Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
High-performing school district superintendents: preparation, recruitment, and retention
(USC Thesis Other)
High-performing school district superintendents: preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS 1
HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS:
PREPARATION, RECRUITMENT, AND RETENTION
by
David Christian Rynkiewicz
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2018
Copyright 2018 David Christian Rynkiewicz
HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS 2
Dedication
This work is dedicated to my beautiful wife, Flavia. She has sacrificed so much for me to
be successful. I love her and appreciate all that she has done for me and our family. This work is
also dedicated to my Papito and Mami; Dad, Mom; and my big, awesome family who have been
patient, loving, and supportive while I pursued this degree.
Next, this work is dedicated to my precious daughter, Everly. She was born only a few
days after I had just finished writing this paper. Although completing this dissertation felt good,
her birth and life have brought me abundantly more joy. Having this degree will always remind
me of her and the great new blessings that God has given me.
The last and most important dedication of this work is to God: the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit. I thank Him for every struggle and blessing on this path. May He be glorified by
this work and all that I do in my life.
HIGH-PERFORMING SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENTS 3
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge my dissertation chair, Dr. Michael Escalante, who has
coached and taught me about leadership, relationships, perseverance, and the superintendency.
Next, I would like to acknowledge the support and expertise from the other two members of my
dissertation committee: Dr. Alan Green and Dr. Charles Hinman.
I acknowledge the participants of this study, including all of the superintendents, board
members, and the executive search firm consultant. They made this research come alive through
their rich insights and commentary.
I acknowledge my fellow students and friends in my dissertation group and the Wednes-
day night USC EdD Cohort. They made this process fun, and I learned a lot from them. They are
the next generation of leaders in education.
Next, I would like to mention my First Friday Fire brothers. They are like my personal
board of directors who encouraged and helped me make the best decisions.
Finally, I would like to acknowledge my small group at Baseline Community Church.
They kept praying for me and remained my friends even when I was absent from their lives so
much. Their persistent love is appreciated and not unnoticed.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 4
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 7
Abstract 8
Chapter One: The Problem 9
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 10
Purpose of the Study 11
Research Questions 11
Significance of the Study 11
Assumptions 12
Limitations 12
Delimitations 13
Definition of Terms 13
Organization of the Study 15
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature 16
History of the Position 16
Women Superintendents and Superintendents of Color 20
Preparation for the Superintendent Position 23
University Training Programs 23
Licensure 25
Nonuniversity Training Programs 25
Mentoring 27
Networking 29
Recruitment 33
Board of Education Recruitment Experience 33
Superintendent Candidate’s Recruitment Experience 38
Superintendent–Board Relationships 41
Opposing or Collaborative Power 41
Actions Leading to Conflict 43
Actions Leading to a Positive Relationship 43
Retention 46
Skillsets 48
A Measure of High-Performing School Districts 51
Theoretical Framework 52
Four Frames 52
School District Leadership That Works 55
Level 5 Leadership 58
Conceptual Framework 59
Figure 1: Conceptual framework for study 60
Chapter Summary 61
Chapter Three: Research Methodology 62
Research Questions Restated 62
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 5
Research Design and Method 62
Qualitative Research 62
Population and Sample 64
Access and Entry 69
Instrumentation 70
Data Collection 71
Data Analysis 72
Ethical Considerations 73
Chapter Summary 74
Chapter Four: Findings 75
Study Participants 76
Qualitative Interview Participants 76
Quantitative Survey Participants 78
Findings for Research Question 1 79
OJT Experience 79
Site Principal Experience 85
Mentors 90
Summary of Results for Research Question 1 96
Findings for Research Question 2 96
Informal Entry Plans 97
Networking 103
Doing Good Work 107
Summary of Results for Research Question 2 110
Findings for Research Question 3 110
Positive Relationship With School Board 111
Focus on Innovation 117
Ongoing Training 120
Summary of Results for Research Question 3 125
Chapter Summary 126
Chapter Five: Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations 127
Purpose of the Study Restated 128
Summary of Findings 129
Research Question 1 129
Research Question 2 129
Research Question 3 130
Limitations 131
Implications 131
Recommendations for Future Study 133
Conclusion 134
References 135
Appendices
A. Research Participants’ Invitation E-mail 148
B. Superintendent Survey 150
C. School Board Member Survey 157
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 6
D. Superintendent Interview Guide 161
E School Board Member Interview Guide 162
F. Executive Search Firm Interview Guide 164
G. Question Alignment Matrix 166
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 7
List of Tables
Table 1: Qualitative School District Superintendent Participant Interviewees
Table 2: Qualitative Interviews: School Board Members and Executive Search Firm
Consultant
Table 3: Summary of Quantitative Survey Samples
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 8
Abstract
The K–12 school superintendent is an important position that ultimately affects student
achievement. Superintendents must be prepared to navigate the complexities of the position to
be successful or run the risk of ending their retention and careers early. This qualitative study
examined the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K–12 school superintendents who
successfully served in high-performing school districts in a region of school districts near the city
of Los Angeles. Perspectives from the qualitative participants (three superintendents, two school
board members, and one executive search firm consultant) served to answer this study’s three
research questions through common themes. The common themes were also supported by quan-
titative survey data. The three research questions of this study sought to understand superinten-
dent preparation, recruitment, and retention, respectively. Prior on-the-job training experience,
experience as a site principal, and having mentors supported the preparation of superintendents.
Informal entry plans and networking were used as recruitment strategies by superintendents.
Having done good work in prior positions also supported superintendent recruitment. Having a
positive relationship with the school board, focusing on innovation, and receiving ongoing
training supported the retention of superintendents. The themes of this study have implications
for aspiring and current superintendents, school board members, and executive search firm
consultants. Future research can include a focus on superintendent preparation, recruitment, and
retention through a case study or focus group. In addition, future research can include a qualita-
tive study on how high-performing school district superintendents focus on innovation.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 9
CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM
The K–12 school superintendent holds the highest leadership position in a school district
(Kowalski, McCord, Petersen, Young, & Ellerson, 2011). By serving as executive leaders,
superintendents manage site administrators, and create and apply vision, and implement policy
while maintaining an ultimate goal of improving student achievement (Kowalski et al., 2011;
Waters & Marzano, 2006). Superintendents have to manage the complexities of working, part-
nering, and maintaining an ongoing good relationship with their respective school board (Byrd,
Drews, & Johnson, 2006; Fusarelli, 2006; Thompson, 2014). Although not necessary, having a
successful prior history in the traditional school system as a teacher, site administrator, and
district administrator would be beneficial to the success in the position. This success can lead to
ongoing retention and high self-fulfillment (Kowalski et al., 2011). However, termination
follows inadequate performance or a poor relationship with the board (Byrd et al., 2006).
Therefore, it is imperative that aspiring and current superintendents understand how to navigate
the complexities of the position with the proper training, recruitment strategy, and skillsets for
retention.
This is the first chapter of what will be a five-chapter study on successful superintendents.
The chapter contains the background of the problem, statement of the problem, purpose of the
study, research questions, significance of the study, limitations, delimitations, and the definitions
of terms.
Background of the Problem
Since the superintendency is complex, the position is not necessarily sought after by
potentially good candidates (Kowalski et al., 2011). Most superintendents serve 4 to 8 years in
the position and then retire from their careers, with only some successful superintendents serving
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 10
longer terms in the position. However, less successful superintendents are terminated earlier
from the position because of failure to meet school board expectations as well as the high
demands of the position. The superintendency has evolved to require increased and overwhelm-
ing demands on superintendents while in some cases not providing an adequate salary to com-
pensate for these demands (McLaughlin, 2005). Although many superintendents are successful
in the position, the pipeline of aspiring superintendents may be insufficient to fulfill upcoming
openings in the position (Kowalski et al., 2011).
Statement of the Problem
The job of superintendent has become more complex and challenging since its beginning
with the roles, responsibilities, and expectations continually evolving since the inception of the
position in the early 1800s (Kowalski et al., 2011; McLaughlin, 2005). Aspiring superintendents
must thoughtfully consider the proper preparation, recruitment strategies, and skillsets for
ongoing retention and success in the position. Preparation programs, such as universities and
nonuniversities, have made attempts to train prospective superintendents to be recruited and
successful in the position but may have fallen short in their efforts (Barnett, 2004; Björk, Kowal-
ski, & Browne-Ferrigno, 2005; Levine, 2005; Perry, 2012). Supports for current superintendents,
including networking, mentoring, and coaching, have also contributed to most superintendents’
ongoing success in the position; however, superintendent turnover still remains high (Kowalski
et al., 2011). Although many superintendents are successful in the position, dismissal ends the
career in education for the person (Byrd et al., 2006; Kowalski et al., 2011). The fact that dispar-
ities in the recruitment and retention of female superintendents and superintendents of color also
exist magnifies the problem for these subgroups (Kowalski et al., 2011). These inadequacies
signify an overall problem in superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 11
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and
retention of California K–12 school superintendents. Considering that the role of the superinten-
dent is critical to student achievement, it is important to identify the preparation, supports, skills,
and relationships that superintendents need to meet the challenges and complexities of the super-
intendency (Waters & Marzano, 2006).
Research Questions
The following research questions will guide this study:
1. How have training programs and experience prepared superintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges of the superintendency?
2. What are the perceptions of current successful superintendents and school boards
regarding the strategies used to help the current superintendent to attain his or her position?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of superintendents?
Significance of the Study
This study should serve to inform multiple stakeholders. Aspiring superintendents will
be informed on the strategies in preparation, skills, and relationships that will support their
transition to the superintendency. School boards of education will be informed on the insights
that help them to recruit better candidates into the position and to maintain a positive relationship
with their superintendent. Executive search firms will be informed on strategies to recruit candi-
dates into the position and given strategies related to superintendent retention. University and
nonuniversity training programs will be informed on the impact that their programs make on
training aspiring superintendents. This study will also inform current superintendents about the
strategies necessary to achieve success and longevity in their positions.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 12
This study may also affect multiple stakeholders. University and nonuniversity programs
may have to evaluate their effectiveness in preparing aspiring superintendents into the position
(Goldring & Schuermann, 2009; McCarthy, 2015; Perry, 2013). Organizations such as the Asso-
ciation of California School Administrators (ACSA) and the School Superintendents Association
(AASA) may be affected by the results of this study regarding their influence on superintendent
preparation, recruitment, and retention. School boards and executive search firms will be
affected by their hiring practices. Aspiring superintendents will be affected by their adoption of
strategies to be prepared and recruited into the position. Current superintendents will be affected
by incorporating strategies and skillsets that improve their ongoing retention.
Assumptions
The results of this study were based on the assumptions that successful superintendents
are individuals who are currently employed for at least 2 years in their current district. It was
assumed that all participants would be truthful in their survey and interview responses. Finally, it
was assumed that state test scores from the state government are accurate indicators of student
achievement and district success.
Limitations
The first limitation of this study is that it could not sample the census of California K–12
school superintendents. Second, only participants who completed the surveys were included in
this study. Participants who were interviewed were selected because they met inclusion criteria.
Next, the results of the study were limited to the participants in the study. The study was con-
strained by the time and resources to collect data, which may reduce generalizability. Finally, the
reliability of the survey and interview instruments may have affected the validity of the study.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 13
Delimitations
One delimitation of this study was that it exclusively sampled what the study determined
as successful superintendents. Superintendents not identified as successful were not sampled.
Although the researcher was collecting purposeful sample data, a delimitation of this study was
that the researcher collected only a convenience data sample from California K–12 superinten-
dents, school board members, and executive search firms (Johnson & Christensen, 2014).
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are defined:
ACSA: An organization of school leaders in California.
AASA: An organization of school leaders in the United States and across the world.
California School Boards Association (CSBA): An organization of school board members
in California.
Dean’s Superintendents Advisory Group (DSAG): A group of current and former superin-
tendents with an affiliation to the University of Southern California.
Entry plan: The goals and action plan that a new superintendent develops to enter or
transition successfully during the first 100 days in the role. A new superintendent’s entry plan is
shared with stakeholders.
Executive search firms: Organizations that provide customized services to school boards,
school districts, and candidates in the search for and selection process of school superintendents.
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC): A program of the Council of
Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) that has crafted model standards for school leaders.
Nontraditional superintendents: Individuals who do not posses a typical background in
education. These individuals typically come from the field of law, business, and the military.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 14
Preparation programs: A program designed by universities or professional organizations
that provide educators, including superintendents, with a certification in the area of education
chosen.
School board: The body of governance for a local school district. As the governing body,
whether elected or appointed, school boards are responsible for all policies and regulations
within the local school district. They are tasked with hiring and evaluating the district superin-
tendent.
School district: A local educational agency that operates schools in a local geographic
location.
Strategic plan: Refers to organizational goals and action plans developed collaboratively
by the superintendent, the board, and/or stakeholders.
Successful superintendents: Superintendents who are currently employed in a position for
2 or more years.
Superintendency: The office, position, or jurisdiction of a superintendent.
Superintendent: An administrator or manager in charge of a number of public schools or a
school district; a local government body overseeing public schools.
Superintendent preparation: The strategies used by an aspiring superintendent that
equipped him or her for the superintendent position.
Superintendent recruitment: The process or strategy used by an aspiring superintendent to
gain his or her first superintendent position.
Superintendent retention: The process or strategy used by a superintendent to maintain his
or her current position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 15
Organization of Study
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One has presented an introduction to
the study, the problem that the study was seeking to understand, the research questions that it was
seeking to answer, the significance of the study, the limitations and delimitations, and the defini-
tions of terms. Chapter Two contains a literature review of the scholarly literature relevant to this
study. Chapter Two also provides a theoretical and conceptual framework that acted as a lens for
the study. Chapter Three presents the study’s methodology, a description of the sample and
population, instrumentation, and data collection and data analysis utilized for the study. Chapter
Four reports the study’s findings and how they answer the study’s research questions. Finally,
Chapter Five deals with a presentation of the study’s conclusions, future implications, and
recommendations for further research relating to superintendent preparation, recruitment, and
retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 16
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter provides a context of the relevant literature in the field of successful superin-
tendents. It is organized with literature related to the history of the position, women superinten-
dents and superintendents of color, superintendent preparation, networking, recruitment, superin-
tendent–board relationship, and ongoing retention. Theoretical and conceptual frameworks are
also included at the end of this chapter.
History of the Position
From its beginnings through the present, the position of school superintendent has
evolved (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). Callahan (1966)
conceptualized the evolution of the position as having four roles of superintendents: teacher-
scholar, business manager, statesman, and applied social scientist. Although the four roles were
particularly emphasized in each time frame, new roles did not entirely replace the use of older
ones (Cuban, 1976). Presently, superintendents have primarily adopted the role of communica-
tors (Kowalski, 2005). Although this role is used predominantly, a superintendent should know
how to exercise each role at the appropriate time.
The earliest and prominent role that superintendents adopted was the role of teacher-
scholar from 1850 to the early 1900s (Kowalski, 2005). At that time, the common movement
was to assimilate new students into American culture through public schools, which offered
common courses and curricula (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). Subsequently, the primary role of
the district superintendent was to implement the common curricula and supervise teachers
through centralizing control at the local level through standardization. Having a reputation as a
master teacher and an administrator was a prerequisite to the position so that the superintendent
could supervise and have credibility with teachers (Kowalski et al., 2011). Superintendents
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 17
during this time period proudly identified themselves as teachers, were influential members of
the National Education Association, and distinguished themselves from politicians and managers
(Callahan, 1966; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). Instructional leadership remained the primary
focus for superintendents through 1910 but did not become irrelevant in subsequent roles
(Kowalski, 2005).
As the role of teacher-scholar began to diminish in the early 1900s, superintendents began
to adopt the role of business manager until 1930 (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011).
In the late 19th century, America had already began its transition from an agrarian economy to an
industrialized one (Callahan, 1966). As a result, city demographics were urbanizing rapidly and
quickly enlarged local school districts (Kowalski, 2005). The urbanization of school districts
created a need for superintendents to primarily take the role of managers, which followed the
trends of scientific management during the Industrial Revolution (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011;
Kowalski et al., 2011). Being a teacher-scholar was secondary to being a business manager.
School boards of education, especially large ones, depended on and expected their superinten-
dents to have managerial skills. Universities and big city superintendents also pushed for the
new business manager role and created university courses to increase the managerial capacities of
prospective superintendents (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski et al., 2011). However, there were also
opponents to this new role.
Opponents, including scholars, believed that superintendents adopted the role of business
manager because they were tricked into it by appeasing their board of education and leaving the
role of teacher-scholar behind (Kowalski et al., 2011). Other critics believed that superintendents
just followed the trends of the Industrial Revolution and became so powerful that they took away
local control and decision making (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). Although the role of business
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 18
manager brought success to urbanized school districts, the stock market crash of 1929 brought
this role to an abrupt end in 1930 with sharp criticism of superintendents’ business management
role (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). School boards of education and local constit-
uents were looking for a new role for superintendents.
As American schools experienced very scarce resources after the Great Depression,
superintendents adopted the role of “statesmen” from 1930 to the mid-1950s (Kowalski, 2005;
Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). Ironically, political activism prior to this
period was considered unprofessional (Kowalski, Petersen, & Fusarelli, 2007). However, the
negative public sentiment of superintendents as business managers stemmed from the public’s
loss of local control by the centralization of power in the superintendent (Kowalski et al., 2011).
Scarce resources brought a need for superintendents to compete against other districts and other
state agencies for their own school district while also drawing from and relying on local commu-
nity resources (Kowalski, 2005). The goal was to create consensus among the various stake-
holder groups, including employees, policymakers, and taxpayers (Howlett, 1993). While
balancing the multiple inward and outward political demands, superintendents were viewed as
astute political strategists, taking on political leadership in a truly democratic context (Callahan,
1966; Kowalski, 2005). Nonetheless, critics of this role felt that it was overly idealistic and
unrealistic in practice (Kowalski, 2005). Critics identified a lack of the scholarly leadership
needed in superintendents to navigate the new political and economic concerns after World War
II (Fusarelli & Fusarelli, 2005). Superintendents had to adopt yet another role in the 1950s. The
roles that superintendents have historically adopted are relevant for successful superintendents.
From the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s, superintendents adopted the role of applied social scien-
tists (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). The goal for
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 19
superintendents in this role was to use interdisciplinary scientific inquiry to solve problems of
practice (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski et al., 2011). With the help of the Kellogg Foundation’s
monetary sponsorship, universities and professors shifted superintendent preparation program
academics to focus more on theory and less on practice (Kowalski, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner,
2011). Superintendents had become viewed as experts with high technical knowledge but also
disconnected from their organization’s practices, with no vision to move it forward (Kowalski,
2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). Like the arguments of the prior critics
from the 1890s to 1930, critics in this time period claimed that superintendents were discon-
nected from local stakeholders in policy development and decision making (Fusarelli & Fusarelli,
2005). A superintendent’s role as applied social scientist was becoming inadequate in the
mid-1970s.
Since 1980, a superintendent’s predominant role has been as communicator (Kowalski,
2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). This role stemmed from America’s
transition from the Industrial Revolution to the Information Age, where it became important for
managers to know how to access and process information for decision making (Drucker, 1999).
This ability to access and process information is exercised through the skill of communication in
a two-way, symmetrical interaction between the superintendent and stakeholders (Kowalski,
2005). Superintendents exercise the skill of communication by collaborating with various
stakeholders to solve problems for the sake of facilitating school improvement (Kowalski, 2005;
Kowalski et al., 2011). Communication and an organization’s culture have been strongly linked
together where culture is expressed through stakeholder communication and subsequently
reforms culture (Kowalski, 2005). Superintendents can be transformational leaders in their
respective organizations when they build positive relationships by engaging in open discussions
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 20
that benefit everyone (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). Communication in a district or school gives
meaning to the work of the stakeholders, forges stakeholders’ perceptions of reality, shapes
communicative behavior, and ultimately redefines its culture (Kowalski, 1998). Effective trans-
formational superintendents positively affect culture by exhibiting “consistent communicative
behavior characterized by open, multidirectional, symmetrical (intended to benefit all parties),
and relational (intended to build or strengthen personal relationships) exchanges” (Kowalski &
Brunner, 2011, p. 118). In addition to the historical progression of roles of superintendents, there
has been a progression of access for women superintendents and superintendents of color.
Women Superintendents and Superintendents of Color
The American school superintendent position has historically been represented as a
predominantly White male position (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). Consequently, the scholarly
literature has been limited to studies that mainly include White male samples and a lack of
studies of women superintendents and superintendents of color (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011).
Although progress has been made where more women and people of color are in the position,
disparities for these groups are historically evident (Björk, Glass, & Brunner, 2005; Kowalski et
al., 2011; Sampson, Gresham, Applewhite, & Roberts, 2015). Early American educators were
initially literate White males who mainly taught other White students and also controlled educa-
tion for women and people of color (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). This control included teaching
at a lower intelligence level to other groups while also charging money to these groups for
learning (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). As positions in educational leadership, administration,
and the superintendency became available, women and people of color were discriminated
against not to enter these positions (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). School boards and other
administrators preferred to hire their White male colleagues (Glass, 2000; Glass, Björk, &
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 21
Brunner, 2000). The women’s suffrage movement of the early 1900s improved women’s rights
and encouraged a rise of women superintendents, mainly in more rural school districts (Kowalski
et al., 2011). Although the percentage of women superintendents rose to 8.9% in 1910, the
percentage was still low and confirmed that the position remained a masculine role (Kowalski et
al., 2011). Disparities in the number of superintendents of color were also historically present,
with higher numbers in rural and racially segregated school districts before 1954 (Kowalski et al.,
2011). Ironically, after the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) ruling, the percentage of Black
superintendents dropped substantially where, if employed, Black superintendents were serving in
problem-ridden and low-performing districts (Brown v. Board of Education, 1954; Kowalski et
al., 2011). The numbers of women superintendents and superintendents of color declined to their
lowest point in 1982, with 1.2% of superintendents reporting as female and 2.1% reporting as a
person of color—thus reaffirming that the position was White and masculine (Kowalski et al.,
2011). Since 1982, the number of women superintendents and superintendents of color has
improved, albeit not equal to that of White males (Grogan & Shakeshaft, 2010; Kowalski &
Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011; Sampson et al., 2015). Among the most recent national
study, 24.1% of superintendents reported as females and 6% as persons of color (Kowalski et al.,
2011). Although these figures represent improvements, the percentages are still low compared to
White male superintendents (Sampson et al., 2015).
The barriers to entry for White males, women, and people of color into the superintendent
position are different (Glass, 2000; Glass et al., 2000; Grogan, 1996; Grogan & Shakeshaft,
2010; Kowalski et al., 2011; Muñoz, Pankake, Ramalho, Mills, & Simonsson, 2014; Sampson et
al., 2015; Whitaker, 2006). Females comprise 72% of all educators, including 75.9% of teaching
positions and 50.3% of principal positions being female (Glass, 2000; Grogan & Shakeshaft,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 22
2010). Females are reported to be poorly positioned to enter into the superintendent position
because most superintendents come from secondary positions, whereas 75% of primary grade
teachers are female (Dowell & Larwin, 2013; Glass, 2000). Conversely, males’ most common
entry position was that of high school teacher (Kowalski et al., 2011). The modal primary
entry-level position for females creates more barriers to entry to the superintendent (Dowell &
Larwin, 2013). Male superintendents also report less teaching experience than their female col-
leagues, with most male superintendents reporting having 10 years or less of teaching experience
before administration, while most female superintendents reported having 20 years or less
(Kowalski et al., 2011).
Studies about women superintendents also found other factors that created barriers to
entry for women, including experiencing discriminatory hiring practices, gender biases, being
blocked by school boards, being seen as ineffective at leadership and fiscal management, having
a lack of role models, and holding low self-efficacy in the position (Glass, 2000; Glass et al.,
2000; Grogan, 1996; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011; Muñoz et al., 2014;
Whitaker, 2006). Barriers for entry into the superintendency are similar for people of color;
however, the fact that very limited research is present in this area confirms that barriers to entry
are present (Kowalski & Brunner, 2011; Kowalski et al., 2011). Subsequently, the lack of
research on superintendents of color and women is creating a lack of role models and a smaller
pipeline for the position (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). There is a need
to connect women superintendents and superintendents of color to other women and people of
color to leadership roles (Sampson et al., 2015).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 23
Preparation for the Superintendent Position
Superintendents, current and past, have been prepared through multiple avenues. These
may have included university training programs, nonuniversity training programs, and certifica-
tion. The course of preparation is contingent on each state’s requirements with respect to quali-
fying for the position of school superintendent. Some states’ requirements for the position are
more regulated, while others are less regulated. The following sections will discuss the literature
on each of the possible ways superintendents can be prepared for the position.
University Training Programs
Historically, superintendents have taken on the position by adopting various roles,
including teacher-scholar, business manager, statesman, applied social scientist, and communica-
tor (Kowalski et al., 2011). Today, the position takes on each role as needed according to the
discretion of the superintendent but primarily adopts the role of communicator. University
training programs assist in superintendent preparation to exercise these various roles.
Although not a prerequisite for the position, university training programs offer advanced
degrees to prepare superintendents, including the doctoral degree (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005;
Kowalski et al., 2011). The types of doctoral degrees include the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
and the Doctor of Education (EdD). Increases in percentages of superintendents with doctorates
began in the 1950s when the position took on the role of applied social scientist, which was
driven by the rapid development of the social sciences at universities across the nation (Kowalski
& Brunner, 2011). These increases also continued rapidly from 1971 to 2000 with more superin-
tendents holding advanced degrees, including 45% holding a doctoral degree in 2000 (Glass et
al., 2000). In 2011, the most recent national study of American school superintendents showed
that 85% completed an accredited university training program and 45.3% held a doctoral degree
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 24
(Kowalski et al., 2011). These data revealed that the increases in percentages of superintendents
holding doctoral degrees have flattened out since 2000 but have still remained high (Glass et al.,
2000; Kowalski et al., 2011). High percentages of superintendents with doctoral degrees may
indicate that school boards may favor superintendents with doctoral degrees (Glass et al., 2000).
The 2011 report also showed that most superintendents (74%) believed that their academic
preparation was good or excellent (Kowalski et al., 2011). Overall, university training programs
have the positive ability to transmit formalized knowledge and professional culture to the next
generation of superintendents (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). However, a body of literature
reveals a few critics of university training programs.
Critics of university training programs for superintendents felt that the programs are
ineffective, are unnecessary, are burdensome for entry, and have to be at least overhauled
(Barnett, 2004; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005; Kowalski et al., 2011; Levine, 2005; Shulman,
Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006). Levine (2005), one of the strongest of critics, felt that
the EdD is a watered-down doctorate, unnecessary for any job in school administration, and
creates the expectation that superintendents must hold a doctorate. This concern for university
training programs, albeit less intense, has been echoed by others in that universities have had a
disconnect between providing potential superintendents with formal academic knowledge and
practical intelligence (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). Critics identified that university training
programs must differentiate between the PhD, a theoretical researcher’s degree, and the EdD, an
applied practitioner’s degree, because the two degrees have been too similar and ineffective for
training superintendents (Orr, 2006; Shulman et al., 2006). Similarly, there has been a push by
some to create a new degree for practicing administrators called the Professional Practice Doc-
torate (PPD); Perry, 2013; Shulman et al., 2006). However, this movement has not gained
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 25
traction. Universities such as the University of Southern California (USC) have effectively
responded to the critics in revising and differentiating their PhD and EdD degrees so that they are
meaningful to both educational researchers and practitioners, including superintendents (Perry,
2012; Shulman et al., 2006). As feedback returns to universities in preparing future superinten-
dents, EdD programs will continue to be redesigned and improved to benefit prospective superin-
tendents (Bowers, 2016; Goldring & Schuermann, 2009). Superintendent preparation through
university training programs are instrumental in preparing successful superintendents.
