Cincinnati Public School system, hold the Ohio Supremem Court and State Legislature accountable and make them do their jobs.

Many moons ago, the State Supreme Court determined that the way OH funded it's schools was unconstitutional (property taxes). But there is no penalty if the Legislature doesn't define and set in motion alternative funding. In conclusion, the fucking politics won't find another way to fund and the court won't force them.

and the kids, teachers, and everybody else is caught in the middle.

It's not just cincy, it's in almost every major urban and rural school system in OH. And it god damn fucking sucks.

:mad:


btw: KY got of their asses and did fund their schools differently, and they have decent school systems. IN is the same way. It's not like it hasn't been done before.

Shlep
23 Jan 2007, 09:00 PM
So I was watching the news yesterday and they mentioned the Cincinnati Public Schools superintendent was up for a raise... I believe she will make $203K now...

With all the cut's in funding for schools, can someone please explain to me what a superintendent does and why do they deserve to make this much money?

Well, I'm not one to usually use the term "deserve" when discussing compensation; like most any other job, you get what the market will bear and what the folks hiring you believe you are worth.

But I think noonan hit the proverbial nail on its head: for what they do, $200 large is fairly modest for being the Superintendant of a large public school system. They are, in effect, managing a large and multi-faceted company with hundreds (maybe thousands, not sure really) of employees funded with tax money.

The super has to tangle with the school board, wrestle with local and/or state government on everything from funds to policy decisions, champion the lastest magic bullet program or pet darling project of the state to trun everyones' kid into a mini-Einstein, alternately act as advocate for and whip-cracker against the underpaid/overworked teachers and their union, and dance on the carpet for parents who think they should be getting $1 worth of education for twenty-five cents and feel that is the job of everyone else but themself and their kid to see to it their kid learns while performing damage control for every little minor scandal that crops up from a student claiming they were touched inappropriately by the Phys Ed coach to some dipshit teacher trying to be hip by calling a black student "nigga" (remember, that *did* happen).

There are a hell of a lot of qualified people who would not even think about putting up with that kind of crap for a low six-figure salary.

frizgolf
23 Jan 2007, 09:21 PM
That's the idea. To get competent individuals to consider government jobs, raising the competitiveness of the selection process, and getting in the most qualified/best experienced people.
I'm a lowly government grunt. I feel no real challenge in my present position.
But you couldn't pay me enough to take the shit some of the higher-ups do in my building.

Angel30
23 Jan 2007, 09:44 PM
Well, I'm not one to usually use the term "deserve" when discussing compensation; like most any other job, you get what the market will bear and what the folks hiring you believe you are worth.
I suppose "deserve" was the wrong choice of word to use. And, now that I have a better understanding, I feel a little silly for bringing it up. ;) But at least I am informed now and that is better than being an ignoramus. :p

Shlep
24 Jan 2007, 12:16 AM
I suppose "deserve" was the wrong choice of word to use. And, now that I have a better understanding, I feel a little silly for bringing it up. ;) But at least I am informed now and that is better than being an ignoramus. :p


That's cool...sorry if I came across like I was busting chops. It's kind of a personal quirk of mine...that is, the semantics of the word "deserve." Were I more familiar with the workings of the Ohio public school system, I might be inclined to agree with someone who said "Such-and-such deserves this-or-that amount of money to do whatever."