/

usctheses

/

uscthesesreloadpub_Volume1

/

Leadership traits and practices supporting position longevity for urban school superintendents: a case study

(USC Thesis Other)

Leadership traits and practices supporting position longevity for urban school superintendents: a case study

PDF

Transcript (if available)

Content

LEADERSHIP TRAITS AND PRACTICES SUPPORTING POSITION LONGEVITY
FOR U RBAN SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS: A CASE STUDY

by

Carla Beam

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 2012

Copyright 2012 Carla Beam

ii

DEDICATION

To my family I owe so much. They have taught me many life lessons that have
led me on this quest and called me to the teaching profession. To my sister Charleen
Beam Riley, your lifelong friendship, sister talks and editing expertise have been
invaluable. The trips to your lovely inn in the mountains outside Yosemite provided the
backdrop for me to get started on my first three chapters. What an inspiration. Thank you
so much. To my brother Marty Beam and his family, Pam, Ryan and Lauren, thank you
for providing constant cheering from the sidelines. Ryan and Lauren, you are to keep
pursuing your own educational endeavors. If your ‘ol Aunt Carla can do it, you can.
Never give up!
To my mother, Dorothy, who was the catalyst, who demanded nightly ‘reads’ as
we were growing up—instilling a love and the gift of life-long learning in me. Thank you
so very much. To my dear step-father Roy Merritt, you are still missed as you are such a
source of inspiration to me. You were always taking classes, long after graduating from
USC, completing both a law degree and a master’s degree. You revered education and
were thrilled to learn I had been accepted at your alma mater. I so regret you will not be
physically with me on graduation day, but you will be in my thoughts and in my heart.
And finally, and above all, to my darling husband, Guy Bell, who has enriched
my life beyond my dreams and has provided all the space needed with which to complete
this endeavor. You told me at the beginning of my program not to worry, that you would

iii

handle everything you possibly could and you have stayed true to that statement. This has
been a wonderful and incredible journey and there is no way I could have completed it
without your support, computer expertise, patience, companionship and love. To my
family I dedicate this publication with love.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my Dissertation Chair, Dr. Pedro Garcia, for his ongoing
support, feedback and encouragement throughout this process. Little did he know that
when I first met him at the Cohort 2009 Welcome Dinner, I had selected him as my chair
right then! I knew then he would be a great fit for me. I want also to thank Dr. Rudy
Castruita, also part of my dissertation committee. His knowledge, positive attitude and
dedication to assisting dissertation students greatly contributed to my success in
completing this program. To Dr. Steven Fish, the third committee member, I owe much.
Without his generous support at a time when I did not think I would complete the
coursework leading to this point, he reignited the passion to persevere and restored my
confidence. I will be always grateful.
The personnel at USC-Irvine have been wonderful. The facility was top-notch and
I appreciate the many times you booked a study room for me. Everything I asked for was
attended to and always cheerfully.
To the myriad of outstanding teachers, principals and support personnel in Long
Beach Unified I have worked with, I appreciate your talents, the many late night talks and
ongoing encouragement. To Dr. Phuong Le, thank you for your belief in me from the
beginning. Your insights into this program and recommendations were taken to heart. I
am so fortunate to have met you on my journey. You are so dear! To school psychologist,
Mireya Iruegas Cervantes, school nurse, Jannette Jeffery, and school counselor Angela

v

Bisson Lundberg, I owe all of you a debt of thanks I cannot repay. Our long weekend
breakfasts and lunches always gave me more than I gave in return, and you will never
know how much I really appreciate it. You are all extraordinary women with limitless
talents. To Special Education Administrator, Kelly Lingel, without whom I was not sure I
would have gotten through the last three years in the classroom, I owe a huge debt of
thanks. You were always able to troubleshoot the many issues that arose and always
provided information efficiently with a positive spin. To teachers, Lorraine Fiori, Erika
Hartman, Elizabeth Morse, Margaret Serna, and Patricia Weber-Miller—you all
demonstrated what excellence in teaching looks like. Your compassion for students and
dedication to improve student learning is infectious and inspiring. Your unwavering
support during this journey has been incredible. To principals Claire Alvarez and Doris
Robinson, you have been very gracious in sharing both your successes and pitfalls to
improve the level of education we provide our young students. I am indebted to you both.
While pursuing my general education teaching credential at Loyola Marymount
University, Drs. Edmundo Litton and John ‘Ty’ Binfet were outstanding professors. You
provided rich material inspiring many insights and much reflection and you did so with
unparalleled enthusiasm. To both you gentlemen, I am extremely proud to have been
your student and recall my experiences at LMU with great appreciation.
In the Special Education Department at California State University at Dominguez
Hills, while working toward my Special Education teaching credential, I had the great
privilege of having Dr. Carrie Ann Blackaller as an instructor and as my advisor. You

vi

were a model of professionalism and a leader in this constantly-changing field. Since my
time with you as a student, you have become a dear friend. Without your guidance and
encouragement, I am not sure I would have ever challenged myself to work toward this
degree. To Dr. Ann Chlebicki, Chair of the Administrative Services Credentialing
program at CSUDH, I am most grateful for your influence and constant, rich feedback
during pursuit of that credential.
To Sally Newman, words cannot tell you how much I owe you and how dear you
are to me. Without your strength and ability to know so well what I needed done in my
classroom, this undertaking would not have been possible. You kept the classroom on
track many times when I was under the weather, overly tired or just too frazzled to
remember what I was going to do next. You are no longer just a colleague but a dear
friend. To my many friends I owe more than I can possibly express. Friends were a
constant source of support. To Deborah Kaplan-Wyckoff and Leslie Appleton Young,
you both have been academic mentors since our days in elementary school. You have
been such a source of strength and great personal insight. I admire you both so much. To
my dear friend Sharon Gray Taplin from days at Mills College, you have always been a
phone call away and provided such clarity during our getaway weekends during this
process. Thank you so much for the many years of friendship. To Cheryl Hayes, Peggy
Keller, Tom and Christi Kinberg, Helene Miller, Judy Newman, Eileen Pollaro, Vibeke
Newell, and Kathleen Spier, your friendship has provided a rich patchwork of support. So
many phone calls from me! I am sure you are all thrilled this process is finally over.

vii

Finally, I am so appreciative to my fellow graduate students within my cohort at
USC-Irvine with whom I was fortunate to navigate the waters. I have been blessed by the
support and life-long friendships made, especially Sonia Amaral, Chelvi Subramaniam,
Maruth Figueroa, Peggy J. Smith, Kurt Wimer-McLachlan and Christiane Woerner. I
have learned much from all of you and am thrilled to be part of such a dedicated and
talented group of educators. Now we are all part of the USC family. Fight on!

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION………………………………………………………………….. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………… iv
ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………. viii
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY………………………… 1
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……………… 15
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY……………………………………... 43
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS………………………………………………. 53

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH.. 80
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………… 87
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Initial Letter to Potential Respondents………… 95
APPENDIX B Postcard Potential Respondents Will Return…... 97
APPENDIX C Letter to Superintendent……………………….. 98
APPENDIX D Survey for Board Members…………………….. 100
APPENDIX E Survey for Union Officers……………………… 103
APPENDIX F Survey for Cabinet Members…………………… 106
APPENDIX G Interview Questions for the Superintendent…… 109
APPENDIX H Interview Questions for
Board of Education Representative……………. 111
APPENDIX I Interview Questions for Union Officer………… 113
APPENDIX J Interview Questions for Cabinet Member……… 115

ix

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to add to the research on position longevity for
urban school superintendents by examining personal character traits and skills. The study
explores how these traits translate to leadership behaviors. Additionally, relevant
background and experience necessary to success were examined. This was a case study
involving one superintendent and the school district he manages. The work of Bolman
and Deal (2003) provides the conceptual framework by viewing leadership behaviors
through structural, human resources, political and symbolic frames. This study utilized a
quantitative research design through the use of surveys to all Board of Education
members, the superintendent’s cabinet and all union officers. Qualitatively, the research
design involved interviews with the Superintendent, a Board member, a cabinet member
and a union officer. Another superintendent was interviewed to add interest to this study
and to add validity to the findings. Information was garnered from interviews, but too few
surveys were completed to make the quantitative results significant. Findings in this
study examine those traits and skills necessary for the successful superintendent, as
identified by superintendents themselves and those around them and serves as
recommendations for post-graduate study programs or for those wishing to hone their
skills.

1
CHAPTER ONE

OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY

Educators in American public schools face a daunting task providing each student
the opportunity to become a participant in the global society that increasingly insists on
well-educated citizenry. Transforming public school systems into more effective
learning institutions was demanded by the public with the passage of the No Child Left
Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 or Public Law 107-110 (The White House, 2002). This
legislation calls for educators to ensure academic achievement of all students while
placing the ultimate burden on the leader – the superintendent.
Leadership by the superintendent is critical in identifying a clear vision for the
district and providing a road map for all educators to follow as they provide day-to-day
instruction. Leaders inspire a shared vision and must have an intimate knowledge of
people’s dreams, hopes, aspirations, visions and values (Kouzes and Posner, 2002).
District personnel must believe that leaders have their best interests at heart and
understand their needs. However, being the leader of a school district does not end with a
vision. The 21
st
century superintendent is a well educated and political individual
managing a myriad of roles including balancing the budget and managing resources
which are becoming increasingly scarce, responding to all stakeholders concerning

2
accountability for student achievement, improving test scores and working with the board
to address district as well as community issues. Moreover, the superintendent must
communicate with the teachers’ union concerning contract and operating issues while
providing instructional leadership and staff support to the regular members.
The superintendent is responsible for all quality decisions that affect school and
district performance, and one of the most important decisions for the superintendent
involves successful assignment of principals who are skilled in raising student
performance (Byrd, Drews, and Johnson, 2006). In larger districts, the superintendent is
aided by a cabinet, or assistant superintendents who know the pool of potential candidates
ready to transition to an administrative position. Now the superintendent is expected to
balance all of the roles successfully (Elmore, 2000).
How does this happen? Is a successful district led by a superintendent who is
fortunate to surround himself with people who know what they are doing, or does the
superintendent have personal characteristics, knowledge and well-defined relationship
skills that allow him to move comfortably within the groups with whom he must conduct
the daily business of running a district? This intensely complex job requires the leader to
be able to wear many hats and direct subordinates in different ways. The topic shifts and
needs change as he moves from his cabinet of professionals immediately around him to
the board and then the community at large. This job not only requires finesse but it also
requires that the superintendent be able to recognize what skills are needed in order to

3
complete his tasks, have the constituency understand his intent and keep the district
moving in the direction he has set.
These qualities can be seen through the perspective of leadership that suggests
that organizations can be viewed from four different vantage points identified as frames
(Bolman and Deal, 2003). The structural frame emphasizes formal roles and
relationships, the human resource frame focuses on the needs of people, the political
frame considers the conflict over scarce resources, and the symbolic frame views
organization as culture with shared values. Each of these frames sounds simplistic, but in
reality, each is very complex. The experienced and skilled superintendent should be adept
at transitioning in and out of each of these frames, and these leaders should know which
frame is most appropriate to the situation.
Within the structural frame, the superintendent is able to review and refine
processes that are currently in place. This is the frame in which ongoing analysis of data
is shared and discussed. The structural frame is where problem solving takes place. One
of the dilemmas within the structural frame is goal-less versus goal bound (Bolman &
Deal, 2003, p. 72). In many organizations, many members do not know what the goals
are, and in others, the goals have become irrelevant because those who set them hang on
to them after they are no longer effective.
The human resource frame as described by Bolman & Deal (2003) shapes what
people do for one another within the organization while focusing on organizational
wisdom and the needs of employees. It is the heart of the organization. It is about

4
empowerment of all employees. Training and organizational development operate within
this frame, and training should be integrated into a comprehensive system that every
principal can follow, such as training to the standard and accomplishing a specific
mission.
In understanding the political frame, Bolman & Deal (2003) refer to politics as
making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and opposing interests.
It means working with coalitions and recognizing the major constituencies within the
educational arena. With the current state of the budget, there is less money to get the
same job done as in the previous year. It takes a very creative superintendent to do more
with less. Everyone within the educational setting is charged with looking at how to make
that happen, from working with a shortage of teachers to a shortage of copy paper.
Viewing difficulties as challenges is part of working within the symbolic frame.
Making tough decisions, communicating unpopular decisions and resolving crises, are
part of the superintendent’s job. Conflict is both natural and inevitable within
organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2003). This is also the frame that incorporates the
importance of vision and communicating it to all subordinates in the organization. An
organization’s core philosophy is its vision or sense of purpose and directs the
organization toward the future. Being able to examine the situation from multiple vantage
points, (Bolman & Deal, 2003), allows the leader to diagnose challenges clearly and
develop strategies to move forward. It allows the superintendent to be a visionary, a
prophet and a source of inspiration.

5
Researchers have studied leadership style extensively over the past three decades,
focusing on what behaviors effective leaders’ exhibit. An important leadership model
developed over the past twenty years includes two different leadership styles:
transformational and transactional (Northouse, 2007). “Transactional leadership refers to
the bulk of leadership models which focus on the exchanges that occur between leaders
and their followers” (p. 176). Transactional leaders exchange things of value with
subordinates to advance their own as well as their subordinates’ agendas. An example
might include a teacher giving students a grade for work completed, or a manager
offering an employee a promotion in exchange for performance. Leaders who practice
this approach achieve results through positive or negative reinforcements of behavior and
can be very influential because subordinates realize it is in their best interest to do what
their leaders ask of them. This model also acknowledges non-transactional behaviors,
referred to as non-leadership or laissez-faire behaviors typically associated with a hands-
off leadership approach (Northouse, 2007). Leaders who practice this type of behavior
tend to abdicate responsibilities, delay decisions, and make little effort to help
subordinates satisfy their needs. An example of this would be the manager who has little
contact with others in the organization, has no long-range plans, and who does not call
meetings with employees.
In contrast, “transformational leadership is the process whereby a person engages
with others and creates a connection that raises the level of motivation and morality in
both the leader and the follower” (p. 176). Transformational leadership inspires followers

6
to accomplish things beyond what might be expected. Transformational leadership
stresses that leaders must understand and adapt to their follower’s motives and needs.
These leaders are also good role models who empower staff members to achieve higher
standards and engender trust in others. They are change agents who articulate a clear,
shared vision of the organization and establish meaning in organizational life.
Transformational leadership is associated with more effective achievement of
outcomes, higher performance levels among followers and the ability to successfully
initiate and execute change. These leaders like to be surrounded by employees who enjoy
challenges and want to grow professionally. They willingly put much time and energy
into staff development, identifying and supporting employee-specific goals, and creating
high-performing teams. Better leaders can be developed by establishing and nurturing
mentoring relationships with good leaders. A highly successful superintendent would
embody many of the qualities needed for transformational leadership. He must be willing
to revisit his plans, reprioritize and assess his organization, while reflecting upon ways to
improve himself and his leadership.
A good leader takes a personal inventory in order to effect growth and become a
better leader. He knows flexibility is always part of the job. He is the ultimate example of
what he wants his leadership team to be. He is constantly on display, always being
cognizant to set an example (Nestor-Baker and Hoy, 2001). It should make no difference
whether he is at his job or out in the community. He might be tough to work for, but he
should always be ready with praise. He should let the lessons from the past influence the

7
present and guide the future. In light of unprecedented technological developments,
rapidly changing world events and compressed cycles of social change, the need for
adaptive, flexible, empowering leadership has never been greater.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Children were failing at alarming rates and test scores were slipping. According to
the publication of A Nation at Risk (1983), the government reacted by establishing
guidelines such as Goals 2000 (North Central Regional Education Laboratory, 1994) and
legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act (The White House, 2002). The public has been
led to believe that it has a crisis on its hands and that no one is addressing it. The finger is
pointed at leadership within the educational arena stating that they have an ethical and
moral responsibility to shape the changes needed. Rhetoric is heard through the media on
almost a daily basis that there is an absence of leadership at the local, state and national
levels, and conditions of decay for the educational system continue to decline.
This statement conflicts with the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium
(ISLLC) (1996). Twenty-four state education agencies and other professional
organizations came together to develop guiding principles, from which ISLLC developed
six standards to which each state association adheres. Standard Five calls for
administrators to act with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner. Standards One,
Two and Six call for administrators to develop, articulate, advocate, nurture, understand,

8
respond to, and influence the larger political, social and cultural context in which they
work (ISLLC, 1996).
Clearly, the observance of ISLLC standards, along with personal characteristics,
knowledge, previous experiences, education and one’s skill of operation within the four
frames of organizations make this job incredibly difficult. More than ever school districts
are under the microscope with dwindling revenue from states and the federal government
and the fall-out from recent legislation such as NCLB. Districts are penalized by NCLB if
there is no progress made under its mandates (The White House, 2002). Many
superintendents are hired by school districts to initiate and implement new programs to
increase test scores and overall student performance (Hayes, 2001). Sometimes school
boards look to non-traditional superintendents outside the school system in an attempt to
find a heroic leader who can salvage a failing system (Fusarelli, 2006). School
superintendents and heads of corporations are now operating out of the same ring
according to Hayes (2001). In many school districts, the title of Superintendent is being
replaced with Chief School Officer (CSO). Both Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and
CSO answer to a board, the public and employees. Many superintendents are replaced
when new school board members are elected and do not like what they see or hear of the
current CSO (Hayes, 2001).
Superintendents have a multi-faceted job. Ultimately, they are responsible for the
successes and failures of their school systems. They allocate resources, influence the
distribution of information, and at times, guide the direction the school board takes. In

9
addition to being at the helm of their organization, they help people advance in their
careers. There is a tremendous need for all school districts to have a leader who is highly
trained and possesses the skills, knowledge and finesse to help schools ready their
students for a place in the global society of tomorrow. The current body of research does
not clearly identify what those personal characteristics are, what previous educational and
situational experience is mandatory, how to move between the frames of leadership
effectively and work with boards and teachers’ unions successfully while closing
achievement gaps and propelling the district into to 21
st
century. This study will identify
leadership behaviors that successful urban superintendents possess to create positive
environments that lead to increased student achievement and promote growth for
employees. An urban school district is not easy to define. There is no single definition of
urban in education scholarship (Encyclopedia of African American Education, 2011), but
several characteristics are attached to the term of urban education. Urban areas are known
for dense populations, racial and economic segregation, high crime, large school systems,
diverse job and career opportunities and cumbersome public government infrastructures
(Encyclopedia of African American Education, 2011). The superintendent who is being
considered has a school district, which is certainly part of this type of system.