Licensure
Scholars such as Kowalski and Björk (2005) have identified that the superintendent
position is quasiprofessional and must become certified through licensing (Kowalski & Björk,
2005). The licensing of superintendents and superintendent training programs is done through
organizations such as the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the
AASA, and the ISLLC (Cooper, Fusarelli, Jackson, & Poster, 2002; Jackson, 2002; Kowalski,
2003; McCarthy, Shelton, & Murphy, 2016; Teitel, 2005). NCATE, a national organization,
plays an important role for universities through the accreditation of degree programs for superin-
tendents, setting licensing standards, and influencing the work of professors (Cooper et al.,
2002). Kowalski (2003) believed that demanding licensing requirements through the AASA and
ISLLC will improve public and board confidence in superintendents as well as improve their
professional preparation (Kowalski, 2003). However, critics of superintendent certification
through licensure are present.
Nonuniversity Training Programs
Organizations such as The Broad Foundation believed that university training programs
and licensing are ineffective (Fordham Institute & The Broad Foundation, 2003). Instead,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 26
certification requirements should be reduced and training should not come from universities, but
by providers (Fordham Institute & The Broad Foundation, 2003). Hess (2003) also echoed the
same sentiment, crediting superintendent candidate shortages to burdensome university training
programs and heavy standards for licensure. These barriers to entry could prevent potentially
great candidates from entry into the superintendency (Hess, 2003). Organizations such as The
Broad Center Academy have taken steps as an alternative to universities and official licensure to
train superintendents using both traditional and nontraditional candidates, while also successfully
placing some of their alum into large urban districts (Fordham Institute & The Broad Foundation,
2003). Although the critics of university training programs and state licensure have taken steps
for their students to circumvent those processes, the critics still disagree about the value of
licensing and university training programs for superintendents (Kowalski, 2008).
The criticisms of university training programs and the desire to deregulate the licensing
process were based on anecdotal evidence (Kowalski, Petersen, & Fusarelli, 2009). Although
most novice superintendents found their university or nonuniversity training program to be either
good or excellent, the literature still reports that they wished the programs better connected the
training to their actual practice as a superintendent (Kowalski et al., 2011; Sanchez, 2008;
Santiago-Marullo, 2010). Nonetheless, most superintendents have rated their university training
as a valuable and high-quality experience (Kowalski et al., 2011). The AASA standards are
continuing to be identified as valuable for modern superintendents (Santiago-Marullo, 2010).
Therefore, universities must continue to play a key role in preparing superintendents by following
the rigorous licensing requirements of the NCATE, AASA, and ISLLC, because they have the
resources to teach upcoming superintendents (Cooper et al., 2002). In addition to preparation,
mentoring takes on an important role for successful superintendents.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 27
Mentoring
Although the superintendency may be considered a superior position to any other in a
school district, the mentoring of superintendents is important for their success and is becoming a
more widespread practice (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005; Glass et al., 2000). The mentoring of
superintendents has helped to increase superintendent effectiveness, increased the likelihood of
longevity of novices in the position, and has proven to be necessary for ethical decision making
(Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005; Buchanan, 2013; Crippen & Wallin,
2008). Although historically there have been fewer female superintendents, the mentoring of
aspiring and current female superintendents creates confidence in their pursuit of and effective-
ness in the position while also preparing upcoming executive female leaders (Kowalski et al.,
2011; Searby & Tripses, 2006). Mentoring female superintendents is supporting higher percent-
ages of female superintendents in the position. Because mentoring plays a critical role for
success, aspiring and novice superintendents must consider the right qualities in and sources of
mentors with respect to the preparation for and execution of the position (Alsbury & Hackmann,
2006; Glass et al., 2000).
Aspiring and current superintendents must seek mentors with the right qualities who are
willing to take on the position (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). The mentor and novice superin-
tendent, or protégé, relationship should be positive for both parties, because a mentoring relation-
ship that is negative can be detrimental to the protégé’s development and longevity in the posi-
tion (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006). Novice superintendents must actively take on the role of the
protégé by overcoming the fear of the relationship and instead being an active learner (Björk,
Kowalski, et al., 2005; Searby & Tripses, 2006). Protégés must also assume responsibility in
taking the action recommended by the mentor, which may include taking risks in their own
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 28
position (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). Consequently, the role of the mentor is critical for the
protégé’s development and success (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005;
Crippen & Wallin, 2008). Primarily, mentors must be seasoned, highly effective, and well
respected in their own experience as superintendents (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk,
Kowalski, et al., 2005). Mentors can then lead their protégés to govern their districts effectively
and protect them from making damaging decisions (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; McClellan,
Ivory, & Domínguez, 2008).
Mentoring advice also includes advice in both important and ethical decision making
(Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Beem, 2007; Buchanan, 2013). The mentor must also commit
time to the relationship to be available to listen to and build confidence in the superintendent-
protégé; mentoring can also include introducing the protégé to a network of other administrators
(Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005; Crippen & Wallin, 2008). Over
time, the mentor provides the protégé with an appropriate yet diminishing level of oversight so
that the protégé can begin to maintain independence in his or her own position (Björk, Kowalski,
et al., 2005). Mentors must be committed to the growth of their protégés from being novices to
seasoned veterans in the superintendency (Crippen & Wallin, 2008). Because mentors must
maintain the highest standards, superintendent-protégés must know where to find them.
Novice superintendents can develop a network of mentors from multiple sources
(McCann & Johannessen, 2009). Mentors can be defined as personal or professional, but the
most valuable relationship happens when an intrinsic connection is made between the mentor and
superintendent-protégé (Crippen & Wallin, 2008). A potential protégé may pursue a potential
mentor in his or her personal or professional sphere but must take the risk of entering into the
position (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). This would be a voluntary and informal mentor–protégé
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 29
relationship. However, sometimes the relationship may be difficult to cultivate. Because
mentoring has proven to improve superintendent effectiveness and longevity, some states, such
as Massachusetts and Texas, mandate novice superintendents to be mentored by local. seasoned
superintendents (Beem, 2007). States such as these recognize that this provides novice superin-
tendents the ability to talk to someone confidentially before making decisions in the position.
Other states may not necessarily mandate a mentor and protégé relationship, but have associa-
tions with professional organizations (e.g., AASA) and universities (Beem, 2007). Formal
mentoring relationships through mandated state programs and professional associations provide
avenues for mentoring. However, the fact that many veteran superintendents lack the time to be
mentors can contribute to a shortage of quality superintendent mentors (Eichman, 2009). Univer-
sity training programs, which serve aspiring superintendents, can fill this need by also formally
connecting protégés to mentors (Eichman, 2009; McClellan et al., 2008). Superintendent
mentoring has been positive for novices to succeed in the highly visible position while preventing
detrimental decision making (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Beem, 2007). The mentoring rela-
tionship is also beneficial to the mentor (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006). Over time, protégés have
developed their own network of mentors, have reflected on the multiple characteristics of their
mentors, and have begun to emulate their qualities as they perform the duties of the superinten-
dent (Crippen & Wallin, 2008; McCann & Johannessen, 2009). The novice superintendent then
transforms into a mentor for the next generation of superintendents.
Networking
Because the superintendent position has primarily adopted the role of communicator, to
be successful, superintendents must create a network of stakeholders both within and outside the
school district (Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Kowalski et al., 2011). The act and skill of networking
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 30
should begin early in the superintendent’s career during his or her training in a university
(Cooper et al., 2002; McClellan et al., 2008). Universities can play a critical role in helping
aspiring superintendents to start building relationships with recruiters and current superinten-
dents, while also potentially gaining connections to mentors through networking events (Cooper
et al., 2002; Glenn & Hickey, 2009; McClellan et al., 2008; Sharp, Malone, Walter, & Supley,
2004). Organizations such as the ACSA and AASA also help both aspiring and current superin-
tendents to connect with other current, veteran, and retired superintendents (Beem, 2007; Cooper
et al., 2002; Livingston, 2007). Networking before the superintendency may be essential to gain
access to leadership roles (Sampson et al., 2015). Superintendents must develop a network,
including mentors and peers, to have access to the resources and intellectual capital of others in
order to be successful and have longevity in the position (Beem, 2007; Glenn & Hickey, 2009;
McCann & Johannessen, 2009). Ultimately, a superintendent must be an expert in building his
or her own social network (Ripley, Mitchell, & Richman, 2013).
A source of networks that aspiring and current superintendents can access are through
organizations such as the AASA or ACSA (Beem, 2007; Cooper et al., 2002; Livingston, 2007).
These organizations can function at a national, state, regional or local level (Beem, 2007; Cooper
et al., 2002; Livingston, 2007). Although it is better for a superintendent to be associated with at
least one of these networks, a single network for this position is still insufficient (Livingston,
2007). Rather, superintendents should be involved in multiple levels of networking, because
each network has its own purpose (Livingston, 2007). National networks such as the AASA
command a powerful voice and lead the profession across states lines (Livingston, 2007). State-
level administrative organizations such as the ACSA or the School Administrators of Iowa
provide networking whereby superintendents can be involved in peer support and policy
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 31
development (Beem, 2007; Livingston, 2007). In order to create connections among superinten-
dents, these organizations hold annual conferences that include networking opportunities (Beem,
2007). County-level organizations, usually regional groups of state or national organizations
such as the AASA or ACSA provide a colleague group for superintendents that is in close
proximity for peer support and mentoring (Beem, 2007; Livingston, 2007; Searby & Tripses,
2006). Sometimes local and regional needs cannot be met by these state or national associations.
Therefore, universities can play a role in filling the networking needs of superintendents (Cooper
et al., 2002; McClellan et al., 2008). Similarly, a consortium of local district superintendents can
create an exclusive small network to compare practices, provide professional development, and
collaborate with veteran superintendents (Gladwell, 2000). This type of local networking
exposes superintendents to the innovative programs implemented by other districts (Meier &
O’Toole, 2001). Networking within these various organizations, both large and small, assist
superintendents to enter into and succeed in the profession (Ripley et al., 2013).
While in the position, networking plays an important role for superintendents, as people
in their various networks are a resource of intellectual capital (Beem, 2007; Cooper et al., 2002;
Juenke, 2005; Livingston, 2007; Ripley et al., 2013; Searby & Tripses, 2006). For novice super-
intendents, networking allows for connections to veteran superintendents who may act as
mentors or at least provide advice for decision making (Beem, 2007). Networking also helps
novice superintendents to establish trust with key stakeholders within and outside the school
district (Ripley et al., 2013). Superintendents of any tenure can also collaborate with other local
superintendents of districts with similar characteristics to improve their own districts with
programs or policies (Gladwell, 2000; Meier & O’Toole, 2001). Female superintendents and
superintendents of color may perceive disadvantages to enter into some superintendent networks
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 32
because the networks may be seen as the “old boys” network (Searby & Tripses, 2006). Instead,
female superintendents and superintendents of color may fear entering into networks, which may
also be contributing to the lower percentages of these superintendents being nationally employed
(Kowalski et al., 2011; Searby & Tripses, 2006). However, networks for female superintendents
can have a positive impact on school districts and reduce feelings of isolation in the position
(Searby & Tripses, 2006). Networking also has a purpose for superintendents when managing a
school district.
Superintendents can use networks immediately within and around a school district to
improve student outcomes (Juenke, 2005; Meier & O’Toole, 2001, 2003; Paulsen, Nihlfors,
Brinkkjær, & Risku, 2016; Stone-Johnson, 2015). When networking with stakeholders immedi-
ately local to the district, superintendents can build enough trust with external stakeholders so
that they can grant the district more autonomy in its own decision making (Meier & O’Toole,
2001). Frequent outward networking also strengthens district performance in the short term and
builds a foundation for future enhancements in the district (Meier & O’Toole, 2003). Network-
ing with local stakeholders is another source of reducing the isolation of the superintendent
(Stone-Johnson, 2015).
Superintendents also network within the organization with various stakeholders (Meier &
O’Toole, 2001, 2003; Paulsen et al., 2016; Stone-Johnson, 2015). Networking within the
organization is referred to as network style management and encourages a more outward and less
centralized approach (Meier & O’Toole, 2001). Network management also contributes posi-
tively to district program performance and testing outcomes (Juenke, 2005; Meier & O’Toole,
2003). In this style of management, superintendents network with teachers and site administra-
tors within the district to become part of the decision making process (Paulsen et al., 2016). The
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 33
superintendent enters the various parts of the district to utilize the local environment to create and
structure change so as to produce higher performance (Meier & O’Toole, 2003). Through
network management, superintendents engage individual school leaders and exert influence over
the school (Paulsen et al., 2016). In some instances, superintendents can also take on mentoring
roles for upcoming leaders when networking internally (Paulsen et al., 2016). Networking within
the school district allows the superintendent to control and distribute knowledge through the
organization for enhanced student performance (Juenke, 2005; Stone-Johnson, 2015). Network-
ing in this manner has a strong effect on the organization with longer-tenured superintendents
exerting even more influence over the district because they have learned to tap their network
resources (Juenke, 2005). Networking is an essential practice for superintendents to ensure
success and longevity while also improving student outcomes (Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Meier &
O’Toole, 2003; Ripley et al., 2013). Superintendents must make constant efforts to use network-
ing as a daily tool and not just as a luxury in which to partake when time permits (Meier &
O’Toole, 2003). Successful superintendents engage in and maintain their networks to ensure
retention in the position. Aspiring superintendents must also network to be recruited to a posi-
tion.
Recruitment
The recruitment of superintendents includes the experiences of two main parties, the
hiring board of education and the job-seeking superintendent.
Board of Education Recruitment Experience
The school board’s experience in filling the vacancy of the district superintendent can be
complicated and time consuming. Boards of education can either conduct the recruitment
process by themselves or use a search consultant to assist in the process (Björk, Glass, et al.,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 34
2005; Kowalski et al., 2011). Usually, smaller districts take on the recruiting process on their
own while larger districts hire a search consultant. Although there is no preferable method, the
most prevalent method is for a school board is to form its own committee to manage the process
(Björk, Glass, et al., 2005). The general process includes the committee drawing up a job
description, publishing the opportunity at universities or state associations, working with staff to
screen applicants, conducting interviews, and bringing the candidate before the board for an
interview (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005). Because a school board takes on its own hiring role,
professional development for board members for hiring a superintendent is valuable to avoid
pitfalls and is in some cases mandatory to ensure that the board can make effective decisions
(Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Glass, 2000; Kamler, 2009). The recruitment process can be compli-
cated and risky; therefore, some districts use search firms.
Use of a search firm. A school board’s use of a search firm’s consultant allows the
board to use the firm as an extra “arm” of the board (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Glenn & Hickey,
2009; Kamler, 2009). Superintendent search consultant firms are usually owned and staffed by
retired superintendents, who are usually white, are over 50, hold a Master’s degree, and are in the
consultant position as a post career step (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Glenn & Hickey, 2009).
School boards also tend to prefer and predominantly hire retired superintendents (Glenn &
Hickey, 2009). Because many school boards rely on these search consultants, the search consul-
tant has become a predominant gatekeeper to the position for aspiring superintendents (Glenn &
Hickey, 2009).
Although search consultants hold the position as the gatekeeper to the superintendency,
search consultants also run into barriers to assist a school board to fill a vacancy in the position
(Kamler, 2009; McLaughlin, 2005; Tallerico, 2000). This is because the superintendent position
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 35
includes increased demands while not always providing a commensurate salary (McLaughlin,
2005). These issues become disincentives for potentially suitable candidates and ultimately
reduce the applicant pool (Kamler, 2009; Kowalski et al., 2011; McLaughlin, 2005). As a result,
recruiting firms and consultants tend to rely heavily on outreach and networking to fulfill vacan-
cies (Kamler, 2009). The fact that the applicant pool is even smaller for women and people of
color has contributed to the lower percentages of women and people of color in the position
(Kowalski et al., 2011). In addition, the predominant White demographic of most search consul-
tants along with their routines and norms limits the potential recruitment of women and people of
color to the position (Tallerico, 2000). Thus, the superintendency has continued in its historic
norm to be a position held by White men (Kowalski et al., 2011; Tallerico, 2000).
Opportunities to diversify. There is an opportunity for boards of education to diversify
the position of the superintendent (Winter, Rinehart, Keedy, & Björk, 2007). Although women
are counted as 65% of the total workforce nationwide, women occupy only 14% of the superin-
tendent positions (Newton, 2006). Disparities in the percentages of women superintendents and
superintendents of color continue to exist (Kowalski et al., 2011).
Although there is no exclusive pathway to the position, females and people of color are
not predominant in favored stepping-stone positions, such the high school principal (Glenn &
Hickey, 2009; Tallerico, 2000). School boards and search firms tend to hold specific beliefs and
routines that emphasize the normed ideologies and sociocultural values that disadvantage women
and minorities (Tallerico, 2000). The recruitment strategies of search firms tend to benefit men
because they emphasize the practice, knowledge, and skillsets usually associated with men
(Newton, 2006).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 36
Since the 1980s, the percentage of women and people of color in the superintendency has
been trending toward more equitable levels for women (Kowalski et al., 2011). Still, women
have reported barriers to the position in the form of being excluded from the “good old boy”
superintendents, lacking a general professional network, not receiving encouragement, and
lacking influential sponsors (Sharp et al., 2004). Although the percentage of women serving in
the superintendency has increased, there has not been a substantial gain yet for people of color
(Kamler, 2009). These disparities are especially magnified for women of color and particularly
for African American females (Brown, 2014). African American female superintendents who
have overcome these barriers have reported having to carry themselves to higher standards and to
harder to dispel stereotypes and prove capacity (Brown, 2014). African American females also
reported needing strong professional networks that include a White mentor and advocate (Brown,
2014). Although trends for women and people of color are improving, school boards of educa-
tion and their search consultants have the continued opportunity to be cognizant of the barriers
when seeking candidates that meet their qualifications.
Qualities sought in candidates. School boards may seek certain qualities in possible
candidates, including personal characteristics and being a potential change agent (Björk, Glass, et
al., 2005; Kowalski et al., 2011). Because the position is highly visible, boards desire their
eventual superintendent to hold personal qualities and characteristics that emulate the image and
role model that they can project when representing the school district (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005).
These qualities are essential during the interview and give board members their “gut feeling” in
terms of eventually hiring the person (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Tallerico, 2000). School boards
also desire the potential superintendent to be a potential change agent for teaching and learning,
for management efficiency, and in relationships with the community stakeholders (Björk, Glass,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 37
et al., 2005). Specifically, 26% of school boards have primarily hired their superintendents for
this purpose (Glass, 2000). Finally, school boards desire their potential candidates to be able to
exercise the five main roles of the superintendent: being an effective communicator, manager,
instructional leader, statesman, and applied social scientist (Kowalski et al., 2011). However, the
role of being an effective communicator carries the highest expectation, with 85.4% of hiring
school boards expecting this skillset (Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Kowalski et al., 2011). Boards also
have preconceived notions and expectations in regard to gender, with women stereotyped mainly
as instructional leaders and change agents and men stereotyped mainly as political leaders and
business managers (Newton, 2006). These preconceived notions may provide advantages to each
gender when certain expectations are given a heavier weight than others. Nonetheless, other
aspects are considered by boards during the recruitment process.
School boards of education and search consultants require candidates to have the appro-
priate prior career experience (Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Kamler, 2009; Kowalski et al., 2011;
Tallerico, 2000; Winter et al., 2007). Superintendents with successful prior experience in the
position are preferred by school boards (Kamler, 2009). When possible, vacancies are filled by a
superintendent of a neighboring district. However, increased demands, insufficient salaries,
inadequate benefits, and a lack of incentives makes it difficult for some boards to recruit an
experienced superintendent (McLaughlin, 2005). Consequently, school boards then turn to
first-time candidates for the position. The experience required by a school board and its search
consultant for a candidate usually includes a career history with a traditional career path through
K–12 education: teacher, assistant principal, principal, district director, and assistant superinten-
dent (Kowalski et al., 2011; Tallerico, 2000). However, prior experience as a principal and as a
district administrator position is a firm prerequisite (Kowalski et al., 2011). Although any
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 38
experience of a principal fulfills the prerequisite, search consultants and boards of education
primarily seek candidates with successful experience as a high school principal (Glenn & Hickey,
2009). The reason is because successfully leading a high school as a principal provides the
candidate with the opportunity to gain multiple experiences working with many stakeholders on
and off the campus to lead the organization, and this experience is similar to leading a school
district (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). In addition, successful high school principals are able to
navigate the political environment of the school and have an understanding of multiple issues
(Glenn & Hickey, 2009). These experiences solidify the perceptions of the requirement to many
boards of education and search consultants (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). Interestingly, high school
principals have been reported to enjoy their position so much that they did not feel incentivized
to pursue the superintendent position (Winter et al., 2007). With the limited supply of candidates
with preferred high school principal experience, boards of education and search consultants
maintain prerequisite skillsets similar to the high school principal (Glenn & Hickey, 2009).
These include general experience, skills as an effective administrator, and being able to commu-
nicate (Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Kowalski et al., 2011). Similarly, hiring boards and search
consultants want to see their candidates have the ability to apply their experiences from a school
campus and to relate them to the superintendency (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). With the right
criteria, a superintendent candidate can be successfully recruited to the district. While school
boards are recruiting, superintendent candidates have their own experience through the recruiting
process.
Superintendent Candidate’s Recruitment Experience
Aspiring superintendent candidates recognize the necessity to progress through the
traditional career path in K–12 education (Kowalski et al., 2011). This traditional career path
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 39
includes recognizing that experience as a high school principal is most beneficial to attaining the
superintendency (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). Aspiring superintendents also recognize that being
able to create and maintain a consensus with many stakeholders in a school community is a
marketable quality to demonstrate to search consultants and hiring boards of education (Glenn &
Hickey, 2009). Because search consultants are the gatekeepers to the position, it is imperative
for applicants to build relationships and network with them in order to gain entry (Glenn &
Hickey, 2009). A relationship with the search consultant also allows superintendent candidates
the ability to learn as much about the position as possible—knowledge that provides a competi-
tive edge during interviewing (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). Building relationships with search con-
sultants emphasizes the importance of networking prior to entry into the position. Incoming
superintendents need to consider creating an entry plan when entering the position.
Entry plan. Because the position of the superintendent is highly visible, political, and
critical for many stakeholders, incoming superintendents need to create a formal entry plan that
begins as early as the interview or day of appointment (Kowalski et al., 2011; Smith, 2012;
Sutton, 2012). Entry plans can be formal, well-conceived plans or just informally created. The
more rigorous and thoughtful an incoming superintendent makes his or her entry plan, the more
successful his or her transition will be (King & Blumer, 2000; Sutton, 2012). The reason is
because formal entry plans include a timeline and theoretical best practices in organizational
culture, social capital, and trust (Kowalski et al., 2011). Entry plans are becoming much more
prevalent, with higher percentages of superintendents reporting that they had an entry plan in
place (Sutton, 2012). The first 90 days of any chief executive’s tenure is highly important and
essential for the success of the new superintendent (Sutton, 2012). The recruited
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 40
superintendent’s goal with his or her entry plan is to establish communication and collaboration
with the various stakeholders in the school district (Sutton, 2012).
Central to any formal entry plan is the communication of the recruited superintendent’s
vision (King & Blumer, 2000; Swindle, 2005). This communication begins as early as the inter-
view process with critical questions to the board of education from the candidate superintendent
about the board of education’s vision (King & Blumer, 2000). Prospective superintendents need
to ensure that both the superintendent and the board of education have a collective vision. If the
vision is mutual, then the superintendent proceeds to be recruited and brings his or her vision to
the various stakeholders of the district and community (King & Blumer, 2000). Although com-
municating the vision is critical during the entry period, interviewing and listening are the most
effective actions of new superintendents to gain a common vision for the school district (Swin-
dle, 2005). Interviews with board members, who are the superintendent’s supervisors, provide
insights about the organization’s history and potential future (King & Blumer, 2000; Swindle,
2005). An interview with the prior superintendent also provides insights to the district’s immedi-
ate past, honors the predecessor, and builds the trust of stakeholders (King & Blumer, 2000).
The new superintendent must identify key players, both high profile and local, who can help the
superintendent learn the history, identify underlying key issues, establish credibility, determine
what is being done, and communicate the vision and goals that he or she has (Swindle, 2005; The
Broad Center, 2004). As the new superintendent builds coalitions with the various stakeholders,
he or she will begin to learn about the good things that are happening and start communicating
them (Kerrins & Cushing, 2001). Critically important to this communication is having the super-
intendent immediately identify himself or herself not as an outsider looking in, but rather as an
inclusive member of the district (Kerrins & Cushing, 2001; Swindle, 2005). Communicating
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 41
belonging to the district and praising the good aspects helps the new superintendent to build
coalitions and trust with the various stakeholders of the district while also emphasizing that
everyone is contributing to the goal (Kerrins & Cushing, 2001). Finally, through the entry plan,
newly recruited superintendents can identify opportunities for early wins that are important to the
immediate and ongoing success of the position (Swindle, 2005). The formal entry plan is critical
for the successful recruitment of superintendents. Successful superintendents are also active in
their relationships with their board.
Superintendent–Board Relationships
Once a superintendent is recruited, it is imperative that both the new superintendent and
school board have a positive relationship. The relationship between the board of education and
the superintendent can be very complex, ever changing, dynamic, and transforming (Thompson,
2014). A good relationship can turn sour very quickly, but sometimes there are opportunities for
a bad relationship to improve. Nonetheless, a good relationship between the board of education
and the superintendent is essential for the ongoing success and tenure of the superintendent (Byrd
et al., 2006). Specifically, the superintendent must have a positive relationship with the school
board president, who is a key cornerstone to the success of the school district and high student
achievement (Goodman & Zimmerman, 2000). In order to ensure success, the goal for both
school boards and superintendents is not to work on individual strength but rather in partnership
with each another (Thompson, 2014). However, because of power issues, this goal can be
difficult to reach and maintain.
Opposing or Collaborative Power
Both superintendents and school boards are in positions of power, which can be used in
opposition or in partnership (Mountford, 2004; Tallerico, 1989). Superintendents usually have
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 42
traditional educational experience from serving in the ranks of being a teacher to becoming the
superintendent (Kowalski et al., 2011). School board members, however, are in public office
after being elected by the local citizens to exercise power in policy decisions. Both positions
hold high power, but motivations to assume each position of power come from differing personal
definitions of power (Mountford, 2004). One definition of power that an individual can maintain
is having personal power, which manifests itself as having power over another power (Mount-
ford, 2004). The other definition is having altruistic power, which manifests itself in collabora-
tive power with the goal of the public good. The definition that a board member assumes can
have implications on how he or she will interact with other board members and with the superin-
tendent (Mountford, 2004). A cunning and wise superintendent can identify each board mem-
ber’s personal definition of power in order to negotiate decisions about policy in the district
(Mountford, 2004). Governance by the school board and superintendent is a dynamic, political,
negotiated, and democratic process that affects both current and future district agendas (Tallerico,
1989). The governance process is a process in which both superintendent and school board have
something to gain, but they will also have to pay a price through compromise (Tallerico, 1989).
