Guest Author
When asked his opinion about birth control, Bobby Kennedy famously said, “As the last of six children, I may have a conflict of interest.” So do I on the question of elected vs. appointed superintendent.
As the first and only non-educator chosen to lead Okaloosa Schools, I freely admit I wouldn’t make the cut in any professional application process.
The risk paid off for Okaloosa, at least to the extent that our district rose from C-status to the highest performing in state history. We overcame financial crises de jour in favor of lower administrative overhead, higher teaching salaries, no tax increases and fiscal stability.I was a business guy who knew something about running a large multisite organization. I was an activist parent troubled by the stagnation of my children’s schools. That I was elected at all is testament to our community’s preference and, arguably, to our schools’ need for a leader unobligated to what had become inbred succession, flat-lined performance and a culture more prone to excuses than solutions.
Much as I’d like to claim credit, Okaloosa’s turnaround wasn’t about me. Nor will the experience of other districts with businesspeople or military officers as school chiefs settle the question of elected vs. appointed leadership. Alberto Carvalho, the Miami-Dade superintendent, honored as the nation’s best, is appointed. So were his predecessors who left town just ahead of the tar bucket and chicken feathers, including one whose penchant for gold toilet fixtures and platinum girlfriends landed him in prison.
Santa Rosa, the county with the lowest per pupil funding in Florida, consistently rates among the best in the state. Superintendent Tim Wyrosdick does more with less than any of his peers. He’s elected. Also elected are superintendents whose districts line the bottom.
If it’s student performance and better management we’re after, the solution isn’t in the pedigree or reporting relationships of the superintendent. Superintendents of both elected and appointed varieties can lovingly hold hands in the warm spring rain with their school boards. Both can also get down in the mud and the blood with their school boards.
I had the advantage of a bold school board that held themselves, our schools and me to high, clear, measurable objectives. It didn’t matter that we were all elected. What mattered is we were all united. We would move up from 27th in the state to first in three years. No excuses. We would end social promotions in all grades. Cold turkey. We would cut administrative costs and put the money into helping struggling students and paying teachers better. Those who hit their marks kept their jobs. Those who didn’t … well, we had a lot of going away parties.
While the superintendent’s competence and courage are essential, the real impulse for better schools is the pain threshold of the public. As long as the business community plays small ball on advisory committees and signs onto platitudinous vision statements, schools will be run from the inside out for the benefit of the adults who work there, whether appointed or elected. As long as parents and teachers can be sidetracked into blaming each other, then it’s everyone’s fault and no one’s responsibility to ensure every student earns her promotion solely on academic achievement. As long as taxpayers are gulled into thinking money is the magic elixir, costs will continue to rise in an alternate universe from quality.
There is no hard wire connecting how superintendents are selected to how much schools improve. Appointed or elected, superintendents produce the performance we tolerate and the results we deserve. The real question in public education is whether and when we will decide to deserve better.
State Sen. Don Gaetz of Niceville served as School Board chairman and later as superintendent of Okaloosa County schools. He recently completed a two-year term as president of the Florida Senate. He is the Senate Education Appropriations chairman.