10
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this qualitative research study was to identify the personal
characteristics and strategies that successful superintendents use to meet the demands
from stakeholders. These demands include managing school boards while avoiding
political turmoil and stress in addition to leading their districts in increased student
achievement. This body of work included a case study of a superintendent and his tenure
at the helm of an urban district and an interview with a superintendent from another
district in order to provide a contrasting view. This study evaluated how the personal
characteristics and skills translate into leadership behaviors that enable all stakeholders to
benefit from a successful superintendency. Several research questions guided this
investigation:
1. What personal traits and skills does the successful superintendent
possess?
2. How do these personal traits and skills translate into leadership
behaviors?
3. What background and experience are of significance in preparing for a
successful superintendency?
In this study, success was defined as “leading sustained and effective strategies to
improve student achievement, particularly for the most disadvantaged students” (Fuller et
al., 2003).

11
This study identified the skills, training and knowledge that superintendents
consider important and presented key competency criteria needed to be successful as a
school leader in this time of high accountability. The results of this study provide a
foundation for program developers concerned with the most appropriate education and
training necessary to best prepare superintendents. By looking at already successful
superintendents who have demonstrated specific skills, knowledge and strong
relationships, the findings can assist school boards as they select new district leaders by
looking for and identifying the traits needed. Potential superintendents will have
information to better prepare themselves as they enter the leadership arena. Current
superintendents looking to refine specific traits within their leadership style will find
information that can be used to provide a base of support.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Bolman & Deal’s (2003) research on the Four Frames of Leadership provide the
necessary background from research related to strong leadership skills for
superintendents.

12
ASSUMPTIONS

The study assumed that the superintendent relied on personal and professional
background, experience and preparation received in a superintendent training program to
inform his decision-making processes upon entry into office. The literature used to
support the development of the conceptual framework and instruments applied for data
collection were assumed to be credible and valid. The study also assumed that the
participants voluntarily provided accurate and truthful responses to surveys and
interviews.

LIMITATIONS

The restrictions of time and resources limit this study to one urban school district.
The limitation of one school district allowed for a thorough investigation and detailed
analysis of data. The additional interview of another superintendent was completed to add
a comparison of particular phenomena of the superintendent studied. The data collection
for this case study will be conducted during the months of December 2011 through
February 2012, consisting of surveys and interviews. The qualitative nature of the study
lends itself to potential bias of analysis and interpretation of the researcher. The study
results will not be transferable, as it was limited to one urban district. Undetermined

13
variables or factors within the district context may have an effect on the results of the
study. This study was limited to voluntary participation.

DELIMITATIONS

This study was delimited by the choice to examine the strengths, skills and
challenges of one urban school district superintendent. The information gathered and
analyzed was from board members, assistant superintendents and union officials and
from the superintendent. Study findings could be subject to a different interpretation. This
study was delimited by the examination of the evidence that supports a focus on
addressing competencies solely related to education administration and instructional
leadership.

DEFINITION OF THE TERMS

For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined and
included in the scope of this study:
Accountability: The obligation of schools to produce improvements in student
academic achievement. This is a system that holds districts, schools and/or students
responsible for student performance. Accountability systems typically consist of

14
assessments, public reporting of results, and rewards or sanctions based upon student
performance over time.
Achievement gap: A term that refers to the observed difference in educational
performance measure between groups of students defined by race/ethnicity, gender, and
socioeconomic status.
Conceptual Framework: A lens through which research literature, theories, and
other pertinent information forms the basis for the analysis of findings within the study.
Content Standards: The content standards define the highest achievement of
proficiency that every student can achieve by gaining the knowledge and concepts
presented through standards-based curriculum.
Curriculum: This term refers to the materials used to teach. Classroom materials,
such as textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etcetera, should address the scope and
sequence of the district’s learning standards.
Instruction: Refers to the delivery of curriculum and may encompass a variety of
teaching strategies.
School Boards: Elected community representatives who are responsible for hiring
the superintendent and approving all policies within the district. They are elected every
four years and usually range between five to nine members.
Stakeholders: Parents, students, teachers and community members, the groups of
people who have a stake or interest in the success of the local educational system.

15
CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Preparing students to take their place in a democratic society and in a global
marketplace has never been so urgent. The public, state officials and national legislators
place public education as a first priority to insure further generations advantages that will
bring financial success and personal fulfillment to its students. There must be great
schools with great leaders at the helm and great leaders at the district level. The job of
leading a large urban district is not an easy one, and ultimately it falls on the shoulders of
one, the superintendent. Many personal characteristics and skills translate into leadership
behaviors affecting high performance and the agenda for public schools is indeed
ambitious.
Urban school superintendents hold one of the most challenging and important
jobs in America’s education system. In the 21
st
century, superintendents are charged with
making visible and rapid improvements in the academic achievement of the nation’s most
vulnerable children when accountability and standards are at a peak. These individuals
must break down barriers to restructure and build capacity for quality teaching and
learning in their schools. Superintendents must build consensus with community leaders,
school boards, teachers and parents to support their vision of instructional purpose. They
must serve as mediators, political leaders and agents of change amidst the highly

16
politicized environments of large urban school districts (Council of Great City Schools,
2008/2009).
Leadership is an extremely complex phenomenon. Leadership literature is
capacious, and no single theory has been able to capture the essence (Mello, 2003).
Leadership has been defined in terms of individual personality traits, leader behaviors,
and responses to leader behaviors, interaction patterns, role relationships, interpersonal
exchange relationships, follower perceptions, task goals, organizational culture and the
nature of work processes (Northouse, 2007). Leaders can display leadership behaviors in
one of four types of frameworks: structural, human resource, political, or symbolic
(Bolman & Deal, 2003). This model suggests that leaders can be put into one of these
four categories. Relying on only one of these approaches would be inadequate as one
should strive to be conscious of all four approaches, and not just depend on one or two.
For example, during a major organization change, a structural leadership style may be
more effective than a symbolic leadership style; during a period when strong growth is
needed, the symbolic approach may be better. This study will be pursued through these
frames.
Learning has been repositioned onto the center stage of education, and the starting
point is recognizing that almost all of the major forces that have significantly shaped
schooling are coming from outside the educational arena. Understanding culture, values,
and society is a critical prerequisite for understanding leadership dynamics and what
contributes to effective leadership (Mello, 2003). Socially, the family is constantly

17
changing. There is increased immigration and shifting social patterns (Thomas, 2001).
There is increased poverty, declining indices of physical well-being for students and the
unraveling of families (Murphy, 2005). Politically, there appears to be a decline in the
importance of the democratic welfare state that defined American for most of the 20
th

century. Economically we have watched a postindustrial world in which market
globalism has exerted a greater influence over schooling than ever before (Murphy,
2005).
The expectation of achievement for all students was set with the advent of the No
Child Left Behind legislation in 2001. Superintendents are to be dedicated to eliminating
the achievement gap (Harvey, 2003), while continuing to be leaders of instruction
(Miller, Salsberry and Devin, 2009). The new agenda requires superintendents to become
connoisseurs of data that will be used to drive the accountability discussion (Education
Writers Association, 2003; Harvey, 2003). In addition to the many hats the
superintendent wears, now he must begin to worry about non-traditional roles, which
include school readiness for young children as well, as how older children are spending
their time outside of school hours (Harvey, 2003). Superintendents must focus on
creating an environment where children can take advantage of individualized learning
connected to personal interests. At the same time, students must be connected to the
broader social context of learning in order to live together in an increasingly complex
democracy. Innovation, though not necessarily a requirement, does draw interest and
thinking outside the box and is being encouraged in every business today. One of the

18
newer advancements in service delivery is collaboration between urban high schools and
higher education in an attempt to ready students for college and to streamline the process
from high school to community college to completion at the local university. Proponents
of this process boast that freshmen are better prepared, rates for graduation have
improved, the costs for math and English remediation have reduced, and access for
traditionally underrepresented students has improved (Cohn, 2010). These issues are in
the forefront of the minds of superintendents in large urban districts.

BACKGROUND OF THE SUPERINTENDENCY

The role of the urban 21
st
century superintendent will be more encompassing than
those previously. Leaders must have an ever-expanding range of skills and abilities and
must be able to use these to deal with the complexities of the education enterprise, as well
as with the challenges of today’s political realities, economic constraints and unstable
social conditions (Hodgkinson and Montenegro, 1999). Urban schools now find
themselves struggling and competing in an environment emphasizing accountability,
assessment and choice (Harvey, 2003). While districts in the early 1900s numbered more
than 150,000 in the United States, today there are fewer than 15,000 (Cox, 2002). Racial
minorities often settle in large urban districts lured by cheap housing and the prospect of
jobs and these numbers have swelled due to the migration of refugees seeking security
from revolutions, civil war or natural disasters. These families often arrive without

19
clothing, jobs, health insurance, language skills or familiarity with American culture
(Usdan and Cronin, 2003). The children enroll in public schools with a variety of issues
that must be addressed immediately. Where does the superintendent begin? Being able to
articulate the agenda to the board, teachers’ union, central office, school sites and the
public at large is of paramount importance.
Effective communication is a requisite for the successful superintendent (Arnold
and Harris, 2000; Cooper, Fusarelli and Carella, 2000; Harvey, 2003; Pitner and Ogawa,
1981; Renchler, 1992). Superintendents must know how to be persuasive and how to sell
their ideas (Houston, 2001; Pitner & Ogawa, 1981). Superintendents who use
relationship-enhancing communication both professionally and politically will be more
effective administrators (Kowalski, 2005). Relational communication has now replaced
the classic model of top-down management (Kowalski, McCord, Peterson, Young and
Ellerson, 2010). Relational communication is open, two-way, and is intended to benefit
all interactants (Burgoon and Hale, 1984). Further, it is intended to minimize formal
authority and actual power differences (Burgoon & Hale, 1984) and focus on both
communicative behavior and mutual perceptions of communicative behavior (Littlejohn,
1992).
Ideally, this is a process in which parents and the public can come together with
district leadership to define the district’s agenda. Public engagement is not a process of
persuading local citizens that the district is right; it is a course of action to assist the
public in coming to judgments about the issues confronting the district (Harvey, 2003).

20
An effective superintendent must be able to articulate with clarity and precision his
vision, goals, and plans when speaking with all groups. Nowhere is this more vital than
with the board of education (Peterson and Short, 2001).

THE SUPERITENDENT AND THE BOARD

Historically, boards and superintendents have not had a compatible working
relationship (Mountford, 2004); however, superintendents who articulate a clear vision
and direction for their school districts usually enjoy high-quality working relationships
with their boards (Sharp, Malone and Walter, 2002). Between 1820 and 1860 as city
populations grew, school boards became overwhelmed with the enormity of their tasks.
The office of superintendent was created to address the many concerns of boards while
providing ongoing instructional support to teachers (McCloud and McKenzie, 1994). The
field of educational leadership was launched by Elwood P. Cubberley in the 1920s (Hess,
2003) with formal training of school superintendents beginning at the same time which
included courses in law, school finance, management, and later in leadership (Cooper,
Fusarelli, Jackson and Poster, 2002).
The organizational structure of the public schools affects the manner by which
school administrators operate. The responsibility for education is reserved for the
individual states, rather than the federal government. Each state established its own
system of public schools at the local level. Some school districts are separate from the

21
local county government, while some states align their districts with local county
governments geographically. The districts that are separate from county government are
known as fiscally independent school districts, as they have taxing authority and establish
their own budgets. Districts, which are aligned with county boundaries, are fiscally
dependent, as their budgets need to be approved by their county governments because
they lack taxing authority (Bird, 2010). Public schools are supported by a mixture of
property taxes, income and sales taxes and other sources, such as lottery proceeds and
excise taxes. The revenue proportions of this mixture vary from state to state. The school
district is controlled by a group of five to nine citizens who are elected locally. Board of
Education members usually serve a term of four years as prescribed by the state (Bird,
2010). They are legal extensions of state government, and they have a legislative
responsibility to set policy and ensure that state laws and regulations are followed
(Kowalski et al., 2010). School boards are often among the key instigators of reform
(Anderson, 2003) and are instrumental in hiring the chief executive officer, commonly
known as the superintendent of schools.
A sound relationship between the board and superintendent is critical to success
of the superintendency and in the efficient management of the district (Educational
Writers Association, 2003; Fusarelli, 2006; McCloud & McKenzie, 1994; Peterson &
Short, 2001; Portis and Garcia, 2007; Sharp, Malone & Walter, 2002; and Usdan and
Cronin, 2003). More than ever before, the key responsibility for the superintendent is to

22
define the relationship between the board and the organization that it represents
(Kelleher, 2002).
The superintendent is the ultimate leader of learning and support in the district.
Conditions must be in place that will allow him and the board to function as a team
(Harvey, 2003; Kelleher, 2002; Sharp, Malone & Walter, 2002). Neither the board nor
the superintendent can be successful if they cannot work together. Understanding the
differences of the roles between board members and the superintendent enables a more
effective working relationship (McCloud & McKenzie, 1994; Mountford, 2004; Sharp,
Malone & Walter, 2002). The tasks before the board are to work with the superintendent
in creating a vision, establishing goals and setting policy, and not meddling in the details
of district administration or micromanaging schools (Fuller et al., 2003; Harvey, 2003;
McCloud & McKenzie, 1994). The superintendent must have the ability to frame issues
in a way to influence the board to decide favorably on superintendent-supported agenda
items (Lashway, 2002; Peterson and Fusarelli, 2001; Peterson & Short, 2001). School
boards and superintendents must work together to improve schools and student academic
performance while keeping instruction at the top of the district’s agenda (Renchler,
1992). The political and managerial elements of day-to-day business will disappear, but
responsibilities should always be aligned with the prevailing goal of constant
instructional progress (Lashway, 2002).
Another responsibility of the superintendent is providing perspective while
continuing to focus on long-term goals and commitments (Kelleher, 2002). Working

23
collaboratively with the board for the greater good is the ideal. When one reaches the top
of an organization, there are not always right or wrong answers. There are merely
dilemmas with consequences attached to each choice (Houston, 2001). A high-quality
working relationship with the board allows for several minds to weigh out all possible
outcomes and reach consensus while being confident that the best choice was made.
Being a member of the team means that everyone accepts responsibility and that no one
is considered the scapegoat. Boards and superintendents accomplish very little directly,
but depend on the efforts of those in the schools to commit to the board’s goals, and if
mistakes are made district personnel need to feel they have the support of the board and
the superintendent (Kelleher, 2002).
As the chief executive officer, superintendents must be visionary leaders
(Kowalski et al., 2010). Urban superintendents and their boards must address issues of
increasingly tough fiscal situations including unpopular budget proposals and budget
cuts, declining test scores, public mistrust, weak rapport between parents, district officials
and board members and many lawsuits (Fusarelli, 2006). Often board members come to
their positions with limited understanding of their policy role or the role of the individual
members as a governing body (Kowalski et al., 2010). Some board members are being
sent to tutorials paid for by philanthropic organizations to become educated on policy and
school improvement prior to their service in order to gain footing in a complicated world
of confusing jargon, sophisticated theories and political posturing (Blair, 2002).

