Ken Seifert
I wrote last week on how a superintendent candidate looks at a community. This week let's take a look at how a community can question the candidates. The School Committee has invited the community to participate in focus groups. Citizens should take advantage of such an opportunity.
What follows is just one of the ways a community can assess candidates for key positions in public service. We used this approach in the '70 and '80s. It contains more detail than the average reader may desire. It is intended for those most interested in such a process.
One consideration is to be sure of the job you want accomplished, whether it is long or short term. It should be part of a master plan. Another consideration is do you want a leader or an administrator? There is a significant difference.
The key stakeholders should know what they are looking for and why. That gives everyone a common yardstick to measure candidates and a common ground for deciding the best of those in the field. There should be a general consensus before the candidate is interviewed and applications reviewed.
We looked at the candidates in two phases. One was the application process and the other the finalist stage. Our application described both stages. It indicated our standards and expectations for the job. In the application material we asked for a portfolio that demonstrated planning, innovations, conflict resolution and any other materials the candidate felt pertinent. Most candidates did not include such data. All information was eventually returned. Some made frequent visits to the schools.
For the first interview we tried to assess the following:
Conceptual skills: visions, relationships, frameworks (also known as seeing THE BIG PICTURE)
Technical skills: methods, procedures, practices. (HOW TO GET FROM A TO B)
Human skills: empathy, knowledge in sociology and psychology, organizational behavior (BEING A PEOPLE PERSON)
We also tried to ascertain what the person knew about schools and education; what kind of training and experiences the person had accumulated, not just what appeared in the application; and what deeds, not words, had the candidate achieved.
We assumed all of the above were good indicators of how the candidate would perform.
Then there was the gut feeling about the person. It was important, but not the end all and be all of the decisions. We recorded and summarized our opinions. As agreed upon, they were confidential. A short list developed.
When we had the short list of candidates, the final interviews were critical. It would last hours for each candidate. It would not contain softball questions such as they ask the finalists in the Miss America Pageant. They would be pragmatic and philosophical in their intent. We told the candidate, you should assume you are in the job and the circumstances should not to be considered hypothetical. We wanted to see how the candidate would perform in the job.
We had our usual onsite visits for the most serious candidates. If you plan your strategy before the visit they can be productive. Sometimes they are not.
At the end of the process the superintendent woud recommend someone such as a new principal to the School Committee. I felt the process was effective because I never recommended a candidate to the committee that I did not feel was the best person for the job. My last recommendation as superintendent was for an elementary principalship for Eileen Woods.
Dr. Seifert's questions for the next schools leader
Here are the kinds of questions that could be asked of candidates. The list is endless.:
What are effective schools?
What is the role and relationship of the elementary, middle and high schools?
How would you assess the Andover schools?
How would you conduct an education audit?
What are the most significant innovations in education these past ten years?
How do you evaluate curriculum? Instruction?
Given the next few years will be difficult financially, how do you propose to make the schools better with less money?
What if morale needs a boost, how would you raise it?
If you need to do so, how does a superintendent raise school credibility in a community?
In your research of the Andover schools, what is good about them and what do you think needs to be changed?
What is your process of staff development, decision- making, innovation and research and development? If we visited your school district how much of what you said would we see?
How would you get rid of non productive people in your organization?
As an educator what was the biggest mistake you ever made? Why was it a mistake?
What is the biggest controversy you were asked to solve? How did you solve it?
If we talked to your staff what would they say are your strengths and weaknesses? How do you know?
What has been your greatest achievement to date?
What would you do if you thought the School Committee was right and the staff was wrong? How about the reverse situation?
What specific role do you think the parents should play in interaction with the schools?
Nationally, the public schools are losing market share to home schooling, charter schools, private and parochial schools. How would you change that trend?
What is your map for putting Andover farther along the road to excellence?
What do you think of Andover's diploma requirements?
What do you propose as an evaluation process for your efforts and achievements as the superintendent?
Why should we hire you?