It is imperative that both learn to positively interact for long-term tenure for both school
board members and the superintendent (Alsbury, 2003; Byrd et al., 2006). Local community
members become more involved when there is conflict, which can ultimately result in changes in
the school board’s membership through voting (Alsbury, 2003). In addition, superintendents
leave districts, either voluntarily or through termination, because of conflicts with the school
board (Byrd et al., 2006). There are patterns and actions that lead to conflict between the school
board and the superintendent.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 43
Actions Leading to Conflict
Actions taken by the superintendent and school board members contribute to conflict
between the two (Byrd et al., 2006; Escalante, 2002; Glass et al., 2000; Harvey, 2003). Because
the school board creates policy for the district and for the superintendent, many superintendents
reported feeling frustrated by the bureaucracy and politics of the position (Byrd et al., 2006). In
some cases, school boards end up micromanaging the superintendent and his or her administra-
tive team, thus interfering with his or her goals and responsibilities (Harvey, 2003). Superinten-
dents have acted to manipulate school board members by lobbying them, siding with a segment,
or making deals with individuals (Escalante, 2002; Harvey, 2003). This type of behavior ends up
causing resentment for board members (Harvey, 2003). Poorly communicated and misunder-
stood expectations also contribute to conflict between the superintendent and the school board
(Escalante, 2002; Glass et al., 2000; Thompson, 2014). In some cases, expectations may be
communicated, but actions taken by one party are inconsistent and could contribute to conflict,
uncertainty, and loss of trust (Escalante, 2002; Thompson, 2014). Although actions or nonaction
may seem innocent, both the superintendent and school board must be proactive with taking
actions that promote a continued positive relationship.
Actions Leading to a Positive Relationship
A superintendent who is successful at maintaining a positive relationship with the school
board is one who brings the right attitude, develops and maintains an effective relationship, and
creates and keeps a unified atmosphere of trust between the superintendent and the school board
(Eadie & Houston, 2004; Escalante, 2002). Maintaining a positive relationship requires a com-
mitment by both parties and an investment of significant time, thought, and energy (Escalante,
2002; Sutton, 2012). Effective superintendents need to be able to focus all of the stakeholders
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 44
around a common vision of school improvement by communicating that the superintendent is
trustworthy, an expert, and socially attractive (Fusarelli, 2006; Petersen & Short, 2001).
To maintain unity, the superintendent as communicator is the role of highest priority and
manifests itself in regular and frequent communication between the superintendent and the
school board via telephone or personal letters with a basic “no-surprises” rule in both directions
(Escalante, 2002; Harvey, 2003; Kowalski et al., 2011). An agreement on school board and
superintendent priorities must be discussed early to maintain focus and to create boundaries for
both the school board and the superintendent (Harvey, 2003).
Boundaries. Boundaries are necessary to create and maintain a positive relationship
between school boards and superintendents (Eadie & Houston, 2004; Fusarelli, 2006; Harvey,
2003; Mountford, 2004). Similar to a corporate structure, the school board acts as a corpora-
tion’s board of trustees that creates organizational policy, while the superintendent functions as a
contemporary chief executive officer (CEO) who is the supreme manager of the district and who
implements the board’s policies (Eadie & Houston, 2004; Fusarelli, 2006; Mountford, 2004). In
order to maintain this healthy distinction between their roles and to prevent the micromanage-
ment of their position, superintendents must create a boundary that ensures that they can still
manage the district and hire and fire site managers (Harvey, 2003). School boards must place
their focus mainly on creating broad policy, developing budgets, setting goals, ensuring account-
ability, and assessing the superintendent’s performance (Fusarelli, 2006; Mountford, 2004). As
both parties understand their defined roles and structure, both can focus on making governance a
top priority in a symbiotic relationship wherein the superintendent is building the board’s capac-
ity in developing a governing design, structure, and process, while the board supports the profes-
sional autonomy of the superintendent to manage the district (Eadie & Houston, 2004).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 45
Superintendents can also make recommendations on policy to board members; if in agreement,
the board members can accept and adopt the policy (Kowalski et al., 2011). In the use of bound-
aries, the board president and the superintendent are the source of leadership in a school district
and retain formal authority similar to that of a CEO and chairman of a corporation (Petersen &
Short, 2001). Finally, boundaries must be created asserting that both the members of the school
board and the superintendent have a human dimension that must be acknowledged (Bolman &
Deal, 2003; Eadie & Houston, 2004). As boundaries create a framework for a positive relation-
ship between the school board and the superintendent, collaborative efforts can also enhance the
positive relationship.
Team work and collaboration. An effective school board–superintendent relationship
is not one of individual strength but rather of teamwork and collaboration (Thompson, 2014). A
stronger partnership guarantees the success of the school district and helps to meet the needs of
the surrounding community (Glass et al., 2000; Thompson, 2014). In addition, frustrations can
be reduced or eliminated when there is team-oriented focus on student achievement (Thompson,
2014). The ability of a superintendent to lead a team-oriented district is an essential skillset for
ongoing success (Petersen & Short, 2001). A successful method and practice of team-oriented
school boards and superintendents is that they participate in regular closed-session workshops
(Escalante, 2002; Petersen & Short, 2001). These workshops provide a safe and nonpublic place
to work as a team in capacity building, planning, honest self-reflection, and maintaining a
cooperative working relationship (Escalante, 2002; Petersen & Short, 2001). As the team-
oriented interactions increase, the perceptions by the school board of the superintendent’s
expertise, trustworthiness, attractiveness, assertiveness, and emotiveness are improved and
become more positive (Petersen & Short, 2001). Subsequently, the board will view the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 46
superintendent’s suggestions for critical policy decisions more favorably, provide higher evalua-
tions, and hopefully renew his or her contract when the time comes (Kowalski et al., 2011;
Petersen & Short, 2001). A collaborative, team-oriented relationship between the superintendent
and the board that has created healthy boundaries will ensure success for higher student achieve-
ment and longer tenure times for both the superintendent and the school board (Kowalski et al.,
2011; Thompson, 2014). Successful superintendents proactively build positive relationships
early with their board members to ensure retention. However, the retention of superintendents is
also affected by other factors.
Retention
Most superintendents have success in the position, with 54.3% reporting having 2 to 8
years of experience in the position and 24.3% reporting having 13 or more years in the position
(Kowalski et al., 2011). About 97.2% of superintendents also reported being highly successful in
the position—a factor that can be attributed to their job satisfaction (Kowalski et al., 2011). The
position has been maturing with an increase in the median age of superintendents (Björk, Glass,
et al., 2005; Glass et al., 2000). The figures are optimistic when considering that the position can
have positive effects on student achievement (Parker-Chenaill, 2012; Waters & Marzano, 2006).
Although many superintendents report successful retention in their current position, 2.3% have
reported that their contract was not renewed by their school board and that they did not return to
the superintendency (Kowalski et al., 2011). Having a school board renew the superintendent’s
contract is critical to his or her retention (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Melver, 2011); however,
there are other reasons affecting superintendent retention.
A superintendent’s retention in a position can be limited by a number of circumstances
(Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Ezarik, 2001; Kowalski et al., 2011; Melver, 2011; Talbert, 2011).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 47
Since superintendents can find success and high job satisfaction in the position, superintendents
mainly leave their positions to move on to be superintendents of larger districts (Björk, Glass, et
al., 2005). Similarly, retirement is a common step after the position. Therefore, many other
successful superintendents decide to move onto retirement following a successful term in the
superintendency (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Melver, 2011). Personal circumstances, such as the
superintendent’s affect, also may determine his or her retention in the position (Ezarik, 2001;
Talbert, 2011). Superintendents who want to stay in their position have a higher likelihood of
being retained than superintendents who feel as though they ought to stay (Talbert, 2011). Sim-
ilarly, a superintendent’s affect determines his or her belief regarding the potential of the dis-
trict’s students to learn, with superintendents who have low beliefs not having longer retention in
the position (Ezarik, 2001). These factors may also contribute to a poor relationship with the
school board. Conflict with the school board is the second largest circumstance why superinten-
dents leave their position (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Melver, 2011). A sour relationship with the
school board increases the likelihood that the superintendent’s contract would not be renewed or
would be prematurely terminated (Kowalski et al., 2011; Melver, 2011).
Having an ongoing positive relationship with the school board is essential for a superinten-
dent’s retention (Kowalski et al., 2011; Lehman, 2015; Melver, 2011). A superintendent must
have skill in building and maintaining positive relationships with primarily the school board
members but also with district administrators, site administrators, teachers, parents, students, and
other community members (Melver, 2011). Positive board interactions, particularly during
critical times in the organization, increase the superintendent’s tenure and retention (Lehman,
2015). Ongoing communication with the school board members is necessary to support the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 48
positive ongoing relationship (Ezarik, 2001; Melver, 2011). The ability to communicate and
other skillsets are important for the superintendent to develop and exercise when in the position.
Skillsets
School superintendents can make “classic” mistakes that can quickly end their career
(Kerrins & Cushing, 2001). However, they can ensure a higher likelihood of retention by devel-
oping and exercising a certain set of skillsets. Obvious for the position are the five main roles
that the superintendency has historically taken on: teacher-scholar, business manager, democratic
leader, applied social scientist, and communicator (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Kowalski et al.,
2011). The modern-day superintendent takes on the role mainly as a communicator (Kowalski &
Keedy, 2005). However, he or she must also have skills to be an instructional leader and manage
the business of the district (Brewer, 2012; Kowalski & Keedy, 2005). The literature reveals that
although superintendents must have many skills, there are three main skillsets.
The first and most dominant skillset stems from the superintendent as the communicator
(Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Chen, 2014; Kowalski et al., 2011). Communication for the superin-
tendents is not just a role but rather a critical skill that must be studied, developed through
practice, and even learned on the job (Kowalski & Keedy, 2005). Communication for the super-
intendent is the ability to read, write, speak, and listen so as to clearly articulate the vision of the
organization (Chen, 2014). In addition, the superintendent’s use of communication is critical
when creating policy, developing strategy, and setting priorities with the school board and the
various stakeholders of the school district (Chen, 2014). The superintendent is the ultimate
model of communication to the stakeholders of the organization, and he or she must be able to
ensure that communication is also occurring among the various stakeholders of the organization
(Shaw, 2014). Although some might say that the superintendent should communicate with a
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 49
top-down approach, other scholars have suggested that superintendents should participate in
two-way, complementary communication that engages and includes others in problem solving
and encourages trust, credibility, and mutual understanding (Kowalski & Keedy, 2005). The
emphasis on the communication skillset by the superintendent reinforces the skillset among the
various stakeholders of the organization and increases organizational capacity for communication
(Shaw, 2014). This is especially important for school organizations, which are in the business of
communicating knowledge to learning students.
A second skillset reported by scholars is for superintendents to have financial skills
(Lehman, 2015; Melver, 2011; Shaw, 2014). School boards desire superintendents to run the
organization so that it does not go broke; therefore, having budgetary awareness is key for the
superintendent (Melver, 2011). Superintendents must be able to apply the principles and under-
stand the issues of financial operations in school management (Shaw, 2014). The financial
skillset will also benefit the school organization in times of financial crises (Lehman, 2015).
Subsequently, successful use of the financial skillset will increase the trust in the superintendent
by the school board and ensure increased retention for the superintendent (Lehman, 2015).
Inabilities to succeed with the financial skill can sour the relationship with the board and put the
superintendent’s position at risk (Escalante, 2002; Shaw, 2014).
Next, scholars point to organizational skillsets as being beneficial for superintendent
retention (Chen, 2014; Kowalski et al., 2011). Organizational traits and skills have been identi-
fied as assisting the superintendent to lengthen his or her tenure (Chen, 2014). Superintendents
with the organizational skillset are able to develop and implement strategies to run the school
district while also maintaining openness to stakeholders and the school board (Chen, 2014).
Organizational skillsets can manifest themselves in multiple ways but are revealed symbolically
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 50
by the condition of district’s schools and facilities (Kowalski et al., 2011). A superintendent who
can exercise and display organizational skillsets is able to emphasize his or her leadership to
stakeholders and to be a model for others in the organization (Kowalski et al., 2011). Subse-
quently, this ability increases the superintendent’s likelihood of retention.
Finally, scholars have identified skillsets in leadership as necessary for superintendent
retention (Brewer, 2012; Kowalski et al., 2011; Lehman, 2015; Shaw, 2014). Superintendents
must be able to vision and plan the direction of the district (Kowalski et al., 2011). This skillset
includes being able to gain broad stakeholder participation to help create the vision as well as to
navigate the political ebb and flow of the district. The superintendent’s ability to lead in creating
a vision is necessary to become the facilitator through leadership so that others can take owner-
ship of the vision, goals, and outcomes of the district (Brewer, 2012). It is imperative that a
superintendent has leadership skills and knowledge of principles of developing and implement-
ing long-term plans (Shaw, 2014). Similarly, superintendent leadership skills must include the
ability to model, goal set, and develop the staff (Brewer, 2012). This process includes not only
the ability to demonstrate values, beliefs, and attitudes for stakeholders to emulate but also the
ability to collaboratively create goals, develop stakeholders, and implement the goals (Shaw,
2014). Superintendents can adopt a servant leadership model that emphasizes the leadership
skills of listening, empathy, a commitment to the growth of people, and building the community
(Greenleaf, 1977; Lehman, 2015). Similarly, superintendents can adopt other leadership models
that emphasize skills in exercising leadership skills in a structural, human resource, political, or
symbolic context (Bolman & Deal, 2003). The ability to exercise leadership skills is imperative
for the success and retention of the school superintendent (Kowalski et al., 2011). Because
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 51
leadership skills are so important for the superintendent, it is important to recognize various
leadership models to frame this study.
A Measure of High-Performing School Districts
California superintendents can be judged by the performance of the school district they
serve through state accountability testing such as the California Assessment of Student Perfor-
mance and Progress (CAASPP; Educational Testing Service, 2017a). The CAASPP assesses
student performance in particular grades in both English Language Arts (ELA) and mathematics
during the student’s time in the school district. Particularly, the assessment determines whether a
student exceeded the standards, met the standards, approached the standards, or was below the
standards. The CAASPP also provides the same measurements for a single district on all of its
students as well as for the entire state of California.
The most recent administration of the CAASPP test at the time of the proposal for this
study (2016) reported that the California state average of students meeting or exceeding the
standards for ELA and mathematics was 49% and 37%, respectively (California Department of
Education, 2017). District averages are reported individually but are usually compared to state
averages. Superintendents in high-performing school districts can boast percentages of at least
20 points higher than these state averages (Educational Testing Service, 2017b). Superintendents
have an opportunity to improve student achievement on the CAASPP by developing and imple-
menting strategies for district leadership (Waters & Marzano, 2006).
Superintendent leadership of a school district ultimately and positively affects student
achievement (Daly, 2009; Leithwood & Azah, 2017; Leithwood & McCullough, 2016; Masu-
moto & Brown-Welty, 2009; Ragland, Asera, & Johnson, 1999; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 52
2015; Waters & Marzano, 2006). Student achievement improves when the superintendent
creates a broadly shared mission of the district and schools (Leithwood & Azah, 2017; Leith-
wood & McCullough, 2016; Ragland et al., 1999; Waters & Marzano, 2006). This process takes
efforts by the superintendent, the district administrative team, and site administrators to build
trust in the administration for the faculty to feel (Daly, 2009; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2015).
Once trust is built, the superintendent can focus everyone in the district organization on improv-
ing instruction, which ultimately affects student achievement (Leithwood & McCullough, 2016;
Masumoto & Brown- Welty, 2009; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2015; Waters & Marzano,
2006). Superintendent leadership is critical to create a high-performing school district.
Theoretical Framework
Although a variety of leadership frameworks may be adopted for the purposes of this
study, the researcher will focus on three: Bolman and Deal’s (2003) four frames, Waters and
Marzano’s (2006) School District Leadership that Works, and Collins’s (2001) Level 5 Leader-
ship. Because the superintendency is heavily a leadership position, these leadership frameworks
will serve as a lens for the researcher in this study.
Four Frames
Superintendents face a variety of challenges and tasks that come in many forms. Al-
though not necessary for success, intentionally using Bolman and Deal’s (2003) four frames can
help a superintendent make better sense of these various challenges and tasks. A frame is the
variety of outlooks that leaders can have in the organization, which can include their mental
models, maps, mind-sets, schema, and cognitive lenses. The various outlooks or frames are the
ways that leaders view their world of leadership and management, analyze organizational behav-
ior, and understand their own behavior in their role.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 53
There are four frames in which leaders, including superintendents, do this: the structural
frame, the human resource frame, the political frame, and the symbolic frame (Bolman & Deal,
2003). Stemming from sociology, the structural frame emphasizes the rules, roles, goals,
policies, technology, and environment through which a leader can view the organization. The
organization is metaphorically like a factory or a machine. The structural frame is based on the
assumption that organizations exist to achieve established goals and objectives and to be efficient
with specifically identified roles and rules. It functions best when rationality prevails above
personal preferences. In the structural frame, superintendents engage in vertical coordination
with their respective school boards, their authority, and exercise their own authority to their
subordinates within the district office and administrators at the various school sites. This process
also includes defining, establishing, and confirming an organization’s structure. Similarly, super-
intendents exercising the structural frame also engage laterally in meetings with peers, board
members, and networks. When a superintendent exercises the structural frame, he or she focuses
on the organization’s goal, implements a strategy to meet the goal, and ensures that organiza-
tional resources are focused on achieving that goal (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
A second leadership frame is the human resource frame (Bolman & Deal, 2003). The
human resource frame stems from social and organizational psychology studies and views the
organization as a family. Specifically, the workers of the organization are human and have
needs, skills, and relationships. The major task of a superintendent exercising this frame would
be to align the organization’s needs with human needs, with an emphasis on organizations
existing to serve human needs. The organization and the human ultimately need each other.
Superintendents exercising the human resource frame must acknowledge the needs that people
have, including physiological needs, safety, a sense of belongingness, love, esteem, and self-
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 54
actualization needs. A successful image of the superintendent exercising the human resource
frame is being a person of empowerment (Bolman & Deal, 2003). In order to reach this image,
superintendents must build the capacity of the people in their organization by investing in them.
The third leadership frame is the political frame (Bolman & Deal, 2003). This frame
stems from political science and views the organization as a jungle in which power, conflict,
competition, and organizational politics exist. The organization must fight for scarce resources
and leaders must ensure that they allocate power to themselves, and develop an agenda and a
power base. The political frame is based on the assumption that organizations are coalitions of
varying individuals and interest groups that have enduring differences but are also after scarce
resources. Conflict is always likely to arise; however, through bargaining and negotiating, goals
can be reached and decisions made. Superintendents can engage in the political frame by estab-
lishing power and making coalitions. Because school districts have scarce resources, superinten-
dents can manipulate and place stakeholders into strategic positions to ensure power and to reach
goals. Although some may find the political frame as being extreme and selfish, the political
frame is still a frame in which leaders sometimes have to engage. The successful superintendent
will be viewed as an advocate for his or her own school district (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
The fourth and last frame is the symbolic frame (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Based on social
and cultural anthropology, the symbolic frame views the organization and its events as a carnival,
temple, or theater. Superintendents exercising this frame must understand the organization’s
culture, meanings, metaphors, rituals, ceremonies, stories, and heroes and meet the challenge of
creating faith, beauty, and meaning for the people of the organization. Assumptions in the
symbolic frame include knowing that what is most important is not what happens, but rather
what something means and that meaning is interpreted differently by the perceptions of the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 55
various people who experience what happened. The organization’s culture is of high value and is
the glue that keeps it together and unites its people. Superintendents can engage in the symbolic
frame by creating, establishing, and emphasizing symbols for the organization. This process
includes communicating and emphasizing the organization’s vision, mission, and values. The
superintendent also needs to tell the story of the organization, which identifies organizational
heroes and heroines; establishes organizational rituals; incorporates metaphors, humor, and play;
and ultimately gives meaning to the organization and its people. The ultimate goal for the
superintendent is to be an inspiration (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
A superintendent does not just engage in only one frame or all the frames but should be
able to switch between frames to better understand and engage in the organization. Knowledge
of Bolman and Deal’s (2003) four frames will assist the researcher in better understanding the
findings of this study.
School District Leadership That Works
The next leadership framework that the researcher will incorporate as a lens for this study
is Water and Marzano’s (2006) School District Leadership that Works. This longitudinal, quan-
titative meta-analysis measured the effects of superintendent leadership on student achievement.
The authors were able to derive three main findings and a supplemental fourth finding from the
study. The findings from this leadership framework will also act as a lens for this study.
The first finding in this leadership framework is that district-level leadership matters
(Waters & Marzano, 2006). Although some may argue that the district leadership team and
administrators may act bureaucratically, Water and Marzano (2006) argued that most school
district leaders matter and can make a positive difference on student achievement. Student
achievement across the district can be positively affected when district leaders are acting on their
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 56
leadership responsibilities efficiently. By being a school district’s leader, the superintendent has
a large responsibility in ensuring that his or her team members are exercising leadership effec-
tively.
The second finding in this leadership framework was that district responsibilities corre-
lated positively with student achievement (Waters & Marzano, 2006). Specifically, there were
five responsibilities that leaders at the district level exercised that had a positive effect on the
school district’s student achievement. The first responsibility identified of successful superinten-
dents was collaborative goal setting of nonnegotiable goals. Superintendents exercised this
responsibility by including all relative stakeholders in the district, including the district-level
administrators, site-building administrators, and the school board. The goal for superintendents
is to come to an agreement, not a consensus, on nonnegotiable district goals that all can agree to
support. If superintendents in the study succeeded in achieving this responsibility, then there was
a direct positive impact on student achievement in the district (Waters & Marzano, 2006).
Following collaborative goal setting, nonnegotiable goals for student achievement and
instruction was a second responsibility of effective superintendents. This means that the col-
laboratively set, nonnegotiable goals should include nonnegotiable goals for both student
achievement and instruction. For nonnegotiable student achievement goals, superintendents
would work with relevant stakeholders in their district to identify specific achievement targets for
the district as a whole, at school sites, and in individual subpopulations of students within the
district. Once these nonnegotiable student achievement goals were identified, each site would be
able to develop an action plan to reach those goals. In regard to nonnegotiable classroom instruc-
tion goals, an effective superintendent would help all relevant stakeholders to identify and adopt
a common framework of classroom instruction utilizing research-based instructional strategies.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 57
The effective superintendent could then hold site administrators accountability for the explicit
and implicit support of the agreed upon nonnegotiable student achievement and classroom
instructional goals (Waters & Marzano, 2006).
The third responsibility of effective superintendents is board alignment with and sup-
portive of district goals (Waters & Marzano, 2006). Effective superintendents will help lead
their school boards to adopt the previously described nonnegotiable goals on student achieve-
ment and classroom instruction and make them the only priority. This process would ensure that
any other initiatives would not compete with the district’s commonly adopted nonnegotiable
goals. The study by Waters and Marzano (2006) even suggests that any board members who
might have another initiative that they are pursuing may compete with and negatively affect the
adopted nonnegotiable goals. The responsibility of board alignment with and support of district
goals by the superintendent would ensure that student achievement is maximized in the district.
The following responsibility of superintendents to positively affect student achievement
is the monitoring of the achievement and instructional goals (Waters & Marzano, 2006). This
behavior involves the superintendent in regularly reviewing achievement and instructional data
and monitoring school site progress to the goals. At times, the superintendent would take correc-
tive action to realign school site behavior to align with the student achievement and instructional
goals. In addition to monitoring the goals, effective superintendents use district resources to
support the goals for instruction and achievement. Although Waters and Marzano (2006) did not
signify the specific amount of resources that superintendents should apply, their study concluded
that effective superintendents are committed to support the district goals with the necessary
resources of money, personnel, materials, professional development, and time. In sum, superin-
tendents can positively affect student achievement in their districts by building collective, non-
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 58
negotiable goals with relevant stakeholders that are tied to student achievement and instruction,
regularly monitoring those goals, and supporting the goals with the use of district resources.
Waters and Marzano (2006) identified two other findings within their study that would
support the leadership framework in the present study. First, effective superintendents provide a
defined autonomy to school site principals in which a nonnegotiable goal is enforced, but that
autonomy is granted to the school principal to achieve the nonnegotiable goal in his or her own
context. Second, superintendent tenure was positively related to the average academic student
achievement, with higher superintendent retention related to the higher average academic
achievement of students. The findings from this leadership framework should support the
findings of this researcher’s study.
Level 5 Leadership
The last leadership framework that the study will incorporate as a lens is Collins’s (2001)
Level 5 Leadership (Collins, 2001). Within this leadership framework leaders can reside in five
ascending levels. A Level 1 leader is the highly capable individual who has talent, knowledge,
skills and good work habits that contribute to the organization. A Level 2 leader is the contribut-
ing team member who can work effectively with others and contributes to the achievement of the
group. A Level 3 leader is the competent manager who can organize “people and resources
toward the effective and efficient pursuit of predetermined objectives” ( p. 70). A Level 4 is the
effective leader who “catalyzes commitment to and vigorous pursuit of a clear and compelling
vision” and “stimulates the group to high performance standards” (p. 70). Although the first four
levels of leadership can have a positive effect on an organization, Collins (2001) contended that
there is a Level 5 leader—the executive. The Level 5 leader requires the ability to perform all of
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 59
the actions of the lower levels as well as have the abilities of the Level 5 leader. The Level 5
leader is one who can transform a school district from good to great.
The particular two qualities of a Level 5 leader are personal humility and professional
will (Collins, 2001). Leaders with personal humility would demonstrate modesty, never be
boastful about self, and deflect any public praise directed toward to himself or herself. He or she
would also absorb and take responsibility for any criticisms and not blame others, external
factors, or bad luck. However, the personal humility of a Level 5 leader must also include pro-
fessional will. No matter how difficult the goals are, leaders with professional will do whatever
it takes to produce the best long-term results for the organization and succeed at producing
excellent results. Whenever successful results occur in an organization, the Level 5 leader gives
credit to others, external factors, good luck, and never to himself or herself. His or her example
sets the standard for the long-term endurance of the organization. Level 5 leaders contribute to
the long-term organizational endurance by selecting superb successors for their positions so that
the organization can be even more successful in the future (Collins, 2001). Metaphorically,
Level 5 leaders look at a mirror in their personal humility and out a window in their professional
will (Collins, 2001). The leadership frameworks developed by Bolman and Deal (2003), Collins
(2001), and Waters and Marzano (2006) served as a theoretical lens for the researcher in the
present study.
Conceptual Framework
The researcher is adopting the conceptual framework in Figure 1 that illustrates a success-
ful superintendent who incorporates the theoretical frameworks. The successful superintendent
is savvy and able to shift his or her actions to incorporate the four frames (Bolman & Deal,
2003), Level 5 Leadership (Collins, 2001), and district leadership that works (Waters &
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 60
Figure 1. Conceptual framework for study. Based on Reframing Organizations
(3rd ed.), by L. G. Bolman and T. E. Deal, 2003, San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass;
“Level 5 Leadership: The Triumph of Humility and Fierce Resolve,” by J. Collins,
2001, Harvard Business Review, 79(1), pp. 65–76; and School District Leadership
That Works: The Effects of Superintendent Leadership on Student Achievement, by
J. T. Waters and R. J. Marzano, 2006, Denver, CO: McRel.
Marzano, 2006). The successful superintendent strategically exercises Bolman and Deal’s
(2003) four frames with the various relationships that he or she has within the organization. The
use of each frame depends on the circumstances of his or her various relationships and the
context of the organization. The successful superintendent also develops and implements strate-
gies from Waters and Marzano’s (2006) School District Leadership That Works. By developing
and implementing these strategies, the successful superintendent focuses the school district and
board on the nonnegotiable goals that were collaboratively set. Finally, the successful superin-
tendent also adopts adopt the posture of Collins’s (2001) Level 5 Leadership when reacting to his
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 61
or her own successes and failures in the position. This leadership level includes reflecting praises
from success back to the organization’s people and absorbing criticisms from failures back to
himself or herself. Depending on the situation, successful superintendents act within these three
theoretical frameworks in unison or in a continuum depending on the circumstances and context
in which they find themselves. Nonetheless, these theoretical frameworks are critical for suc-
cessful superintendent to utilize.
