New Nepotism Rules

My daughter teaches in an affluent, suburban high school.  She called the other afternoon very frustrated because some students in her math class were not putting forth the effort to prepare for a test.  When confronted, the students responded that they would simply go see a certain assistant principal and get a new modification on their 504 plan so they could do better on the test.  Rightfully incensed, the issues at stake here were large.  By high school, the modifications for both 504 and special education should be decreasing, not increasing.  These students had never needed such a modification at any time in their educational experience and were clearly using this as a foil for study.  An assistant principal that was known to be a push over for the wishes of a kid versus supporting sound education practice highlights the highly politicized school environment as well as a secret desire by the AP to be loved rather than be professional.  I shared in my daughter’s frustration and lament, and we discussed professional strategies to help right the world.

My son teaches in a less than affluent, highly diverse mid-urban, school system.  He is one of 5 teachers who teach a science elective, among other things.  Three of the five teachers of this subject are coaches.  My son and another teacher are full-time teachers.  In a grade distribution analysis of the 5 teachers it was revealed that in the coach’s sections kids were almost all making A’s.  My son and the other teacher had few A’s and a few failures.   The administration communicated to my son and his fellow full-time teacher that their grades were not appropriate and recommended that they more reflect the distribution found in the coach’s sections.  He was irate and I agree.  High teacher expectations are a critical component of student success and he was informed that his expectations were too high.  I shared in my son’s frustration and anger, and we discussed professional strategies to help right the world.

My wife teaches in a very diverse low income elementary school in a mid-sized quasi-urban school system.  She came home to relay the story of a 5^th grade student who literally punched a teacher in the chest.  Her frustration was that the police were not called and charges will not be pressed.   The student will end up in a disciplinary alternative school but will not experience the full force of the law for assault, much less assault against a public servant.  Clearly, if the police had been called for an assault at the campus the local media would have jumped all over the story, parents would likely have been fearful regarding the safety of their kids, and the school’s reputation could have been damaged.  Again, I shared in the frustration and anger.  If students do not get the message that discipline will be strictly enforced and teachers will be totally supported then future disciplinary incidents will grow worse.  A false public image is no image at all.  Better to take a stand for the right reasons and take the heat rather than experience a false sense of success.  In this case, there was little my wife could do as she was not a part of the dynamic, but her observation of the response hurts the climate in her school.  I shared her frustration and anger and we discussed policies and procedures that would help right the world.

On the surface these three events might appear to be fodder for a discussion about the real temptation on the part of administration today to do what makes kids and parents happy and decide to take steps that promotes a false image of the school rather than support an educationally correct solution.  That topic merits serious discussion.  But that is not what prompts me to post.

It occurred to me that my response to these three incidents would have been very different were I either my daughter’s, my wife’s or my son’s superintendent.  If any member of my family taught in a school system where I was superintendent I would have heard their stories very differently.  I know me.  I would have met with the building principal and discussed the reputation and behavior of the assistant principal who was promoting student low performance and her reputation as a wimp.  I would have met with any principal who argued that teacher expectations should be lowered to achieve more A’s for students.  I would have met with a principal who was reluctant to enforce discipline and the law.  I could not have simply sat on that knowledge.  I love my family.  I respect them as professionals.  When they share such stories I am angry and amazed and dumbfounded.  I am not objective.  I forget that there are always at least two sides to every story.

So, it is a really good thing that I am not their superintendent.  If I were, then others would quickly learn that whatever my family members told me I would believe and act on.  That would make each of my family members perceived as either the campus snitch or would be used to convey information to me outside the chain of command.  I can see no good outcomes if my family were employed in the same system where I served as superintendent. 

So my first proposed amendment to the nepotism law is to make it a policy violation for an administrator to have a family member employed in the administrator’s chain of command.  No principal may have a family member on his or campus and no superintendent may have a family member employed in the district.

School Board members are subject to the same kind of input and non-objective decision making if they have a family member employed in the system, or if they have kids in the system.  I know board members who have formed strong opinions regarding teachers based on what their sons or daughters tell them about the teacher, and have formed strong opinions about administration or other teachers based on what an adult employee family member tell them about those employees.  Not only are board members not qualified to evaluate professional staff, they are prohibited from doing so.