24
Successful superintendents bring divided boards, staff, parents and communities
together around a central vision of school improvement (Fusarelli, 2006). While excellent
superintendent and board relations constitute one of the most attractive features of a
superintendency (Sharp, Malone & Walter, 2002), there has been much written about the
demise of effective school boards and the relationship with the superintendent (Kowalski
et al., 2010; McCloud & McKenzie, 1994; Mountford, 2004; Peterson & Fusarelli, 2001;
Peterson & Short, 2001; Sharp, Malone & Walter, 2002). Poor relationships weaken
stability of the district and staff morale (Renchler, 1992), increase conflict over
instructional goals and objectives (Morgan & Peterson, 2002), impede long-range
planning (Kowalski, 2006), deter school improvement efforts (Danzenberger, Kirst, and
Usdan, 1992), promote questions about the superintendent’s trustworthiness and
credibility (Peterson & Short, 2002) and generate institutional instability (Renchler, 1992;
Carter & Cunningham, 1997, as cited in Kowalski et al., 2010). Just as there many
reasons for failed superintendent and board relationships, there are many reasons why
board members seek membership on the school board, and this too affects the board’s
ability to fulfill their purpose, and power is the foremost reason.
Being part of a local school board can bring prestige and power to its members,
and power involves the ability to control or influence others at lower levels (Mountford,
2004). Becoming part of a school board for altruistic reasons, such as making a difference
for future generations of schoolchildren or serving out of sense of public duty is different
than someone who wants to fulfill personal needs, desires or agendas (Mountford, 2004).

25
This study identified the importance of board members and superintendents being able to
examine their own motivations for membership and conceptions of power during board
development sessions. This practice strengthened board membership, relations with one
another and the effects these factors have on district-wide improvement.
Members with a single-issue or personal agenda can totally disrupt the board’s
capacity to work, or it can have a divisive impact on the board (McCloud & McKenzie,
1994; Renchler, 1992). Issues between board members can also divert the agenda of the
board. In addition to personal agendas and conflicting priorities, there might be
differences concerning community culture (McCloud & McKenzie, 1994; Sharp, Malone
& Walter, 2002). This might be an internal conflict between board members such as
personality conflicts or racial and ethnic differences (McCloud & McKenzie, 1994).
Alternatively, external conflict can be brought to the board from the community through
specific religious or interest groups, intervention from the mayor’s office, other agencies
serving children, and ongoing matters of policy (McCloud & McKenzie, 1994). All of
these forces affect the day-to-day operation of effectively running districts.

THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE TEACHERS’S UNION

The school board is not the only group with whom the superintendent must work
effectively. The teacher’s union can be a powerful presence in the district. After four
decades of the beginning of collective bargaining in public education, union contracts

26
regulate virtually all aspects of school district operations including how teachers are paid
and assigned to schools, teacher evaluation, protocol of disciplining students, the extent
and nature of professional development, the length of the school day and year and under
what conditions teachers can be disciplined or fired (Hess and West, 2006).
Today, teachers’ unions are among the most powerful interest groups in local,
state and national politics. They claim a membership of four million, or 73% of public
school teachers, as surveyed in a recent national poll in either the National Education
Association (NEA) or American Federation of Teachers (AFT) (Hess & West, 2006).
Until recently, unions operated with no interference from federal school legislation.
NCLB became the first federal education law to recognize openly the role of collective
bargaining in educational governance (Hess & West, 2006). Today, it is implicit that
districts must abide by NCLB requirements in an approach that accommodates the local
collective bargaining agreement.
The relationship of the board and superintendent with the union has become
somewhat adversarial in recent times. Instead of mutual respect what is seen now is a
culture of accommodation. It appears in many instances that it is a system that is based on
needs of adults instead of needs of children (Fuller et al., 2003), ordering pay and
working conditions as the first and second priorities. In order to ultimately improve
student learning there should be a triangle made of school boards, unions and central
office staff (Fuller et al., 2003).

27
The negotiation process cannot succeed without informed leadership, prepared
with the skills to plan and execute a sound strategy at the table. Principled behavior
should be built into the proceedings. Ongoing communication, personal contact and
recognition of the valuable, unique individuals who make up the teaching ranks are the
most important factors in successful collective bargaining (Hewitt, 2007). The
superintendent and the board must be in agreement concerning the approach to be used
and how the content of the district’s initial proposal will be developed (Ingram and
Snider, 2008). The most important component of the bargaining process is clear
communication between the governing board and the management negotiating team
regarding the board’s expectations for the team. Clear communication consists of the
front-loading of facts. The value of front-loading is full disclosure and transparency
(Hess & West, 2006), resulting in a reputation of honesty and trust. Use of this method
minimizes the need to communicate changing information during the negotiation process
(Ingram & Snider, 2008).
In the work studied by James Harvey (2003) a colloquium of former urban
superintendents were interviewed about their work with and feelings about teachers’
unions. The group agreed that communicating with the union was critically important to
their success and that superintendents must be willing to reach out to their unions. The
most important lesson was that the contract always outlasts the superintendency and
board tenure, enduring educational fads, administrative edicts and changes in state and
federal law.

28
Bringing the union into the reform process early and demonstrating how key
elements such as professional development will assist teachers has proven to be an
effective advance in gaining union support for change (Portis & Garcia, 2007). Unions
are exerting influence over school board elections. In a discussion concerning teacher
unions and educational politics, Hess and West (2006) reported that noted Stanford
political scientist Terry Moe found that when unions endorse candidates, that candidate
wins 76 percent of the time, as opposed to others winning just 31 percent of the time
without the endorsement. Clearly, union persuasion can alter the dynamics on a school
board. Moe ultimately found that union-backed candidates hold much more positive
attitudes than others toward collective bargaining (Hess & West 2006). Just as it is
important for school board candidates to have union backing in districts where unionism
is strong, it is important for superintendents to have the backing of their cabinet members
and central office staff.

THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE CABINET

Highly successful leaders develop and count on leadership involvement from
many others in their organization. A superintendent is no different. If one has the
opportunity to choose their cabinet members; it should be done wisely. Relying on others
for leadership is known as distributive leadership (Leithwood, 2005; Meyer and
Feistritzer, 2003; Usdan & Cronin, 2003). Cabinet members come from a highly qualified

29
pool of veterans throughout the district and have vast amounts of knowledge and
experience. Utilizing the concept of distributive leadership reduces the chance of errors
arising from decisions based on limited information available to only one leader. On the
other hand, it augments opportunities for the organization to advance from the capacities
of its members, permitting each one to benefit from the range of their individual
strengths. Furthermore, distributive leadership develops a fuller appreciation among
cabinet members of the concept of interdependence and how one’s behavior affects the
district as a whole (Leithwood, 2005). Central office staff is a crucial stakeholder, and
wise superintendents include them in collaborative goal setting (Waters and Marzano,
2006). In turn, they will be able to assist principals in day-to-day operations and be able
to articulate the wishes of the superintendent.
Distributive leadership allows the superintendent to depend on others for their
expertise. Distributive leadership provides greater opportunities for cabinet members to
build capacity across central administration (Vasudeva, 2009) through increased
participation in decision making, greater commitment to organizational goals and strategy
development (Leithwood, 2005). Many superintendents must be like military field
commanders. They must make decisions on the spot and rely on essential information
from others. The job of the superintendent is to lead the district so that others can focus
on the core mission.
A study done by Fuller et al. (2003), found superintendents in large urban districts
cast central offices in a more negative light in that the personnel focused on day-to-day

30
survival rather than student learning. Many of the central staff were entrenched in
performing tasks a certain way and were accustomed to watching superintendents come
and go, so they preferred not to make waves. Central office personnel are supposed to be
carrying out the program of the superintendent, but often they seem intent on waiting out
the superintendent (Fuller et al., 2003). In addition to working with the board, union and
cabinet members, the superintendents must have or develop skills to work with the
community.

THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE COMMUNITY

Although civic organizations and faith-based groups are not part of the district’s
formal governance structure, it behooves superintendents who want to build a successful
tenure to embrace them (Harris, Lowery, Hopson & Marshall, 2004; Harvey, 2003;
Kowalski et al., 2010; Useem, 2009). The concept of local control for public schools in
this country was established with the advent of public instruction, and it is a value rooted
in liberty (Bird, 2010). It establishes the rights of citizenry to pursue their interests
through direct involvement with school boards and superintendents. This kind of
engagement can be productive or destructive, and superintendents do not see community
pressure as an asset. However, they do recognize the value of widespread community
support (Kowalski et al., 2010).

31
Parental involvement is also part of the community dynamic. Parents are an
important collective source of potential influence on superintendents. They are able to
alter the schooling process at the local school district level in meaningful ways to better
support their children. For example, parents were instrumental in bringing to light
problems that led to school desegregation based on race (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964), creating provisions of equal opportunities based on gender (U.S. Department of
Labor, 1972) and expanding and improving programming for students with special needs
(U.S. Department of Education, 1997). These issues are supported by parents who wish
to work collaboratively with superintendents, as these children do not typically have
organized groups representing their interests (Kowalski et al., 2010).
As superintendents become more involved in the activities of schoolchildren
outside of the school grounds, they see the importance of recreational opportunities and
community centers as elements of community health (Harvey, 2003). Gaining support for
learning opportunities after school is essential, and these facilities support the district.
Communities can assist high school youth through job networks in order to make
connections between learning and making a living (Harvey, 2003). Having community
conversations is frequently difficult, but it is important for promoting understanding and
supports a shared sense of responsibility for district goals (Harvey, 2003).
A superintendent can be much more effective when he is backed by a politically
powerful and engaged mayor, especially if the mayor has direct control within the
district. There can be clashes between strong willed mayors and superintendents,

32
especially over funding streams and budget items. Both superintendent and mayor must
work very hard to insure seamless working relationships for the good of both community
and school district (Useem, 2009).
The superintendent must have great patience and have detailed knowledge at his
fingertips. The superintendent shares district successes as well as concerns, such as
writing an occasional column for the local newspaper or being interviewed on a regular
basis by the local news media (Harris et al., 2004). In this way the superintendent
demonstrates his commitment to keep the community abreast of all educational affairs
and the changes in monetary resources.

THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE MEDIA

All public figures grapple with the media and superintendents are no different.
Large urban districts receive attention because of their size and economic influence
(Fuller et al., 2003). The skilled superintendent understands this and uses it to his full
advantage. It behooves him to anticipate and prepare well-thought out responses to all
district issues in advance of the media. He is willing to answer the criticism as well as
share press releases about awards or reports concerning student achievement (Harvey,
2003).

33
THE SUPERINTENDENT’S LEGACY AND INVESTING IN OTHERS

When working with others, the single most important quality is self-awareness,
and it is closely associated with success as a leader as stated by Warner Burke (Bennis, et
al., 2003). This collection of renowned industry experts were interviewed concerning the
current situation of managerial education. Tichy (Bennis, et al., 2003) stated that integrity
is the foundation of free enterprise and all leaders need a clear, teachable point of view.
He also believes it is the responsibility of leaders to give back to society and to practice
global citizenship (Bennis et al., 2003). Goens (2002) too, found that leading with
integrity is vital to relationships and leadership. Peter Senge, one of the pre-eminent
authorities on organizational leadership argues that the development of a culture that
encourages learning is the primary task of leadership and perhaps the only way a leader
can genuinely influence or inspire others (DuFour, 2000).
When recruiting new personnel to work at the administrative level, research
indicates it is more important to hire the right people because it is easier to develop the
skills needed to do the job rather than trying to develop people skills (Collins, 2001;
Harvey, 2003; Higgins, Young, Weiner and Wlodarczyk, 2009; Nestor-Baker and Hoy,
2001; Vasudeva, 2009). The best leaders develop and strengthen those with whom they
work, building competence and confidence in others. Superintendents must embrace their
role as staff developer and grow their internal leadership pool, as it is the only strategy

34
for leaving a legacy that survives their own departure (DuFour, 2000; Harris et al., 2004;
Vasudeva, 2009).
Research supports the fact that the crux of leading and leadership is about
relationships (Goens, 2002; Houston, 2001). The most valuable relationships occur when
an intrinsic connection is made on a personal, rather than on a formal level (Crippen &
Wallen, 2008; Lytle, 2009).

CHARACTER TRAITS OF SUPERINTENDENTS

Research posits a plethora of data about the characteristics of highly successful
people. The ability to work effectively with others begins with knowing and
understanding one’s self (Kelleher, 2002). The superintendent must recognize and
understand his strengths and weaknesses and be willing to reflect in ongoing self-
examination (Harvey, 2003; Houston, 2001; Hoy & Smith, 2007; Jentz & Murphy, 2005;
Mello, 2003). He must also see the value in the mistakes of his own and those of his
predecessors and learn from them (Useem, 2009).
Many personal traits noted in this review are characteristics that are part of any
leader’s repertoire. These include honesty (Hoy & Smith, 2007; Hoyle, 2002; Kirkpatrick
& Locke, 1991; Mathys, 2003) trust (Dirks and Ferrin, 2001; Ellingson, 2010; Jentz &
Murphy, 2005; Mathys, 2003; Peterson & Short, 2001; Sergiovanni, 2005), optimism

35
(Hoy & Smith, 2007; Mathys, 2003), persuasiveness ( Peterson & Short, 2001),
assertiveness (Peterson & Short ,2001) and resiliency (Harris et al., 2004; Hoyle, 2002).
A successful leader demonstrates an understanding of others (Mathys, 2003), and
possesses strong interpersonal skills (Kowalski et al., 2010; Mathys, 2003). He displays
ethical and personal integrity (Hoyle 2002; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991; Nestor-Baker &
Hoy, 2001), has a strong work ethic (Mathys, 2003) and is loyal to his own beliefs and to
the organization (Mathys, 2003). He has effective and strong communication skills,
(Peterson & Short, 2001), demonstrates attentive listening (Mathys, 2003), is able to
mediate (Pitner & Ogawa, 1981), and displays empathy when appropriate (Peterson &
Short, 2001).
True leaders have a personal belief in their capacity to organize and execute
actions required to achieve specific goals (Harris et al., 2004; Hoy & Smith, 2007;
Kelleher, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2010), possess a positive outlook (Harris, et al., 2004),
and demonstrate common sense (Lytle, 2009). He does not react; he acts (Harris et al.,
2004). He is flexible (Harris, et al., 2004) and demonstrates an ability to stay focused
(Harris et al., 2004).
Leaders are calculated risk takers (Renchler, 1992; Sergiovanni, 2005),
knowledgeable about education (Kerrins & Cushing, 2001; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991),
and are themselves in a learning mode (Kelleher, 2002). He displays altruism (Harris et
al., 2004; Kowalski et al., 2010; Mello, 2003), courage (Kowalski et al., 2010), and
fairness (Hoy & Smith, 2007; Hoyle, 2002). He also displays fortitude (Hoy & Smith,

36
2007; Kowalski et al., 2010; Meyer & Feistritzer, 2003; Orr, 2006), respect (Ellingson,
2010; Hoyle, 2002), resolve (Ellingson, 2010) and drive (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991).
Leaders are moral mentors (Hoyle, 2002; Mello, 2003; Sergiovanni, 2005), while
demonstrating social consciousness (Kowalski et al., 2010). They are seen as hopeful
(Sergiovanni, 2005), faithful (Sergiovanni, 2005), and compassionate (Hoyle, 2002).
They exude self-confidence (Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991), energy (Kerrins & Cushing,
2001) are motivators (Hoy & Smith, 2007; Kirkpatrick & Locke, 1991) and are people-
people (Cooper, Fusarelli & Carella, 2000).

POSITIVE PERSONAL CHARACTIERISTICS
DEVELOP INTO LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS

Desirable personal characteristics alone are not sufficient for successful
leadership. Effective leaders use their positive character traits and translate them into
leadership skills. For example, the superintendent is usually seen as a change agent
(Harris et al., 2004; Kowalski et al., 2010; Portis & Garcia, 2007; Renchler, 1992; Sharp,
Malone & Walter, 2002). In order to be an effective change agent, one needs to create
vision with a team (Crippen & Wallen, 2008; Nestor-Baker & Hoy, 2001; Pescopella,
2009; Renchler, 1992) be a motivator, have self-confidence and drive, show resolve, be a
risk taker, be assertive, and set and lead by example (Mathys, 2003) with a professional
code of conduct. He supports and challenges others (Crippen & Wallen, 2008) and is a
team builder (Rivero, 2010).