Chapter Summary
This chapter was a review of the literature relevant to this study that provided a context
for the purpose of this study. Aspiring and successful superintendents must carefully consider
the historical and current roles that the superintendent position has adopted. They must take
proper measures to prepare for, enter, and stay in the position. Successful superintendents may
also adopt theoretical frameworks for the position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 62
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Successful California superintendents have experiences in their preparation, recruitment,
and retention, all of which have served to support their ongoing success in the position. How-
ever, the fact that the average tenure of school district superintendents has dropped may signify a
problem in preparation, recruitment, and retention (Kowalski et al., 2011). The purpose of this
study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and retention of California superintendents.
Chapter Two was a review of the literature that involved the various aspects of superintendent
preparation, recruitment, and retention. This chapter will describe the study’s research questions,
research design and methods, sample and population, access and entry, instrumentation, data
collection, ethical considerations, and data analysis.
Research Questions Restated
This study was seeking to answer the following research questions:
1. How have training programs and experience prepared superintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges of the superintendency?
2. What are the perceptions of current successful superintendents and school boards
regarding the strategies used to help the current superintendent to attain his or her position?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of superintendents?
Research Design and Method
Qualitative Research
This study utilized a qualitative methods approach that involved qualitative data in the
form of interviews that were collected for analysis (Creswell, 2014). Studies that have used a
qualitative approach emphasized exploring and understanding the meaning of a problem.
(Creswell, 2014). In addition, qualitative studies may take on a constructivist worldview that
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 63
seeks to find the meaning that people construct of a problem, process, or phenomenon (Creswell,
2014; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The qualitative design of this study helped in better under-
standing the process of superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention through the par-
ticipants’ perspectives. Although this study was not a quantitative or a mixed-methods study, the
researcher also incorporated quantitative data drawn from survey instruments that supported the
study’s themes. By combining and integrating quantitative data with the qualitative themes, a
study can gain answers to the research questions from a qualitative perspective with the support
of quantitative data (Creswell, 2014).
Qualitative data were collected in the form of qualitative interviews with successful
California superintendents, school board members, and an executive search firm consultant
(ESFC; Johnson & Christensen, 2014; Maxwell, 2013). Interviews provided evidence through
interpretive data that contributed to the findings of this study (Creswell, 2014). These interviews
also provided the thoughts, beliefs, knowledge, and motivations that California K–12 superinten-
dents, school board members, and an executive search firm had about superintendent preparation,
recruitment, and retention (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). To conduct the interviews, the
researcher incorporated interview protocols tailored to each group that intentionally sought
answers to the research questions (Johnson & Christensen, 2014; Maxwell, 2013).
The source of quantitative data for this study was in the form of surveys containing Likert
scale items (Fink, 2013). These surveys were administered to California K–12 superintendents
and K–12 school board members. The use of surveys helped this study to gain a more general
measurement of the thoughts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions of successful California
superintendents, school board members, and an executive search firm on superintendent prepara-
tion, recruitment, and retention (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). The results from these various
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 64
groups illuminated common and varied perceptions on superintendent preparation, recruitment,
and retention.
Both qualitative interview and quantitative survey data were collected concurrently,
analyzed separately, and used to support the themes that answered the research questions
(Creswell, 2014). The researchers were able to triangulate connections in the data among the
study’s participants themselves to gain information about the different aspects of superintendent
preparation, recruitment, and retention. As well, a greater depth of understanding of these factors
was gained (Maxwell, 2013). The triangulation of interviews and surveys with superintendents,
school board members, and an executive search firm also increased the credibility and internal
validity of this study (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher believed that
the qualitative approach of this study would support the reader’s interest in better understanding
the problem of superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention (Creswell, 2014). In sum,
the qualitative approach of this study provided a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of
the research questions (Creswell, 2014). The following section will describe the study’s research
sample and population.
Population and Sample
The purpose of this study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and retention of
California superintendents. In order to fulfill the study’s purpose, the researcher focused on the
population of current superintendents in California, California school board members, and execu-
tive search firms. Although the most accurate findings could be made by taking a sample of the
entire population of California superintendents, board members, and executive search firms, time
and financial constraints limited the researcher to collecting both quantitative and qualitative data
from a sample of the population of these three groups (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). In
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 65
addition, the researcher focused the research of this study on superintendents who served in high-
performing districts in a region within Los Angeles County. In order to maintain the confidenti-
ality of the participating districts and participants, the researcher used a pseudonym of Beachside
Valley for the region under study—a suburban region of school districts outside of Los Angeles.
The researcher chose high-performing school districts to answer the research questions through
the perspectives of these particular superintendents. Beachside Valley was chosen because of its
convenience to the researcher.
Although the study incorporated a qualitative methods design and collected qualitative
data, the researchers also collected quantitative survey data. Both types of data were collected
through a mixed sampling design that considered (a) the time orientation of the collection of
qualitative data and the relationship between qualitative and quantitative samples (Johnson &
Christensen, 2014). The mixed sampling design that this study incorporated was the parallel
concurrent mixed sampling design, which signified that the study would draw samples for the
qualitative components during the same time period from different people of the same population
(Johnson & Christensen, 2014).
Part of this study’s process was conducted in a group of eight researchers at the USC
Rossier School of Education with whom this researcher is working. As part of the process where
some of the data collection was done as a group, there may be shared comments and information
from other members in the group. The following discussion will deal with the types of data
collected.
The qualitative data was drawn from a purposive sampling technique that qualified
participants to be selected to be interviewed (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). The qualitative data
of this study were collected solely by the researcher of this study. Qualitative data, in the form of
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 66
interviews, were collected by the researcher from three superintendents, two school board
members, and one ESFC. The researcher’s findings were drawn solely from his collected
qualitative data and triangulated with the quantitative data collected by the team of researchers
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). When appropriate, this study’s findings were also compared with the
trends in the qualitative interviews made by the other researchers with their respective superin-
tendents, school board members, and the executive search firm and with permission from team
members and their participants.
The three superintendents sampled by the researcher were selected with the following
qualifying criteria. First, superintendents interviewed were currently serving California school
superintendents in Beachside Valley who were in good standing with their school board, who had
served at least 2 years in their current position, and whose districts were reported to have
CAASPP scores that were at least 20% above the California state average for 2016 of students
meeting or exceeding the standards. The most recent data from the 2016 CAASPP testing
reported that the state average of students meeting or exceeding the standards for ELA and
Mathematics were 49% and 37%, respectively (California Department of Education, 2017). For
the sake of maintaining the confidentiality of the participant superintendents, the CAASPP scores
of the districts were not published in this study; however, the researcher has ensured that partici-
pating districts have met the above criteria. In addition, the researcher has assigned an alias for
each of the participating superintendents of this study. Table 1 summarizes the superintendent
participants of this study, including their alias in this study, their start date in the superintendent
position, whether the superintendent held a doctorate, and whether the district met the criteria
above for CAASPP scores. The researcher believes that this purposive sampling technique
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 67
helped to answer the research questions from the perspective of a successful superintendent on
his or her preparation, recruitment, and ongoing retention.
Table 1
Qualitative School District Superintendent Participant Interviewees
Doctorate District meets
Alias Start date degree CAASPP criteria
Sup A July 1, 2014 Yes Yes
Sup B July 1, 2014 No Yes
Sup C July 1, 2014 Yes Yes
Note. CAASPP = California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress.
Other qualitative data drawn from a purposive sampling technique included interviews
with two school board members and one ESFC (Johnson & Christensen, 2014). The criteria that
the researcher used to select board member participants was that the school board member had to
be a currently serving school board member in a K–12 school district. The selection criteria that
the researcher used to select an ESFC was that the person had to be an active ESFC who had
helped a school board hire a superintendent in the last 2 years. Table 2 summarizes the inter-
viewed school board members and the executive search firm participant in terms of their alias for
this study, their position, and whether they met the selection criteria.
The perceptions from school board members and the ESFC helped to answer the research
questions. Due to the limitations of time and access, the researcher employed convenience
sampling of qualitative data because the participants were easily recruited and willing to partici-
pate in the study (Johnson & Christensen, 2014).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 68
Table 2
Qualitative Interviews: School Board Members and Executive
Search Firm Consultant
Met selection
Alias Position criteria
BM1 School board member Yes
BM2 School board member Yes
ESFC Executive search firm consultant Yes
Quantitative data for this study were collected by the group of researchers. The quantita-
tive data sample was drawn from surveys given to two groups: California superintendents and
school board members. Surveys to collect data from California superintendents were adminis-
tered through the Qualtrics™ service. Quantitative data were not collected from executive search
firms because the group of researchers was able to identify only 17 executive search firm consul-
tants to send surveys to. The results from a survey to ESFCs would not have been generalizable
to the whole population of California executive search firms. The potential number of superin-
tendents, school boards, and executive search firms constituted a limited population. Although a
simple random sample from these populations should have been a representative sample of the
population, the researchers hoped that the number of completed surveys would be sufficient to
begin to generalize any findings (Johnson & Christensen, 2014).
Survey data from California superintendents were drawn from two stratified samples
(Johnson & Christensen, 2014). The first included superintendents who were ACSA members;
the second, superintendents who were members of the USC DSAG. In the case that a participant
was both an ACSA and a DSAG member, the team of researchers took measures that ensured
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 69
data were not duplicated by those particular survey participants. The team used both ACSA and
the DSAG surveys to increase the total responses for the quantitative data. Having an increased
response rate helped to ensure the reliability of the quantitative data (Creswell, 2014). The team
of researchers used superintendents who were members of ACSA or DSAG, because it had the
ability to gain access to the distribution lists from these organizations. In addition to collecting
survey data from superintendents, survey data from California school board members were drawn
from one sample through the CSBA. Table 3 presents each of the quantitative survey samples
that were collected for use in this study.
Table 3
Summary of Quantitative Survey Samples
Survey source N Responses Response rate %
ACSA superintendents 350 61 17.42
DSAG superintendents 61 12 19.67
CSBA board members 300 49 16.33
Note. ACSA = Association of California School Administrators; DSAG = Dean's Superinten-
dents Advisory Group; CSBA = California School Boards Association.
Access and Entry
In order to conduct this study, the researcher received approval from the USC Internal
Review Board (IRB; #APP-17-02065). The IRB uses a process to ensure the study is being done
ethically and that its participants have sufficient knowledge to make a decision to participate in
the study, are able to withdraw from the study, have no unnecessary risks, and that the benefits of
the study to the subject or society outweigh the risks (Glesne, 2011).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 70
The gatekeeper to all of the participants were the participants themselves. In order to gain
access for the quantitative data, the team of researchers asked for permission from the ACSA and
the DSAG to gather data for the sake of the study; participants also gave access by their own
willingness to participate (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). To gain consent for the qualitative inter-
views, the researcher asked permission from participants via a written request for permission for
interviews (see invitation email in Appendix A). With the permission of the qualitative interview
participants, an audio recording device was also used to capture the data (Bogdan & Biklen,
2007).
Instrumentation
The researcher used both quantitative and qualitative instruments to collect data to
understand superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention. The use of both types of
instruments provided an analytical and meaningful approach to answer the research questions.
Quantitative instrumentation. The instruments used to collect quantitative data were in
the form of surveys (Fink, 2013). The surveys were developed using Qualtrics
™
, a web-based
survey tool available to all doctoral candidates at USC. The surveys were designed to collect
data specifically from successful superintendents and school board members. The surveys were
designed with 4-point Likert scale items that served to gain the perceptions of superintendents
and school board members (see Appendices B and C, respectively) about superintendent prepa-
ration while incorporating the literature review as a lens for the study. Because it was a 4-point
scale, answers in the survey landed on an opinion of either agree or disagree. Answers were
given numerical values where 4 represented Strongly Agree, 3 represented Agree, 2 represented
Disagree, and 1 represented Strongly Disagree. An option with a numerical value of 0 was also
included that represented Don’t Know. The two surveys were pilot tested and modified thereafter
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 71
to ensure that they were usable and would provide the information necessary to answer the
research questions (Fink, 2013). Data collected from these quantitative instruments were ana-
lyzed, compared, and connected to the qualitative data.
Qualitative instrumentation. The instrument used to collect qualitative data was in the
form of a qualitative interview matrix for each of the participant groups: California superinten-
dents, school board members, and the ESFC (Johnson & Christensen, 2014; Maxwell, 2013; see
Appendices D-F, respectively). The purpose of qualitative interviews was to gain in-depth
information from the sample to answer the research questions. Qualitative interviews from the
three sample sources also served the purpose of triangulation, as well as connecting both the
qualitative data and quantitative data (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The qualitative interview matrix for each respective qualitative sample group was devel-
oped by the team of eight researchers for the purpose of staying focused and guided during the
limited amount of time they had with each participant in the sample (Patton, 2002). The inter-
view matrix also facilitated a standardized, open-ended interview with each participant so that
each participant was asked the same question in the same order as the other participants (Patton,
2002). Variations in questions may have existed when the researcher asked prodding questions
or questions to develop a participant’s answers. The use of an open-ended interview guide
reduced variations for participants interviewed by the researcher and by the team of eight re-
searchers (Patton, 2002).
Data Collection
Data from both quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews were concurrently from
California superintendents, school board members, and the executive search firm (Johnson &
Christensen, 2014). Quantitative survey data were captured using the Qualtrics survey service.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 72
Once the window for receiving data closed, the group of eight researchers analyzed quantitative
data and identified trends in survey items where the majority of participants responded similarly;
the team mainly used the mode of the data (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006).
For qualitative interviews, was no particular order in which the interviews took place;
rather, the interviews were conducted at the time when the qualitative sample found most conve-
nient. The interviews were captured using an audio recording device with the prior permission of
the participants (Weiss, 1994). The researcher chose to capture an audio recording so that he
could attend to the participant more than attending to taking notes. However, the researcher was
also intentional in collecting descriptive and reflective field notes that captured the participants’
responses in reference to the research questions (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). After the interviews
were completed, the researcher captured the audio recordings through transcription (Bogdan &
Biklen, 2007; Weiss, 1994).
Interviews lasted approximately 20 to 60 minutes with only one interview per participant.
Finally, for the sake of maintaining the participants’ comfort and freedom during the interviews,
the locations of the interviews were at the venue that the participants most preferred (Weiss,
1994). The researcher believed that the above mentioned data collection choices would enhance
the findings to answer this study’s research questions.
Data Analysis
Once both quantitative and qualitative data were collected, the researcher made the
following efforts to draw findings from each source of data. For quantitative data from Likert
scale items, a statistical analysis was executed to identify measures of central tendency, common
trends, and competing perspectives within the sample (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006). Qualitative
data were transcribed and imported into computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 73
(CAQDAS), where it was coded and analyzed (Harding, 2013). Using the constant comparative
method, the researcher identified themes in the qualitative data to answer the research questions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To do this, the researcher used open and axial coding to gain emer-
gent themes from the data. Thereafter, quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed through a
side-by-side comparison by using the Question Alignment Matrix (see Appendix G). Emerging
findings from qualitative data were triangulated between qualitative interview participants and
the quantitative survey results, with sources from the literature review—and when applicable,
with data from the participants of the other researchers on the team (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The researcher was confident that this data analysis approach answered this study’s research
questions.
Ethical Considerations
Ethical considerations must be made by the researcher of any study (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). This researcher made rigorous plans to ensure full, honest, and ethical findings to the
study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To ensure the rights of the participants and to maintain the
integrity of the study, the researcher put the following safeguards into place. First, the researcher
sought and awaited IRB approval from USC prior to collecting any data for the study (Glesne,
2011). Next, the researcher empowered the research participants through informed consent so
that participants were aware that participation was voluntary, that any aspects of the research
might affect their well-being, and that they could choose to stop participating at any point of the
study (Glesne, 2011). Because the data collection and communicated findings might affect the
professional outcomes of the participants, the research made each participant anonymous and
confidential in this study (Glesne, 2011). Data collected over the Internet were managed and
protected by the researcher by taking every measure necessary to ensure that data collection and
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 74
dissemination were done in a strictly secure manner (Glesne, 2011; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
All computerized data will be maintained securely by the researchers for 2 years from the date of
the study’s publication. The goal of the researcher was to maintain the integrity of the study and
the privacy of the participants.
Chapter Summary
This study sought to understand superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention
through a qualitative methods approach. Data collected from successful superintendents, school
boards, and executive search firms through surveys and interviews were analyzed both statis-
tically and analytically. Emerging findings from both quantitative and qualitative data were
compared to the quantitative data and connected to answer the research questions. The next
chapter will present the findings.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 75
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
The purpose of this study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and the retention
of school district superintendents. This chapter will analyze the data collected by the researcher
and present the findings to answer the research questions. Triangulating the data improved the
reliability of the themes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher will present perspectives
from each of his six qualitative interview participants. Quantitative data collected by the team of
eight researchers from superintendents who were members of the ACSA, superintendents who
were members of the DSAG, and school board members who were members of the CSBA were
also used to triangulate the data. In addition, the researcher incorporated commonalities in
responses from the shared qualitative interview data gathered by the team of eight researchers
when appropriate, which included 26 superintendents, 16 board members, and eight ESFCs (each
researcher interviewed one ESFC). Finally, the researcher incorporated themes from the litera-
ture review to confirm the findings.
This study was seeking to answer the following three research questions:
1. How have training programs and experience prepared superintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges of the superintendency?
2. What are the perceptions of current successful superintendents and school boards
regarding the strategies used to help the current superintendent to attain his or her position?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of superintendents?
This study was conducted in California, with an emphasis on qualitative interviews from
three superintendents in Beachside Valley. The researcher incorporated a qualitative approach in
this study, using qualitative interviews (Creswell, 2014). However, quantitative survey data were
also used support and reinforce the identified themes. Qualitative interviews were conducted
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 76
with three superintendents, two school board members, and one ESFC using the interview guides
in Appendices D, E, and F. A constant-comparative method was incorporated when analyzing
the qualitative data, including coding the data with open and axial codes to determine emergent
findings (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Quantitative data were also analyzed for trends where most
quantitative survey participants responded similarly on an item, using the mode (Kurpius &
Stafford, 2006). Quantitative survey questions were connected to qualitative interview questions
by the use of the Question Alignment Matrix in Appendix G. Although the methodology of this
study was qualitative methods and the study’s findings were drawn primarily from the qualitative
interview data, quantitative survey data were also incorporated when the survey data appropri-
ately supported each theme of the study. In this chapter the data are presented with respect to
how they answer each of this study’s research questions. When appropriate, references to the
literature in Chapter Two are also utilized in the discussion.
Study Participants
Qualitative Interview Participants
The researcher gathered qualitative data from a total of six participants. Three partici-
pants were superintendents who were currently employed in a school district in Beachside
Valley. Two were school board members who were in their official term during the study.
Finally, one participant was an ESFC who had helped a school board to place a superintendent
during the last 2 years. The researcher used the six individuals to compare and triangulate
findings among superintendents, the board members who hire superintendents, and the ESFC
who helps school boards to identify and recommend potential superintendents to fill the position.
The following discussion presents a brief background of each participant.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 77
Sup A was a superintendent of a suburban district in Beachside Valley with a student
enrollment of about 3,500 students; the CAASPP ELA and math scores were at least 40% above
the state of California averages. Sup A had had a traditional career pathway to the superinten-
dency, serving as a teacher, assistant principal, site principal, district administrator, county
administrator, and the superintendent of his district at the time of this study. Sup A held a
doctoral degree.
Sup B was a superintendent of a suburban district in the Beachside Valley with a student
enrollment of about 6,000 students; the CAASPP scores were at least 20% above the statewide
averages. Sup B had had a mostly traditional career pathway to the superintendency, having
served as a teacher, counselor, assistant principal, site principal, and the superintendent during
the time of this study. Sup B did not have experience as a district administrator before taking on
the role of superintendent and did not hold a doctoral degree.
Sup C was a superintendent of a suburban district in the Beachside Valley with a student
enrollment of about 10,000 students; the CAASPP scores were at least 25% above the statewide
averages. Sup C had had a traditional career pathway to the superintendency, having served as a
teacher, counselor, assistant principal, principal, district administrator, and superintendent at the
time of this study. Sup C held a doctoral degree.
Both BM1 and BM2 were school board members at two school boards of education
within the state of California. During this study, BM1 worked as a teacher and had served as a
school board member for 1 year. BM2 was a local business person and had served as a school
board member for 2 years. BM2 served in a school district in Beachside Valley, whereas BM1
did not. BM1 was also a board member of a superintendent whom another researcher in the team
of researchers sampled.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 78
At the time of this study, the ESFC was a consultant who worked for an organization that
helped place superintendents into open positions in school districts. The ESFC had worked as a
superintendent for three school districts and was a teacher, site administrator, and district admin-
istrator before that. He had helped various school boards of education in the state of California to
hire their superintendent.
Quantitative Survey Participants
The researcher worked in a team of eight researchers to gather quantitative survey data
from superintendents and school board members. Survey questions were developed, deployed,
and analyzed by the team of eight researchers. The team of researchers surveyed three groups:
the ACSA superintendents, the DSAG superintendents, and the CSBA members.
With the limited access the team had, the ACSA superintendents survey went out to a
total of 350 superintendents (n = 350). Due to circumstances outside of the team’s control, the
ACSA superintendents’ survey was forced to end within 1 week. The total number of partici-
pants who completed the entire survey was 61, for a 17.42% response rate. Because the team
had a limited response rate, the team sent out a second survey.
The second survey was distributed to 61 DSAG superintendents. The total responses
from this survey were 12, for a 19.67% total response rate. The team took measures to ensure
that survey responses would not be duplicated in the case that a superintendent might have had
the opportunity to respond as a member of both ACSA and DSAG.
The third survey for CSBA members was distributed to 300 school board members who
were members of the CSBA. The total number of responses from this survey was 49, for a
16.33% response rate.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 79
Findings for Research Question 1
In order to better understand how training programs and experience prepared superinten-
dents, Research Question 1 asked, “How have training programs and experience prepared
superintendents to manage the complexities and challenges of the superintendency?”
Training programs, including university doctoral programs, have been utilized by pros-
pective superintendents to prepare for the superintendency (Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). Forty-
eight percent of superintendents reported holding a doctoral degree, meaning that almost one out
of every two superintendents held a doctorate during their tenure (Kowalski et al,, 2011).
University training programs or the doctorate may not be essential to prepare for the superinten-
dency (Levine, 2005; Perry, 2013; Shulman, Golde, Bueschel, & Garabedian, 2006).
The superintendency is a complex and challenging position in which the person needs to
be prepared for thorough training programs and experience. The data analysis of this study
revealed three common themes on how training programs and experience prepared superinten-
dents:
1. On-the-job training (OJT) experience was perceived as better than training programs
in preparing superintendents to manage the complexities and challenges of the superintendency;
2. Experience as a site principal best prepared superintendents to manage the complexi-
ties and challenges of the superintendency; and
3. Having mentors better prepares an aspiring superintendent for the superintendency.
OJT Experience
Many aspiring superintendents have taken extra efforts to attend university training
programs with the hope of quickly climbing the career ladder to the superintendency (Levine,
2005; Shulman et al., 2006). Holding the doctorate was perceived as a strategy by some to
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 80
become qualified and ready for the position. Interviews with 100% of the qualitative interview
participants (n = 6) revealed that OJT was more important than university training. Through the
qualitative interview process with the six participants, there was a clear and common theme that
the OJT experience before the superintendency was the best preparation for the superintendency.
According to the ESFC,
it’s not about just obtaining the position. It’s about being prepared for the position before
you get the position. So many people want to move through the system, through various
positions too quickly, and they just want to put in time to get to the superintendency.
They want to put in time as an assistant principal, then as a principal, then as a district
office position to get to the superintendency. And oftentimes those are the people that
lose. Those are the people that don’t do well. . . . People who do well, the rock star super-
intendents, they’re the ones that learn along the way. It’s about the work and the depth of
the work, and they become a superintendent before they are a superintendent. So they put
in the time and they move into the position, but they’ve moved into the position when
they already have the skill set. They just don’t have the title. They invested enough in the
work that they do, at the requirements that are in the job that by the time they get to the
job—it’s such a natural progression that they thrive in the job. (interview, October 9,
2017)
To the ESFC, many potential candidates who were motivated to gain the superintendent position
were focused on moving quickly through the ranks of the K–12 school system. Some aspiring
superintendents even earned a doctoral degree to prepare for the position. However, the ESFC
suggested that candidates who move too quickly were actually forfeiting opportunities to receiv-
ing OJT that could prepare them with the skill sets for the superintendency. During the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 81
interview, ESFC noted that “your best training is training that is on the job. It’s practical. It’s in
depth. . . There is no substitute for on-the-job training” (interview, October 9, 2017).
In his position of recruiting superintendent candidates, the ESFC was an expert in identi-
fying and recruiting the best candidates for school boards of education to hire. The ESFC had to
evaluate potential candidates but had a simple measure: “I think that good candidates . . . have
had a wide variety of experiences that prepare them for the job. They were focused on doing
their current job really well so that they became an expert in their current job (interview, Octo-
ber 9, 2017. The OJT experiences that successful superintendents had before becoming a super-
intendent were critical to prepare them for the position. This theme was also confirmed with the
three superintendents whom the researcher interviewed.
Sup A credited training programs with merit but also suggested that successful superin-
tendents learned the job through their career path and proved that they were excellent before they
attained the superintendency:
I do think that superintendent training programs can have a lot of merit, but I also think
that successful superintendents just are typically those that were successful in every other
job that they did. They have good common sense. They’re intelligent. And those kind of
things you can’t really train for. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A’s response was contextualized in his own experience in preparation for the superinten-
dency, where he moved through the traditional career path as a teacher, assistant principal, site
principal, assistant superintendent before entering the superintendency. Being successful in
every job also develops potential candidates’ reputation. The success symbolized in their own
being emanates to the organization they work for; this is a symbolic frame (Bolman & Deal,
2003). During the interview, Sup A stated that his career path was “probably the best training I
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 82
had to prepare” (interview, September 13, 2017). The same sentiment was shared by the other
superintendent participants.
Sup B had received training in earning a master’s degree but not a doctorate. She had
experience as a teacher, counselor, assistant principal, and finally as a site principal for over 20
years. Sup B expressed how training did not always necessarily match the actual practice of
educational administration: “It’s easy to receive training and hear, ‘You should try this or you
should try this.’ But in actuality to take that and then put it into action are two very different
things” (interview, September 26, 2017). Sup B was able to be prepared for the superintendency
through his experience. Although she did not discredit training programs, she also noted that she
did not earn a doctorate and was not planning to do so. Her response echoed Levine’s (2005)
sentiment that the EdD degree is not necessary to prepare for the superintendency. However, Sup
B’s experience prepared her so much that her board of education hired her as superintendent
straight from her prior position as a site principal. Her experience was credited as preparing her
for the position; Sup C also confirmed this theme.