My second proposed amendment to the nepotism law is to make it a policy violation for a board member to have any family member employed by the school system regardless of when that employment began.  It would be good if we could prohibit board members from having their kids in the system, but I fear that would eliminate almost all board members.  I will say that every teacher who has ever taught a board member’s son or daughter clearly is aware of the additional pressure when doing so.

(As an aside and disconnected from nepotism, I also support policy that would prohibit a person on a public school board from placing their children in a private school.  The message to the system in such a case is disastrous.)

Teachers are much the same if their child is in their classroom, in their school, or on an athletic team they coach, etc...  The teacher and the child can do nothing right.  Any success the kid has will be attributed to teacher or coach favoritism.  The response to any problem the kids has will be attributed to favoritism as well.

My third proposed amendment to the nepotism law is to make it a policy violation for a teacher to teach any family member and for a coach to coach any family member.  There would need to be some exceptions to such a policy for smaller schools and schools where only one teacher teaches a given grade level or subject.

I struggle with an additional proposal regarding superintendents’ children in a school system.  As long as superintendents are required to live in the system where they superintend their children will attend school in the system.  Just like teaching or coaching a board member’s child, superintendents are swayed by the stories their kids come home and tell, and professional staff are influenced by the awareness that they are teaching or coaching the boss’s kids.  I see no good way around this as long as it remains OK for superintendents to be married and have children and that they are required to reside within the boundaries of the system.  I would strongly recommend that any superintendent with children in the system bend over backwards to ensure that there is no favoritism reaping rewards or sanctions for their kids.  Hard to do, but professional.

If we are to be a professional learning organization then we should practice such professionalism.  Our decisions must be based on the law, on best professional practice and on research.  They should not be based on who one knows or to whom one is related.  That sort of old time paternalistic approach to public education needs to be eliminated.  To do so will result in weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth for those who are connected to public education to provide additional perks and protection for family members.  If so, the amendments to nepotism policies are even more needed.

Imagine a school system that is in fact a learning organization where decisions are made based on best practice and research, not on whom you know or who you are.  Sounds good to me!

The Scottish Vote

55% of the voters in Scotland cast their votes to remain part of the United Kingdom.  Wow.  I am both very surprised and very pleased.  Had I wagered on the election outcome I would have lost.  The CNN sub-headline this morning says, “Scotland rejects independence.”  I do not see it that way.  I see it as Scotland rejects secession.

It appears to me we live in an age of secession.  Unhappy in your marriage?  Secede.  Unhappy with your church?  Secede.  Unhappy with your government’s policies?  Secede.  Unhappy with the ethnicity of those in leadership positions?  Secede.  And has there ever been a teenager frustrated by parental oversight who has not contemplated running away from home?  Secede.

The American Civil War was a classic example of this approach.  The “South” left the union.  The “North” fought to get them back.  We usually do not think about the fact that there were many in the North who supported the South and many in the South who supported the North.  It was not a universal split, it was a majority split led by those with power in the South, and it was mainly done for both economic and cultural reasons.  The South lost and technically became a defeated nation that waged war on the United States of America, and the idea that one or more of the “united” states may withdraw from the union was put to rest.  Well, put to rest everywhere but Texas, but that is another story.

I remember the battle over the City of Stafford and the Stafford Municipal School District.  In 1977 the City of Stafford was booming as Houston expanded.  Stafford was a small part of the Fort Bend Independent School District, a district that was at that time mostly rural.  Stafford knew that their property values were higher than Fort Bend and that they would be better off if they could secede and spend their wealth on themselves rather than share it with the rest of Fort Bend.  A lengthy court battle ensued and Stafford eventually won the right to secede becoming the only school district in Texas that is governed by a city council rather than a school board of trustees.  Sadly, Fort Bend boomed and the values in Fort Bend are now well beyond those of Stafford.  Stafford cannot grow.  The short sightedness of the folks in Stafford continues to hurt them.  But, as is typical, if I think I will be better off by cutting and running, I will cut and run.