37
The superintendent has superior communication skills and provides clarity,
specificity and seriousness of purpose (Kelleher, 2002; Kowalski et al., 2010; Peterson &
Short, 2001). He is able to articulate his vision while setting goals that are both realistic
and challenging (Hoy & Smith, 200; Waters & Marzano, 2006). He is willing to seek
feedback from key stakeholders and demonstrate credibility by joining other stakeholders
in an open process for evaluating the state of the organization and engaging in collective
development for the implementation of plans for change (Jentz & Murphy, 2005). He
provides role clarification and guides critical discussions (Peterson & Short, 2001).
Building relations with stakeholders is vital to the role of leadership (Lytle, 2009;
Orr, 2006). In order to facilitate relationships, those around the superintendent must feel
they can trust his actions and words. Relational trust is a tie that binds roles together and
allows for the creation of conditions that embody reciprocal obligations by attracting and
motivating people to join his team (Ellingson, 2010; Hoy & Smith, 2007; Kelleher, 2002;
Mathys, 2003; Nestor-Baker & Hoy, 2001; Rivero, 2010; Sergiovanni, 2005). Coalition
building is important not only at the district level but also at the local and state level (Orr,
2006). Leadership is about helping people understand the problems they face, helping
them manage these problems, and sometimes helping them learn to live with them
(Sergiovanni, 2005).
The superintendent is seen as the key player by the district and community (Bird,
2010). Community involvement and parental support are essential to forging the district
mission and vision (Kowalski et al., 2010). One of the most vital roles the superintendent

38
plays is defining the relationship between the board and the district (Kelleher, 2002) and
ensuring the community at large understands the goals of the district.
The superintendency is also a political job (Cuban, 1998). He is the author of the
district’s budget. The budget must be transparent, raising everyone’s attention to the need
for careful stewardship of resources (Hoy & Smith, 2007). Increasingly, the budget is not
just about the money, but for those around the superintendent, it is about feeling valued
and affirmed (Bird, 2010; Hoy & Smith, 2007). He must have political acuity, and
especially in large urban districts the superintendent must be able to influence legislative
and fiscal matters (Meyer & Feistritzer, 2003; Rivero, 2010).
As superintendent, he is an effective manager demonstrating personal
accountability while creating and supporting district measures for improvement (Cuban,
1998; Fusarelli, 2006; Kerrins & Cushing, 2001; Meyer & Feistritzer, 2003; Orr, 2006).
He is able to set direction, develop people, develop the organization and manage
instruction (Cuban, 1998; Miller et al., 2009).
The superintendent provides strong community leadership. He is someone who
demonstrates a professional code of conduct (Mathys, 2003) and promotes civility while
drawing out and embracing differences (Sergiovanni, 2005). The superintendent is a
constant learner and is responsible for modeling learning for others (Kelleher, 2002). He
is committed to issues that serve the underprivileged such as racism and poverty,
(Kowalski et al., 2010) and implementing a strategy that promotes respect for diversity
(Hoyle, 2002). He demonstrates these leadership skills by caring deeply about his work

39
and elevates leadership to a level of moral action (Sergiovanni, 2005). The process takes
heart, soul and time (Ellingson, 2010; Mathys, 2003) while investing in hearts around
him (Houston, 2001).

THE SUPERITNENDENT AND TENURE

When tenure for the urban superintendency is discussed, numbers as low as 2
years and as high as 6 years are considered to be average (Yee and Cuban, 1996). When
this issue was studied, Yee and Cuban found the mean tenure to be 5.76 years. These
variations in tenure are based on how it is defined. Some define it as the total length of
time in office (Yee & Cuban, 1996), while others have acknowledged turnover rates
(Natkin et al., 2002). Another variation is mean tenure versus median. Means, or averages
can be distorted by a few extreme outliers. A mean of 2.33 years was concluded by the
Council of Great City Schools, (2000), but these results were based on incumbency,
which necessarily underestimated total tenure. A median of 2.5 years to 4 years was also
found by Meyers and Feistritzer (2003), with the caveat of differences in the ways tenure
can be counted; Cuban (1998) reported 6 years, the Council of Great City School (CGCS)
(2008/2009) reported 3.5 years. It should be noted here that CGCS surveys only the
nation’s largest urban school districts, so their findings are very different from other
studies. In a survey done by Cooper et al., (2000), the average tenure was found to be 7.4
years, Hodgkinson and Montenegro (1999) found the average to be 5 years and Renchler

40
(1992) and Thomas (2001) found 2.5 years. Clearly, this discussion is far from over. The
issue that confounds readers, school boards and the community at large is that most
people equate short lengths of time with negative consequences, and this has damaged the
image of the superintendency (Natkin et al., 2002).
Waters and Marzano (2007) found that the superintendents with lengthy tenure
had a positive effect on the average academic achievement of students. They espoused
that the positive correlation between the lengths of superintendent’s service affirmed the
value of leadership stability and of a superintendent remaining in a district long enough to
see the positive impact of his leadership on student learning and achievement.
Conversely, excessive turnovers affected every aspect of the superintendent’s career
(Natkin et al, 2002).
While many researchers have found a complex mix of environmental, local and
professional factors that help explain changes in tenure, the causal and interactive
relationship between them remain a mystery (Yee & Cuban, 1996). Short tenures create
public perceptions of increased instability, lower morale and a loss of organizational
direction; however, there is no conclusive evidence about what qualities and behaviors
the successful superintendent possesses that shape tenure.

41
CHALLENGES FACING SUPERINTENDENTS IN THE 21
ST
CENTURY

The job of the superintendent is ever changing. Superintendents are operating in
an increasingly hostile arena (Bird, 2010). A challenge is for the superintendent to set
standards, create and implement assessments that are for all students, and have clear
accountability. This means finding the right balance between central authority and site-
based autonomy (Archer, 2005; Orr, 2006). Effective superintendents keep student
achievement the number one issue on the agenda (Harvey, 2003; Useem, 2009) drawing
up strategic plans, designing managerial changes and pleasing everyone (Useem, 2009).
Because the district depends on the state for more than half of its revenue, district
officials must be extremely attentive and responsive to state and political leaders--
whatever their political view (Useem, 2009). Engaging public support is critical when
money is scarce (Harvey, 2003; Sharp, Malone & Walters, 2002).
In today’s educational milieu, the superintendent must be seen as a change agent
(Harris et al., 2004; Kowalski et al., 2010; Portis & Garcia, 2007; Sharp, Malone &
Walter, 2002). There are constantly expanding expectations (Hess, 2003). The
superintendent must constantly adapt to a myriad of social, economical and political
conditions. Accountability demands have escalated, hours have lengthened, duties have
increased, and authority is not equal to responsibility (Meyer & Feistritzer, 2003).
The successful superintendent is willing to teach school boards, staff and
community the complexities of the value-conflicts their districts face (Cuban, 1998). He

42
is someone who leads individuals through technological, organizational and cultural
changes (Hess, 2003). His managerial role emphasizes planning with an emphasis on
budgets, organizing, staffing and leadership. The superintendent sets the direction of the
district while motivating and inspiring those around him (Hess, 2003).

CONCLUSION

There are indeed many personal characteristics that research has identified as
important to the superintendency and no one or groups were able to identify them all.
Additionally, there does not appear to be agreement as to the most important and those
desirable but not indispensable. What is more critical is how these characteristics
translate into leadership behaviors. The office of the superintendent is influenced by
multiple interconnected forces within the district and throughout the community. A
superintendent’s ability to successfully work with the board, the union officials, the
cabinet, the media and the community-at-large is dependent on the personal
characteristics and leadership behaviors he possesses. In addition, background and prior
experiences help support his ability to do the job with aplomb. This case study has been
developed to uncover the key criteria of a single superintendent with tenure of nine years
that will contribute to the understanding of what it takes to be successful in school district
leadership.

43
CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes the purpose and design of the study, identifies the sample
used to conduct the research, explains the instruments used to conduct the research, and
clarifies the procedure to collect and analyze the data.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this case study will be to examine factors leading to the successful
tenure of urban school district superintendents. This study will assist in understanding the
nature and sources of a human and societal problem. Namely, how does a superintendent
manage a successful career when so much about the educational system is in such
disarray? This study identifies the personal character traits and the transformation of
these traits into positive leadership behaviors through a literature review, a case study of
a successful superintendent in his ninth year of district leadership and an interview with a
superintendent in another district for a contrasting view. In addition, a survey was given
to those who work regularly and closely with the superintendent. Key competency
criteria are presented that are needed to be successful as a school leader in this time of
high accountability.

44
Because this study only looks at one urban school district in depth, there is clearly
limited transferability; however the findings may provide useful information for
universities when developing the programs and training necessary to best prepare future
superintendents. By looking at already successful superintendents who have
demonstrated specific character traits, knowledge, and strong relationship skills, the
findings can assist school boards as they select new district leaders by looking for and
identifying the preferred personal characteristics. Potential superintendents will have
information to better prepare themselves as they enter the leadership arena. Current
superintendents looking to hone specific skills within their leadership style will find
information that can be used to provide a base of support. This study will be based on the
following research questions:
1. What personal traits and skills does the successful superintendent possess?
2. How do these personal traits and skills translate into leadership behaviors?
3. What background and experience are of significance in preparing for a
successful superintendency?

RESEARCH DESIGN

This study will be based on Creswell’s (2003) six steps of the research process.
They are: identification of a research problem, review of the literature, specifying a
purpose for the research, collecting data, analyzing and interpreting the data and reporting

45
and evaluating the research. It is designed as a mixed-method research study and will be
conducted through the use of surveys and interviews.
The quantitative portion of this study will be completed through a survey intended
for board members, union officers and the superintendent’s cabinet (Appendices D, E,
and F) linked to MUSD. The use of surveys allow for a larger collection of data to be
utilized (Mertens, 2004). Bolman and Deal’s (2003) research on the Four Frames of
leadership provide the necessary background from research related to strong leadership
skills for the position of superintendent. The data from these surveys will be analyzed for
common characteristics seen to be important in the successful superintendency of this
case study.
The qualitative component of this research will be completed through face-to-face
interviews of a board member, a union officer and a cabinet member (Appendices H, I,
and J) of approximately one hour in duration to allow interviewees the opportunity to
share their observations and perceptions of characteristics, skills and practices of the
superintendent. The superintendent will also be interviewed (Appendix G) for
approximately one hour in duration to garner his perceptions concerning what constitutes
a successful tenure. An interview with another superintendent will perhaps lend either
supporting evidence as to positive character traits leading to success or a view that is in
opposition to what has been reported in the district being studied. The data from these
sources will be used to answer the three research questions presented above while
allowing the researcher to gather in-depth information.

46
SAMPLE AND POPULATION

Merritt Unified School District (MUSD) served more than 86,000 students in the
2009 – 2010 school years. Within MUSD, neighborhoods contrast greatly from the
graceful homes along the ocean to the closely packed downtown district. Typical of the
area, the student body represented diverse backgrounds and socioeconomic status. Fifty
percent of the students were Hispanic, 18% were African American, 17% were white, 9%
were Asian, and 6% were Filipino and Pacific Islander. Sixty-six percent of the students
qualified for free or reduced-price meals, 26% were learning English, and 8% required
special education services (www.ed-data.k12.ca.us).
MUSD operates 89 schools including 61 elementary schools: 14 middle schools;
6 large comprehensive high schools; 3 smaller high schools; a K-12 school; and 4
alternative sites. Parents are free to enroll their children in any school of their choice,
although the student assignment formula includes a slight neighborhood preference.
The focus of the unit of analysis in this study will be the superintendent, the
cabinet of five assistant superintendents, five board of education members and four union
officers. All of these individuals deal with the superintendent in unique professional
capacities and share the MUSD culture. Additionally, another superintendent will be
interviewed to provide a comparison with the superintendent being studied in depth.
Because the superintendent is being expressly chosen for his lengthy tenure of
more than nine years and outstanding successes, one could argue that the case is one of

47
extreme case sampling. However, if that was the situation, the superintendent could be
considered an outlier. In reality, there are others who have experienced success as heads
of large urban districts. This case is determined to be one of intensity sampling, meaning
it is information rich and manifests the phenomenon of interest intensity. This case lends
itself to criterion sampling as the participants who were chosen to be surveyed and then
interviewed are intricately connected to the superintendent. Board members, assistant
superintendents and union officials live by his decisions or give input into the decisions
he ultimately makes for the common good of all employees and programming. Members
of his cabinet in turn interpret the decisions for their subordinates. Criterion sampling
adds important qualitative components to management information systems or an
ongoing program monitoring system (Patton, 2002). This case study also provides the
backdrop for opportunistic emergent sampling as new opportunities will abound during
the interview process through questions that lead in other directions but are pertinent to
the entire study.

INSTRUMENTS

The survey instrument is based on a four-choice Likert scaling. The choices will
be: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree or Strongly Disagree. Statements in all surveys
attempt to answer the original questions of the study. Surveys for board members, union
officers and cabinet members can be found in Appendices D, E and F respectively.

48
Survey Monkey will be used for the on-line survey and the program will triangulate the
data that is common to all surveys.
The interviews will be semi-structured so the interviewer is free to probe and
explore within these predetermined inquiry areas. Interview guides ensure good use of
limited interview time. They make interviewing multiple subjects more systematic and
comprehensive and they help to keep interactions focused. In addition, the interview will
be recorded. Recordings have the advantage of capturing data more faithfully than
quickly written notes and will make it easier to focus on the interview (Patton, 2002).
The interviews will be open-ended questions with a chance at the end of the
interview to add any additional information that might be pertinent. All interviews will be
taped and transcribed for clarity and tapes will be kept in a locked safe. Each interview
will be noted with the inclusion of time of interview, date, place, interviewee’s name and
district position. The tape recorder will be turned on and tested before each interview.
Each interviewee will have the questions before the interview so answers can be prepared
thoughtfully. An introduction reminding the interviewee who the interviewer is and what
the dissertation is about will be offered. The interviewee will be told that because this
superintendent has held the position for a lengthy time, the interviewee is in a unique
position to help this researcher and those providing instruction at the university level plan
course work more effectively for people seeking to become superintendents. Interview
questions for the Superintendent, a board member representative, a union officer and a
cabinet member can be found in Appendices G, H, I and J respectively.

49
Before closing, each interviewee will be thanked and assured of confidentiality.
Each interviewee will be asked if contact can be made in a follow-up phone interview if
clarification is needed for any of the responses. Both surveys and interviews will be field
tested before actual administration.

DATA COLLECTION

Each person (except the superintendent) in the population will be contacted by
mail and asked to participate in the survey. The mailing includes a letter (see Appendix
A) describing the purpose of the study, a description of the survey format, the interview
format (if chosen), an introduction to the author, a guarantee that data will be kept
confidential, and a stamped, addressed postcard for the reply. The postcard (see
Appendix B) includes: a blank for the respondent to include his or her name and whether
or not he/she would be willing to participate in a face-to-face interview and a blank to
mark if he or she agrees to allow the interview to be taped. For those who do not initially
respond, a second mailing with the same information as the first will be completed. If the
postcard is not returned, a phone call will be made to the participant. Once the postcards
are received, the survey will be emailed to each participant.
The letter to be sent to the superintendent (see Appendix C) describes the purpose
of the study, an introduction to the author, a guarantee that data will be kept confidential
and asks for the best time to call to set the interview while asking if he will agree to the

50
taping of the interview. The same letter will be sent to another superintendent requesting
an interview with the same information with the exception of the specific question about
coffee with the Superintendent.

PHASES OF THE STUDY

Phase one of the study consists of a survey that will be sent on-line and should
take approximately 5 - 10 minutes to complete. The survey will be sent to the five school
board members, four union officers and seven assistant superintendents within the school
district. Once the surveys are received phase two will be put in place. This entails an
interview with a board member, an assistant superintendent and one union official. These
interviewees represent their disciplines, but it should be noted that only their opinions
will be expressed. They will not be speaking for others. The interviews will last
approximately one hour. Phase three of the study involves a 1 - 1½ hour face-to-face
interview with the superintendent.

DATA ANALYSIS

Multiple methods triangulation will be utilized in this study because both surveys
and interviews will garner results. This information will be used in addition to the
literature review and the framework of Bolman and Deal (2003). The data will be

51
collected and coded, scored and analyzed by Survey Monkey. The Likert scale will use
four possible answers, but because of the small sample size, this data has its limitations.
The qualitative analysis consisting of the one-to-one interviews will provide
valuable information concerning the superintendent’s use of personal characteristics and
leadership behaviors, which have lead to his success.

RESEARCH FINDINGS

There will be quantitative and qualitative findings from the surveys and
qualitative findings from the interviews. In addition, there will be qualitative findings
from the review of literature.