Although Sup C held a doctorate, he still consistently noted his prior experience as what
prepared him for the superintendency: “The admin programs were good as far as exposing you to
issues, but nothing that I feel like actually prepared me for it. I don’t think there’s anything other
than experience that prepares you” (interview, October 9, 2017). Although Sup C held a doctor-
ate and attended university training in administration courses, he still reported that it still did not
prepare him as much as his prior experience. During the interview when the researcher asked,
“Which professional experiences leading up to becoming the superintendent were the most
beneficial and why?”, Sup C responded:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 83
I 100% believe that you learn best in pain. It would be a culmination of every painful
failure that I experienced over those years. . . . I made a lot of mistakes, and I learned
quickly from my mistakes. I try not to make the same mistakes twice; but by far the
ability to make decisions, learn from the painful failure and then grow from it is to me the
real education in life. (interview, October 9, 2017)
Sup C focused the importance of OJT experience as opportunities for failure. Failure was an
opportunity for learning and reflection. Sup C, a successful superintendent, adopted qualitites of
Level 5 leadership before even entering the superintendency; he did not point the failures out to
others but rather absorbed his own failures to learn from them (Collins, 2001). Sup C also had
university training experience, and more university training experience than almost half of what
superintendents reported in 2011 (Kowalski et al., 2011). However, he still credited his prior
work experience as his best preparation. Sup A, Sup B, Sup C, and the ESFC all confirmed that
OJT is best at preparing superintendents.
BM1’s perspective of OJT experience also confirmed this common theme: “On- the-job
training might be the best, but you want to be prepared for it. The superintendency is so demand-
ing and so very much different than any other position in a school district” (interview, September
30, 2017). BM1 believed that OJT experience prior to the position was best but also emphasized
the importance of being ready for the position. Although OJT experience was most important,
other training was also helpful to prepare his superintendent.
BM2’s perspective of this common echoed BM1’s perspective. He believed that the most
effective training that his superintendent received was his OJT experience. During the research-
er’s interview with BM2, BM2 noted that his superintendent’s most effective training was
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 84
work experience as being a site administrator for so many years. She came up through
the system. She was a substitute teacher back in her first teaching assignments. Then she
taught elementary school. Then she taught in the middle school ages. Then she was a
counselor for a while at the middle schools. So it’s just kind of in her blood. Again, it’s
just basically on-the-job training. (interview, October 16, 2017)
BM2 believed that his superintendent’s movement through the ranks of her career history
was the best training that she received. BM2’s response suggested an “in her [superintendent’s]
blood” symbolism (Bolman & Deal, 2003). The common theme of OJT experience was present
not only in the interview with BM2 but also in interviews with the other five qualitative partici-
pants. In addition, the perspectives of BM1 and BM2 on this theme was also confirmed by the
quantitative CSBA board member survey. Responses from that survey indicated that 93.88% of
board members strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “My superintendent’s prior work
experience was more important than his/her university training experience to prepare him/her for
his/her current position.”
Although this common theme was identified, university training was still considered
important by the participants: “Obviously, having a doctorate and having the right academic
training is important and adds to the person’s [potential superintendent] depth of the leader”
(ESFC, interview, October 9, 2017). However, OJT experience was perceived as better than
training programs in preparing superintendents to manage the complexities and challenges of the
superintendency.
Quantitative survey data from the ACSA superintendents survey also supported the
common theme of the importance of OJT. In that survey, 88.52% strongly agreed or agreed with
the statement, “My prior work experience was more important than my university training
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 85
experience to prepare me for my position as a superintendent.” Similarly, in the DSAG superin-
tendents survey, 91.67% agreed with the same statement. The quantitative surveys confirmed the
theme of the importance of OJT for preparing for the superintendent position.
Site Principal Experience
The most recent decennial study on K–12 superintendents reported that most superinten-
dents had experience as a site principal before entering into the superintendency (Kowalski et al.,
2011). This study confirmed that prior research and supported the importance of experience as a
site principal. A common theme of school site principal experience was evident within the
researcher’s interviews with five out of the six (83.33%) of the qualitative interview participants,
including the three superintendents, the ESFC, and BM2. Particularly, experience as a site
principal best prepared superintendents to manage the complexities and challenges of the super-
intendency.
Sup A credited his experience as site principal as the best training he had to prepare for
his role as the superintendent:
I think some of the best training I had to prepare myself for being a superintendent was
actually a site principal. And working as an assistant principal and a principal in [school
removed for confidentiality]. Assistant principal for 2 years, principal for 3 years. And
working as a site principal and learning the dynamics of running a school, managing
teachers, pushing instruction, dealing with difficult parents. I see a superintendent as a
principal in a larger scope. I’d say a superintendent’s most similar job in the district is to
that of a principal on a larger scope. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A’s site principal experience was identified by him as the best training, because there were
experiences that he had during that time that prepared him to manage his district. His response
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 86
included running a school, collaboratively working with teachers and parents, and focusing on
instruction. His experience as the site principal involved pursuing goals and working collabor-
atively with stakeholders—all tasks similar to the model of effective district leadership that
works (Waters & Marzano, 2006).
Sup B also identified her site principal level experience. During the interview the re-
searcher asked Sup B, “Which experiences leading up to the superintendency were the most
beneficial and why?” In her response, Sup B noted:
I would say teaching for sure, because in your heart to be a successful leader and adminis-
trator and superintendent, every decision I make is still about kids. Every decision. It has
to be. And being an elementary school principal. I think that’s probably one of the best
jobs a person can have is being a school principal, because you have that balance. At
least for me, of being able to teach and to have fun with kids and yet be able to see
change. (interview, September 26, 2017)
Sup B viewed her position in a different, human resource approach. To Sup B, focus on children
was very important to her. Her leadership style and decision making were centered on children,
who are humans (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Her decisions took a human resource approach that
centered on the main stakeholder of his district—the students—and valued the change that she
would see from those decisions. By being the site principal, she was able to have the experience
where she saw the balance between children and instituting change. The experience of being a
site principal to Sup B prepared her to be a successful superintendent.
Sup C also echoed the importance of school-level experience. His reply to the research-
er’s question, “Where did you receive your most effective training and why?” was the following:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 87
Now granted, I have five board members that I have to manage, but they’re not sitting
here, where a high school principal of a large high school, especially a one-high-school
community where you are it—you’re the rockstar and everything. It’s difficult. Those
years definitely prepared me more than anything else. Definitely more than any of my
other jobs in between that one. Deputy superintendent . . . It was just whatever the super-
intendent asked me to do. Very singular oriented. The scope was wide, but I was
directed. The principal . . . Although you had many bosses, so to speak, you were on that
campus in charge of 10,000 people. (interview, October 9, 2017)
The most recent 10 years of Sup C’s career path was within his own district, where he
served as the high school principal of his one-high-school district, deputy superintendent, and
superintendent. Sup C emphasized how much heavier and accountable the site-level principal
job was, when compared to the responsibilities of deputy superintendent. His description of his
site-level principal experience revealed that there are many more stakeholders and individuals
who are looking toward the principal’s leadership. Preparation as the site principal provided
experience in exercising the structural frame to thousands of stakeholders on the site campus
(Bolman & Deal, 2003). Successful experience as the site principal prepared Sup C with the
skills to be successful in his position as a superintendent. Interestingly, Sup C said that his job as
a superintendent was not as tough as his prior job as the principal at his high school:
I’ll still say that the principal at [name removed for confidentiality] High School is a
tougher job than mine, being superintendent, because you are everything to everyone and
it’s unfiltered. You’re on the ground, and you’re dealing with these issues live. A lot of
my job is very much filtered. In other words, I get to dictate the time. I can shut my door
and have time to think on something. I have the ability to do that. I didn’t have that
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 88
available to me as a principal and you have bosses. You’re managing up and down.
(interview, October 9, 2017)
The site-level experience of Sup C was intense preparation that he experienced and
credited as the best preparation for his position as the superintendent. The perceptions of Sup A,
Sup B, and Sup C were consistent in that they perceived their experience as school site principals
as the most effective training for their position.
During the researcher’s interview with the ESFC, the ESFC also emphasized the impor-
tance of prospective superintendents to have school site principal experience. Although he men-
tioned that all of the experiences in all of the positions are important, he emphasized how critical
it was for a prospective superintendent to have school site principal experience:
I think the site-level experience is pretty critical because you’re in a decision-making
mode and you have to navigate through the various personalities, particularly at the high
school level. I think the high school principalship is the most closely aligned with the
superintendency of any position. (interview, October 9, 2017)
The ESFC was looking for candidates who had the prerequisite of having school site principal
experience, and he particularly highlighted the high school principal experience. Decision
making and navigating through various personalities were part of the skill sets with which
prospective superintendents must be prepared before entering the position. The most recent 2010
decennial study of superintendents also revealed that most superintendents had school site
principal experience at a high school (Kowalski et al., 2011). Although not necessarily a prereq-
uisite for the superintendent position, experience in the high school principal position was
preferred by the ESFC, but not required. However, school site principal experience was
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 89
important in preparing for the superintendency. The ESFC’s perspective helped support the
needs of the school boards of education for which he consulted.
The researcher’s interview with BM1 did not confirm this theme, because BM1’s superin-
tendent was never a site administrator. BM1 credited his superintendent’s experience as an
assistant superintendent as the most beneficial. Also, BM1 had experienced working only with
his particular superintendent. His perceptions might have been limited and did not contribute to
this theme.
When the researcher asked BM2 what experience was the most beneficial preparation for
his superintendent, BM2 identified site administration. During the interview in reference to site
administration experience, BM2 said,
Well, you have to exercise leadership. You have to understand the policies that a school
district has that controls sites, how teachers would interact with students, and what the
curriculum would be. So enforcing policy, because essentially that’s what a superinten-
dent is supposed to do, is to enforce a policy set by a school board and direct all aspects of
the school district towards those policies and the goals those policies are supposed to
obtain. (interview, October 16, 2017)
BM2 provided perspective on the importance of experience in site administration, includ-
ing the site principal, that helps prepare a superintendent. BM2’s main concern was that his
superintendent would enforce and implement the policies that were developed collaboratively by
the board. The action to enforce the policies is a component of district leadership that works
(Waters & Marzano, 2006). It was also a reasonable desire of any board to have its policies
enforced. BM2’s response also provided the similarities between the job of a site administrator
and the superintendent and connected them to exercising leadership. For example, BM2
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 90
compared a site principal to a superintendent who understood and enforced policies at the site;
this was an exercise of the structural frame (Bolman & Deal, 2003). Next, BM2 also compared
the site principal to the superintendent in that the principal understands how teachers interact
with students (a human resource frame), and what the curriculum would be (another structural
frame). To BM2, a site principal was a position of preparation for the superintendency, because
of the various ways a site principal had to exercise leadership. BM2’s perspective confirmed and
triangulated this theme in the study.
The quantitative data from the ACSA superintendents’ survey also confirmed this theme.
In their responses to the survey, 91.8% strongly agreed or agreed with the statement in the
preparation section that stated, “Having experience as a principal is a crucial element in prepar-
ing me for the position as a superintendent.” The DSAG superintendents’ survey also confirmed
this theme, with 91.66% strongly agreeing or agreeing with the same statement. The importance
of site principal experience was evident in the qualitative data and confirmed by the two superin-
tendent surveys.
Mentors
Positive mentoring relationships have helped aspiring superintendents to prepare for the
position (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk et al., 2005; Glass et al., 2000). This study con-
firmed the theme of the importance of mentors found in the literature. A common theme across
100% of the qualitative interview participants (n = 6) was that aspiring superintendents can
prepare for the superintendency by having mentors.
During the study, Sup A pointed out the many mentors he had had before the superinten-
dency that helped to prepare him:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 91
I think I had a lot of different mentors going through. There was always my superinten-
dent at the time . . . and then all of my colleagues. All the principal colleagues I had
really helped me. And then, as I progressed, I made relationships with people like [pro-
fessor’s name removed for confidentiality] and [name removed for confidentiality] who
was my superintendent at the county office of education. And so all those relationships
really helped. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A had pointed out many professional mentors who had helped to prepare him for the super-
intendency. The mentors had the right qualities, including the subsequent position in which he
was going to work, that helped prepare him for the next position (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006).
Interestingly, Sup A also used peer mentors—other principals—to support his success. Perhaps
this is a connection to the second theme above, having experience as a site principal. Later in the
interview, when the researcher asked how his mentors helped to prepare him, Sup A answered, “I
think that you need someone to be able to bounce ideas off of. . . . So having somebody, espe-
cially people that have gone through this and have experience is really helpful” (interview,
September 13, 2017). Before attaining the superintendency, Sup A was able to receive support
and training from mentors in his previous positions that prepared him for the superintendency.
Sup B pointed out how he had a mentor who pushed her to take on the next step in her
career:
A gentleman named [removed for confidentiality] was my mentor and was the reason that
I even went into administration. I never intended to be an administrator. That was never
on my radar. . . . And so he was pretty relentless as far as, “You need to take your skill set
and use it beyond being in the classroom.” And he really mentored me, and he was the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 92
one that kind of set the bar higher as far as my accomplishments. (interview, Septem-
ber 26, 2017)
Sup B had a person who was able to push her to pursue higher positions, even as early as her
position as a teacher. Sup B’s mentor encouraged her to take on challenging situations and build
her confidence (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006). This proactive work by the mentor helped move
Sup B toward the trajectory of the superintendency. Sup B had another mentor who was identi-
fied during her interview, her father, who was also a superintendent:
My dad was in the district for 4 years. I learned at a young age, I think without even
realizing it, what kind of superintendent I didn’t want to be. I used to hear about a lot of
superintendents and not really realizing you take in the information. At least from my
standpoint, you don’t realize how that’s going to be used later. (interview, September 26,
2017)
Sup B’s father, an experienced superintendent, was able to indirectly mentor Sup B through his
own example but also through descriptions of other superintendents who were not good exam-
ples. The examples of the other unsuccessful superintendents prepared Sup B not to make
damaging decisions when preparing for the superintendent position (Alsbury & Hackmann,
2006). Sup B’s father was her role model and exemplar superintendent that she could emulate
(Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005). Sup B’s experience of being mentored by her father helped
prepare her for the superintendency.
Sup C also pointed out mentors that he described as pushing him to the next level. He
commented:
I’ve had a number of mentors along the way. . . . Just having people in my life that contin-
uously said, “You should be doing more. You’re prepared. . . . I believe in you. You
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 93
have the ability to do this. Don’t worry that you haven’t done it before. You’ll figure it
out.” Pushing me. I have had those. (October 9, 2017)
Sup C’s experience was similar to that of Sup B in that he also had mentors in his life who had
pushed him. These responses confirmed the literature that mentors encourage mentees, build
confidence, and facilitate a mentee’s transition to the next job (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006).
Sup C was very proactive and strategic in seeking out mentors who would prepare him for the
superintendency:
I’ve seeked [sic] them out all the way along in my career. I find the very best people that I
believe are in their field and that I just soak up as much I can from them. . . . I feel like I
had the most to learn from someone that was always a layer ahead of me. What do they
see that I don’t see right now? They have access to different lenses that I didn’t have.
(interview, October 9, 2017)
He realized that mentoring played a critical role for his own preparation and that he would get the
most gains from mentors who were at the next layer of his own development because those
people had a perspective that would help him to prepare for the next position and, ultimately, the
superintendency. This response confirmed the literature on the importance of mentor selection,
including seeking mentors with the right qualities (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Glass et al.,
2000). Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C all had common experiences and perspectives on the role
mentors played in their careers to prepare for the superintendency. This theme was also present
with the ESFC, BM1, and BM2.
The ESFC also confirmed the theme of the importance of mentors for aspiring superinten-
dents. In reference to a superintendent whom he had recently placed, the ESFC focused on the
importance of who that superintendent worked for. During the interview, the ESFC talked about
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 94
this superintendent: “She worked for a quality superintendent. She learned a lot. She was a
student of his leadership” (interview, October 9, 2017). In this case, being mentored by her own
supervisor was the mentoring and training she needed to prepare for the superintendent position.
This interview confirmed the literature that reported that having a professional mentor is an
effective way of increasing the competency of superintendents, because aspiring superintendents
will try to emulate their mentors (Crippen & Wallin, 2008). The ESFC confirmed that her
success in her current position was strongly due to that particular superintendent for whom she
worked.
BM1 also confirmed this common theme of the importance of mentoring for aspiring
superintendents. BM1 believed that the best experience that his superintendent had before
entering the superintendency was being in cabinet: “I would think being an assistant superinten-
dent because you are working directly with a superintendent. Once you’re on cabinet, you have a
whole different perspective that for the classroom” (interview, September 30, 2017). The expe-
rience of BM1’s superintendent was that she was able to have a professional relationship with her
superintendent and therefore gained a new perspective. BM1 believed that this was the most
beneficial experience for his superintendent in preparing for the superintendency. BM1’s super-
intendent had a professional mentor that helped her gain a perspective of the superintendency
(Crippen & Wallin, 2008). BM2 was also able to point out the mentor that his superintendent
had.
BM2 pointed out his superintendent’s personal mentor as the person who prepared her for
the superintendency:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 95
Her father was a big name in the school district back when it was young. She’s very well
known at the high school. That legacy and protecting that legacy has driven her to be the
best she can be within the education side of it. (interview, October 16, 2017)
BM2’s superintendent had a personal and professional relationship with her father, who was a
prior superintendent (Crippen & Wallin, 2008). Her father was a model for many aspects of
being a superintendent. BM2’s superintendent would use her father as a figure to emulate. The
legacy that her father built was one that she wanted to continue through symbolic leadership
(Bolman & Deal, 2003). In addition, BM2’s superintendent had experienced learning from pro-
fessional mentors in her career. BM2 stated in the same interview, “Watching how her superin-
tendents when she was principal would interact with district personnel and how they interact with
her. I guess just her perspective on whether they were right or wrong and what she would do
differently” (interview, October 16, 2017). BM2’s superintendent used other models of leader-
ship to which she was exposed during her career to gain feedback and reflect on what she would
and would not do when she became superintendent. Again, this information confirmed the liter-
ature that aspiring superintendents should develop mentors whom they can model, including
reflecting on the aspects of the mentors they have experienced (Crippen & Wallin, 2008).
This common theme that aspiring superintendents prepared for the superintendency by
having mentors was confirmed with Sup A, Sup B, Sup C, the ESFC, BM1, and BM2. The
quantitative data from this study also helped to support the theme.
Quantitative survey data from the ACSA superintendents’ survey confirmed this theme.
A total of 85.49% of respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “Having mentors
was instrumental in preparing me for the superintendent position.” In the DSAG superintendents
survey, 100% of the superintendents strongly agreed or agreed with the same statement. The
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 96
quantitative data from the CSBA board members’ survey further confirmed this theme. In that
survey, 81.63% of school board members strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “Having
mentors was instrumental in preparing my superintendent for his/her current position.” The
quantitative data from this study’s surveys reinforced the importance of prospective superinten-
dents having mentors to prepare for the position.
Summary of Results for Research Question 1
The superintendent position is complex and challenging and requires aspiring superinten-
dents to be prepared for the position before entering it. Results from this study pointed to three
common themes from the qualitative interview participants that were confirmed with quantitative
survey data. In preparing for the superintendent position, successful superintendents had prior
OJT experiences through their entire career path and learned deeply about each position. Next,
successful superintendents prepared for the position by having prior experience as a school site
principal, and they confirmed that the position was most closely aligned to the superintendency.
Finally, successful superintendents had mentors in their life, both professional and personal, who
helped prepare them for the superintendent position.
Findings for Research Question 2
In order to better understand the recruitment experiences of superintendents, Research
Question 2 asked, “What are the perceptions of current successful superintendents and school
boards regarding the strategies used to help the current superintendent to attain his or her posi-
tion?”
Aspiring superintendents were prepared before marketing themselves to be recruited for
their prospective superintendent positions. School boards of education required their prospective
superintendent to have certain qualities and characteristics before they were hired (Björk et al.,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 97
2005). Undoubtedly, aspiring superintendents with successful prior work experiences were
usually hired (Kamler, 2009). Although the applicant pool for the superintendency is small,
prospective superintendents still needed to use strategies to help them attain their position.
Results from this study recognized common themes that answered Research Question 2.
For this question, the themes were not nearly as evident as responses to the other research
questions; however, the researcher was able to identify two themes that answered Research
Question 2:
1. The use of an informal entry plan was a strategy that superintendents had that contrib-
uted to their recruitment, because it determined the appearance of their posture during recruit-
ment; and
2. Networking was a strategy that superintendents used to help them attain their position
as superintendent.
Although not as strong as these first two themes, the researcher also identified a third
theme that was worthy to be presented in this study: doing good work in prior positions was a
strategy superintendents used to be recruited.
Informal Entry Plans
Because the position of superintendent is like that of the Chief Executive Officer of a
corporation, prospective superintendents had an entry plan ready when being recruited in the
position (David M. Sutton, 2012; Kowalski et al., 2011; Smith, 2012). This study also confirmed
the prior literature through the qualitative interviews of superintendent participants (n = 6) in that
they all pointed to an informal entry plan that contributed to their being recruited into the posi-
tion. Although the informal entry plan appeared to be a way for each superintendent to have
marketed or promoted themselves, the researcher identified the use of the informal entry plan as a
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 98
way to determine an appearance of each superintendent’s posture during recruitment. This
posture was an embodiment of the purpose that each superintendent would bring to the position.
Sup A had an informal entry plan during his recruitment:
It’s very popular to say, “Here’s my 90-day plan or my 60-day plan.” But then what? So
I had a 1-year plan, and it was to really evaluate and start to add to what we already had
here, which was already a great district. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A’s use of his entry plan was to take a longer time than what was popular and evaluate what
was already going on in his district. He was not trying to change the district; rather, he wanted to
evaluate how he could add to the good things that were already happening in the district. This
strategy was appropriate because Sup A’s district was a very high-performing district, having the
highest CAASPP scores of the districts involved in this study. The researcher believed that the
school board was not looking for a new superintendent who was going to change the district,
because doing so may have hurt the performance of the district. Instead, the district was looking
for a superintendent who had the strategy for keeping the good things going in the district. This
finding confirmed the prior literature in that school boards sought candidates with certain
qualitites (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005). Although Sup A’s informal entry plan was not the primary
reason he was hired, his informal entry plan determined an appearance of Sup A’s posture when
presenting how he would enter that district. The use of an entry plan in this manner was also Sup
A exercising his structural frame in that he wanted to keep the good structures of the organization
in place (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Sup B also had an informal entry plan when being recruited into the position. She had
served most of her career in her district as principal before becoming the superintendent. As a
result, she had built relationships with many stakeholders, including the school board. When
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 99
asked, “Did you create an entry plan when being recruited in the position?” Sup B said, “Not a
written entry plan, but in my mind I knew what I needed to do” (interview, September 26, 2017).
Sup B’s perspective was unique in that she had spent her whole career in her own district and had
formed many relationships; therefore, she knew what direction stakeholders and the school board
wanted to go. Her informal entry plan included doing the same things at the district level as she
used to do at the school site level. Sup B said that she was most favorable to hire because of
what she “had done at the school site. Because they [Sup B’s school board] had said, ‘Can you
come and turn every school into [name removed for confidentiality] School?’” (interview,
September 26, 2017). Sup B’s informal entry plan of doing what she had already done at her
school for her whole district determined the appearance of her posture during recruitment. The
perceptions that the school board had of Sup B were that she was successful at her school; Sup B
exercised Bolman and Deal’s (2003) symbolic frame with the school board (Bolman & Deal,
2003). These perceptions of Sup B helped her to get recruited into the position. Sup B incorpo-
rated an informal entry plan strategy that connected with this perception, in that she was going to
do throughout the district what she had done at her school.
Sup C also had a similar experience as Sup B in regard to his entry plan. Sup C was in
his district for about 9 years before being recruited into the superintendent position. He did not
create a formal entry plan but rather had an informal entry plan of where he and the school board
wanted to go:
I came from within; I already had relationships, and I already had a very strong sense of
where we were as a district and where we needed to go. I had really good relationships
with all five board members already. Four out of the five were my PTA [Parent Teacher
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 100
Association] presidents when I was high school principal. There was no honeymoon
time. It was just like, “Let’s get started.” (interview, October 9, 2017)
When Sup C was being recruited, he was already a normal part of the district’s commu-
nity. This included being its assistant superintendent and its prior high school principal. Over
that time, Sup C’s experience included having a collaborative relationship with individuals on his
school board whereby he and the board knew where they potentially wanted to go. Sup C shared
developed goals with the school board that he was ready to implement; this situation was Sup C
exercising a component of Waters and Marzano’s (2006) School District Leadership That Works.
Having these shared common goals made Sup C the most favorable individual to hire. Sup C’s
entry plan was to implement the goals. Although Sup C did not have a formal entry plan, he still
had a plan: “I think I did have a plan, but it was to get started” (interview, October 9, 2017). Sup
C’s informal entry plan determined an appearance of his posture, which was being proactive at
moving forward with the goals that the board members wanted.
All three superintendents had informal entry plans that contributed to being recruited into
the position. Sup A’s informal plan determined an appearance of his posture, which was to
evaluate the district and keep the good things going. Sup B’s informal plan determined an
appearance of her posture, which was to implement the symbolic success that she had across the
entire district. Sup C’s informal plan determined an appearance of his posture, which was to
implement the goals that both the school board and he had. Qualitative interviews with the
ESFC, BM1, and BM2 also supported this common theme.
The ESFC contributed to theme on the use of entry plans during recruitment. Although
the superintendents he had recommended had formal entry plans, the entry plans were not the
reason why they were hired. The ESFC even said, “The entry plan alone is not going to get them
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 101
the position. The entry plan is not going to get them recruited” (interview, October 9, 2017).
However, the ESFC did provide a purpose for the use of an entry plan: “It helps them, quite
honestly, to prepare for the interview. That if they have clarity around their job and what they’re
going to do when they get the job—it helps them in the interview process” (interview, October 9,
2017).
The ESFC upheld a purpose for the entry plan, which was to help the candidate with the
interview process during recruitment. Particularly, the ESFC pointed out that the entry plan
provided prospective superintendents with clarity around their job and what they were going to
do. This finding supported the common theme that the informal entry plan contributed to the
superintendent’s recruitment process because it determined an appearance of each superinten-
dent’s posture, which in this case was during the interview. Although the ESFC stated that the
entry plan would not get the prospective superintendent the position, interviews with the board
members in this study showed that it does help a candidate during the interview process.
The school board members are the gatekeepers to a prospective superintendent getting a
job in a school district (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). During the interviews when the researcher asked
board members, “How important is it for a prospective superintendent to have an entry plan when
being recruited?” each board member strongly pointed out its importance. For example:
From my viewpoint, very important. If they didn’t have some sort of plan, I think it
would take a long time for them to deal with the issues that are faced by the district. I
think they need to tell what the situation of the district is: financial, personnel, test scores,
and student’s scores. (BM1, interview, September 30, 2017)
BM1’s response was based upon the prospective superintendent being able to address the issues
that were relevant to the district. The prospective superintendent needed to fit the school board’s
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 102
needs. Particularly, the prospective superintendent needed to come in with a posture of meeting
this BM1’s district’s needs.
BM2 also shared the importance of the entry plan when being recruited into the position:
It’s critical. They should be proactive enough to know about the district they wish to be
superintendent. That tells me that their interest is more than a paycheck—it’s a career
thing. Their heart needs to be in it. It can’t be just a job. Their heart has to be there. I
think that when they’re a stakeholder emotionally, you get more collaboration, more fair
dealings with the people that are in the district. All around just a better fit. (interview,
October 16, 2017)
BM2 strongly pointed out the importance of an entry plan. However, BM2’s purpose for
the entry plan was not a list of what the superintendent planned to do; rather, the purpose was to
determine whether the candidate’s heart was in it and whether the candidate was a stakeholder
emotionally. This finding contributed to the common theme of the use of entry plans during
recruitment, because in this case, the entry plan helped determine the appearance of a candidate’s
posture when applying for the position. To BM2, the posture of the candidate during the
recruitment process was critical for being selected in that it showed BM2 if the candidate’s heart
was in the position. Prospective superintendents who have incorporated an entry plan during
recruitment would have exercised their human resource and symbolic frames (Bolman & Deal,
2003).
