We are in the process of hiring a new high school principal. This will be the third prinipal in a few short years. The high school is the lighthouse school for a school district. People judge the system by how good the high school is and where it is headed. It is the launching pad to the next step in a college-minded town's dream for its children. Where there is only one public high school in town it becomes more significant.
In addition, we are rapidly closing in on our accreditation. Soon such an event will be over and we will then plot a journey to excellence - or a second route, good scores on the MCAS test.
On the one hand, there is a comprehensive structure for interviewing candidates for a position of such importance. Then there is a typical process, one that gathers interested candidates, conducts an interview or two, and makes the selection.
Just like painting a house, it is the preparation before the application that makes a world of difference.
Interviews
A good interview includes the open and honest sharing of what each other wants accomplished, so when the contract is ultimately signed both the employer and the employee know to what they have agreed.
Most interviews do not achieve this and most contracts never last very long.
Committee preparation
A well prepared committee has examined what needs to be done, the kind of person it would like to hire, has an accurate description of the workplace and knows the expectations of the community. In addition to the formal application, a written summary statement that describes the above is included so candidates know what the community and education authorities are looking for. Such information should be placed on the school website. The community should know what the committee is looking for and the School Committee should know the kind of leader our community desires. It is that information that tells candidates whether they are the type who should apply for the position.
Most committees are not committees at all, but rather a collection of individuals who want to ask their favorite questions. There is no consensus on what is important and what is not. There is not a unified set of criteria to judge the candidates against the job to be done and who would most accurately fill the position. Members of the typical committee are not equals and those who prevail are usually those who have individual opinions and are forceful. My dad used to say: beware of an empty barrel, they sound the loudest. There is no consistency to the process and no standards for comparison. It is only a summary of gut feelings.
Candidates
Good candidates should have a very good picture of who the authorities want in the job. They would prepare themselves in advance to address the concerns in the document outlining town desires, make focused suggestions and add their creativity and uniqueness on what they would do and why they are the best choice for the job. The candidates might even offer suggested job descriptions of what they would do in the first 90 days, if selected.
Typical candidates usually fall into certain stereotypes. They have "canned presentations" they give in every interview. They speak in generalizations and are not very conversant with local issues and specific educational needs. Not prepared to deal with suggested problems, they need time to conduct a needs assessment. Some will say they believe in involvement, accountability and individual differences. Some will say they are very eager to work in Andover. When they are finished you really don't know who they are and what they would do.
Decision time
After each candidate has completed the final interview, the committee should take the time and gather the results based on criteria and gut feelings. It is so easy to confuse who said what, when five people are interviewed in one evening. Who is involved in the process is also quite a critical step. Everyone cannot be the final judge, but exposure to the candidates is always appreciated. It is especially important for the candidate. It gives him a good picture as to the social kind of community he will possibly lead. He should also meet people who are neutral to the schools as well as the loyal opposition.
Those who have the final say should look at all the data and impressions, think long and hard as to what the school needs and be confident in whom they select. If a person who inspires confidence does not emerge, then don't recommend.
We are a strong community and although we are in the work-to-rule mode and accreditation is just around the corner, the majority of citizens, real educators and scholars want the right person and not just any person. Good luck!
Ken Seifert is a 40-year resident of Andover and former superintendent of the Andover schools.