ETHICAL CONSDERATIONS

Human Subjects Protection Training (CITI) was offered and completed in
conjunction with the University of Southern California Institutional Review Board (IRB),
and all guidelines and procedures will be strictly followed. Confidentiality of all the
participants in the study will be strictly adhered to, and informed consent will be acquired
from all participants prior to the surveys and interviews being conducted. All parties who
participate in the study will be informed as to the nature and purpose of the study. All
steps will be taken to protect the anonymity of all participants who are informed of the

52
confidential nature of their responses. All names will be changed and voluntary
participation ensured. All transcripts will be secured and locked in a safe until 2014 when
they will be destroyed.

SUMMARY

This study is designed as a mixed methods approach incorporating quantitative
data through the use of surveys and qualitative data through both surveys and an open-
ended question format in interviews. Findings from the surveys and interviews along with
those from the literature review will be triangulated in order to provide a more robust and
multifaceted understanding of the personal characteristics and leadership behaviors that
lead to a successful tenure as superintendent. These findings will be presented in chapter
four and recommendations for further research will follow in chapter five.

53
CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

The focus of this study was to determine what personal characteristics and skills
the successful superintendent possesses, how the characteristics and skills translate into
leadership behaviors and what background and experience are of significance in
preparation for a successful superintendency. Success was defined as tenure over seven
years and providing sustained leadership to improve student achievement, particularly for
the most disadvantaged students. This study utilized a survey emailed to the members of
the Board of Education, the superintendent’s cabinet or assistant superintendents, and the
officers representing the local teacher’s union. In addition, interviews were garnered from
the Superintendent, Mr. Wrightman, an assistant superintendent, a Board member and a
Union officer. In both the survey and in the interview, the respondent was given the
option of not answering a specific question, and the survey was created as to not reveal
which answer came from a particular member of a subgroup.
Additionally, an interview was added with a superintendent from another district
(Dr. Bishop) to add interest to this study and collect additional insights to support or
oppose findings from the original study. Dr. Bishop is in her first year of a small urban
and award-winning district. She has been in her district for twenty-four years, and was
the Deputy Superintendent before being named Superintendent this past summer upon

54
retirement of her predecessor. The district is substantially smaller with only six
elementary schools, two middle schools, one comprehensive high school and one
continuation high school. Two schools receive Title 1 funding. In contrast, Mr.
Wrightman’s district has sixty schools receiving Title 1 funding.
A series of questions were designed to obtain responses using a Likert scale in the
survey. Respondents had a choice of answers: strongly agree, agree, disagree and
strongly disagree. The interview questions were designed to be more open-ended, using
the formats of ‘how’, ‘what’ and ‘tell me’ to elicit their thoughts about the nature of the
Superintendent. Only Dr. Bishop was interviewed about her personal traits and leadership
skills because this paper concerns Mr. Wrightman’s personal characteristics and
leadership skills. No one was surveyed in Dr. Bishop’s district to discern their thoughts
about her ability to manage the school district. As such, it did not seem appropriate since
she has not completed her first year at the helm.

1. WHAT PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND SKILLS DOES THE
SUPERITNENDENT POSSESS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO HIS
SUCCESSFUL TENURE?

When examining personal characteristics, which embodied the first question in
the research; what personal characteristics and skills does the successful superintendent
possess, the Superintendent was at first somewhat reluctant to answer. The question to

55
him was, what personal characteristics do you possess that has led you to a successful
tenure as superintendent? He answered hesitantly, “Oh, I don’t know, but that’s a good
question”. Mr. Wrightman then stated that he believed if one is going to be successful,
one must be willing to look at mistakes that have been made along the way. He harkened
back to a time in the classroom when he had made an error in not fully preparing his
students in the subject of circle graphs for the California Achievement Test. He said,
“Never again” placing the blame squarely on his shoulders and resolving to prepare each
subsequent class in this curriculum area. Mr. Wrightman stated that he uses this same
type of strategy with many things that he does, always asking, “How can I do it better?”
He answered his own question by replying that it is “data driven”. The data shows what
one is doing and if it is effective. He follows this strategy when working toward the
district’s strategic plan that he, the cabinet and Board develops. He believes that if the
strategic plan is followed and reviewed systematically, it keeps everyone on track, and
the district goals are met.
When interviewing Dr. Bishop about the types of characteristics needed to be
successful as a superintendent, she responded that one must have courage, possess a core
amount of knowledge about education and understand learning concepts. In addition to
the importance of knowing the facts, she iterated several times that one must be cognizant
that the superintendent serves at the pleasure of the board, and “You must buy into the
fact that it is their district”. She went on to say, “One is rewarded as being successful
when our board is happy with us”.

56
Dr. Bishop stated that she measured success when children are achieving at higher
levels than previously noted, more students are graduating, and completing A-G
requirements so they have more opportunities while being involved in the arts and
extracurricular activities. She calls school the four As—Academics, Athletics, Activities
and Arts. She believes if students are involved in at least two of these areas then students
are engaged and will do well. She believes that students will have unlimited possibilities
which is the district’s mission statement. When discussing personal characteristics she
mentioned being able to think on one’s feet, being a good communicator, having wisdom
and good judgment, and surrounding ones’ self with people who can be trusted to further
the Superintendent’s vision, as well as representing the Superintendent well in the district
and in the community. High visibility is critical, especially in the first year. She believes
that high visibility symbolically says that the job of educating children matters and that is
this message that she wants her constituency to know.
When the subject of low performing students was broached, Mr. Wrightman
reported that in 2008-2009 the average first quarter exams for middle school were at the
50
th
percentile. Today the average is the 67
th
percentile. He espoused the good work that
the elementary schools have done in preparing students, that all the reforms that are being
done with the lowest performing schools are paying off. He summarized this information
by saying there is no gap now between the lowest performing schools who had the
highest number of children from impoverished backgrounds and English learners and
those not in that band. He also shared that in some cases the lowest performing schools

57
are outperforming some of highest performing schools. Not only did these students close
the gap, they actually accelerated the gap by a 27 point gain. Mr. Wrightman feels that
districts must stick to their plan. The plan can be revised if the data indicates deficiencies
found, but having a strategic plan is paramount to success.
Currently, Dr. Bishop’s district has an API of 912 and a target of 942 for this
year. She reported that all schools in her district are doing well, but they are encouraged
to “always do better”. She said she is more concerned with the small percentage of
students not making the proficiency mark and is asking her school administrators what
they are doing to help this group. Dr. Bishop stated it is her responsibility to ask the right
questions to get school administrators to think outside the box and find solutions to assist
all students. She asserted, “You must capitalize on the human capital you already have,
and then support them”.
Another issue that Mr. Wrightman feels is critical is being open and honest
saying, “We don’t have all the answers. None of us do, whether we are in or out of the
classroom”. He asserted that having a team that can agree on the path and use the data to
get there insures student achievement. A target area within the strategic plan was to study
and then remedy the truancy and tardy issue within the district. Mr. Wrightman shared
that it is about ownership and accountability by everyone.
Two years ago the schools were directed to send out their own letters to families
when a student had a certain number of truancies as defined by the Education Code. He
confided that some schools did this and some did not. When this was discovered, the

58
responsibility was moved to a central location and training was given to make sure data
was being input correctly and done the same way at each school. He shared that there
were some rough spots in the beginning and parents certainly did not like getting the
notices about the truancies and or tardiness but because schools are all doing the same
thing, both truancies and tardiness are down significantly this year. Again he reports, “It’s
all about the data, so it works”. He further contends that it is about consistency and by
keeping goals simple, clear and manageable so that change and progress are attainable.
“We made sure everyone knew ahead of time what the expectation was, what the letters
to families said and that the policy was non-negotiable because it was part of the
Education Code.” In finality he said, “You must stay on it. If it is a priority, you must
keep it going”.
A member of the Board, the cabinet and the teacher’s union were interviewed and
asked about the Superintendent’s personal characteristics leading to a successful tenure.
They were able to quickly bring to mind many characteristics. All interviewed said he
was a people-person and that his relationship skills are well-defined. Upon request for
elaboration, it was found that he has developed personal relationships with many
throughout the district, he can take in many different opinions, and that he does not make
people feel as if what they are saying is any less important than what another person has
to say, valuing all opinions, not just those in agreement with his. They all echoed that he
has personal integrity, a strong commitment to the job, he is able to see the big picture,
has great organizational skills, is amiable, open-minded, accessible, an effective listener

59
while keeping communication lines open, has high energy and is fair. All responded that
they find him intelligent and that his aptitude is broad in nature. This means that not only
does he understand the instructional piece of running a district but is very astute at
understanding budgetary matters and can quickly pull numbers needed to determine if
something is feasible. One respondent said, “He has such a propensity for facts and
figures, that he puts most budget people to shame.”
The respondents came back repeatedly to the issue of the Superintendent and to
his fair treatment of people around him. Mr. Wrightman expects much of those around
him, but never fails to dig in and do the work himself. One of the respondents has
characterized him as a servant-leader. “He rolls up his sleeves and does the work himself.
He does not sit back and just take notes; he is not just the facilitator”. The respondents
note he is trustworthy and has much trust in those around him, especially with his
cabinet. This is the group that he relies on to be his eyes and ears at each school in the
district, to take the pulse of each school and to keep him abreast of any matter that might
surface as a potential issue. Several respondents mentioned that he is very protective of
the district—not wanting to expose the organization to any harm.
Respondents echoed that he is results-oriented. An example was given that during
a meeting with the cabinet they were talking about the organizational chart. The cabinet
felt he was spread too thin and they wanted to take some of the responsibilities off his
plate. They finally convinced him that he could still have oversight, but that he needed to
depend on others to get the information for him and not do it himself. According to one

60
of the respondents, “the problem is not that he is a micro-manager; but because he has
done so many of the jobs in the district he knows how to do everything and often does
them himself.”
One of the respondents characterized him as pro-reform, but not to the point of
doing something simply to be a showman or simply to upset the apple cart. He knows
that would create conflict. However, he is not willing to force reform simply because the
federal government says change it. It if makes sense and can be proved through the use of
the data he will fight for the change and stand by it.
When the question, “What motivates you?” was posited to him, he quickly
responded, “the students and teachers!” He feels that because he had good grade school
teachers and administrators and that he has been given the opportunity to do what he
wants to do, it is his moral obligation to give it back and make sure that each child in his
district has the same opportunities to become whatever is wished. He went on to say that
his daily work is done by doing the best of his ability and that if he makes a mistake it is
done without malice, that it is not the next job he is thinking about, it is the one right now
that matters. He confided that he has no interest in becoming a superintendent anywhere
else; he loves his community and the district. During the interview with Dr. Bishop, she
too stated that she has no interest in working with another district and hopes to complete
her tenure in her current position.
When asked about where Dr. Bishop gets her motivation, she replied, “my team”.
She shared that they are an incredible group of people, and she believes they are the

61
finest group with whom she has worked. “The energy from working together and from
seeing growth in each of the schools and any type of excellence motivates me. It can even
be if the football team wins because it means that the kids are happy and successful—
that’s motivating!”
Part of running a large urban district over a long period of time enables a
superintendent to see many changes. Mr. Wrightman talked about seeing changes
economically and demographically and reported that economically, “we have become a
very different system”. When Mr. Wrightman began his tenure, the district was spending
more money than it was bringing in and the redeeming feature was funds garnered from
winning a huge lawsuit. It was about sixty-seven million dollars. The district was able to
do many things with the lawsuit money for almost ten years. Now the greatest challenge
has become continuing down the road to excellence for improvement with fewer
resources, losing $330 million since 2008 and just over 20 percent of the employees.
Along with the fiscal issue comes keeping motivation high and supporting everyone with
what they need in order to accomplish their jobs. He went on to say that it is very
personal when jobs are cut. When he began his current position, there were nine people
working with him, now there are only two secretaries and himself.
Part of his job is to be constantly looking at how to best utilize the public space
the district owns. The past several years have been about down-sizing administrative
positions, closing schools in areas that are not forecasted to have high populations of
school-age children and consolidating departments. He works in tandem with his cabinet

62
or the assistant superintendents to find ways of operating leaner and then takes the
findings to the board for their approval. Sometimes the board wants more information or
studies before they give their nod, and he adds that is their prerogative as the Board.

2. HOW DO THESE PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS AND SKILLS
TRANSLATE INTO LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS?

Trying to elicit information to answer the second research question, “How do
these personal characteristics and skills translate into leadership behaviors?” is better
answered in anecdotes and not necessarily a list of attributes. For instance, the
Superintendent was asked how he developed trust between himself and the board. Mr.
Wrightman answered that he thought it was about honesty and setting clear expectations
and goals. He also stated he does what he needs to do to make sure the board members
have the information they need for making important decisions. The superintendent
relayed, “Workshops are held for the board members to educate and inform them on a
variety of topics and each takes their job very seriously”. One of the respondents said that
Mr. Wrightman will work with each board member independently on strategic planning
to insure understanding of material to be presented or voted on at board meetings.
Respondents from each subgroup stated that their group trusted him, he gives up-front
information and he is honest. This foundation allows all to accept guidance from him.

63
Translating personal attributes into leadership skills goes back to relationship skill
building. Several interviewed spoke about Mr. Wrightman's ability to treat everyone
equally and hear what they have to say and not show favoritism to some over others. All
interviewed said that it is difficult for anyone to discern whom he really likes and who he
does not because everyone is treated fairly, and that people have often said how much
they appreciate that trait. One respondent said that this is sometimes a detriment for him;
he is not aware of people’s hidden agendas because he does not view people in that
context.
Making changes is difficult for all and being the superintendent of a district
means being aware of the changes in the community and their perceptions, in the practice
of instruction, for money available to run programming and to pay personnel. Keeping up
with these changes can be daunting. An example of change within the district that Mr.
Wrightman did not want to facilitate was the practice involving televised board meetings.
His predecessor had said that televised board meetings would be detrimental to what the
district does and Mr. Wrightman held that position. There were those around him who
were saying that it was time to televise the board meetings, and urged him to do so. The
teacher’s union was then instrumental in placing two members on the board who were
backing the position to televise and it became a different discussion. They pressed very
hard to get the board meetings televised and before long, everyone in the community was
able to see what was transpiring. In the end, it proved to be beneficial for the
superintendent and for the district. One of the new board members endorsed by the union

64
wreaked havoc in the district and was removed from office after the public became aware
of several inappropriate incidents.
All interviewed feel the Superintendent has leadership skills that could be
effective as a leader in other types of organizations. His accessibility, receptiveness,
encouragement of those around him to speak their mind, team-building skills, promotion
of collaboration, especially when developing the strategic plan, and providing stability in
light of all budgetary constraints are all leadership skills necessary for being at the helm
of successful businesses.
The board is intricately involved in the strategic plan for the district. Goals for the
plan come from the Superintendent. These goals come from the assistant superintendent
who garner goals from the individual schools, so the ideas for the district’s strategic plan
comes from the bottom to the top and then is set by the Board as the goals for the year. In
actuality the strategic plan is set for five years at a time. There is a timeline that requires
reporting three times a year to the board as to the progress of the goals. If for instance a
deficiency is found in November, recommendations for corrections are implemented and
then in March an update on the progress is necessary. In May there is a final evaluation,
which is part of the overall evaluation of the Superintendent’s job for the year assessed
by the Board. Mr. Wrightman says it is about transparency, ownership, and sticking with
it until the deficit is corrected.
When asked how the Superintendent fosters open dialogue with the Board, again
he answered, “Honesty”. He asserted that they know they must set policy and that fiscal

65
management is priority one. There are no surprises between him and the Board. They also
know that they too are held accountable for what transpires in the district.
They know they must be available to the public, but if a member of the
community calls complaining about a principal, they will listen but it is not their job. The
Superintendent believes this is where many districts get into trouble; many Boards begin
to micromanage the teachers and school personnel. According to Mr. Wrightman, it is not
the Board’s responsibility. “They have hired a CEO, the superintendent, and it is his or
her job to ensure that schools are staffed appropriately”. He went on to say that he has
had the conversation with Board members that each of them is only one Board member
and no more or less important than any other person in the community, but as a board
they are to work collaboratively. He says that luckily all the board members have a
background in education; they love what they do and are very bright. They are careful to
vet out the pros and cons of each issue until they have the whole picture and feel they can
competently come to a reasonable and fair decision.
Dr. Bishop agreed that honesty must exist between the superintendent and the
board. She also added transparency. She was quick to caution that every error made does
not need to be reported, but it is imperative to communicate with the board regularly so
there are no surprises. She ensures that they each have a copy of all press releases and
anything that could become potentially serious. She provides a weekly review of all
major issues in each school, which is drafted Thursday evening and sent to them on
Friday.