Quantitative survey data also supported this common theme, but not as strongly as for the
other research questions. In the ACSA superintendents’ survey, 55.74% strongly agreed or
agreed with the statement, “Creating a ‘First 100-Day Entry Plan’ was important in preparing me
for the interview/transition into the position as a superintendent.” Although not as strong as the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 103
survey items mentioned earlier in this chapter, the data leaned slightly toward the importance of
entry plans. In the DSAG superintendents’ survey, 83.33% of superintendents strongly agreed or
agreed with the same statement. The quantitative data moderately supported the importance of
entry plans when being recruited into the position.
Networking
Networking has been an activity and strategy that superintendents have engaged in,
including during the recruitment process (Meier & O’Toole, 2001; Ripley, Mitchell, & Richman,
2013; Sampson et al., 2015). Networking before the superintendency was a practice that some
superintendents used to gain access to leadership roles (Sampson et al., 2015). Networking has
also helped some prospective superintendents to gain trust with key stakeholders in the district
community (Ripley et al., 2013). Other superintendents had also networked with an ESFC to
gain access to the position (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). Results from this study that answered
Research Question 2 confirmed a common theme that networking was a strategy that superinten-
dents used to help them to attain their current position. Of the six qualitative interview partici-
pants, 66.67% supported this theme. All three qualitative interview superintendent participants
reported using networking as a strategy to gain their superintendent position. The ESFC also
confirmed that superintendents whom he had placed had engaged in networking. Following is a
discussion on the perspectives of Sup A, Sup B, Sup C, and the ESFC individually.
Sup A reported to have strategically used professional relationships, such as networking,
to attain his position as superintendent:
Well, every time you make a connection with someone, you try to keep that connection.
So you stay in contact. But what people don’t understand is it’s not just about knowing
somebody. It’s about having those people have confidence in you that you’re gonna do
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 104
good work. And so making connections with the right people, but also have the right
people have confidence in you. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A strategically used networks that he started and maintained for the purpose of having the
right people have confidence in him. Sup A maintained the connections with the right people
and ensured that they had confidence in him. This confidence in Sup A helped him to get
recruited into the position of superintendent. Networking before being recruited confirmed the
literature that networking is essential to gain access into leadership roles (Sampson et al., 2015).
It also confirmed that networking is essential to build trust (Ripley et al., 2013). In addition, Sup
A developed and used his symbolic frame, which included making people have confidence in
him (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Sup B’s perspective on the importance of networking, including building and maintaining
relationships, was evident through her participation in the study. Sup B’s prior career experience
was solely in her district; therefore, there were many relationships and networks that she had
developed within the district. Sup B believed that her experience as well as the networks she had
built helped her to be recruited into the position:
Networking is so important. And that’s really what’s been a benefit to me is that I’m very
well connected to this community and have been. I grew up here. As I said, my dad was
here. So I know how this place works. (interview, September 26, 2017)
Sup B’s networking within the district was essential to be hired.
Sup C’s perspective also confirmed the common theme of networking as a strategy that
superintendents use to help them attain their current position. Sup C had spent many years in the
district working as its high school principal and deputy superintendent. Sup C identified the
strong relationships as helping him get recruited:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 105
For me, in my situation, I already established strong, positive relationships with the
community and with the teachers and all the union groups. As principal for over 6 years,
I worked hard to get to know not just the high school community in the district, but the
entire vertical from K to 12. Then when I became deputy superintendent and then super-
intendent, the school board’s recruitment of me was based on the fact that I got to start
day one with moving the district forward instead of the normal, “I’m going to spend a
year building relationships and getting to know people.” They already knew what they
were getting, and they valued that. (interview, October 9, 2017)
Sup C intentionally networked not only within the high school where he was principal but
also throughout the entire district from kindergarten to the 12th grade. This finding confirmed
the prior literature that high-performing district superintendents and administrators built trust in
the staff and faculty (Daly, 2009; Tschannen-Moran & Gareis, 2015). The fact that Sup C was so
well networked in the entire district made him the most favorable individual for the school board
to hire as superintendent. They knew that he could move forward with district initiatives on day
one in the superintendency. Sup C also explained how he intentionally and strategically net-
worked in the district before he was recruited: “I had to be strategic. Building the right supports
across the district, because I knew I wanted to stay in [name removed for confidentiality]. So I
had to make sure that I was knowledgeable of all the 360 degrees of the organization” (interview,
October 9, 2017).
Sup C was motivated to stay in the district and used networking to support his recruitment
into the position. The experience of Sup C as well as Sup B confirmed the prior literature that
networking within the district is essential to build the trust of the stakeholders, including school
boards (Meier & O’Toole, 2001). The perspectives of Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C confirmed the
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 106
theme that answered Research Question 2, which was that networking was a strategy that super-
intendents used to help them attain their current position.
The qualitative interview with the ESFC also confirmed this common theme and
strengthened the theme through triangulation. In the researcher’s interview with the ESFC, the
ESFC noted that superintendents who were being recruited
did networking. They reached out and got to know key people, and they did their job
well. I think probably doing your job well and networking would be maybe the two key
things and then, quite honestly from a third-firm standpoint is, we hear about folks that
are doing well. (October 9, 2017)
The ESFC acknowledged that prospective superintendents should do a good job in their current
position but should also network. The combination of both strategies helps to get the word out
on how good prospective superintendents could be in the superintendency, and in some cases
their names get to an ESFC.
When Sup A and the superintendents to whom the ESFC was referring were prospective
superintendents, networking outside of their organizations was a strategy used with the intention
that their names would eventually reach an ESFC (Glenn & Hickey, 2009). When Sup B and
Sup C were prospective superintendents, they networked with their respective boards and district,
knowing that their school board would be conducting its own search for a superintendent (Björk,
Glass, et al., 2005). Networking within and outside of the district was a strategy that superinten-
dents used to get recruited for the position.
There were no data from the qualitative interviews with BM1 and BM2 that confirmed or
disproved this theme. There were no data from the quantitative surveys with the ACSA
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 107
superintendents, DSAG superintendents, and the CSBA board members that confirmed or
disproved this theme.
Doing Good Work
Although not as strong as the first two themes that developed related to Research Ques-
tion 2, a third theme was identified. The researcher noticed a common theme for two of the three
qualitative interview superintendent participants and the ESFC, or 50% of the qualitative inter-
view participants. The theme was that doing good work in prior positions was a strategy that
superintendents used to get recruited. The theme was noteworthy to the researcher due to the
gravity it took on in the perspectives between the two qualitative interview superintendent
participants regarding their recruitment experience as well as the perspective of the ESFC about
the strong qualities that he looked for in superintendent candidates.
During the qualitative interview, Sup A was very open about how he intentionally
pursued the superintendency. Every decision that he made and the relationships that he devel-
oped contributed to the goal; however, he also pointed out doing good work:
Well, every step I took was intentional. And so I think that’s important. If you have that
goal in mind, everything you do needs to be centered around that. Every relationship you
build, every accomplishment you make adds to that. . . . Everything I did was proactive to
support that. And just do good work, to be the best principal, to be the best assistant
superintendent, and the results will fall into place. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A was focused on pursuing the superintendency with every action he took, including
doing good work. Later in the interview, Sup A described how he used his good work to be
recruited into the superintendent position. Particularly, he used his good work in conjunction
with his professional relationships:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 108
Well, every time you make a connection with someone, you try to keep that connection,
so you stay in contact. But what people don’t understand is, it’s not just about knowing
somebody—it’s about having those people have confidence in you that you’re gonna do
good work. And so making connections with the right people, but also having the right
people have confidence in you. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Then the researcher asked, “So how do you create confidence in other people?” Sup A
responded, “You do good work. You follow up on what you say you’re gonna do. You impress
them, and that’s what it comes down to, is the work you did” (interview, September 13, 2017).
Sup A’s history of good work was self-reported to help him attain the superintendent position.
Specifically, his performance created a sense of confidence in others that he did good work. This
theme connected to the study’s theoretical framework, because Sup A had developed a reputation
and symbol of himself that he did good work (Bolman & Deal, 2003). He used building confi-
dence for others in his good work as a recruitment strategy.
Although Sup B did not expressly use good work as a strategy, she did note that she was
hired because of the good work she did at her school site as the principal. During the research-
er’s interview with Sup B, Sup B responded to the following question: “What prior experiences
did you have that made you most favorable to hire?” “What I had done at the school site because
they even had said, ‘Can you come and turn every school into [name removed for confidentiality]
School’”(Sup B, September 26, 2017). This response did not signify that Sup B used good work
as a strategy and did not directly answer Research Question 2. However, the researcher recog-
nized that Sup B’s response supported Sup A’s perspective that doing good work helps in the
recruitment process. Sup A had done good work and had proactively used that history as a
recruitment strategy. On the other hand, Sup B had done good work and coincidentally was
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 109
recruited by her board because of her good work. The common thread between Sup A and Sup B
was the good work that they had done. Data from the qualitative interview with Sup C did not
contribute to or take away from this theme.
The ESFC also contributed to this common theme through his perspective on how the
superintendents he placed took proactive steps to be recruited. Before they were hired,
they were focused on doing their current job really well so that they became an expert in
their current job. . . . From a third-firm standpoint, we hear about folks that are doing
well. They don’t always come to us. Sometimes we go to them. (interview, October 9,
2017)
The ESFC’s job existed primarily for the purpose of helping school boards to hire their next
superintendent (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005; Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Kamler, 2009). The ESFC
also needed to ensure school boards that he recommended the best candidate for hire, because a
bad placement could lead to the termination of the superintendent (Byrd et al., 2006). Therefore,
the ESFC was looking to recruit prospective superintendents who had experience and a reputa-
tion of doing good work. The ESFC perspective confirmed the perspectives of Sup A and Sup B.
Data from BM1 and BM2 did not contribute to or take away from this theme. Quantita-
tive survey data also did not contribute to or take away from this theme. The lack of qualitative
data from Sup C, BM1, and BM2 as well as quantitative data on good work experience was a
limitation of the instruments in this study. Although this last theme was not as prevalent in the
data as the other two, the researcher still wanted to include it as a theme that contributed to
answering Research Question 2.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 110
Summary of Results for Research Question 2
Successful superintendents in this study used strategies to help them attain their positions
as superintendents. Although not as prevalent as themes for the other research questions, the
results of this study identified three common themes that answered Research Question 2 on the
strategies that superintendents used during recruitment. First, participating superintendents used
an informal entry plan as a strategy that determined the appearance of their posture during
recruitment. Second, using networks was a strategy that was used by superintendents to be
recruited into the position. Third, doing good work in the positions before the superintendent
position was a recruitment strategy that superintendents used.
Findings for Research Question 3
In order to better understand strategies that support superintendent retention, Research
Question 3 asked, “What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of superinten-
dents?”
Although superintendents have been successfully recruited, their retention in the position
is not necessarily guaranteed (Kowalski et al., 2011). Superintendents needed to ensure that they
took specific measures and used strategies that supported their retention. Results from this study
confirmed three themes that answered Research Question 3:
1. A positive relationship with the school board supported the retention of superin-
tendents;
2. High-performing district superintendents focused on innovation in their districts; and
3. Receiving ongoing training is an essential strategy that contributed to the ongoing
retention of superintendents.
Following is a discussion on each of these themes.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 111
Positive Relationship With School Board
The prior literature reported that a positive relationship with the school board was critical
for the retention of the superintendent (Byrd et al., 2006; Escalante, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2011).
A theme of this study also confirmed the prior literature with respect to a positive relationship
with the school board supporting the retention of superintendents. All six (100%) of the qualita-
tive interview participants contributed to this theme.
Sup A confirmed that his retention was dependent on his school board. During the
researcher’s interview with Sup A, the researcher asked, “What professional relationships
support your retention?” Sup A replied, “Ultimately, your retention—it’s your relationship with
your school board” (interview, September 13, 2017). Then the researcher asked, “What strate-
gies do you use with your board to support your retention?” Sup A responded: “Ongoing com-
munication. . . . The weekly meetings, phone calls, emails daily . . . ongoing” (interview, Sep-
tember 13, 2017). Sup A recognized that his retention was dependent on his relationship with his
school board. This view supported prior literature that reported that a good relationship between
the superintendent and the school board is essential for the tenure of the superintendent (Byrd et
al., 2006). Sup A also used constant ongoing communication, such as weekly meetings, phone
calls, and emails, with his board to support this positive relationship and subsequently his
retention. These actions also supported prior literature that reported that the superintendent’s
ongoing communication with school board members is necessary to support a positive ongoing
relationship (Ezarik, 2001; Melver, 2011).
Sup B also contributed to the common theme of having a positive relationship with the
school board. During the researcher’s interview with Sup B, the researcher asked, “What profes-
sional relationships support your retention?” In her response, Sup B identified her school board:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 112
“A lot of it is making sure you have a good relationship with them [referring to the board]”
(interview, September 26, 2017). Thereafter, in the interview, Sup B focused on a strategy that
she used to maintain that relationship, which was communication:
For every superintendent, the board is somewhat the most challenging. And that is a daily
challenge to keep them informed and trying to. ‘Cause a typical day in the superinten-
dency, I’ll filter through hundreds of emails, who knows how many encounters. And out
of those pieces, what pieces do I need to communicate to them? (interview, Septem-
ber 26, 2017)
She then described an incident about which she had kept the board members informed. The
information was critical because the board members were expected to be at a public event at one
of the district’s campuses. In reference to the board members arriving on campus, Sup B said, “I
don’t want them to walk in the gate and not have an answer” (interview, September 26, 2017).
Sup B recognized that her relationship was critical. First of all, Sup B focused a lot of her energy
sifting through her e-mail to find what pieces of information should have been communicated to
her board members. Second, she ensured that her board members had the information they
needed before they arrived in the public setting. This example supported the prior literature
indicating that a superintendent must have constant communication with the school board that is
regular and consistent with a “no surprises” rule (Escalante, 2002; Harvey, 2003; Kowalski et al.,
2011). Sup B’s constant efforts to vet information and communicate it to her board was support-
ing her retention.
Sup C also expressed how a positive relationship with his board supported his retention.
During the researcher’s interview with Sup C, the latter identified his relationship with his board
as critical for his retention:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 113
I would say it’s my relationships with my board members, because the second that three
of them don’t like me, I don’t have a job. The most important thing I have to do is man-
age five publicly elected board members to make sure that we are on the same page.
(interview, October 9, 2017)
Sup C recognized that his retention as the superintendent was contingent on the relationship he
had with his board members. In regard to strategies that he used to support that positive relation-
ships, Sup C noted:
That’s relational skills. You have to build trust among the board members. And in order
to do that, you have to be willing to spend time, be vulnerable, move toward the pain. In
other words, be willing to listen and hear honest, courageous conversations. Not just
what you want to hear. . . . It’s spending a lot of time with them. To me, you’re going to
pay one way or the other. You’re going to spend time with them either proactively,
investing and prepping them for issues and how you’re thinking and what you’re feeling,
or after something explodes. I’ve always been willing and able to do the preventative. I
spend hours every month with each board member just one-on-one personally. It’s a lot
of time, but I also don’t have the issues that a lot of people have on the tail end. It’s just
time with the board members. To me, if you build trust on all the little things, then when
you have a big thing happen that challenges the organization, that stretches it, pushing
people out of their comfort zone, I find that I get the trust. Even if they’re scared or
they’re a little anxious about a decision, if they know that the last 20 things and they feel
good about why I did them and how it worked out, then when it comes to the big things,
they’re willing to take a risk with me. That pays off. (interview, October 9, 2017)
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 114
Sup C’s response developed his strategy on how he maintained a positive relationship
with his school board. Specifically, Sup C shared how he proactively invested a lot of time to
create trusting and positive relationships with his board members. He also shared how this
proactive investment of time allowed him to be able to make decisions during trying times in the
organization. Sup C’s response confirmed prior literature that asserted that a significant amount
of time should be invested in the superintendent–school board relationship for increased retention
(Escalante, 2002; Sutton, 2012). Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C all individually confirmed the impor-
tance of maintaining a positive relationship with their school board. The perspectives of the
ESFC, BM1, and BM2 also contributed to this common theme.
During the researcher’s interview with the ESFC, the researcher asked, “What profes-
sional relationships support a superintendent’s retention?” The ESFC responded:
Well, the key relationship in retention of a superintendent is with the board. Board
members, they would be the key. They’re not always easy relationships, but that would
be the most critical relationship that the superintendent would need to develop is a rela-
tionship with the board members. (interview, October 9, 2017)
The ESFC immediately recognized the importance of the relationship between the school board
and the superintendent. This view also confirmed the perceptions of the three qualitative super-
intendent participants: Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C.
The researcher asked the ESFC, “What strategy should a superintendent use when inter-
acting with the board?” He replied:
Well, one, they need to do a lot of listening. Two, they need to look and see how they can
say yes or how they can if the request is not appropriate. How they can redirect or de-
velop a new strategy for going forward. They need to learn how to develop a collusive
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 115
leadership team or a collusive team with the board. . . . They need to meet with the board
members individually. Most superintendents don’t spend enough time with their board
individually. They think they spend time with the board members as a group, that that’s
sufficient. They really should be meeting individually with board members on a regular
basis in order to strengthen the relationship so that when you come to a formal board
meeting, you have that informal relationship developed already so that in a formal setting
the board will support your agenda and support your recommendation. (interview,
October 9, 2017)
The ESFC was expressing the need for the superintendent to invest time into building the indi-
vidual relationships with each board member. This response confirmed Sup C’s perspective on
how he maintained a positive relationship with his board. In addition, it also confirmed prior
literature on the importance of investing time (Escalante, 2002; Sutton, 2012). BM1’s and
BM2’s perspectives as board members also confirmed this common theme and its importance for
superintendent retention.
BM1 asserted that his superintendent’s relationship with the board supported his superin-
tendent’s retention. During the interview with BM1, the researcher asked, “What professional
relationships support your superintendent’s retention?” BM1 responded by saying, “Well her
relationship with the board. That would be the primary relationship requirement because the
board only evaluates one person, that’s the superintendent” (September 30, 2017). BM1’s per-
spective as a board member contributed to the importance of the common theme, because as a
board member he would be part of the decision making process to remove a superintendent that
would not have a positive relationship with the board. BM1’s perspective aligned with the views
of Sup A, Sup B, Sup C, and the ESFC.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 116
BM2’s perspective also contributed to this common theme of positive board relation-
ships:
Lack of knowledge amongst the team members themselves as to what each other is doing
is dangerous in [name of superintendent] retention. You’ve got to communicate with
each other. Some superintendents will not do that. They’re like, “Oh, I don’t have to tell
the board why I’m doing something. I’m the superintendent.” Then when that happens
over and over and over, that superintendent doesn’t stay very long. (interview, Octo-
ber 16, 2017)
BM2’s perspective demonstrated a nonexample of a superintendent who allowed a negative
relationship to develop with the school board. The superintendent in this example did not
communicate and did not ensure everyone had the same knowledge. BM2 strongly suggested
that those types of superintendents would not be retained in their position very long. BM2’s view
contributed to the perspectives of all six qualitative interview participants in this study, thus
making this a very strong theme.
Quantitative data also contributed to the reliability of this theme. Two items in the ACSA
superintendents’ survey contributed to this finding. First, 96.72% of the responding superinten-
dents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “The relationship with my board of education
determines my success in retaining my position as a superintendent.” In the DSAG
superintendents’ survey, 91.67% strongly agreed or agreed with the same statement. These
quantitative data strongly point out that superintendents believed that their relationship with the
board was critical to their success in retaining their position.
Second, 96.72% of the responding superintendents agreed with the statement “The rela-
tionship with my board determines my desire to continue in my position as superintendent.” In
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 117
the DSAG superintendents’ survey, 91.67% strongly agreed or agreed with the same statement.
Data from this second statement provided a perspective on the affect of the superintendents who
participated in this survey. Although the data contributed to the strength of this common theme,
the data also suggested that a positive relationship with the school board motivates the superin-
tendent to stay in the position. Conversely, a superintendent may also choose to leave due to a
sour relationship with the board. Nonetheless, data from multiple qualitative and quantitative
sources in this study confirmed the theme of having a positive relationship with the school board.
Focus on Innovation
Successful superintendents developed and implemented strategies for School District
Leadership That Works (Waters & Marzano, 2006) and ultimately improved the student achieve-
ment in their district. Included in these strategies were the use of resources to support achieve-
ment and instructional goals. In regard to using resources, a common theme in this study was
identified by the researcher as answering Research Question 3: that high-performing school
district superintendents focused on innovation in their districts. The theme was identified only
within the data of the three qualitative superintendent participants and not for the ESFC, BM1, or
BM2—or only 50% of the qualitative interview participants (n = 6). Although this theme was
not prevalent across all of the participants, the researcher found it noteworthy in that it was
common among the responses of Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C. In addition, Sup A, Sup B, and Sup
C were are all superintendents identified purposefully in this study because they were superinten-
dents in high-performing school districts. Therefore, this theme was included to support answer-
ing Research Question 3. Following is a discussion of this theme. The researcher used Merriam-
Webster’s definition for innovation as “the introduction of something new” and “a new idea,
method, or device” (“Innovation,” 2017, p. 1).
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 118
Sup A identified innovation as a strategy that supported his retention as a superintendent.
During the researcher’s interview with Sup A, the researcher asked, “What strategies support
your retention?” In response, Sup A said, “Always improving, always trying to innovate” (Sep-
tember 13, 2017). Sup A identified that his retention was based on being innovative and improv-
ing the school district he led as the superintendent. His retention was contingent on it. Innova-
tion came up again later in the same interview. The researcher asked, “What factors have moti-
vated your ongoing retention in the position?” Sup A responded, “Success, high achievement,
innovative programs. Those kinds of things” (interview, September 13, 2017). Sup A’s focus on
innovation was a strategy for retention as well as a source of motivation for ongoing retention.
Sup A’s school district was identified as high performing, and Sup A and his school board
wanted it to continue to remain high performing. Sup A’s focus on innovation contributed to his
school district’s ability to continue to be high performing and also increased Sup A’s motivation
to continue to serve that district as the superintendent. Sup A exercised his structural frame by
focusing on innovation and innovative programs in the district (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Sup B also described how she was focused on innovation in her district. During the
researcher’s interview with Sup B, the latter described how she wanted to transform the way her
schools looked so that they did not resemble institutions:
One of the first things that I did when I went to the elementary school is started making it
look less like an institution. And my goal, if you drive around and go to our campuses
now, and in the last few years has been my goal, is the school should not look like institu-
tions. They should look like places that have learning courts and have space for kids to
sit down and enjoy. My dream still is to have a lounge more like a student center on our
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 119
high school campus as well as our junior high. I was just talking to our school-to-career
counselor about getting a Starbucks on campus. (interview, September 26, 2017)
Although Sup B’s response did not explicitly discuss innovation, her response described
how she was focusing on innovation with respect to how her campuses looked and using new
ideas on how they should look. To Sup B, traditional campuses looked like institutions. Her
goal was to make them look less like institutions and more like places to sit down and enjoy—an
innovative idea. Sup B was exercising her symbolic leadership frame, because she was focusing
on symbolically changing the way that her organization looked (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Sup C contributed to this common theme among the superintendent participants. During
the researcher’s interview with Sup C, the latter discussed how he focused on innovation:
I have the unique position to be able to create the most innovative school district in
America, and that we will be. There’s nowhere else I would rather be than at a school
district that has a school board that’s forward thinking and innovative. Demanding
innovation of me, not just going along with me. (interview, October 9, 2017)
Sup C’s retention was based on his focus on innovation. Particularly, his retention as the super-
intendent continued for two reasons. First, his school board demanded innovation from him. If
he was not innovative, then he would not be retained in the position. Second, Sup C’s was
motivated to stay in the position because his school board was also innovative. Sup C and the
school board had a collaborative and symbiotic relationship that supported his retention. Sup C
was also demonstrating Level 5 leadership in his response because he was attributing some of the
success from being innovative back to the people, including his school board (Collins, 2001).
Thus, Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C identified a common theme of focusing on innovation in their
district, which supported their retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 120
Qualitative data from the remaining interview participants of this study did not include
any information on innovation. The lack of this information did not contribute to or take away
from this theme; however, the instrumentation to collect the qualitative data from the remaining
participants did not explicitly seek data on innovation. This was a limitation of this study. In
addition, quantitative data from the quantitative survey instruments did not include any informa-
tion on innovation. The fact that instruments to collect the quantitative data did not explicitly
seek data on innovation was another limitation of this study. However, the researcher notes that
the common theme of focusing on innovation as a strategy for retention was unique only to the
superintendents of the study.
The researcher compared the data from these superintendent participants with the data
from the team of eight researchers’ superintendent participants—a total of 26 superintendents.
The researcher identified that the common theme of focusing on innovation was present in the
comments of the three superintendent participants of the researcher’s study but not in the remain-
ing 23 superintendent participants interviewed by other members of the research team. This
comparison may suggest that the theme may be applicable to superintendents of high-performing
school districts; however, future research would have to be conducted to confirm whether that
was a true finding. Nonetheless, a focus on innovation was a strategy that superintendents of this
study used for retention in their position.
Ongoing Training
Superintendents prepare for the position by receiving university and non-university
training (Glass et al., 2000; Kowalski et al., 2011). Although training prepared prospective
superintendents for the position, ongoing training may be still be important to ensure retention.
One of this study’s themes that answered Research Question 3 emphasized the importance of
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 121
ongoing training to support the retention of superintendents. Particularly, receiving ongoing
training was an essential strategy that contributed to the ongoing retention of superintendents.
This theme was recognized by 100% of the six qualitative interview participants. Following is a
discussion on this theme.
Sup A identified how ongoing training was supporting his retention as a superintendent:
I think ongoing training is important and that’s hard to do, to stay current. But I think
going to CSBA, going to the annual superintendents’ conference, making connections
with other superintendents is real important. And it’s a two-way street; as much as you
wanna stay in an organization, or not, the board has to feel the same way. So it goes both
ways. But I think you need to stay current, and you rely on your people to help you stay
current. (interview, September 13, 2017)
Sup A identified ongoing training as necessary for him to stay current so that his retention was
supported. Interestingly, he included his board’s affect toward him in his response. This sug-
gested that ongoing training helped his board to see that he should be retained in his position, and
Sup A recognized that ongoing training helped him to stay current.
Sup B also recognized how ongoing training was supporting her retention in the position:
I think because our business is so fluid, we have to stay current. And so I just finished a
seven-page document [for the school board] basically on what we’ve done in the last 9
months. And a lot [of] that is staying current and of making that sure I receive the proper
training. . . . And I take advantage of the opportunities that are out there to stay current.
Whether it’s a webinar or going to an actual ACSA regional meeting. Just last week we
met with a legislative analyst from Sacramento—those types of things. I think the reten-
tion is making sure that you as a superintendent stay current and know where is education
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 122
going and how can we stay somewhat ahead of it. . . . And I try to make sure that I have as
much exposure as I can to keep up. I read all of the CSBA pieces as well. So I know
what they’re hearing so that I’m well trained to respond to those types of things. So I
think that part of it is very important to the retention issue. You really have to make
yourself valuable to the organization. (interview, September 26, 2017)
Sup B credited ongoing training as important in supporting her retention in the position. To Sup
B, ongoing training helped her to stay current when making decisions for the school district.
Ultimately, ongoing training helped her to make herself valuable to the organization and pre-
vented her from making mistakes that would end her retention as superintendent (Kerrins &
Cushing, 2001).