The Ukrainian conflict seems to me to be a secessionist story.  The conflict between branches of Islam in the Middle East appears to me to be a secessionist story, and ISIS clearly wants to rule the world with their own brand of faith.  In the Presbyterian Church where I grew up a secessionist movement is underway to split off churches that do not support the notion of allowing gay pastors.  In my church there has been a successful secessionist movement to split the worship service into two services, one following traditional Methodist liturgy, hymns, anthems, etc. and the other very informal celebrating what I call radio music led by guitar strumming and drum beating lay people.  The two groups rarely interact.  The early service, or “contemporary” service, has their own sanctuary and are gone by the time the rest of us arrive for church.  In fact we live in a day where non-denominational churches are the big deal.  Seems to me that folks want to be believers, but do not want to follow commonly accepted liturgy and ground rules.  So we have these islands of independent mega churches all over the place and it is virtually impossible to find in writing what they really believe.

(As an aside, what I observe occurring politically across the globe based on ethnicity, belief systems, and cultural variables is the opposite of what I see occurring economically across the globe.  We live in the age of globalization and merger.  Large economic concerns are more interested in becoming larger than they are splitting up into smaller and smaller operations.  Wonder why?)

On and on it goes. Seceding is easier than staying and working things out.  It comes as no surprise to me that folks want to secede.  Earlier in human history if a group disagreed with or did not relate to the ruling group they could and would pack up and go elsewhere and start over.  Believe Jesus visited the western hemisphere and that polygamy is OK?  Pack up and head west.  Now we have nowhere else to go. 

This nation was founded by folks who disagreed with what was going on in Europe.  They were the minority.  They were the economic, political and philosophical losers so they seceded to the “New World” to form a new nation under a federalized government.  Funny to me that there remain folks who oppose the concept of a federal government and I wonder if they understand our history and the Civil War. 

But Scotland voted to stay in the United Kingdom!  Wow.  I wish Russia would get out of the business of encouraging secession in the Ukraine.  I wish radical Muslims would stop insisting that the world operate the way they want it to operate.  I wish those that oppose current US policy would stop threatening to shut down our government to have their way.  I wish the divorce rate were lower.  I wish folks would learn to work within a diverse system to ensure that their wants, wishes, needs and beliefs were met, rather than symbolically packing up and running away from home.

(The only thing worse than secession, from my point of view, is banishment wherein someone working within a system to create change is kicked-out of the system for thinking differently than the ruling majority.  That kind of thinking to me is worse than secession and simply contributes to more secession later on and represents the anti-thesis of a democratic belief system.)

On the other hand, we did say that, “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”  We would not exist as a nation without secession. 

But we seceded from a dictatorship, not a democracy.  Those who so insist on having their own way that they would support secession from a democracy are working on intellectual premises I cannot support. 

Way to go Scotland!

Pitfalls of Rookie Administrators

A week of school has come and gone.  Across the state and nation teachers and kids are learning to live with the expectations and personalities of new administrators.  I have watched this phenomenon for a long time and sadly it appears that most university courses really do not prepare anyone to be an administrator in a public school, else wise the problems listed below would not occur.  A quick Google search for “first year teachers” yields about 155 million hits.  A search for “first year administrators” yields less than half that many and most of those seem to be about how administrators can help first year teachers.  Clearly, someone needs to talk about first year administrators. 

Sadly, there are few first year administrator mentorship programs, but there should be.  The change from classroom to front office is dramatic and can be traumatic.  First year administrators need a lot of coaching and support.  From my point of view there are distinct behaviors that proclaim to the world that this person is a rookie public school administrator and may be doing more harm than good.  Here is my list, not exhaustive and not in any particular order, but a list none the less of observed rookie behaviors in need of coaching and mentoring.

“When I taught…”

A teacher leaves the classroom in June and arrives in August as an administrator.  This change in roles is huge.  As a teacher one has a support group, fellow complainers, and a sense of belonging, confidence and expertise.  As a first year administrator all of that is gone.  I remember walking into the teachers’ lounge as a teacher and I was warmly greeted and quickly brought up to speed on the latest gossip.  When I walked into the teachers’ lounge as a first year principal all conversation stopped.  It hurt.  I found my name written on bathroom walls for the first time in less than flattering terms.  The temptation of a first year administrator is to return to that teacher support group with tales of what one did as a teacher, how one handled discipline, etc. as a teacher, yadda, yadda, yadda.  First year administrators do not get it that they are not a teacher and teachers know that.  Every reference to what one did as teacher will result in eye rolls and eventual alienation.  (The same can be said for experienced administrators who change districts and spend all their time talking about how things were done in their previous district.)  An administrator has a different point of view and a different set of responsibilities.  He or she is not a teacher any more.  The trick is to develop a new support group of fellow administrators rather than attempting to rejoin the ranks of teachers.