66
Ongoing dialog and being open fosters a great working relationship according to
Dr. Bishop. “When there is trust, you have predictability and stability and that is when a
board and a district function most effectively. You must say what you will do and do
what you say,” she iterated. She stated that it is part of being reliable. She went on to say
that working with her cabinet requires the same protocol.
Trust between Mr. Wrightman and his cabinet works the same way. He meets
with them on a weekly basis and they know exactly what will be on the agenda because it
is driven by the strategic plan. Each assistant superintendent has a goal related to the
strategic plan and each has a common template that they report progress or lack of
progress on that plan and then they all discuss how they can best support each other. He
shared that the cabinet is very cohesive; they have all known each other for years in the
district. Everyone works well together and each understands how the subgroup they
represent fits with the others. The superintendent feels that all the assistants are much
vested in their jobs and feels it is a unique piece of this district. Most of them went to
school in the district and/or have had children or grandchildren attending school in the
district, so there is a very close community and a real commitment to see the district
succeed. He went on to speculate that many districts get into trouble when the
superintendent leaves and a new one comes in and dismisses the entire cabinet. He said,
“Then you have no history and parents and teachers go crazy, because it’s a whole new
agenda—everything that everyone had been working toward gets thrown out!”

67
When asked about how he handles conflict, Mr. Wrightman expressed that it is
his personal belief to take a breath and not over react. If it is between people, those
people should be brought together and have an honest conversation about the conflict. He
gave an example of something that occurred approximately seven years ago. He gave a
top-down decision saying that Advanced Placement (AP) classes were going to be open
to everybody who wanted to take them. The decision was not one vetted out with the
board. The board supported it because it was part of the district’s mission to open access
for college and career. Mr. Wrightman said it was a very personal decision for him as he
believed that not to let everyone take the classes harmed and held back students. The
majority of the students in the AP classes were white, when 50% of the student body in
the district was Hispanic. When he announced his mandate he followed up by saying it
was nonnegotiable. He said what ensued was horrible. Everyone was angry. Mr.
Wrightman formed a committee of teachers, counselors and parents. There were many
discussions between him and all stakeholders. Many did not believe that simply anyone
should be able to take an AP class; some believed it should be a pure elitist system for a
variety of reasons. Some were fearful because they did not believe the students had the
skills to understand the coursework, or wondered what the district was going to do with
the students if they did not succeed. One of the biggest concerns was that the passing rate
would be dragged down, as the passing rate at that time was 55%, which was the national
average. However, he was insistent and was sure it would be positive.

68
Fast forward seven years. Hispanics are number one in the AP classes and they
have been for the past four years. The number of students going into the California State
University system has jumped from 500 to over 850. Every subgroup gained, and 3,000
more students are passing the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) test.
Scholarships have gone from twenty million to fifty-one million dollars. Now there are
no complaints. The Superintendent concluded, “Sometimes you have to push people
while remaining open and honest. I knew I was pushing them and I told them we must be
careful that we were not putting up walls and keeping certain people out”.
Dr. Bishop stated during her interview that if there is conflict she handles it
“head-on”. She will not publically embarrass anyone, but she does seek out whoever is
involved and always approaches issues from the point of what is best for students. She
shares that students are counting on adults to assist them, and if there is conflict, people
cannot be performing at their highest level and doing their best work.
One leadership skill difficult to define is commitment to the job. Each respondent
mentioned his commitment in a different way. One mentioned that his commitment was
to the district, to the city and to the children of the district. One said Mr. Wrightman has a
kind of intrinsic pride about making the district better and better because he was a part of
it from the beginning. Another comment was that there are generations of people who
have gone to school here and they are proud of that. Now their grandchildren are in
school here and there is even more pride. Having a city with a K-12 system, a well-
known city college and a 4 year university within the city limit makes for a seamless

69
education and this Superintendent has been one of the biggest promoters of that fact. He
went through this system and feels it is an excellent system. That carries a lot of credence
when he is out in the community talking about the school district and all that is available
for the children of the district. The community sees him as the first example as to what
their child can become.
This Superintendent meets monthly with employees. They are able to ask
anything about the district with the caveat of personal concerns about their supervisors
and that is handled off-line. Leadership skills are also involved in working with the
community at large. It is another area of finesse, which requires listening, responding
appropriately and follow-through.
He meets with the public in different venues around the city to insure all
neighborhoods have access. The meetings are rotated from mornings to evenings. Half of
the agenda is set by the Superintendent and half is set by the community. Norms are set at
every meeting, which insures there will be no discussion about individual teachers or
principals. Several times he has set up field trips for parents to see particular programs in
action. Once the program was presented they broke into groups to teach the parents a
little about the program and how to assist students at home.
Mr. Wrightman also cited an example of school partnership at a parent meeting
last year in the community. At the meeting parents stated they wanted School Loop in
elementary school. This is computer access to the school, what is going on at the school
and ongoing communication with each teacher including current grades and homework

70
assignments. Mr. Wrightman stated, “The cost was appraised and it was high, but the
parents kept pushing and now we have over half of our households in the district signed
up for it. This was a great sign; parents wanting to find more ways to be involved and
they cannot do it if they do not have the tools, so we made it happen”. Mr. Wrightman
made it clear that parents are a big part of the equation; it is not just the student who is
important in the decision-making.
Dr. Bishop said that because the district is so small and she has had such a lengthy
tenure, she knows most of the district personnel quite well, but has not entertained the
idea of meeting with the teachers on a formal scheduled basis, but does want to
implement something in the near future. She reported that she is interested in knowing
where the teachers would like to see the district go and hear some of their ideas about
new programs the district might implement. She further stated that all faculty and staff
want to feel capable, cared about and confident. As the leader of the district it is her job
to not only help students succeed, but also provide opportunities for the staff to feel
successful and to feel their needs have been heard.
When working with the community, Dr. Bishop says that parents are an extension
of the students. Treating students well is paramount, and working with their parents is
equally important. She conveyed that the reason everyone in the district has employment
is that parents choose to have their children educated in this district. Being responsive to
parental concerns and complaints is part of the job, and she expects that anyone who

71
answers the phone must be aware of this and either handle the issue or make sure it is
passed to a person who can.
When asked how he interfaced with the media, he said, “As little as possible.” He
revealed he is an introvert by nature. Mr. Wrightman went on to report that the district
tries to handle most situations before the media becomes aware of them so he remains
clear and concise and does not discuss personnel matters with them but remains open and
honest about “the good, the bad and the ugly” in the district.
In Dr. Bishop’s district the media are to contact her office first. Schools have
permission to do regular press releases, but each school calls the Superintendent’s office
before making any comment that will be printed. “I handle the press with honesty and
always optimistically and with a little bit of savvy, always trying to put a positive spin on
all issues, Dr. Bishop alleged. She related a story of a shooting that occurred in a business
in her district’s catchment area and how it affected the entire community. The media was
out in front of the elementary school near the incident in order to gain comment and
perspective from the students. She met the reporters out in front of the school and advised
they already had much press on the incident. She reminded the media when children are
confronted with the aftermath of such a horrific event; it re-triggers the trauma so the
media’s presence would be an ongoing reminder for the students. She was quick to report
that apparently they understood what she was trying to say and packed their equipment
and left.

72
Working with the local teacher’s union requires open communication according to
the superintendent. Mr. Wrightman feels that the union officials need “a heads up”
whenever anything such as a school closing is going to take place. He wants the same
kind of open dialogue with them coming from the opposite direction. If there is a
potential grievance he would rather hear about it and try to work it out before it gets to
the point of involving attorneys. The Superintendent reported that where you do not have
trust, you catch people off guard and they are surprised. An example would be if the
Superintendent had a press conference and said we are going to change X, Y and Z and
nobody in union leadership knew. He asserted it is not fair to work within a district and
not show transparency.
Dr. Bishop maintains that the relationship with the Superintendent’s office and the
union is always fragile to some degree. She feels the relationship in her district is
successful, but says she is cognizant that there are always two factions. She says that she
respects the union’s position and gives them information before press releases, so they
are not caught unaware of changes in district procedure. Often when she is readying a
press release, she calls the union president and asks if he wants to be included in the
statement. She further states that the relationship is like a marriage, especially when it
involves the budget. “We are all going to be upset about the budget cuts but in five years
from now we are still going to be here and the relationship must endure budget issues and
negotiations, so we must make it work.”

73
When asked about being a “change agent” and what motivated him to become a
superintendent he replied that it started when he was a teacher. Mr. Wrightman said he
was a troublemaker and said to himself, “Maybe I should be a superintendent and bring
about this or that particular change. I’ve always wanted to be a superintendent, so you
have to be careful what you ask for!” He went on to report that when he went into
administration at the school level it was to have a greater impact on more people. When
he became Superintendent, he relayed that he felt he could help set policy issues and “that
is what it is all about”. He concluded by saying, “the time that this job becomes boring or
no longer fun, it would be the time to get out.” He said he knows this district is not
“flashy”, but it is about “consistency”. “It is about outcomes, about keeping it steady”, he
shared. He furthered his statement by saying, “Anyplace can do this if they are willing to
stick to it. However, what happens with superintendents is that he or she knows that the
average tenure is only three years, so then they have to make a splash. But you cannot get
a plan out and measure the success in three years.” Mr. Wrightman also shared that he
does have a support group. There is a cluster of superintendents within the state with
whom he speaks on a weekly basis. He does this through Skype, but on a larger scale
where everyone can see one another and talk at length without leaving their own
building, saving much travel time.
During the interview with Dr. Bishop she reported that she loves change and gets
easily bored. She confides that she is overly intense and is “probably on the hyper side”
but this allows her to carry energy from school to school and from project to project. She

74
purports it is important to keep inspiring those around her to reach higher while working
with those students who are not yet showing proficiency. She meets with each principal
and asks for a list of all children who are not proficient and asks what is being done to
assist this group of students. She feels the school is not really successful until each child
demonstrates proficiency. “Sometimes it is difficult to move teachers, who are
entrenched in their habits, but teachers too are desperate to be inspired to change lives
and inspiring others is part of a Superintendent’s job”.

3. WHAT BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCES HAVE BEEN
SIGNIFICANT IN PREPARING FOR THIS POSITION?

When questioning the Superintendent about what experiences he believed readied
him for this current position he was very candid. He stated that he had lived poorly as a
child in this district, was one of many boys in a family with parents who did not graduate
from high school, although his father returned to school in his late 20’s to graduate. Mr.
Wrightman reported he was a good student but admitted that his parents did not know
how to work the system. They put all their trust into it. Now, for this Superintendent it
became an issue of social justice, that school and opportunity should be available for all
students. Mr. Wrightman’s formal education included matriculating through his district’s
schools, the local city college and the university within the city limits. He reported that
every job he has had has prepared for the superintendency. He held nine different

75
positions before becoming the superintendent and the jobs provided a diverse set of
opportunities, from instruction, to learning how to work with conflict and understanding
budgets. He ended the interview with this statement. “I think we have the greatest
profession because it’s a living organism that is always changing.”
When questioning the other members of the groups around him, they all stated
that his knowledge of instruction and the classroom makes him the perfect choice to be
the instructional leader of the district. All echoed that he knows “kids” well and has their
best interest and academic needs as his first concern. The respondents stated that he sees
and understands the bigger picture in education both at the state and national level.
He knows systems. They credit this knowledge from the many jobs he has had in
the district. One of the respondents stated that being the Deputy Superintendent gave him
many opportunities to work with the business office and learn the financial piece of
running the district. Understanding the fiscal necessities of a school district is so complex
and most districts have a business office, as does this one, but all interviewed about this
Superintendent feel the district is in a unique position to have someone at the helm that is
most knowledgeable about the district’s financial situation.
The respondents also repeated one another concerning Mr. Wrightman’s deep
understanding of the community and district. Further they believe that because he lived
locally, was active in the community, was a product of the school system and worked in
many district positions, these were all factors that have been instrumental in preparing
him well for his current position.

76
Dr. Bishop completed her Doctorate in Education in 2004 and she feels a
Superintendent’s formal education is extremely important. She also feels that all positions
she has held have assisted her in being successful as Superintendent. Having been in her
current district for approximately twenty-five years, she was afforded many opportunities
to wear different hats. She was a middle school teacher, a high school teacher, a high
school assistant principal, high school principal, continuation high school principal, a
director, assistant superintendent and finally the Superintendent. She believes that when
one has reached the point that most of the jobs are familiar and one connects with the
board it becomes a “right fit”.
She also believes that it is important to stay connected to other superintendents in
the area and reach out to them. “Keep current with the literature out there and the changes
in education” Dr. Bishop insists. She also related that she attends superintendent
conferences and talks with many of them on a regular basis at county meetings. “It is so
important to surround yourself with people that know more than you do and ask questions
when you don’t get it,” she relays.
Reflecting on the answers given by everyone who was interviewed and the small
sampling of surveys returned there are several things that are curious. When addressing
the results of the surveys, all remarks on the Likert scale were answered in the same vein.
There was not enough difference to affect any quantitative review. For instance, if the
statement read, The Superintendent is a constant learner and models learning for others,

77
all respondents answered ‘Strongly agree’. The respondents’ answers were in concert
with Mr. Wrightman’s answers from the interview.
There are many missing surveys from this body of work. Three out of five Board
of Education members answered their surveys. One Assistant Superintendent out of five
and one union officer out of five answered the survey. They were sent a letter of
introduction before the survey and follow-up consisted of an e-mail through the district,
e-mail from the home computer and a telephonic message asking for participation.
Many of the traits and characteristics given about the Superintendent and by the
Superintendent were found in the literature review. Everyone interviewed mentioned that
good communication is the essence of the job. That statement is probably a universal
shared by everyone in any business today. Those Superintendents who use relationship-
enhancing communication professionally and politically are more effective administrators
as was documented by Kowalski, (2005).
It has become apparent to this researcher that being the Superintendent is much
like being in sales when dealing with others. One must know how to be persuasive and
how to sell their ideas. This echoes the research of Houston, (2001) and Pitner and
Ogawa, (1981). This is done not only on the school campuses but in meetings with the
Board and in the community. Peterson and Short, (2001) found this to be of paramount
importance and Harvey (2003) stated that it is the Superintendent’s job to enlighten the
community about the district’s issues and have them support the district’s positions.

78
Both Superintendents detailed the importance of a sound working relationship
with the board, and many in the literature reviewed agreed with this position (Educational
Writers Association, 2003; Fusarelli, 2006; Hess, 2003; McCloud and McKenzie, 1994;
Portis and Garcia, 2007; Sharp, Malone and Walter, 2002 and Usdan and Cronin, 2003).
One noticeable difference between the Superintendents was the inclusion of a strategic
plan outlined by Mr. Wrightman that he and the Board prepared. He was quick to state
that the strategic plan drove all business in the district, and the data gathered throughout
the year informed decision-making and ultimately supported the strategic plan. Dr.
Bishop never mentioned a strategic plan that she or the Board of Education used to
further their vision in the district. Dr. Bishop did not mention data gathering either, but it
can be assumed that it must be done in order to discern what kind of progress will be
acceptable by each school within the school year.
By sharing many anecdotes, Mr. Wrightman appeared to be more connected to
other superintendents throughout the state than Dr. Bishop. He is part of a state task force
and has conversations via Skype weekly with a select group of superintendents in the
state. Dr. Bishop said that she goes to monthly county meetings of superintendents and
has access to previous superintendents who held her position in her district, but gave no
specifics. Perhaps as she acquires her own rhythm and has more experience in the
position, she will have a select small group with whom she can discuss issues and gain
options concerning district dilemmas.

79
Depth about Dr. Bishop’s personal traits and leadership skills was not easily
discernible due to the limited exposure to her and previously unknown influences.
Although Dr. Bishop has spent her teaching and administrative career in the
district where she is now the Superintendent, she is not from the local area--unlike Mr.
Wrightman. All interviewed about him feel that his knowledge about the district as a
student, teacher and administrator make him the perfect choice for Superintendent. He
purports a seamless education for students in his district from elementary school through
the local university just as he has done. He has done much to insure the same kind of
opportunity for all students who successfully complete high school in his district and it
has cemented his favor in the community-at-large.

80
CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This study provides some insights into the personal character traits and leadership
behaviors that superintendents possess in order to manage a large urban school district.
This was an in-depth case study of one superintendent; however another superintendent
was interviewed for interest and possible contrast.
The purposes of the study were:
1. To determine what personal traits and skills are
needed for successful superintendents;
2. To determine how these personal traits and skills
translate into leadership behaviors; and
3. To determine what background and experience are of
significance in preparing for a successful superintendency.
Interviews were conducted with the Superintendent, a member of the Board of
Education, a member of the superintendent’s cabinet and a union officer. In addition, a
survey was e-mailed to all members of the above mentioned subgroups. An interview was
conducted with a superintendent of a neighboring district in search of agreement or
dissent of answers garnered by the aforementioned concerning the focused
superintendent.