Sup C also identified how ongoing training was supporting his retention as superinten-
dent:
The most important ongoing training I have right now is a small superintendent collabora-
tive. It’s a small collaborative organized by my coach. I have an executive coach. He
has a small group of us that he coaches, and we meet regularly—at least once a month.
We just run through problem-solving protocols, work on different issues that each of us
are having. It’s the strongest kind of ongoing training I have because it’s live, it’s
relevant, and it’s from peers that are in the same position that I am. (interview, October 9,
2017)
Sup C identified that the small superintendent collaborative group of which he was a part
provided the best ongoing training that he had that supported his retention. Within this collabo-
rative, Sup C was able to receive coaching from his executive coach. Training received by Sup
C’s coach confirmed the importance of superintendents to have coaches so that they can be
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 123
trained properly (Beem, 2007). In addition, Sup C received training from working alongside
other superintendents in his collaborative. This training included working on problem-solving
protocols and various issues. Sup C’s use of the collaborative also confirmed other scholarly
literature on the use local consortiums of superintendents for professional development (Glad-
well, 2000). The training that Sup C received from his small-group collaborative supported his
retention.
Sup A, Sup B, and Sup C each individually described how ongoing training supported
their retention. Data from the qualitative interviews with the ESFC, BM1, and BM2 also con-
firmed this common theme of ongoing training to support superintendent retention.
The ESFC gave his perspective on why ongoing training was important in supporting a
superintendent’s retention in the position:
Once you get the position, you’ve got to continue to grow. So I think ongoing training
contributes to your success as a leader. You would be surprised at the various issues that
superintendents face when they move into the position. Oftentimes, these are not things
that we learn about, but they’re just things that come up on the job. So continuous learn-
ing, continuous personal development becomes important. If you don’t have that per-
spective, you’re not going to handle the complex problems well. If you have that
perspective, you’re going to handle those situations well. So you have to be a continuous
learning. If you’re not, you’re just not going to do well. (interview, October 9, 2017)
The ESFC strongly identified how ongoing training and learning were to being successful in the
superintendent position. If a superintendent was not a continuous learner, then the superinten-
dent was not going to do well.
BM1 identified how ongoing training supported the retention of his superintendent:
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 124
I think the most probably relevant and continuous training comes from the county. . . . I
think there’s monthly superintendent meetings and they talk about what’s coming down
the pike, if you will, as far as negotiations, finance, testing, test scores, sports, personnel
issues, new administrative regulations, board regulations that are coming down and
making sure that you follow all of the procedures for getting those done. What the
requirements and changes do to PERS [Public Employees’ Retirement System] and STRS
[State Teachers’ Retirement System]. It’s just a lot. (interview, September 30, 2017)
BM1 recognized that his superintendent’s retention was dependent on the training he received.
To BM1, there were many aspects of the job and regulations that were necessary for his superin-
tendent to be trained on and updated on.
BM2 also identified the ongoing training that was supporting his superintendent’s
success:
It’s more personal growth. There is no board-mandated training for her at all. Her
training is self-motivated. There’s superintendent symposiums—the basic things that all
superintendents go through. Mainly it’s just his growth and any current legislation that’s
coming down or changes in curriculum. She has to learn about that to comply. I guess
it’s keeping up with what a superintendent is supposed to do. (interview, October 16,
2017)
BM2 noted that his superintendent’s training was not mandated, but was self-driven. This
process included working with other superintendents and understanding the current legislation
and updated regulations. BM2’s perspective connected his superintendent’s retention to compli-
ance with legislation and regulation. It was imperative that his superintendent learn the updated
legislation so that she could comply with the school board by enforcing it.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 125
Interestingly, later in the same interview, BM2 identified ongoing training as a strategy
for superintendents to participate in to be successful. During the interview, the researcher asked,
“Are there any other strategies or skills that a superintendent should use to be successful?” BM2
responded, “Well, continuing education on educational strategies and trends” (October 16, 2017).
Again, in BM2’s perspective, ongoing training was an important strategy for superintendents to
use that would support their success and retention. This theme was common across all six
qualitative interview participants. Quantitative survey data also triangulated and strengthened
the theme.
Superintendent participants of the ACSA superintendents’ survey also contributed to this
theme. In the ACSA superintendents’ survey, 93.34% strongly agreed or agreed with the state-
ment, “Receiving on-the-job professional development trainings (such as conference attendance)
is a process/strategy that supports my success in retaining my position as a superintendent.” In
the DSAG superintendents’ survey, 66.67% strongly agreed or agreed with the same statement.
Perhaps superintendent members of ACSA may have been biased to receive OJT through their
ACSA membership.
Summary of Results for Research Question 3
Although superintendents have arrived at their position, they still needed to adopt and
implement strategies that supported their retention. Results of this study identified three themes
that included strategies that superintendents can take to support their retention. First, having a
positive relationship with the school board supported superintendent retention because school
board members would be positive about their superintendent’s performance and because the
superintendent would have a desire to continue in the position. Second, superintendents focused
on innovation in their school districts; focus on innovation was a strategy specific to this study’s
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 126
sample, which included high-performing school district superintendents. Last, superintendents
supported their success by receiving ongoing training.
Chapter Summary
This chapter examined the emergent themes that were identified by the researcher to
answer this study’s three research questions on superintendent preparation, recruitment, and
retention. The emergent themes from this study were drawn from six qualitative interview
participants, including three superintendents, one ESFC, and two board members. The emergent
themes from this study were also confirmed with quantitative data where applicable, as well as
by relevant literature in Chapter Two. These multiple data sources served to strengthen the
validity and reliability of this study’s themes (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Three emergent themes were identified relating to superintendent preparation: (a) the
value of OJT experience as better than training programs, (b) value of experience as a site prin-
cipal, and (c) the value of mentors in preparing aspiring superintendents for the job.
Three emergent themes were identified relating to the study’s second research question on
superintendent recruitment: (a) use of an informal entry plan, (b) networking, and (c) doing good
work in the positions before the superintendent position
Three emergent themes were identified relating to Research Question 3 on retention: (a)
having a positive relationship with the school board, (b) focus on innovation in the school
district, and (c) ongoing training to support success.
This chapter included a discussion on this study’s emergent themes, which answered this
study’s three researcher questions. The summary, limitations, implications, recommendations for
future study, and the study’s conclusion are presented in Chapter Five.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 127
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
School superintendents of K–12 districts are the top administrators and leaders of the
districts they serve (Kowalski et al., 2011). Although they have taken on multiple roles, their
main role in the position is as communicator. School boards of education are publicly elected
offices who take on the responsibility of hiring their district’s superintendent, with the expecta-
tion that the superintendent will ultimately improve student achievement and outcomes through
their policies (Kowalski et al., 2011; Waters & Marzano, 2006). With these expectations, super-
intendents must persevere in maintaining their retention in the position through ongoing strate-
gies or else fall prey to having their employment being terminated by their board (Byrd et al.,
2006).
Because the superintendent position has become more complex since its inception in the
early 1800s, aspiring superintendents had to consider how to properly prepare, be recruited, and
maintain their retention in the position (Kowalski et al., 2011; McLaughlin, 2005). Prospective
superintendents have pursued preparation programs such as universities and non-university
programs; however, these same programs may have been burdensome and inadequate to truly
prepare aspiring superintendents for the position (Barnett, 2004; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005;
Levine, 2005; Perry, 2012). Through mentoring and networking, some candidates have been
successfully recruited (Kowalski et al., 2011). Still, the complexities and challenges of the
position have caused some superintendents to have poor relationships with their respective board
and be dismissed from the position (Byrd et al., 2006; Kowalski et al., 2011). These shortfalls
signified an overall problem in superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 128
Purpose of the Study Restated
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and
retention of high-performing school district superintendents. Three leadership models served as
theoretical frameworks to guide this study: (a) Bolman and Deal’s (2003) organizational frames,
(b) Collins’s (2001) Level 5 leadership, and (c) Waters and Marzano’s (2006) School District
Leadership That Works: The Effect of Superintendent Leadership on Student Achievement.
The researcher of this study worked collaboratively with a team of eight researchers from
the USC’s Rossier School of Education to design the study, research questions, the qualitative
methodology, and the qualitative and quantitative instrumentation. The team also collaboratively
took quantitative survey samples from three quantitative survey groups: (a) ACSA superinten-
dents, (b) DSAG superintendents, and (c) CSBA school board members. The researcher worked
independently to gather independent qualitative data from six participants: three superintendents,
one ESFC, and two school board members. Qualitative and quantitative instruments were
designed to align with the three research questions of this study:
1. How have training programs and experience prepared superintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges of the superintendency?
2. What are the perceptions of current successful superintendents and school boards
regarding the strategies used to help the current superintendent to attain his or her position?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of superintendents?
With his own qualitative sample, the researcher identified three emergent themes per
research question in this study. In all there, were nine emergent themes in the study.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 129
Summary of Findings
Research Question 1
The analysis of qualitative interview data produced three themes in which training
programs and experience have prepared superintendents for the position. First, superintendents
identified that their OJT experience was perceived as better than training programs in preparing
superintendents to manage the complexities and challenges of the superintendency. Although in
2011, many superintendents had reported that they possessed a doctoral degree, a doctoral degree
may not have been the best preparation for the superintendent position (Kowalski et al., 2011).
This study confirmed prior literature that suggested that the doctoral degree was not necessary to
prepare for the position (Levine, 2005; Shulman et al., 2006). On-the-job experiences, however,
were the best preparation for this study’s sample.
Second, experience as a site principal best prepared superintendents to manage the com-
plexities and challenges of the superintendency. This finding confirmed the prior literature that
asserted that site principal experience was the experience that best prepared superintendents for
the position (Kowalski et al., 2011).
Finally, aspiring superintendents prepared for the superintendency by having mentor
relationships. This study confirmed that mentors helped aspiring superintendents to build confi-
dence, be pushed forward, not make damaging decisions, and have a model that they could
emulate (Alsbury & Hackmann, 2006; Björk, Kowalski, et al., 2005).
Research Question 2
Three themes were identified in this study to answer Research Question 2, which was in
reference to superintendent recruitment. The themes identified were not as evident as the themes
that answered the other research questions but were still notable to be identified. First,
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 130
participating superintendents used an informal entry plan as a strategy that determined the
appearance of their posture during recruitment. Superintendent participants were recognized as
exercising the symbolic frame during the superintendent recruitment stage of their career
(Bolman & Deal, 2003). The symbolism that they demonstrated matched the qualities that their
respective boards were looking for when hiring a superintendent (Björk, Glass, et al., 2005).
Second, the use of networks was a strategy that was used by superintendents to be recruited into
the position. This study confirmed the importance of networking in that it helps build the trust in
key stakeholders and helps potential superintendents to gain access to leadership positions
(Glenn & Hickey, 2009; Ripley et al., 2013; Sampson et al., 2015).
Finally, doing good work in the positions before the superintendency was a recruitment
strategy that superintendents used. The ongoing experience in doing good work produced a
strong symbolism for the candidate that they could exercise when being recruited (Bolman &
Deal, 2003). Superintendents built confidence in others regarding their reliability to perform
well in the position.
Research Question 3
Three last themes were identified in this study that answered Research Question 3, which
related to superintendent retention. First, having a positive relationship with the school board
supported superintendent retention. This theme confirmed the prior literature that emphasized
the importance of a superintendent’s relationship with his or her school board members through
consistent and ongoing relationship building and maintenance (Byrd et al., 2006; Escalante,
2002; Kowalski et al., 2011). Not only did a positive relationship with school board member
support retention of their superintendent, but also a positive relationship with the school board
motivated the superintendent to continue working in his or her position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 131
Second, superintendents focused on innovation in their school districts. Through the
focus on innovation, superintendents in the study implemented strategies of Waters and
Marzano’s (2006) School District Leadership That Works. Superintendents supported their
success by receiving ongoing training. One hundred percent of the superintendents in this study
identified that ongoing training supported their retention. Quantitative survey data from this
study confirmed this theme as well, with 93.34% of superintendents agreeing that ongoing
training supported their retention. This finding confirmed prior literature on the importance of
ongoing training, including both university and non-university training (Glass et al., 2000;
Kowalski et al., 2011).
Limitations
The research design of this study called for a parallel-concurrent data collection period
wherein all participants were sampled in the same brief time period. Emerging themes through
superintendent samples were not always explicitly mentioned or described by other participants.
The data collection design of this study was a limitation on the themes identified. The instru-
mentation of this study, through quantitative and qualitative instruments, was also a limitation.
Emergent themes from qualitative participants were not necessarily pointed out by other qualita-
tive participants due to the design of the semistructured interview protocols and the quantitative
surveys. Finally, quantitative data were limited in the study due to time restraints on collecting
data and by the total response rates of the surveys.
Implications
This study contributed to the body of scholarly literature by identifying strategies that
successful superintendents took during their preparation, recruitment, and retention for the
position. Although the insights gained were from the participating superintendents, school board
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 132
members, and the ESFC, aspiring and current superintendents, current school board members,
and executive search firms can use the insights and themes identified in this study.
Aspiring superintendents can begin their preparation immediately in their current position
by learning their work to the deepest levels possible and doing it to the best of their ability. In
this study, 100% of the participants pointed to the importance that prior OJT was in preparing for
the superintendency. Currently aspiring superintendents can be ensured that their own experi-
ences and quality of work would not potentially disqualify them from potentially being a superin-
tendent. Aspiring superintendents should network with other educators and leaders to build and
maintain relationships with them as well as stakeholders to build trust and confidence in their
work. This process would require aspiring superintendents to pursue doing good work in their
current positions and sharing news of their good work through their networks.
In order to be retained in their position, current superintendents must continue to maintain
a strong and positive relationship with their board as a whole and individually through consistent
informal and formal communication. To accomplish this task, current superintendents must be
proactive at vetting information and disseminating it to their school board members. Current
superintendents must invest time in creating and maintaining the relationships so that when the
organization is challenged through an event, the superintendent’s position can be protected and
retained. Finally, current superintendents should focus on developing and implementing strate-
gies that increase student achievement and focus on innovation. This process will take ongoing
training and a life-long learning posture on the superintendent’s part.
School boards of education can also contribute to superintendent retention. Although
superintendents must pursue a positive relationship with the school board to ensure retention,
school boards of education must also pursue a positive relationship with their superintendent to
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 133
support ongoing retention. If superintendents do not feel that they have a positive relationship,
they may leave the position. Next, if a superintendent position vacancy should exist, school
boards of education can prepare to fill the position by seeking candidates who have had a career
record of good work, a person who was a site principal, and a person who is innovative.
ESFCs must continue to maintain their records to ensure that they have a pulse on excel-
lent aspiring superintendent candidates who will fill the next set of vacancies in the superinten-
dent position.
Recommendations for Future Study
Based on the themes of this study, the researcher identified the following research recom-
mendations:
1. Future research could include a case study on how a superintendent in a high-
performing school district focuses on innovation. Qualitative interviews, observations, and col-
lection of minutes and artifacts could inform more specific strategies on innovative initiatives in
successful districts.
2. Future research could focus on specific OJT experiences that superintendents had that
were beneficial to their preparation, including mentoring relationships. Qualitative interviews
with superintendents and their respective mentors, both past and present, could provide insights
on the subtleties of the preparing for the position.
3. Future research could include case studies on the perceptions of successful superinten-
dents’ preparation, recruitment, and retention. In this case, future research could include focus
groups with the successful superintendent, his or her respective board member(s), the ESFC, any
of the superintendent’s mentors, any people in their network, and professionals in their prior
work. The focus group could allow for emergent findings that would add to this study’s findings.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 134
Conclusion
The K–12 school superintendent is a complex and challenging position requiring the right
strategies for preparation, recruitment, and retention (Kowalski et al., 2011). Aspiring and
current superintendents must carefully consider their approach toward the superintendent posi-
tion to ensure a successful career.
This was a study on superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention. Themes were
drawn from qualitative data and supported by quantitative data to answer three research questions
based on superintendent preparation, recruitment, and retention. The researcher took measures to
ensure that data were collected ethically and that the themes reported were derived scientifically.
Although there is no guarantee to attain or be successful in the superintendent position, aspiring
superintendents can still employ specific strategies in their preparation for and recruitment into
the position, and current superintendents can take action on strategies that will support their
retention. This study has informed the reader on strategies for successful superintendent prepara-
tion, recruitment, and retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 135
REFERENCES
Alsbury, T. L. (2003). Superintendent and school board member turnover: Political versus
apolitical turnover as a critical variable in the application of the dissatisfaction theory.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 39, 667–698.
Alsbury, T. L., & Hackmann, D. G. (2006). Learning from experience: Initial findings of a
mentoring/induction program for novice principals and superintendents. Planning and
Changing, 37(3), 169–189.
Barnett, D. (2004). School leadership preparation programs: Are they preparing tomorrow’s
leaders? Education, 125(1), 121–129.
Beem, K. (2007). Superintendent mentoring the state way. School Administrator, 64(4), 10–17.
Björk, L. G., Glass, T. E., & Brunner, C. C. (2005). Characteristics of American school superin-
tendents. In L. G. Björk & T. J. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Prepa-
ration, practice, and development (pp. 19–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Björk, L. G., Kowalski, T. J., & Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2005). Learning theory and research: A
framework for changing superintendent preparation and development. In L. G. Björk & T. J.
Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Preparation, practice, and development
(pp. 71–106). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey- Bass.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 136
Bowers, A. J. (2016). Quantitative research methods training in education leadership and admin-
istration preparation programs as disciplined inquiry for building school improvement
capacity. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(1), 1–25.
Brewer, E. W. (2012). Leadership characteristics of the ideal school superintendent. In V. C. X.
Wang (Ed.), Encyclopedia of E-leadership, counseling, and training (pp. 628–641). Her-
shey, PA: Information Science Reference.
The Broad Center. (2004). Entry plan for an incoming superintendent. Retrieved from https://
wasa-oly.org/wasa/docs/press%20releases/NS%20Resources/Entry%20Plan%20for%20Inco
ming%20Supt_Broad%20Center.pdf
Brown, A. R. (2014). The recruitment and retention of African American women as public
school superintendents. Journal of Black Studies, 45, 573–593.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 4 (1954).
Buchanan, G. S. (2013). Mentoring programs for newly appointed school superintendents: An
analysis of the need for ethical decision-making as a critical component (Doctoral disserta-
tion, Northern Illinois University). Retrieved from ERIC database (ERIC Document Repro-
duction Service No. ED561691)
Byrd, J., Drews, C., & Johnson, J. (2006). Factors impacting superintendent turnover: Lessons
from the field. NCPEA Education Leadership Review, 7(2), 2–3.
California Department of Education. (2017). Smarter balanced assessment test results for state
of California. Retrieved from https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/ViewReport?ps=
true&lstTestYear=2017&lstTestType=B&lstCounty=00&lstDistrict=00000&lstSchool=000
0000
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 137
Callahan, R. E. (1966). The superintendent of schools: A historical analysis. Retrieved from
ERIC database (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED0104410)
Chen, P. (2014). Traits, skills, and competencies contributing to superintendent longevity
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles.
Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: The triumph of humility and fierce resolve. Harvard
Business Review, 79(1), 65–76.
Cooper, B. S., Fusarelli, L. D., Jackson, B. L., & Poster, J. (2002). Is “superintendent prepara-
tion” an oxymoron? Analyzing changes in programs, certification, and control. Leadership
and Policy in Schools, 1, 242–255.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods ap-
proaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Crippen, C., & Wallin, D. (2008). Manitoba superintendents: Mentoring and leadership. Educa-
tional Management Administration & Leadership, 36, 546–565.
Cuban, L. (1976). The urban superintendent: A century and a half of change. Bloomington, IN:
Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Daly, A. J. (2009). Rigid response in an age of accountability: The potential of leadership and
trust. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(2), 168–216. http://doi.org/10.1177/
0013161X08330499
Dowell, M. L., & Larwin, K. H. (2013). Gender equity in educational administration: Investigat-
ing compensation and promotion. Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 3(1), 53–77.
Drucker, P. F. (1999). Management challenges for the 21st century. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 138
Eadie, D., & Houston, P. D. (2004). Ingredients for a board-savvy relationship. Retrieved from
http://www.aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=9296
Educational Testing Service. (2017a). CAASPP: California assessment of student performance
and progress. Retrieved from http://www.caaspp.org/
Educational Testing Service. (2017b). Search smarter balanced test results. Retrieved from
https://caaspp.cde.ca.gov/sb2017/Search
Eichman, J. A. (2009). Formal mentoring and training programs for new superintendents in the
state of Illinois (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Illinois University, DeKalb.
Escalante, M. F. (2002). Communication techniques utilized by superintendents with their
governing boards that develop trust, unity, and a clear understanding of roles and responsi-
bilities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Ezarik, M. (2001). Staying put: Urban superintendent retention appears to be an oxymoron, but a
number of superintendents are mainstays in their cities. District Administration, 37(11), 11–
13.
Fink, A. (2013). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Fordham Institute, & The Broad Foundation. (2003). Better leaders for America’s schools: A
manifesto. Retrieved from http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/publication/pdfs/
manifesto_8.pdf
Fusarelli, B. C. (2006). School board and superintendent relations: Issues of continuity, conflict,
and community. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 9(1), 44–57. doi:10.1177/
1555458905285011
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 139
Fusarelli, B. C., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2005). Reconceptualizing the superintendency. In L. G. Björk
& T. J. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Preparation, practice, and
development (pp. 187–206). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. Boston,
MA: Little, Brown.
Glass, T. E. (2000). Where are all the women superintendents? School Administrator, 57(6),
28–33.
Glass, T. E., Björk, L. G., & Brunner, C. C. (2000). The study of the American school superinten-
dency, 2000: A look at the superintendent of education in the new millennium. Arlington,
VA: American Association of School Administrators.
Glenn, J., & Hickey, W. (2009). The superintendent search: Who are the consultants and what
are the barriers. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 4(3), 1–10.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Goldring, E. B., & Schuermann, P. (2009). The changing context of K-12 education administra-
tion: Consequences for Ed.D. program design and delivery. Peabody Journal of Education,
84(1), 9–43.
Goodman, R. H., & Zimmerman, W. G. (2000). Thinking differently: Recommendations for 21st
century school board/superintendent leadership, governance, and teamwork for high student
achievement. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service and New England School
Development Council.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and
greatness. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 140
Grogan, M. (1996). Voices of women aspiring to the superintendency. Albany, NY: State Univer-
sity of New York.
Grogan, M., & Shakeshaft, C. (2010). Women and educational leadership. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Harding, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis from start to finish. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Harvey, J. (2003). The urban superintendent: Creating great schools while surviving on the job.
Hess, F. M. (2003). A license to lead? A new leadership agenda for America’s schools. Washing-
ton, DC: Progressive Policy Institute
Howlett, P. (1993). The politics of school leaders, past and future. Education Digest, 58(9), 18–
21.
Innovation. (2017). In Merriam-Webster. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/
dictionary/innovation
Jackson, B. L. (2002). Exceptional and innovative programs in educational leadership. Educa-
tional Administration Quarterly, 38, 192–212.
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2014). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Juenke, E. G. (2005). Management tenure and network time: How experience affects bureau-
cratic dynamics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(1), 113–131.
Kamler, E. (2009). Decade of difference (1995-2005): An examination of the superintendent
search consultants’ process on Long Island. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(1),
115–144.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 141
Kerrins, J. A., & Cushing, K. S. (2001). The classic mistakes of new superintendents. Retrieved
from http://www.superintendentofschools.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/
The_Classic_Mistakes_of_New_Superintendents.pdf
King, M., & Blumer, I. (2000). A good start. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 356–360.
Kowalski, T. J. (1998). The role of communication in providing leadership for school restructur-
ing. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 11(1), 32–40.
Kowalski, T. J. (2003). Superintendent shortage: The wrong problem and wrong solutions.
Journal of School Leadership, 13, 288–303.
Kowalski, T. J. (2005). Evolution of the school district superintendent position. In L. G. Björk &
T. J. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Preparation, practice, and devel-
opment (pp. 1-18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Kowalski, T. J. (2008). Preparing and licensing superintendents in three contiguous states.
Planning and Changing, 39(3) 240–261.
Kowalski, T. J., & Björk, L. G. (2005). Role expectations of the district superintendent: Implica-
tions for deregulating preparation and licensing. Journal of Thought, 40(2), 73–118.
Kowalski, T. J., & Brunner, C. C. (2011). The school superintendent: Roles, challenges, and
issues. In F. W. English (Ed.), The Sage handbook of educational leadership (pp. 110-134).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kowalski, T. J., & Keedy, J. L. (2005). Preparing superintendents to be effective communicators.
In L. G. Björk & T. J. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: Preparation,
practice, and development (pp. 207–226). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 142
Kowalski, T. J., McCord, R. S., Petersen, G. J., Young, I. P., & Ellerson, N. M. (2011). The
American school superintendent: 2010 decennial study. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Kowalski, T. J., Petersen, G. J., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2007). Effective communication for school
administrators: An imperative in an information age. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Kowalski, T. J., Petersen, G. J., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2009). Novice superintendents and the effi-
cacy of professional preparation. AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 5(4), 16–26.
Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lehman, D. (2015). A case study describing how servant leadership attributes impact superin-
tendent longevity and leadership styles (Unpublished master’s thesis). Indiana University of
Pennsylvania, Indiana.
Leithwood, K., & Azah, V. N. (2017). Characteristics of high-performing school districts.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 16(1), 27–53. http://doi.org/10.1080/15700763 .2016
.1197282
Leithwood, K., & McCullough, C. (2016, March). Leading high-performing school districts:
Nine characteristics of effective districts and the leadership practices that achieve them.
Education Canada, n.v., 24–29. Retrieved from http://www.cmcleadership.ca/wp-content/
uploads/2016/03/CEAarticleSDL-2.pdf
Levine, A. (2005). Educating school leaders. Retrieved from http://edschools.org/pdf/Final313
Livingston, D. (2007, April). Seven questions of networking: The answers can be found in one of
the better models for superintendents. School Administrator, 64(4), 26.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 143
Masumoto, M., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). Case study of leadership practices and school–
community interrelationships in high-performing, high-poverty, rural California high
schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 24(1), 1–18.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
McCann, T. M., & Johannessen, L. (2009). Mentoring matters: When are the good mentors? The
English Journal, 98(4), 120–122.
McCarthy, M. (2015). Reflections on the evolution of educational leadership preparation pro-
grams in the United States and challenges ahead. Journal of Educational Administration, 53,
416–438.
McCarthy, M., Shelton, S., & Murphy, J. (2016). Policy penetration of the ISLLC standards.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15, 221–230.
McClellan, R., Ivory, G., & Domínguez, R. (2008). Distribution of influence, communication,
and relational mentoring in the US superintendency. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in
Learning, 16, 346–358.
McLaughlin, M. (2005). Superintendent/principal recruitment strategies in small, rural school
districts in northern California. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.
Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2001). Managerial strategies and behavior in networks: A model
with evidence from U.S. public education. Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 11, 271–293.
Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2003). Public management and educational performance: The
impact of managerial networking. Public Administration Review, 63, 689–699.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 144
Melver, T. A. (2011). Causes of job turnover in the public school superintendency: An explana-
tory analysis in the western United States (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Nevada, Las Vegas.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementa-
tion (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mountford, M. (2004). Motives and power of school board members: Implications for school
board-superintendent relationships. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40, 704–741.
Muñoz, A. J., Pankake, A., Ramalho, E. M., Mills, S., & Simonsson, M. (2014). A study of
female central office administrators and their aspirations to the superintendency. Educa-
tional Management Administration & Leadership, 42, 764–784.