“Because I said so.”

A rookie will feel the need to establish his or her power base if they are insecure, and typically they do so in absolutely the wrong way.  Everyone knows who the administrators are and everyone knows the responsibilities of that position.  But if a rookie is insecure about their “power”, he or she will find someone in the organizational structure and order them to do something, “Because I say so,” or some other lame excuse.  Such phrases may make sense with children who lack the life experience and knowledge to understand the logic of a rule.  That is never true for professionally degreed, certified adults.  Asking people to do their jobs is not pulling rank.  Arbitrarily insisting it be done your way or the highway is, and denotes a rookie.  Mature administrators know that everyone in the organization can contribute, have insight and ideas and it is never wise to limit thinking to just one person.  That is a total waste of resources and guarantees poor decisions.  Peter Senge talks about the myth of “I am my position.”  This is a real trap for first year administrators who awake one day knowing they now have structural power because of their position.  Rookies can undermine that power in a hurry by exercising it in the wrong ways.  A much better approach is to recognize that everyone has a job to do, we are all humans, and we must work together to accomplish our mission.  Listening is a key skill.

“Everyone sit down and be quiet!”

Clearly one of our challenges is to maintain student safety and order.  And, clearly we are outnumbered.  When a rule is broken the easiest way out is to punish the whole bus, but that is a rookie response.  If a student misbehaves it is our job to identify the culprit and respond appropriately to that individual.  To tell the whole bus they must not talk punishes kids who were not a problem; punishes kids who were behaving.  Such a strategy totally undermines whatever authority an administrator may have.  This response is especially heinous if we are talking about adults.  Addressing a problem via an announcement at a faculty meeting or via email when the issue lies with only one or two employees sends the message I do not have the courage to talk with you one on one.  It takes courage to lead.  It takes the courage to go to one kid or one employee, tell them what they are doing wrong and determine consequences.  Arbitrarily requiring the entire group to bear the brunt of the punishment may get compliance, but it will not get respect.

“Be loyal to me.  I am your boss.”

All adults in public education are employed by tax dollars to better the lives of the children in their care.  We do so in a variety of ways, but our mission, our reason for being is to promote growth and improvement in our children.  Any other mission is self-centered and/or off target.  Mature administrators will want staff loyal to that mission, rather than loyal to some person on the organizational chart.  It would scare me to death to think that fellow professionals would not be committed to our mission rather than committed to me.  Yes, experienced administrators want loyalty, but loyalty to a mission not a person.  A mission is grand and all encompassing.  Every person has flaws.  If staff is not loyal to the mission then the administrator is set up to become another emperor walking around naked.  The very people perceived to be disloyal may the ones that the administrator can learn from the most.

“You Owe Me.”

Frequently there is a temptation on the part of rookies to develop staff indentured servants.  A rookie can do this by simply saying “you owe me.”  Once the building is full of people that owe the administrator then it seems to the rookie that their power has increased.  That is so not true.  The barter system and indentured servitude went away for a reason.  I think it is unethical for an administrator to perform a function that is part of his or her job and then somehow imply another staff member is indebted to them.  If that same rookie is doing something he or she should not do, then that is also cause for alarm.  If that same rookie is doing something he or she would not do for every employee then that again is cause for alarm.  It is no more reasonable for an administrator to say, “You owe me” than it is for a teacher to say the same to an administrator regarding teaching each day.  Not only is this unethical, it can breed a covey of favorites; staff that everyone knows the administrator favors over others.  Such favorites will be undermined by others as will the administrator for creating them.  Nobody owes anybody for doing our jobs.  Our communities pay us to do that with their tax dollars.  Serve those with whom you work rather than seek their indebtedness.

“No.”

