iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Justin Snider

Justin Snider

GET UPDATES FROM Justin Snider
 

Supply vs. Demand: Rock Star Superintendents

Posted: 03/ 6/11 10:22 AM ET

They command six-figure salaries, often with annual bonuses and car allowances. (Generous health care and pension plans are a given.) Sometimes their employers also foot the bill for their life insurance policies.

There are very few of them, for their skill set is rare. They must be savvy politicians and managers. They must be obsessed with constant improvement.

They'll be under the bright lights of the media, so the camera shy need not apply.

No, we're not talking rock stars, pro athletes or even pro coaches.

We're talking school superintendents. Especially those of large urban districts that have struggled from time immemorial. The original rock star superintendent was Rudy Crew, who asked for -- and got -- a contract from the Miami Dade school system in 2004 that paid him upwards of $500,000 a year. He defended his salary by saying, "I think people are really hungry for leadership. We shouldn't underestimate the value of this kind of leadership. This is public servancy with highly developed skills."

The 2010-11 school year is witnessing a larger-than-usual upheaval among the ranks of urban superintendents: Ramon Cortines is retiring in Los Angeles next month, Joel Klein quit mid-year in New York City, Michelle Rhee was done after Adrian Fenty's failed re-election bid in the nation's capital last fall, Clifford Janey is out in Newark after his contract wasn't renewed, Ron Huberman stepped down in Chicago last November, Beverly Hall is leaving amidst a cheating scandal in Atlanta, Paul Vallas is moving on from the Big Easy and Jerry Weast is throwing in the towel in Montgomery County, Md.

And add Seattle to the list, as Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson was fired on March 2 after a state audit found financial mismanagement to the tune of $1.8 million.

Klein, Hall and Weast have all served eight or more years in their most recent posts, which is much longer than the three-year stay of the average urban superintendent. The trouble with filling such vacancies is that the pool from which candidates are drawn isn't deep; everyone's after the same few fish. The predictable result in a free-market economy is that districts must offer lavish compensation packages to woo, and then retain, their preferred leaders.

In the case of Arlene Ackerman, who has run the School District of Philadelphia since June 2008, that has meant offering her not just a base salary of $348,140 but also an annual performance bonus of up to 20 percent her base salary and, this year, a retention bonus of $100,000. According to the Philadelphia Public School Notebook, "The bonuses are in addition to annual raises, [Ackerman's] health plan, and a $65,000-a-year contribution to an annuity. Add to that 34 vacation days, 30 days of paid consulting time (which come out of her vacation or personal days), and perks like a car and premiums toward a $1 million life insurance policy."

Such eye-popping compensation -- which more than one observer has noted exceeds the combined compensation of Philadelphia's mayor and Pennsylvania's governor -- worries some people, especially in the current fiscal crisis. Among those concerned are Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York and Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, both of whom have recently pushed for upper limits to superintendent salaries. They argue that, with few exceptions, superintendents shouldn't earn more than $175,000 a year.

But when compared to the salaries of top players in other fields -- from Wall Street to higher education -- most superintendents' salaries look, if anything, rather small. Consider, for example, the case of Cathie Black, newly appointed Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools.

Black earns $250,000 a year to run an institution with a $21-billion annual budget that serves 1.1 million students. That's exactly what Matthew Goldstein, chancellor of the City University of New York, earned a dozen years ago when he assumed his current position. Goldstein's salary has now almost doubled to $490,000, which doesn't include a yearly housing allowance of $90,000. But Goldstein's system -- in terms of annual budget and number of students served -- is just one-fourth the size of Black's. And the stakes are arguably lower at the university than the K-12 level.

It's little wonder that someone like Geoffrey Canada, the revered leader of the Harlem Children's Zone, is said to have turned down Mayor Michael Bloomberg's request that he run the New York City Public Schools. The task is daunting, the compensation modest and the likelihood of unqualified success slim. Taking the job of chancellor would have meant a major pay-cut for Canada -- in 2008, he earned $494,269 as president and CEO of the Harlem Children's Zone -- and his reputation might well have suffered if the city's schools didn't show significant improvement on his watch.

