In response to the series of posts, “Observations From the
Perfect Storm,” a reader writes the following:
SC,
I am offended by many of your views of central office. In
large districts, I have seen this as being an issue, but in the majority of
districts, many in upper administration are there because we want to make the
greatest impact on all students. We are not the lazy, teacher hating, student
ignoring, money grubbing people you make us out to be. We work tirelessly to
ensure that EVERY student has access to the best education our district can
give him or her.
SC Response
First, thank you for your response.
I will start my rebuttal with the following fact. I was a
central office administrator for more years than I was a principal.
I’ve re-read the posts in question, looking for your
specific critiques. I don’t see
them. We (neither the principal nor I) DID NOT cast central office
administrators as:
A. Lazy – We both know this is not the case.
B. Teacher Hating – If anything we point out that central
office will often side with complaining teachers over campus administration.
That is not teacher hating. If I were to say the central office administrator
hates anything, it would be conflict.
C. Money Grubbing – You are reading someone else’s
material, not mine. I argue that all educators are underpaid, from classroom
aide to assistant superintendent. And in most cases, I argue that most
Superintendents are also underpaid.
D. Student Ignoring – We didn’t argue this one way or the
other. But if you believe that Central Office is as student centric as the
campus, I would disagree. Just the
nature of the position forces the central office administrator to, at times, compromise student needs for the needs of the entire organization. This is not
an indictment, just a fact.
I do see in
Point #1, I point out that most schools fail
due to failed leadership.
That is
not a secret.
And I will add that
Central Office leaders share in that blame, though they rarely share in the
consequences of that failure.
In
Point #4, the Principal and I agree that Central Office
has little stomach for teacher complaints. And on top of that, most principals
are evaluated by how “happy” their staff reports themselves to be.
I’ll stand by this truism and readily
(in private) point out the districts where this practice is the law of the
land.
In
Point #5, the Principal and I agree that Central Office
is motivated to intervene when campuses are rated unacceptable. And once a
campus is acceptable the attention of Central Office wanes.
Again, I’ll stand by this truism
and readily (in private) point out the districts where this is standard
practice.
In this series of posts, specific to a real (but identity
masked) dysfunctional campus in a dysfunctional district, every adult in the
system is culpable, from the Board to the Teacher. The fact that this principal
wanted to share lessons learned is commendable. The fact that the posts were uncomfortable to read is a good
thing. We should never be
comfortable when adults fail children.
Think. Work. Achieve.
Your turn...
- Call Jo at (832)
477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies
available on Amazon.com! http://tinyurl.com/Fundamental5
- Now
at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks
CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool)
- Upcoming Presentations: Illinois ASCD Fall Conference (Multiple Presentations),
Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association Fall AP Conference, The
Fundamental 5 National Summit (Multiple Presentations)
- Follow
Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation and
like Lead Your School on Facebook
Posts