81

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Results from the surveys were disappointing in that most respondents chose not to
respond at all. Since participation was voluntary, the decision was made to report the
information gathered instead of approaching the potential respondents again. The
Superintendent could have been approached and to request assistance for participation
but this researcher felt that was neither prudent nor an acceptable use of his time.
Although not a discouraging word was heard from any of the interviewees about
Mr. Wrightman, could it be that there is negativism felt by cabinet members and union
officers? Only one cabinet member and one union officer answered the survey, along
with three members of the Board of Education. It is unknown why the others did not
answer the survey. Perhaps the individuals felt their answers could be traced back to each
of them and they did not want to take a chance by saying anything negative.
Mr. Wrightman shared because he was a product of his own district that which
fact carried an intrinsic weight for him to perform at a higher level. He also shared he felt
he had a moral obligation not just as the superintendent, but as a student of the
environment he was now managing. Those close to him who were interviewed echoed
this sentiment also.

82
CONCLUSIONS

The information that was garnered from interviews about Mr. Wrightman stands
in support of the literature review completed. Mr. Wrightman and others interviewed
gave many anecdotes that support Mr. Wrightman working within the four frames of
leadership that Bolman and Deal describe (2003). His ongoing use of data to support the
district’s strategic plan is an example of working within the structural frame. He is able to
define his goals after gathering data from each school and synthesize the information into
the plan that drives the district throughout the year. The structural frame is where
problem solving takes place. Meeting with the board, the cabinet, union officers and the
community-at-large provides many opportunities for him to share and discuss pending
issues in the district and gain input for future decision making.
Bolman and Deal (2003) define the human resource frame as one that shapes what
people do for one another within the organization while focusing on organizational
wisdom and the needs of employees. Mr. Wrightman takes many opportunities to work
with the budget to insure student needs are met while providing as little disruption to
teachers as possible. He takes eliminating teaching jobs personally and remarked that it
was a painful part of his job. He takes calls and e-mails from teachers and the
community, unwilling to pass them off without listening. He says many of the issues that
come across his desk can be solved at individual schools, but he reassures the caller that
if they do not get satisfaction at that level, they are more than welcome to call him back.

83
Operating within the political frame, Bolman and Deal (2003) refers to politics
and making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and opposing
interests. When funding is at a record low, the Superintendent’s decisions regarding
resources affect everyone. He carefully collects information and makes the best informed
decision after much input from his cabinet and the board. Closing schools is not an easy
decision, and it is not just about displacing students, but also is very emotional for the
community. So public commentary is sought, listened to and regarded with reverence.
The symbolic frame as referenced by Bolman and Deal (2003) refers to viewing
difficulties as challenges. There is no doubt that Mr. Wrightman operates within this
frame on a daily basis. Making tough decisions, communicating unpopular decisions and
resolving crises are all part of his job. There were many anecdotes that demonstrated Mr.
Wrightman’s ability to do this effectively. This is also the frame that incorporates the
importance of vision and communicating it to all subordinates in the organization.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Should this paper be replicated, it would be wise to speak with all to be surveyed
up front and get their buy-in. Perhaps the next researcher could meet with each respective
group and explain the work and the importance behind gathering the necessary
information. It would also be important to replicate the interview process in 5 – 10

84
successful districts and look for similarities and or contrasts in personal traits and
leadership behaviors.
This researcher never decided upon a meaning of successful tenure length mainly
because there was such a discrepancy of opinion in the literature. The range was at the
lowest, two years, and at the highest, 7.4 years. Taking both those figures into
consideration, this superintendent is beyond the highest number, so a successful tenure
can be inferred. Future research should be undertaken around this issue. Some defined it
through total length of time in office (Yee & Cuban, 1996), while others acknowledge
turnover rates (Natkin et al., 2002). Another variation is mean tenure versus median.
Means, or averages can be distorted by a few extreme outliers.
Being the product of the school district Mr. Wrightman manages certainly implies
a high sense of pride—seeing children he has taught and their families in the community,
in his neighborhood, in his church and at city events is a higher degree of visibility and he
would have it no other way. He counts himself very fortunate. Looking at home-grown
superintendents would be a fascinating subject for further study, and this researcher was
unable to locate any research that dealt with this subject specifically.
The daunting task of being at the helm of a school district is certainly not one that
concludes at the end of the day. Superintendents make decisions that affect everyone in
the district; sometimes the impact is for years to come. Employing the correct
superintendent is not a task that should be entered into lightly. As Dr. Bishop pointed out,
it needs to be a great fit between individual and the Board, as the work between the two is

85
very serious and has far-reaching implications. This intensely complex job requires the
superintendent to wear many hats and direct subordinates in different ways.
The results of this study provide a foundation for program developers concerned
with the most appropriate education and training necessary to best prepare future
superintendents. School boards, policy setting bodies, and superintendents looking to
hone their skills should consider the responses by all who were interviewed concerning
leadership qualities their Superintendent exhibits. Potential superintendents will have
information to better prepare themselves as they enter the leadership arena. The
individuals who work with him on a daily basis see Mr. Wrightman as very successful
and revered. Marzano, Waters and McNulty (2005) presented the results from their meta-
analysis regarding the principal leadership and the correlations with student academic
achievement. With the many character traits and leadership behaviors, perhaps the same
kind of meta-analysis would be of interest and benefit for superintendent behavior.
The 21
st
century superintendent is indeed well-educated and must be adept at
handling a myriad of roles including balancing the budget and managing dwindling
resources, responding to all stakeholders regarding accountability for student
achievement, improving test scores and working with the Board to address district as well
as community issues. Additionally, the superintendent must communicate with the
teacher’s union concerning contract and operating issues while providing instructional
leadership and staff support to the district personnel.

86
There are many personal characteristics that researchers have defined as important
to the superintendency and as Mello (2003) stated, no researcher has identified them all.
What is important is how these characteristics translate into leadership behaviors. The
superintendent’s ability to successfully work with the Board, the cabinet and union
officers, the community-at-large and the media is dependent on the leadership behaviors
he possesses.
This study identified the personal traits, leadership skills and knowledge that
superintendents consider important. This case study was developed to uncover key
criteria of a single superintendent with tenure of nine years and how he successfully
manages his district by delivering outstanding leadership on a daily basis.

87
REFERENCES

Anderson, S. (2003). The school district role in educational change: A review of the
literature. International Center for Educational Change, Ontario Institute for
Studies in Education.

Arnold, M., & Harris, S. (2000). The song sounds better when all the notes are there.
Contemporary Education, 71(4), 12-15.

Bennis, W., Burke, W.W., Gery, G., Juechter, W.M., Rummler, G. & Tichy, N. (2003).
What lies ahead? Training and Development 57(1), 32-43.

Bird, J.J. (2010). Building budgets and trust through the alchemy of superintendent
Leadership. Management in Education, 24(2), 46-50.

Blair, J. (2002). Schooling school boards. Education Week, 2(6) p. 10.
Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organization: Artistry, choice and
leadership (3
rd
ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Burgoon, J.K. & Hale, J.L. (1984). The fundamental topoi of relational communication.
Communication Monographs, 51, 193-214.

Byrd, J., Drews, C., & Johnson, J. (2006). Factors impacting superintendent turnover:
Lessons from the field. NCPEA Education Leadership Review 7(2). Retrieved
December 29, 2010 from http://cnx.org/content/m14507/latest/

Cohn, K. (2010). Partnering pre-K to university. School Administrator, 67(6), 30-35.

Collins, J. (2001). From good to great: Why some companies make the leap …and others
don’t. New York: HarperCollins.

Cooper, B.S., Fusarelli, L.D., & Carella, V.A. (2000). Career crisis in the school
superintendency? The results of a national survey. Arlington, VA: American
Association of School Administrators.
Cooper, B.S., Fusarelli, L.D., Jackson, B.L., & Poster, J. (2002). Is “superintendent
preparation” an oxymoron? Analyzing changes in program, certification, and
control. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1(3), 242-255.

88

Council of Chief State School Officers. (1996). Interstate school leaders licensure
consortium: Standards for school leaders. Retrieved January 2, 2011 from
http://www.ccsso.org/content/pdfs/isllcstd.pdf

Council of Great City Schools. (2008/2009). Urban school superintendents:
Characteristics, tenure and salary. Urban Indicator, 6(1), 1-11.

Council of Great City Schools. (2000). Urban school superintendents: Characteristics,
tenure and salary. Urban Indicator, 6(1), 1-8.

Cox, D. (2002). Big trouble: Solving education problems means rethinking super-size
districts and schools. Salt Lake City, UT: The Sutherland Institute.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crippen, C. & Wallin, D. (2008) Manitoba superintendents: Mentoring and leadership.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 36(4), 546-565.

Cuban, L. (1998). The superintendent contradiction – Facing the myths and dilemmas
surrounding school chiefs’ role in reform. Education Week, 18(7), 56 and 43.

Danzenberger, J.P., Kirst, M.W., & Usdan, M.D. (1992). Governing public schools:
New times, new requirements. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational
Leadership.

Dirks, K.T. & Ferrin, D.L. (2001). The role of trust in organizational settings.
Organizational Science, 12(4), 450-467.

DuFour, R.P. (2000). The superintendent as staff developer. School Administrator, 57(8),
20-28.

Education Writers Association. (2003). Effective superintendents, effective boards.
Washington, D.C.

Ellingson, J.M. (2010). A matter of trust: My quick transition to the superintendency.
School Administrator, 67(9), 26-29.

89
Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, D.C:
Albert Shanker Institute.

Fuller, H.L., Campbell, C., Celio, M.B., Harvey, J., Immerwahr, J., & Winger, A. (2003).
An impossible job? The view from the superintendent’s chair. Seattle, WA:
Center on Reinventing Public Education.

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.

Goens, G.A. (2002). The courage to risk forgiveness. School Administrator, 59(2), 32-34.

Harris, S., Lowery, S., Hopson, M., & Marshall, R. (2004). Superintendent perceptions
of motivators and inhibitors for the superintendency. Planning and Changing,
35(1), 108-126.

Harvey, J. (2003). The urban superintendent: Creating great schools while surviving on
the job. Orlando, FL: Council of Great City Schools.

Hayes, W. (2001). So you want to be a superintendent? Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow
Press, Inc.

Hess, F.M. (2003). A license to lead? A new leadership agenda for America’s schools.
Progressive Policy Institute 21
st
Century Schools Project.

Hess, F.M. & West, M.R. (2006). A better bargain: Overhauling teacher collective
bargaining for the 21
st
century. American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings
Institution.

Hewitt, P. (2007). Bargaining with the school culture. Leadership, 36(5), 26-30.

Higgins, M., Young, L., Weiner, J. & Wlodarczyk, S. (2009). Leading teams of leaders:
What helps team member learning? Phi Delta Kappan, 91(4), 41-45.

Hodgkinson, H.L. & Montenegro, X. (1999). The U.S. school superintendent: The
invisible CEO. Institute of Educational Leadership.

Houston, P. (2001).Superintendents for the 21
st
century: It’s not a job, it’s a calling.
Phi Delta Kappan, 86(6), 429-433.

90
Hoy, W.K. & Smith, P.A. (2007). Influence: A key to successful leadership. International
Journal of Educational Management, 22(2), 158-167.

Hoyle, J.R. (2002). The highest form of leadership. School Leadership, 59(8), 18-21.

Ingram, R.L. & Snider, B. (2008). An educator’s guide to contract negotiations.
Leadership, 37(4), 30-34.

Jentz, B.C. & Murphy, J.T. (2005). Starting confused: How leaders start when they
don’t know where to start. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(10), 736-743.

Kelleher, P. (2002). Core values of the superintendency. School Administrator, 59(2),
28-31.

Kerrins, J.A. & Cushing, K.S. (2001). The classic mistakes of new superintendents.
School Administrator, 58(2), 38-48.

Kirkpatrick, S.A. & Locke, E.A. (1991) Leadership: Do traits matter? The Executive,
5(2), 48-60.

Kowalski, T.J. (2005). Evolution of the school superintendent as communicator.
Communication Education, 4(2), 101-117.

Kowalski, T.J., McCord, R.S., Peterson, G.J., Young, I.P., & Ellerson, N.M. (2010). The
American School superintendent: 2010 decennial study. American Association of
School Administrators. Lanham, MA: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2002). Leadership: The challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Lashway, L. (2002). The superintendency in an age of accountability. Eugene, OR: ERIC
Clearinghouse on Educational Management.

Leithwood, K. (2005). Educational leadership: A review of the research. Philadelphia,
PA: The Mid-Atlantic Research Educational Laboratory.

Littlejohn, S.W. (1992). Theories of human communication (4
th
ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.

Lytle, J.H. (2009). The context of superintendent entry. School Administrator, 66(5),
8-13.

91

Marzano, R.J., Waters, T. and McNulty, B.A. (2005). School leadership that works:
From research to results. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and
Learning.

Mathys, N.J. (2002). A conversation with C. Richard Panico: Leading an ethically
based organization. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 9(2),
89-101.

McCloud, B. & McKenzie, F. D. (1994). School board and superintendents in urban
districts. The Phi Delta Kappan, 75(5), 384-395.

Mello, J.A. (2003). Profiles in leadership: Enhancing learning through model and theory
building. Journal of Management Education 27(3), 344-361.

Merritt Unified School District. Data Demographics. www.ed-data.k12.ca.us

Mertens, D. (2004). Research and evaluation in education and psychology:
Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Meyer, L., & Feistritzer, E. (2003). Better leaders for America’s schools: A manifesto
(Thomas B. Fordham Institute; The Broad Foundation). Washington, DC: U.S.
Printing Office.

Miller, T.N., Salsberry, T.A., & Devin, M.A. (2009). Power and the role of the
superintendent. Educational Considerations, 36(2), 26-34.

Morgan, C. & Peterson, G.J. (2002). The superintendent’s role in leading academically
effective school districts. In B.S. Cooper & L.D. Fusarelli (Eds.), The promise
and perils of modern superintendency (pp. 175-196). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.

Mountford, M. (2004). Motive and power of school board members: Implications for
school board—superintendent relationships. Educational Administration
Quarterly,40(5), 704-741.

Murphy, J. (2005). Unpacking the foundations of ISLLC standards and addressing
concerns in the academic community. Educational Administration Quarterly,
41(1), 154-191.

92
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Retrieved
December 29, 2010 from U.S. Department of Education web site
http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/index.html

Natkin, G., Cooper, B., Fusarelli, L., Alborano, J., Padilla, A., & Ghosh, S. (2002).
Myths of the revolving-door superintendency: Contrary to perception, tenure
runs much longer than most believe, a research review finds. School
Administrator, 59(5), 28-32.

Nestor-Baker, N.S. & Hoy, W.K. (2001). Tacit knowledge of school superintendents: It
nature, meaning, and content. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(10,
86-129.

North Central Regional Laboratory. (1994). Goals 2000. Retrieved December 29, 2010
from North Central Regional Educational Laboratory website
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnment/stw/sw0goals.htm

Northouse. P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice (4
th
ed.). Thousand Oakes, Ca:
Sage Publications.

Orr, M.T. (2006). Learning the superintendency: Socialization, negotiation and
determination. Teacher College Record, 108(7), 1362-1403.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. (3
rd
Ed.). Thousand
Oakes: CA. Sage Publications.

Peterson, G.J. & Fusarelli, L.D. (2001). Changing times, changing relationships: An
exploration of the relationship between superintendents and boards of education.
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the University Council of
Educational Administration, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1-3, 2001.

Peterson, G.J. & Short, P.M. (2001). The school board president’s perception of the
district superintendent: Appling the lenses of social influence and social style.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(4), 533-570.

Pescopella, A. (2009). A superintendent’s high expectations. District Administration,
45(5), 34-36.

Portis, C. & Garcia, M.W. (2007). The superintendent as change leader. School
Administrator, 64(3), 18-20, 22-24.

93
Pitner, N.J. & Ogawa, R.T. (1981). Organizational leadership: The case of the school
superintendent. Educational Administration Quarterly, 17(2), 45-65.

Renchler, R. (1992). Urban superintendent turnover: The need for stability. Urban
Superintendents’ Sounding Board, 1(1), 2-13.

Rivero, V. (2010). Special Report: State of Debate. The Die-hard communicator.
District Administration, June, 1-4.

Sergiovanni, T.J. (2005). The virtues of leadership. The Educational Forum, 69, 112-123.