The superintendent role is tricky because it generally requires expertise in three distinct arenas: 1) politics; 2) management; and 3) education. Those tapped to lead school districts from other fields -- business, politics, media, the law and the military are popular -- often have little difficulty with the first two of these. But when they're new to the field of education, teachers tend to perceive them as outsiders whose lack of pedagogical knowledge is disturbing, if not downright dangerous. Hence the decision, in New York City and elsewhere, to appoint someone with classroom and curricular expertise to a "Chief Academic Officer" (CAO) post to serve alongside the superintendent or chancellor. In New York City, that person is Shael Polakow-Suransky, a former city math teacher who worked his way up to deputy chancellor of performance and accountability before becoming CAO.

Just how long Cathie Black lasts as New York City Schools Chancellor is anybody's guess. She's indicated an intention to stay through Mayor Bloomberg's third term, which ends in 2013. But at least one pundit, Michael Petrilli of the right-leaning Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington, D.C., thinks Black will be out by Easter.

If she is, New York City will rejoin the long list of major school systems now searching for the next rock star.

 
They command six-figure salaries, often with annual bonuses and car allowances. (Generous health care and pension plans are a given.) Sometimes their employers also foot the bill for their life insura...
They command six-figure salaries, often with annual bonuses and car allowances. (Generous health care and pension plans are a given.) Sometimes their employers also foot the bill for their life insura...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 272
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Max Shaw
My micro-bio is no longer empty.
04:59 PM on 03/09/2011
Considering how a lot of the work is delegated to faculty and staff, there is no reason why superintendents, even in the wealthiest regions should be making obscene amounts of money. Most of that should be going right back into the schools to pay the teachers who are doing their jobs well and giving our children and education that they can use int the future...Not so these ringleaders can take it and go on lavish vacations or put gas in their car. A few of these people earn more than the President! Thats absurd!


And yet...here we are, with Bloomberg for example, closing schools and laying off THOUSANDS of teachers, when a lot of money can be spent capping the salaries of superintendents and the rest being reissued into our education system. Cuts need to be made before our classrooms start featuring double decker seating like in the Simpsons.

Most of these supers can work for several years and retire if they wanted to--and keep their pensions for life. Unbelievable...

The total lack of disicpline and morality by so many who are mismanaging the budgets and being overall fiscally irresponsible to a reprehensible degree should not be anywhere near a school. They are not businesses with expendable commodities. They contain our most valuable resource--our children.

As corny as that last line may have sounded. It is the truth.
10:01 AM on 03/09/2011
Our super earns $250,000 to lead a district with a less than $1 billion budget.
photo
farmilyman
everything is illusion
03:36 PM on 03/08/2011
It's run like a business. The ones at the top get all the money and benefits while the workers toil away for nothing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anthony Garnett
11:27 AM on 03/08/2011
Its the free market at work if school districts are willing to pay $400K plus people are going to take the money
01:54 PM on 03/08/2011
It's not the free market, because the people who pay to employ these people, the tax payers, do not have the final say on how much of their money is being spent. It is decided by other government officials and not up for voter approval.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Venicelady
Ignorance is NOT bliss.
06:11 PM on 03/08/2011
As was the case when Mayor Bloomberg picked both of his Chancellors over the protests of the public at large that wanted educators, not a lawyer and a magazine publisher, to head the top education spot in the city.
olddognewtrick
Half full or half empty...It's the same
12:31 AM on 03/08/2011
they got any openingz?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Venicelady
Ignorance is NOT bliss.
06:19 PM on 03/07/2011
We don't need "rock star" Superintendents in NYC- we need someone that is an experienced and qualified educator, that is aware of the many myriad problems that exist in NYC schools, and is willing to solve them, without playing the blame game.