I believe the biggest temptation on the part of a rookie administrator is to simply say “no.”  A teacher needs understanding today for a sick relative.  Just say no.  A parent needs understanding today for a sick kid.  Just say no.  A sister is getting married out of state.  Just say no.  The authority to say no is inherent in an administrative role.  Every time an administrator responds to a request with a “no” he or she sends a little arrow to the heart of the person who asked.  Every time an administrator says “yes” or seeks to help create the solution the employee seeks, the administrator grows in stature in the eyes of the employee, or parent, or kid.  Clearly, an administrator cannot say yes to every request.  But to say no to most if not all requests for special consideration is in the rookie domain.  Do no harm.  Help people.

“Please read this.”

I will never forget my excitement when I saw school letterhead with my name on it.  Wow.  There it was:  “Bob Wells, Assistant Principal.”  Seeing that enhanced typeface on heavy bond paper I felt ensconced in the position for life.  Ha.  That was in 1983.  Now that I had letterhead surely I am expected to write something on it.  How about a memo to teachers regarding cafeteria duty, or bus duty, or students running in the halls, or counting textbooks?  I could think of a jillion memos to write.  The temptation got worse when schools developed the infrastructure for emails.  Now I can really bombard staff with stuff.  I could require them to read my daily dribble.  I could even send quotations from my favorite holy book, my favorite politician, my favorite philosopher, my favorite TV shows, etc.  Further, I can always claim in light of future calamities that I sent the needed information and directions to the employees and they failed to read such.  I am covered.  I am a rookie and need to be covered.  In reality, management by memo is terrible.  If you love the state and federal school guidelines then you may love local memo management.  Politicians have yet to figure out that sending us a memo does not cause change, or improvement, or anything other than resentment and a loss of respect for the sender of such fodder.  Mature administrators know real change, real improvement, occurs face-to-face with fellow professionals who are treated like professionals and are more than an inbox.  They are heard.  If a culture is established wherein all dictates and knowledge roll downhill, then students will fail as they are at the bottom of the hill.

“It is not my fault.”

The hardest rookie tendency to overcome is the defending perfection tendency.  For the sake of discussion let’s say administrators fall into one of two categories:  pursuing improvement or defending perfection.  If I already know everything, understand everything, and can foresee everything then all my decisions are perfect.  If something goes wrong, I must defend my decisions against whomever it is that is flawed and messed up my decision.  I must seek them out to clearly establish blame as Lord knows it could not be on me.  Failure must be someone else’s fault.  On the other hand, if I recognize that everyone is flawed and I want to promote a learning culture where everyone improves professionally each year then I must model the pursuit of improvement.  Such pursuit is a totally different mindset than defending.  It does not take long to identify the defenders and the pursuers.  Pursuers are reading, they are writing, they are learning.  They are engaged with other professionals seeking better and better ways to promote successful schooling.  Defenders will not try.  They will gather with others who think like they think and perceive the rest of the world as something they must defend against.  Such a mindset on the part of a so-called educator is pitiful.

When rookies do any of the above, or all, they totally undermine the professional culture of the school.  Private sector folks simply do not get this.  They seem to reward many of what I call rookie attributes, but that is because the boss or CEO is responsible for whatever widget is being produced and the boss or CEO likely does know more than the guys on the line.  None of that is true in education.  We cannot fire our kids.  They are the ones who must perform.  Teachers do all that they can to promote that performance, but teachers need support in an atmosphere of safety, honesty and mutual support just as kids do.  Undo those things and teachers beat a path to their classrooms and keep their heads down.  That is not a formula for success.  The last thing a public school administrator should be is top-down, my-way or the highway, or scary to staff.

The saddest observations I make are of the folks who are no longer rookies but continue to make rookie mistakes.  Just as I know teachers with 20 years experience who have repeated their first year experience over 20 years, I know administrators with 20 years experience who have done the same, both sets of behavior are tragic and near criminal in my mind.

I do not know what percentage of teachers work with new administrators each year.  I am guessing it is pretty high, maybe 50%.  Whether your new administrator is a superintendent, a principal or an assistant principal you are going to feel the cultural impact of his or her leadership.  My prayer for each of you is that they have either pursued improvement each year and are way beyond the rookie mistakes listed above, or they are just starting out and can learn at the feet of a good mentor.  It is not about power.  It is about service.

Regardless, I wish you all the best this year as you either break in a new administrator or get broken in as a new administrator.  As for me, kids will always be more important than adult egos.