Sharp, W.L., Malone, B.G. & Walter, J.K. (2002). What motivates someone to become
a superintendent? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-Western
Research Association, Columbus, Ohio, October 18, 2002.

The White House. (2002). Fact sheet: No child left behind act. Retrieved December 29,
2010 from http://www.whtelhouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020108.html

Thomas, J. (2001). The public school superintendency in the 21
st
century: The quest to
define effective leadership. Center for Research on the Education of Students
Placed at Risk (CRESPAR). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 42 U.S.C. 1981-2000h-6. Retrieved March 11,
2010 from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm

Usdan, M.D. & Cronin, J.M. (2003). Rethinking the urban superintendency:
Nontraditional leaders and new models of leadership. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago,
Illinois, April 21, 2003.

U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.) IDEA ’97: The Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act amendments of 1997. Retrieved March 12, 2011 from
http://www2ed.gov/gov/offices/OSERS/Policy/IDEA/index.html

U.S. Department of Labor. Title IX, education amendments of 1972. Retrieved March
12, 2011 from http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm

Useem, E. (2009). Big city superintendent as powerful CEO: Paul Villas in Philadelphia.
Peabody Journal of Education, 84(3), 300-317.

94
Vasudeva, A. (2009). Training for succession. School Administrator, 66(11), 16-19.

Waters, T.J. & Marzano, R. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of
superintendent leadership on student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Communication Education, 54(2),
102-117.

Waters, T.J. & Marzano, R. (2007). The primacy of superintendent leadership. School
Administrator, 64(3), 10-16.

Yee, G. & Cuban, L. (1996). When is tenure long enough? A historical analysis of
superintendent turnover and tenure in school districts. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 32, 615-641.

95
APPENDIX A

INITIAL LETTER TO POTENTIAL RESPONDENTS

November 14, 2011

Dear ___________:
I am currently conducting research that is intended to examine factors that lead to
a successful superintendency in a large urban school district. I am writing to ask you if
you would be willing to participate in a survey. It should take approximately 10 minutes
to complete on-line. The research is titled, “Leadership Practices Supporting Position
Longevity for Urban School Superintendents: A Case Study”. I hope you will be able to
provide some important data to guide future decisions concerning superintendency
programs.
The purpose of my research is to determine the personal characteristics and skills
needed in order to be successful in the position, how these personal characteristics and
skills translate to leadership behaviors, and what personal experience and background are
significant for preparing for a successful superintendency. This research is part of the
requirements of EDUC 790, my doctoral dissertation at University of Southern
California. I am currently a special education teacher in the district, teaching children
with an eligibility of emotional disturbance. I hold current credentials in general

96
education and special education. I have also completed my Level 1 Tier, Administrative
Services Credential. My research advisor is Dr. Pedro Garcia. If you need to reach Dr.
Garcia his email address pegarcia@usc.edu and his phone is (213) 740-1208.
If you agree to participate in this survey, please complete and return the enclosed
postcard. I will email the questionnaire through SurveyMonkey. You will not be
personally identified. I will not use your name in my research report, and your answers
will be kept confidential. If you supply an individual response it will be done
anonymously. It will not be shared with anyone. Your participation is voluntary. The data
I collect will be reported in charts and graphs. I will be selecting several people to be
interviewed. If you would be willing to have a 1 hour taped interview with me, please
indicate that on the card as well.
Please take a few minutes to complete the enclosed postcard and assist with this
important research.
Sincerely,
Carla Beam
Home phone (provided)
Cell phone (provided)

97
APPENDIX B

POSTCARD POTENTIAL RESPONDENTS WILL RETURN

Back of Postcard
Name ______________________________
Phone Number _______________________
Are you willing to participate in the research conducted by Carla Beam titled
“Leadership Factors Supporting Position Longevity for Urban School
Superintendents: A Case Study”? Yes No
Are you willing to participate in a 10-15 minute survey? Yes No
Are you willing to participate in a 45 minute face-to-face interview? Yes No
Best time to call between November 14 – December 9, 2011
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Best time to call to set up the interview _______A.M. _______P.M.
May I tape the interview? Yes No
Your answers will be kept confidential. Your participation is voluntary.

98
APPENDIX C

LETTER TO SUPERINTENDENT

November 14, 2011

Dear __________:
I am currently conducting research that is intended to examine factors that lead to
a successful superintendency in a large urban school district. I am writing to ask you if
you would be willing to participate in an interview for approximately 1½ hours. The
research is titled, “Leadership Practices Supporting Position Longevity for Urban School
Superintendents: A Case Study”. I hope you will be able to provide some important data
to guide decisions concerning programs to ready future superintendents and to assist
those in the position who want to hone their skills.
The purpose of my research is to determine some of the personal characteristics
and skills needed in order to be successful in the position, how these personal
characteristics and skills translate to leadership behaviors and what personal experience
and background are significant for preparing for a successful superintendency. This
research is part of the requirements of EDUC 790, my doctoral dissertation at the
University of Southern California. I am currently a special education teacher in the
district, teaching children with an eligibility of emotional disturbance. I hold current

99
credentials in general education and special education. I have also completed my Level 1
Tier, Administrative Services Credential. My research advisor is Dr. Pedro Garcia. If you
need to reach Dr. Garcia his email address pegarcia@usc.edu and his phone is (213) 740-
1208.
If you agree to participate in the interview, you will not be personally identified,
and all answers will be kept confidential. I will send you all questions in advance so you
can prepare for the interview. Your participation is voluntary.

Sincerely,

Carla Beam
Home phone (provided)
Cell phone (provided)

100
APPENDIX D

SURVEY FOR BOARD MEMBERS

1. The vision for the district is clearly articulated by the Superintendent.
2. The most important relationship the Superintendent has is with the board.
3. The Superintendent is an attentive listener during board meetings and respects
my opinion.
4. The Superintendent keeps student learning and achievement as priority #1 at all
times.
5. The Superintendent is able to prioritize work well.
6. The Superintendent is able to see the value in his mistakes and admit when he is
wrong.
7. The Superintendent has positive interpersonal skills.
8. The Superintendent displays ethical and personal integrity.
9. The Superintendent demonstrates moral leadership.
10. I can trust the Superintendent’s judgment.
11. The Superintendent demonstrates a personal belief in his capacity to organize
and execute actions required to achieve specific goals.
12. The Superintendent possesses a positive outlook.
13. The Superintendent demonstrates common sense.

101
14. The Superintendent demonstrates flexibility.
15. The Superintendent is a motivator.
16. The Superintendent is a team builder.
17. The Superintendent has superior communication skills while providing clarity
and specificity.
18. The Superintendent is seen as approachable and ensures the community at large
understands the goals of the district.
19. The Superintendent demonstrates political acuity and demonstrates influence in
legislative and fiscal matters at the local and state level.
20. The Superintendent shows respect for other points of view and those around him
feel valued and affirmed.
21. The Superintendent provides strong community leadership.
22. The Superintendent is an effective manager demonstrating personal
accountability while creating and supporting district measures for improvement.
23. The Superintendent is a constant learner and models learning for others.
24. The Superintendent is committed to issues that serve the underprivileged, such as
racism and poverty and implements a strategy that promotes respect for diversity.
25. The Superintendent demonstrates leadership skills by caring deeply about his
work and elevates leadership to a level of moral action.

102
Please share any comments you feel are important that were not addressed in this
questionnaire.

103
APPENDIX E

SURVEY FOR UNION OFFICERS

1. The vision for the district is clearly articulated by the Superintendent.
2. The most important relationship the Superintendent has is with the board.
3. The Superintendent is able to see the value in his mistakes and admit when he is
wrong.
4. The Superintendent has positive interpersonal skills.
5. The Superintendent displays ethical and personal integrity.
6. The Superintendent demonstrates moral leadership.
7. I can trust the Superintendent’s judgment.
8. The Superintendent demonstrates a personal belief in his capacity to organize and
execute actions required to achieve specific goals.
9. The Superintendent possesses a positive outlook.
10. The Superintendent demonstrates common sense.
11. The Superintendent demonstrates flexibility.
12. The Superintendent is a motivator.
13. The Superintendent is a team builder.
14. The Superintendent understands and is committed to the needs of the teachers in
the district.

104
15. The Superintendent understands the positions of the Union membership.
16. The Superintendent reaches out to the Union for information and to promote
ongoing dialog.
17. The Superintendent has superior communication skills while providing clarity and
specificity.
18. The Superintendent is seen as approachable and ensures the community-at-large
understands the goals of the district.
19. The Superintendent demonstrates political acuity and demonstrates influence in
legislative and fiscal matters at the local and state level.
20. The Superintendent shows respect for other points of view and those around him
feel valued and affirmed.
21. The Superintendent provides strong community leadership.
22. The Superintendent is an effective manager demonstrating personal accountability
while creating and supporting district measures for improvement.
23. The Superintendent is a constant learner and models learning for others.
24. The Superintendent is committed to issues that serve the underprivileged, such as
racism and poverty and implements a strategy that promotes respect for diversity.
25. The Superintendent demonstrates leadership skills by caring deeply about his
work and elevates leadership to a level of moral action.

105
Please share any comments you feel are important that were not addressed in this
questionnaire.

106
APPENDIX F

SURVEY FOR CABINET MEMBERS

1. The vision for the district is clearly articulated by the Superintendent.
2. The most important relationship the Superintendent has is with the board.
3. The Superintendent uses distributive leadership with the cabinet, capitalizing on
each member’s strengths and deferring to his or her expertise.
4. The Superintendent is fair and easily approachable when handling disagreements
within the cabinet.
5. The Superintendent supports and encourages professional growth among cabinet
members.
6. The Superintendent is able to see the value in his mistakes and admit when he is
wrong.
7. The Superintendent has positive interpersonal skills.
8. The Superintendent displays ethical and personal integrity.
9. The Superintendent demonstrates moral leadership.
10. I can trust the Superintendent’s judgment.
11. The Superintendent demonstrates a personal belief in his capacity to organize and
execute actions required to achieve specific goals.
12. The Superintendent possesses a positive outlook.

107
13. The Superintendent demonstrates common sense.
14. The Superintendent demonstrates flexibility.
15. The Superintendent is a motivator.
16. The Superintendent is a team builder.
17. The Superintendent has superior communication skills while providing clarity and
specificity.
18. The Superintendent shows respect for other points of view and those around him
feel valued and affirmed.
19. The Superintendent is seen as approachable and ensures the community-at-large
understands the goals of the district.
20. The Superintendent demonstrates political acuity and demonstrates influence in
legislative and fiscal matters at the local and state level.
21. The Superintendent provides strong community leadership.
22. The Superintendent is an effective manager demonstrating personal accountability
while creating and supporting district measures for improvement.
23. The Superintendent is a constant learner and models learning for others.
24. The Superintendent is committed to issues that serve the underprivileged, such as
racism and poverty and implements a strategy that promotes respect for diversity.
25. The Superintendent demonstrates leadership skills by caring deeply about his
work and elevates leadership to a level of moral action.

108
Please share any comments you feel are important that were not addressed in this
questionnaire.

109
APPENDIX G

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT

1. What personal characteristics do you possess that have lead to a successful tenure
as superintendent?
2. What motivates you?
3. What was your greatest challenge as a new superintendent?
4. How do you develop trust between yourself and the board?
5. How do you foster open dialog with the board?
6. What is your method of prioritizing?
7. How do you develop trust between yourself and your cabinet?
8. How do you choose your cabinet?
9. How would you work with a cabinet member who might isolate himself in the job
and not be open to a colleague’s point of view?
10. How do you handle conflict?
11. How do you interface with the media?
12. How did you form a successful alliance with the union?
13. Tell me about Coffee with the Superintendent. How did that originate? Are there
many community members who meet with you? What is your policy about
parents or community members calling you?

110
14. Talk about being a change agent and how it motivated you for becoming a
superintendent.
15. With whom do you network? In your opinion, what kind of personal and
professional support network is needed for a superintendent?
16. What experiences or background have prepared you for this position?
17. What is your vision for the future for the district, for education and for yourself?
18. What do you want your legacy to be? How do you want to be remembered?
19. What is your best piece of advice for someone who wants to prepare for the job of
superintendent?
20. Is there anything else you would like to share with me?

111
APPENDIX H

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR A BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBER

1. What personal characteristics does the superintendent possess that have
contributed to his successful tenure?
2. What are his strengths and weaknesses?
3. To what extent do any of his weaknesses limit his effectiveness?
4. What motivates him?
5. Would his leadership skills be effective as a leader in another type of
organization? What about with other colleagues?
6. How does he interface with the media?
7. How does he manage conflict?
8. How does he assign priorities?
9. Do you think he does a good job of aligning his priorities with those of the
board? Can you tell me more about his system?
10. How is role clarification achieved?
11. How does he foster dialog with the board?
12. Who sets the agenda for the board?
13. What are the board’s biggest challenges?
14. What do you think has been the greatest challenge for the superintendent?

112
15. What background or experience has prepared him well for this position?
Is there anything else you would like to share with me?

113
APPENDIX I

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR A UNION OFFICER

1. What personal characteristics does the superintendent possess that have caused
him to be successful in his tenure?
2. What are his strengths and weaknesses?
3. To what extent do any of his weaknesses limit his effectiveness?
4. What motivates him?
5. Would his leadership skills be effective as a leader in another type of
organization? What about with other colleagues?
6. How does he interface with the media?
7. Does he meet with Union personnel on a regular basis?
8. How does he foster dialog with the Union?
9. How does he manage conflict?
10. Do you think he does a good job of aligning his priorities with those of the
Union? Can you give me an example?
11. How is role clarification achieved?
12. Who sets the agenda for the meetings?
13. What are the Union’s biggest challenges?
14. What do you think has been the greatest challenge for the superintendent?

114
15. What background or experience has prepared him well for this position?
16. Is there anything else you would like to share with me?

115
APPENDIX J

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR A CABINET MEMBER

1. What personal characteristics does the superintendent possess that have
contributed to his successful tenure?
2. What are his strengths and weaknesses?
3. To what extent do any of his weaknesses limit his effectiveness?
4. What motivates him?
5. Would his leadership skills be effective as a leader in another type of
organization? Tell me about that. What about with other colleagues?
6. How does he interface with the media?
7. Do you think he does a good job of aligning his priorities with those of the
board? Can you tell me more about his system?
8. How often does he meet with the cabinet?
9. Tell me about the scope of the meetings.
10. How does he manage conflict within cabinet meetings?
11. How is the agenda set for the meetings?
12. How does he assign priorities?
13. What are the cabinet’s biggest challenges?
14. What do you think is the biggest challenge for the superintendent?

116
15. What background experience has best prepared him for this position?
16. Is there anything else you would like to share with me?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to add to the research on position longevity for urban school superintendents by examining personal character traits and skills. The study explores how these traits translate to leadership behaviors. Additionally, relevant background and experience necessary to success were examined. This was a case study involving one superintendent and the school district he manages. The work of Bolman and Deal (2003) provides the conceptual framework by viewing leadership behaviors through structural, human resources, political and symbolic frames. This study utilized a quantitative research design through the use of surveys to all Board of Education members, the superintendent’s cabinet and all union officers. Qualitatively, the research design involved interviews with the Superintendent, a Board member, a cabinet member and a union officer. Another superintendent was interviewed to add interest to this study and to add validity to the findings. Information was garnered from interviews, but too few surveys were completed to make the quantitative results significant. Findings in this study examine those traits and skills necessary for the successful superintendent, as identified by superintendents themselves and those around them and serves as recommendations for post-graduate study programs or for those wishing to hone their skills.

Conceptually similar

PDF

Leadership characteristics, practices and board perceptions that support superintendent longevity in urban school districts: a case study

PDF

Leadership characteristics, practices and board perceptions that support superintendent longevity in suburban school districts: a case study

PDF

Traits, skills, and competencies contributing to superintendent longevity

PDF

Effective leadership practices of catholic high school principals that support academic success

PDF

A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

Effective strategies superintendents utilize in building political coalitions to increase student achievement

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K–12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Strategies for relationship and trust building by successful superintendents: a case study

PDF

Effective strategies that urban superintendents use that improve the academic achievement for African-American males

PDF

Model leadership: discovering successful principals' skills, strategies and approaches for student success

PDF

A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st -century skills

PDF

A study of California public school district superintendents and their implementation of 21st century skills

PDF

Strategies employed by successful urban superintendents responding to demands for student achievement reform

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Successful communication strategies used by urban school district superintendents to build consensus in raising student achievement

PDF

The sustainability of superintendent-led reforms to improve student achievement

PDF

The role of the superintendent in ensuring school board focus on student achievement

PDF

Leadership characteristics, factors and tools that support superintendent longevity in suburban school districts: a case study

PDF

Strategies used by superintendents in developing leadership teams