Otherwise, let Bloomberg just pick Mick Jagger as his next Chancellor. On the other hand, not enough money to do this job for a REAL rock star. As for Cathie Black- if she'll really be gone by Easter- GOOD RIDDANCE!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:14 PM on 03/07/2011
I was working in a district that "let go" a really, really bad superintendent, but by contract continued to pay his salary, although he got another job in another state. And then it happened again. Seriously, my district was paying THREE superintendent salaries at the same time!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:07 PM on 03/07/2011
Gee, and I was so proud when my 27 years of experience finally broke $60,000.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sensimilla
Lead with your heart, and your mind will follow...
02:04 PM on 03/10/2011
i hear ya!
02:46 PM on 03/07/2011
As The Miami Herald pointed out at the time, Crew made far less than the 12th man on the bench of the Miami Heat and less than any CEO in the paper's annual regional business almanac. He also made less per pupil than many other superintendents in the country.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
graywolf68
Is that true or did you hear it on Fox News?
02:44 PM on 03/07/2011
I certainly agree that superintendents shouldn't earn more than $175,000 a year.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
giono
11:53 AM on 03/07/2011
A "rock star" anything is probably overpaid execpt maybe a "rock star" rock star
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mburgh
Come Back Samuel Gompers
11:33 AM on 03/07/2011
The factory model of public schools is broken. Why have monster school districts that resemble Hobbes Leviathan, instead of smaller units that can be managed? The onus of inertia and greed militates against new models that devolve the machine into a workable program. The problem is of course, parents, teachers, administrators, teacher's unions, corporations, textbook publishers, school boards, and the students themselves. Make workable school districts. Make teacher attractive to motivated teachers. Get parents involved. In other words, move to Finland.
photo
LearnMe
Native NY-er, father of 2, husband to 1. I teach
11:01 AM on 03/07/2011
"The superintendent role is tricky because it generally requires expertise in three distinct arenas: 1) politics; 2) management; and 3) education. Those tapped to lead school districts from other fields -- business, politics, media, the law and the military are popular -- often have little difficulty with the first two of these." Superintendents are hired to wear several different hats and often, those hats have conflicting agendas. I wouldn't want the job. www.learnmeproject.com
01:59 PM on 03/08/2011
As a former teacher, I definately wouldn't want the job. But public servants, which is what public employees are, are supposed to be willing to make personal sacrifices for others, that is the whole point of "service." There are many incompetent Superintendants because it is relatively easy to get a PhD in education (especially when compared to other PhD programs) and it pays really really well.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MG Metiva
For Great Justice, I shall post.
09:45 AM on 03/07/2011
My local school superintendent earns a lowly salary in comparision of the Rock Star Superintendents and probably does a better job! Now that's bang for your buck.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Honora
10:54 AM on 03/07/2011
I'm living on social security & am laughing at $500,000. a year. I will come out of retirement & do it for a whole lot less. I'll even move. Have we all gone mad with these executive salaries? I think so. Many many people could do the jobs for a whole lot less. Big money doesn't make a better person for the job. Just a slicker person. fan mg metiva
jlm11579
There's got to be a better way...
09:02 AM on 03/07/2011
Cathie Black was certainly successful in the publishing world, however, Having worked in the closely related advertising world for many years, I don't see how her skill set applies to the job at hand, outside of being media savvy.

I understand the idea of bringing outside fresh thinking. But the complexity of the NY school system might benefit form searching for someone from the inside, who are intimately familiar with the system, and, have formulated ideas for making it better.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mburgh
Come Back Samuel Gompers
11:35 AM on 03/07/2011
Her appointment is predicated on the bankrupt notion that business methods are transferable to governance. The former desires only to make a profit, the latter moves to better the lives of its constituents. Can anyone see the difference anymore?
photo
SeptimusDSX
Always question the obvious.
05:08 PM on 03/07/2011
Very well articulated. I could not have put it better!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:09 PM on 03/07/2011
I can pinpoint the exact moment that education hit the skids...the moment someone said the business model could be used on education and government.