Newton, R. M. (2006). Recruiting women to the superintendency. AASA Journal of Scholarship
and Practice, 3(2), 24–30.
Orr, M. T. (2006). Mapping innovation in leadership preparation in our nation’s schools of
education. Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 492–499.
Parker-Chenaill, R. (2012). The impact of superintendent turnover on student achievement in
rural districts (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). St. John Fisher College, Pittsford, NY.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Paulsen, J. M., Nihlfors, E., Brinkkjær, U., & Risku, M. (2016). Nordic superintendents: Agents
in a broken chain. In L. Moos, E. Nihlfors, & J. M. Paulsen (Eds.), Nordic superintendents:
Agents in a broken chain (Vol. 2, pp. 207–231). Cham Switzerland: Spring International.
Perry, J. A. (2012, September). To Ed.D. or not to Ed.D.? Kappan Magazine, 94(1), 41–44.
Perry, J. A. (2013). Carnegie project on the education doctorate: The education doctorate—a
degree for our time. Planning and Changing, 44(3/4), 113–126.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 145
Petersen, G. J., & Short, P. M. (2001). The school board president’s perception of the district
superintendent: Applying the lenses of social influence and social style. Educational Admin-
istration Quarterly, 37, 533–570.
Ragland, M. A., Asera, R., & Johnson, J. F. (1999). Urgency, responsibility, efficacy: Prelimi-
nary findings of a study of high-performing Texas school districts. Retrieved from ERIC
database (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED428907
Ripley, J., Mitchell, R. M., & Richman, J. A. (2013). New superintendents: Trust, networking,
and social capital. Journal of School Public Relations, 34(1), 40–73.
Sampson, P. M., Gresham, G., Applewhite, S., & Roberts, K. (2015). Women superintendents:
Promotion of other women to central office administration. Advancing Women in Leader-
ship, 35, 187–192.
Sanchez, M. S. (2008). A case study of the experiences of five former and current non-traditional
superintendents (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas A&M University, College
Station.
Santiago-Marullo, D. A. (2010). School superintendents’ perceptions of the American Associa-
tion of School Administrators’ professional standards for the superintendency, their rele-
vancy to the superintendency and the correlation of pre-service preparation of superinten-
dents (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Searby, L., & Tripses, J. (2006). Breaking perceptions of “old boys’ networks”: Women leaders
learning to make the most of mentoring relationships. Journal of Women in Educational
Leadership, 4(3), 179–195.
Sharp, W. L., Malone, B. G., Walter, J. K., & Supley, M. L. (2004). A three-state study of female
superintendents. Educational Research Quarterly, 27(3), 22–37.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 146
Shaw, T. L. (2014). Prioritizing the 21st century superintendent’s skill set and knowledge base
from the school board leadership perspective (Doctoral dissertation, Western Illinois Uni-
versity). Retrieved from ERIC database (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED569651)
Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Bueschel, A. C., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006). Reclaiming educa-
tions doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 25–32.
Smith, M. W. (2012). How successful superintendents build trusting relationships with their
school boards during their entry period (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of
Southern California, Los Angeles.
Stone-Johnson, C. (2015). Complexity theory, networking, and the work of small-district super-
intendents. In G. Ivory, A. E. Hyle, R. McClellan, & M. Acker-Hocevar (Eds.), Quandaries
of the small-district superintendency (pp. 73–89). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan US.
Sutton, D. M. (2012). The entry experiences, challenges, and mediating strategies of public
school superintendents (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). West Carolina University,
Cullowhee, NC.
Swindle, M. A. (2005). Successful superintendent entry: The first 90 days of the superintendency
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California). Retrieved from http://
digitallibrary.usc.edu/utils/getfile/collection/p15799coll16/id/334939/filename/334789.pdfp
age/page/1
Talbert, S. B. (2011). Why do superintendents stay? Components of organizations commitment
and superintendent longevity (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses Database (UMI No. 3488217)
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 147
Tallerico, M. (1989). The dynamics of superintendent-school board relationships: A continuing
challenge. Urban Education, 24, 215–232.
Tallerico, M. (2000). Gaining access to the superintendency: Headhunting, gender, and color.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 18–43. doi:10.1177/ 0013161x960321004
Teitel, L. (2005). Supporting school system leaders: The state of executive training programs for
school superintendents (Working Paper). Boston: University of Massachusetts, Center for
Public Policy.
Thompson, R. (2014). The superintendent and school board relationship: Functioning as a group.
International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 7(1), 69–78.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Gareis, C. R. (2015). Faculty trust in the principal: An essential ingre-
dient in high-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(1), 66–92.
Retrieved from ERIC database (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ1054239)
Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of
superintendent leadership on student achievement. Denver, CO: McRel.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: Free Press.
Whitaker, J. E. (2006). Women in the middle: A qualitative study of the leadership experiences of
female central office administrators (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Utah,
Salt Lake City.
Winter, P. A., Rinehart, J. S., Keedy, J. L., & Björk, L. G. (2007). Superintendent recruitment: A
statewide assessment of principal attraction to the job. Planning and Changing, 38(½), 35–
59.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 148
APPENDIX A
RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS’ INVITATION E-MAIL
Dear___[stakeholder group role],
I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern Cali-
fornia and a ________ [role] in the ________________________ Unified School District. I
would like to invite you to participate in a research study that will investigate the preparation,
recruitment, and retention of successful superintendents.
You are asked to participate only if you are currently employed as a superintendent for at least 2
years. If you agree to participate, you will be asked to complete a survey; estimated time for
completion is approximately 20 minutes. University of Southern California’s Institutional
Review Board has approved this research study (IRB #APP-17-02065).
Your participation is completely voluntary. If you decide to participate after reading this
email, you can access the survey via the following link: ____________
I value your input and hope that you will consider participating in this study. Please email me at
___________________ if you have any questions. Thank you in advance for your time.
Sincerely,
USC Doctoral Candidate Researcher
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 149
Informed Consent
Date: _____________________
Dear ________________________,
My name is __________________ and I am a doctoral student at the USC Rossier School of
Education. I am conducting a research study under the guidance and direction of Dr. Michael F.
Escalante. The purpose of my mixed-methods study is to examine the preparation, recruitment,
and retention of school district superintendents in California. I will interview and survey super-
intendents, board members, and executive search consultants.
You have been invited to participate in a graduate research study that will shed light on the
preparation, recruitment, and retention of superintendents. The results of this study will inform
multiple stakeholders, including aspiring superintendents, school boards, and executive search
firms. It is my hope that this study will serve as a valuable resource.
Your participation, although appreciated, is voluntary and you have the right to withdraw at any
time. The information collected will be kept confidential and anonymous by the researcher and
members of the dissertation committee. Data will be presented in a manner that will ensure that
no individual or district can be identified.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding your participation in this study, you may contact
me at _____________ or Dr. Michael F. Escalante at the University of Southern California.
Thank you, in advance, for your time and assistance.
Sincerely,
_______________, Researcher Dr. Michael F. Escalante, Dissertation Chair
[email address] mescalante@usc.edu
(xxx) xxx-xxxx (818) 802-4769
( ) I have read this form and have been given the opportunity to ask questions. I consent to my
participation in the research described above.
Participant’s Signature: __________________________________ Date: __________
Participant’s Printed Name: ______________________________
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 150
APPENDIX B
SUPERINTENDENT SURVEY
The purpose of this mixed-methods study is to examine the preparation, recruitment, and retention of
California superintendent of schools. Since this position is critical to student achievement, it is important
to identify the preparation, supports, skills, and relationships that superintendents need to be successful.
The goal of this brief, 15-minute survey is to quantify your perceptions on superintendent preparation,
recruitment, and retention. Your participation in this survey is anonymous. Thank you for your par-
ticipation.
Personal Background
1. Gender
N Male
N Female
2. Ethnicity (check all that apply)
N Asian
N Black
N Latina/o
N Native American
N Pacific Islander
N White
N Multiple
N Other
N Decline to state
3. Age range:
N 30-35
N 36-40
N 41-45
N 46-50
N 51-55
N 56-60
N 61-65
N 65+
4. Highest university degree earned:
N Ed.D.
N Ph.D.
N Master’s
N Other
• Please specify
5. What university do you identify with professionally?
•
6. How many years in the education profession?
N 1-10
N 11-20
N 21-30
N 30 or more
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 151
7. How many years as a superintendent?
N 1 year or less
N 1-5
N 6-10
N 11-15
N 16 or more
8. This is my _________ time serving as a superintendent.
N 1st
N 2nd
N 3rd
N 4th
9. Did you come from within the district or outside the district to the position?
N Within
N Outside
10. Past experiences (check all that apply):
• School site positions:
N Elementary school teacher
N Middle school teacher
N High school teacher
N Counselor (any level)
N College/university instructor
N Community college instructor
N Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA)
N Other ______________________
• School site administrator positions:
N Elementary School Assistant Principal
N Middle School Assistant Principal
N High School Assistant Principal
N Elementary Principal
N Middle School Principal
N High School Principal
N Dean of Students
• District-level positions:
N Coordinator
N Specialist
N Director of Curriculum and Instruction
N Director of Research and Planning
N Director of Human Resources
N Director of Student Support Services
N Director: Other ____________________
N Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction
N Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources
N Assistant Superintendent of Business/Chief Business Officer (CBO)
N Assistant Superintendent: Other _____________________
• Other than education
N Please specify: ______________
11. Base Salary Range (approximate):
N Less than $100,000
N $100,000-140,000
N $140,001-160,000
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 152
N $160,001-180,000
N $180,001-200,000
N $200,001-220,000
N $220,001-240,000
N $240,001-260,000
N $260,001-280,000
N $280,001-300,000
N $300,001-320,000
N $320,001-340,000
N $340,001-360,000
N $360,001+
12. Total Compensation Range (approximate):
N Less than $100,000
N $100,000-140,000
N $140,001-160,000
N $160,001-180,000
N $180,001-200,000
N $200,001-220,000
N $220,001-240,000
N $240,001-260,000
N $260,001-280,000
N $280,001-300,000
N $300,001-320,000
N $320,001-340,000
N $340,001-360,000
N $360,001+
School District
13. Type of district:
N Urban
N Urban/suburban
N Suburban
N Rural
14. District student enrollment :
N Less than 1,000
N 1,001-5,000
N 5,001-10,000
N 10,001-15,000
N 15,001-20,000
N 20,001-25,000
N 25,001-35,000
N 35,001-50,000
N 50,001-75,000
N 75,000-100,000
N More than 100,000
Based on your perception of your preparation experience to be a superintendent, rate the following
statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 153
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(1)
Agree
(2)
Disagree
(3)
Strongly
Disagree
(4)
Don’t
Know or
NA (0)
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent preparation:
Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps you took prior to taking on your first superin-
tendent position.
Preparation
1. University programs provided training and
experience that was important in preparing to
become a superintendent.
2. My prior work experience was more important
than my university training experience to pre-
pare me for my position as a superintendent.
3. Holding a doctoral degree was important in
preparation for my position as a superinten-
dent.
4. Nontraditional training programs (such as The
Broad Academy) were important in preparing
me for my position as a superintendent.
5. Holding certification and/or licensure from
organizations (such as ISLLC, AASA/USC,
ACSA) was important in preparing me for my
position as a superintendent.
6. Having mentors was instrumental in preparing
me for the superintendent position.
7. A professional network of support (such as
AASA, ACSA, or through a university) was
important in preparing me for my position as a
superintendent.
8. Informal networks of support (such as profes-
sional colleagues) were important in preparing
me for my position as a superintendent.
9. Networks with university professors were im-
portant in preparing me for my position as a
superintendent.
10. Planning my career was important in preparing
me for my position as a superintendent.
11. My university training program provided in-
tentional supports or resources to prepare fe-
males to enter the superintendent position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 154
12. My university training program provided in-
tentional supports or resources to prepare
people of color to enter the superintendent po-
sition.
13. Having experience as a principal is a crucial
element in preparing me for the position as
superintendent.
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent recruitment:
Recruitment is the process/strategy that your used to gain his/her first superintendent position.
Recruitment
14. Having a mentor(s) was an important process/
strategy for being recruited into my current
position as a superintendent.
15. My university experience was an important
process/strategy for helping me to be recruited
into my current position as a superintendent.
16. Being part of professional networks (such as
AASA, ACSA, university alumni associations)
was an important process/strategy for being
recruited into my current position as a superin-
tendent.
17. Networking with an executive search firm was
an important process/strategy for being re-
cruited into my current position as a superin-
tendent.
18. Holding a doctoral degree was an important
process/ strategy for being recruited into my
current position as a superintendent.
19. Presenting at conferences and/or publishing in
professional journals was an important
process/strategy for being recruited into my
current position as a superintendent.
20. Networking with board members was an im-
portant process/strategy for being recruited
into my current position as a superintendent.
21. My prior experience outside of education was
an important process/strategy for being
recruited into my current position as a superin-
tendent.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 155
22. Creating a “First 100-Day Entry Plan” was
important for being recruited into my current
position as a superintendent.
23. Gender is an important factor for being re-
cruited into the superintendent position.
24. Race and ethnicity are important factors for
being recruited into the superintendent posi-
tion.
25. The demographic composition of a board of
education (such as gender, race, and ethnicity)
is an important factor.
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent retention: Reten-
tion is the process/strategy you used to maintain your current superintendent position.
Retention
26. My university training program provided me
with processes/strategies that currently support
my success in retaining my position as a super-
intendent.
27. Professional networks (such as AASA, ACSA,
university networks) provided me with pro-
cesses/strategies that currently support my suc-
cess in retaining my position as a superinten-
dent.
28. Having a mentor(s) provided me with
processes/strategies that support my success in
retaining my position as a superintendent.
29. Having a district-provided executive coach
currently supports my success in retaining my
position as a superintendent.
30. The relationship with my board of education
determines my success in retaining my posi-
tion as a superintendent.
31. The relationship with my board determines my
desire to continue in my position as superin-
tendent.
32. Board/superintendent protocol (relationship)
workshops have been an important process/
strategy for building our relationship.
33. My relationship with my board is more impor-
tant than my compensation.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 156
34. My compensation determines my desire to
continue in my position as a superintendent in
my district.
35. Negotiating additional compensation jeopar-
dizes my relationship with the board.
36. Having a formal, written strategic plan sup-
ports my success in retaining my position as a
superintendent.
37. Receiving on-the-job professional develop-
ment training (such as conference attendance)
is a process/strategy that supports my success
in retaining my position as a superintendent.
38. District stakeholders hold female superinten-
dents to different standards for their ongoing
job retention.
39. My race and ethnicity may influence the ex-
pectations that district stakeholders have of me
in my position as a superintendent.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 157
APPENDIX C
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER SURVEY
Based on your perception of the preparation experience to be a superintendent, rate the following
statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(1)
Agree
(2)
Disagree
(3)
Strongly
Disagree
(4)
Don’t
Know or
NA (0)
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent prepara-
tion: Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps your superintendent took prior to
taking on his/her first superintendent position.
Preparation
1. My superintendent’s prior work experience
was more important than his/her university
training experience to prepare him/her for
his/her current position.
2. Holding a doctoral degree was important
for my superintendent’s preparation.
3. Nontraditional training programs (such as
The Broad Academy) were important in
preparing my superintendent for his/her
current position.
4. Having mentors was instrumental in pre-
paring my superintendent for his/her cur-
rent position.
5. A professional network of support (such as
AASA, ACSA, or through a university)
was important for preparing my superinten-
dent for his/her current position.
6. Informal networks (such as professional
colleagues) were important in preparing
my superintendent for his/her current posi-
tion.
7. I believe that university training programs
provide intentional supports or resources to
prepare females to enter into the superin-
tendent position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 158
8. I believe university training programs pro-
vide intentional supports or resources to
prepare people of color to enter into the
superintendent position.
Based upon your perception of your superintendent’s recruitment experience to be a superin-
tendent, rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree:
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent recruit-
ment: Recruitment is the process/strategy that your superintendent used to gain his/her
first superintendent position.
Recruitment
9. It was an important process/strategy for my
superintendent to have a mentor(s) to being
recruited into his/her current position.
10. Networking with an executive search firm
was an important process/strategy for my
superintendent to being recruited into his/
her current position.
11. Networking with us, as board members,
was an important process/strategy for my
superintendent to being recruited into his/
her current position.
12. My superintendent’s prior experience out-
side of education was an important pro-
cess/strategy for him/her to being recruited
into his/her current position.
13. Gender is an important factor to being re-
cruited into the superintendent’s position.
14. Race and ethnicity are important factors to
being recruited into the superintendent
position.
15. The demographic composition of a board
of education (such as gender, race, and eth-
nicity) is an important factor to being re-
cruited into the superintendent position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 159
Based upon your perception of your superintendent’s current retention experience in being a
superintendent, rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree:
For the next statements, please use the following definition for superintendent retention:
Retention is the process/strategy that your superintendent used to maintain his/her current
superintendent position.
Retention
16. The university training program provided
my superintendent with processes/strate-
gies that support his/her success in retain-
ing his/her current position.
17. Professional networks (such as AASA,
ACSA, university networks) provided my
superintendent with processes/strategies
that support his/her success in retaining
his/her current position.
18. Having a mentor(s) provided my superin-
tendent with processes/strategies that sup-
port his/her success in retaining his/her
current position.
19. The relationship that my superintendent
has with our board determines his/her suc-
cess in retaining his/her current position.
20. Board/superintendent protocol (relation-
ship) workshops have been an important
process/strategy for my superintendent to
building our relationship.
21. My superintendent’s compensation deter-
mines his/her desire to continue in his/her
current position.
22. Having a formal, written strategic plan sup-
ports my superintendent’s success in
retaining his/her position.
23. District stakeholders hold female superin-
tendents to different standards for their on-
going job retention.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 160
24. My superintendent’s race and ethnicity
may influence the expectations that district
stakeholders have of him/her in his/her cur-
rent position.
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 161
APPENDIX D
SUPERINTENDENT INTERVIEW GUIDE
Preparation Recruitment Retention
Research
Questions
How have training pro-
grams and experience
prepared superintendents
to manage the complexi-
ties and challenges of the
superintendency?
What are the perceptions of
current successful super-
intendents and school
boards regarding the strat-
egies used to help the
current superintendent to
attain his or her position?
What are the perceived
strategies that support the
retention of superin-
tendents?
Themes Interview Questions
Training
Programs
1. What type of training have
you attended that prepared
you for the superintendency?
• 1a. Where did you
receive your most effec-
tive training? Why?
5. Some superintendents have
not utilized training programs
because they believed that the
best training was on the job.
What is your opinion about
that?
9. How is ongoing training
supporting your retention as a
superintendent?
• 9a. What types of
training support your
retention?
• 9b. What strategies sup-
port your retention?
Experience
2. Describe your career path
to the superintendency.
• 2a. Which professional
experiences leading up to
becoming the superinten-
dent were the most bene-
ficial? Why?
6. What prior experiences did
you have that made you most
favorable to hire?
10. What strategies or skills
should a superintendent use to
be successful in his/her role?
Relational
Supports
3. Who were the most im-
portant professional relation-
ships that helped you to pre-
pare for the superintendent
position?
• 3a. How were they im-
portant?
7. Did you strategically use
professional relationships
(mentoring/networking) to
attain your current position? If
so, how?
11. What professional relation-
ships support your retention?
• 11a. What strategies do
you use with your board
to support your retention
as a superintendent?
Experience
4. When did you know that
you wanted to be a superin-
tendent?
• 4a. What proactive steps
did you take to get there?
8. Did you create an “Entry
Plan” when being recruited
into the position?
• 8a. If so, how did it help
you get recruited?
• 8b. If not, how could it
have helped you?
12. Do you utilize a formal,
written strategic plan outside of
the LCAP?
• 12a. If so, how does it
differ from the LCAP?
• 12b. If so, how does it
enhance your retention?
13. What factors have moti-
vated your ongoing retention in
the position?
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 162
APPENDIX E
SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER INTERVIEW GUIDE
Preparation Recruitment Retention
Research
Questions
How have training programs
and experience prepared su-
perintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges
of the superintendency?
What are the perceptions of
current successful superinten-
dents and school boards re-
garding the strategies used to
help the current superinten-
dent to attain his or her posi-
tion?
What are the perceived
strategies that support the re-
tention of superintendents?
Themes Interview Questions
Training
Programs
1. What type of training did
your superintendent attend
that prepared him/her for the
superintendency?
• 1a. Where did he/she re-
ceive the most effective
training? Why?
5. Some superintendents have
not utilized training programs
because they believed that the
best training was on the job.
What is your opinion about
that?
9. How is ongoing training
supporting your super-
intendent’s retention in his/her
position?
• 9a. What types of train-
ing support your super-
intendent’s retention?
• 9b. What strategies did
your superintendent ac-
quire that support his/
her retention?
Experience
2. Describe your superinten-
dent’s career path to the
superintendency.
• 2a. Which experiences
that your superintendent
had leading up to becom-
ing the superintendent
were the most beneficial?
Why?
6. What prior experiences did
your superintendent have that
made him/her most favorable
to hire?
10. What strategies or skills
should a superintendent use to
be successful in his/her role?
Relational
Supports
3. Who were the most im-
portant professional relation-
ships that your superinten-
dent had that helped him/her
to prepare for the position?
• 3a. How were they im-
portant?
7. Did your superintendent
strategically use professional
relationships (mentoring/net-
working) to attain his/her cur-
rent position? If so, how?
11. What professional relation-
ships support your superinten-
dent’s retention?
• 11a. What strategies do
you value the most when
interacting with your
superintendent?
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 163
Career
Planning
4. What proactive steps did
your superintendent take to
get to his/her position?
8. Did your superintendent
create an “Entry Plan” when
being recruited for the posi-
tion?
• 8a. If so, how do you
believe that helped your
superintendent to be re-
cruited?
8.1. How important is it for a
prospective superintendent to
have an entry plan when being
recruited?
12. Do your superintendent
utilize a formal, written strate-
gic plan outside of the LCAP?
• 12a. If so, how does it
differ from the LCAP?
• 12b. If so, how does it
enhance retention?
13. What factors motivate your
superintendent’s ongoing reten-
tion in the position?
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 164
APPENDIX F
EXECUTIVE SEARCH FIRM INTERVIEW GUIDE
Preparation Recruitment Retention
Research
Questions
How have training programs
and experience prepared su-
perintendents to manage the
complexities and challenges
of the superintendency?
What are the perceptions of
current successful superinten-
dents and school boards
regarding the strategies used
to help the current superinten-
dent to attain his or her
position?
What are the perceived
strategies that support the re-
tention of superintendents?
Themes Interview Questions
Training
Programs
1. What type of training was
attended by superintendent(s)
whom you recommended that
prepared him/her for the
superintendency?
• 1a. Where did he/she re-
ceive the most effective
training? Why?
5. Some superintendents have
not utilized training programs
because they believed that the
best training was on the job.
What is your opinion about
that?
9. How does ongoing training
support the retention of super-
intendent(s) whom you have
recommended?
• 9a. What types of train-
ing support a superinten-
dent’s retention?
• 9b. What strategies did
superintendent(s) whom
you recommended
acquire that supported
his/her retention?
Experience
2. Describe the career path
to the position of superinten-
dent(s) whom you have
recommended.
• 2a. Which experiences
that your superintendent
had leading up to becom-
ing the superintendent
were the most beneficial?
Why?
6. What prior experiences did
the superintendent whom you
recommended have that made
him/her most favorable to
hire?
10. What strategies or skills
should a superintendent use to
be successful in his/her role?
Relational
Supports
3. Who were the most im-
portant professional relation-
ships that your superinten-
dent had that helped him/her
to prepare for the position?
• 3a. How were they im-
portant?
7. Did superintendents whom
you recommended strategi-
cally use professional relation-
ships (mentoring/networking)
to attain their current position?
If so, how?
11. What professional relation-
ships support a superin-
tendent’s retention?
• 11a. What strategies
should a superintendent
use when interacting
with the board?
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 165
Career
Planning
4. What proactive steps did a
superintendent whom you
placed take to get to the
superintendency prior to
coming to you?
8. Do superintendents whom
you recommend create an
“Entry Plan” when being re-
cruited for the position?
• 8a. If so, how does that
superintendent to be re-
cruited?
8.1. How important is it for a
prospective superintendent to
have an entry plan when being
recruited?
12. Do superintendents whom
you placed utilize a formal,
written strategic plan outside of
the LCAP?
• 12a. If so, how does it
differ from the LCAP?
• 12b. If so, how does it
enhance retention?
13. What factors motivate the
ongoing retention of superin-
tendents whom you rec-
ommended?
SUPERINTENDENTS: PREPARATION/RECRUITMENT/RETENTION 166
APPENDIX G
QUESTION ALIGNMENT MATRIX
Instrument
RQ1
How have training
programs and experi-
ence prepared super-
intendents to manage
the complexities and
challenges of the su-
perintendency?
RQ2
What are the percep-
tions of current suc-
cessful superinten-
dents and school
boards regarding the
strategies used to
help the current
superintendent to at-
tain his or her posi-
tion?
RQ3
What are the per-
ceived strategies that
support the retention
of superintendents?
Superintendent Survey 1–13 14–25 25–39
Superintendent Inter-
view Guide
1–4 5–8 9–13
School Board Member
Survey
1–13 14–25 26–39
School Board Member
Interview Guide
1–4 5–8 9–13
Executive Search Firm
Survey
1–13 14–25 26–39
Executive Search Firm
Interview Guide
1–4 5–8 9–15
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Perception of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of California school district superintendents
PDF
Educational leadership: a comprehensive analysis of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of school district superintendents
PDF
The superintendency in a California school district: preparation, recruitment, and career longevity
PDF
The obscurity inside the margins: the preparation, recruitment, and retention of women of color superintendents
PDF
The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California schoool district superintendents
PDF
Public school district principals in California: preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
School leadership: preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals
PDF
The preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals in southern California
PDF
Developing longevity in the K-12 principal position: strategies for preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
Understanding the pathway leading to the recruitment, support, and retention of superintendents from multiple lenses
PDF
The 21st-century principal: the recruitment, mentoring, and retention of principals
PDF
K-12 public school district principals in California: strategies for preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
The principalship: preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
An analysis of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals
PDF
Successful superintendents of schools: preparation, recruitment, and retention
PDF
Understanding the 21st-century principalship: contemporary preparation, recruitment and retention practices
PDF
The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K-12 principals
PDF
The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K–12 principals
PDF
Influence of formalized school board training on California school districts
PDF
Superintendent strategies and behaviors: building and promoting trust and strong relationships during the entry period in California
Asset Metadata
Creator
Rynkiewicz, David Christian
(author)
Core Title
High-performing school district superintendents: preparation, recruitment, and retention
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
03/05/2018
Defense Date
03/01/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
entry plan,good work,high-performing school districts,innovation,K12,K-12,leadership,mentors,networking,OAI-PMH Harvest,ongoing training,on-the-job training,preparation,public education,recruitment,retention,school board,school district,site principal,superintendent,superintendents
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Escalante, Michael (
committee chair
), Green, Alan (
committee member
), Hinman, Charles (
committee member
)
Creator Email
rynkiewi@usc.edu,rynkle@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-480597
Unique identifier
UC11267982
Identifier
etd-Rynkiewicz-6078.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-480597 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Rynkiewicz-6078.pdf
Dmrecord
480597
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Rynkiewicz, David Christian
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
entry plan
good work
high-performing school districts
innovation
K12
K-12
mentors
networking
ongoing training
on-the-job training
retention
school board
school district
site principal
superintendents