I originally wrote this article in June, 2019.

Case Study Scenario

A local advocacy group for autistic children is demanding more one-to-one instructional time for their children. As Superintendent, outline the steps you would take to effectively deal with this delegation given finite time and resources, understanding district collective agreements, as well as provincial and federal legislation?

Framing the Case  

For the sake of understanding, traditionally, a school superintendent is a leader in charge of a school district. In this scenario, there are three important points to understand prior to outlining the steps a superintendent should take to carefully assist the advocacy group. The first, is that advocacy groups are one of the many stakeholders that superintendents must work alongside in order to have success (Leithwood, 1995). The second, is that communicating skillfully with advocacy groups is a key superintendent responsibility (Opfer, 2005; Leithwood, 1995). The third, is that collective agreements, with a teacher’s union for example, protect those they serve but can also be barriers for other groups to get what they want. Regardless, “collective agreements have to be served and expectations of the agreements have to be met. The focus should be on working with stakeholders and ensuring they’re treated equitably” (Hayes, 2019a). 

6 Steps to Cracking the Case

There are six essential steps that a superintendent should take when faced with this situation while bearing in mind the district’s finite resources, collective bargaining agreements, and relevant legislation:  

1) Meet with the advocacy group: a) Meet in person with the chairperson of the advocacy group to uncover exactly what the advocacy group wants. b) Reassure the advocacy group that the district will do the best that they can with the resources at their disposal. The advocacy group should know for certain that the district will continue to deliver on its mission of providing the safest learning environment possible for as many students as possible. 

2) Discuss solutions with the school board. Bring the problem as well as a list of possible solutions to the school board. With the help of the board, critically evaluate how the law can be used to benefit this advocacy group (Hayes, 2019b). It should be noted that although the advocacy group’s claims may be valid and possibly represent a best case scenario, there are times when finite resources, collective agreements, and legislation combine to underserve students. 

3) Discuss the possible solutions with school leaders and the principal’s association. The superintendent should meet in person with the principals of the schools that the potential change will affect. The superintendent should both listen to possible solutions from the principals as well as know the limitations of both the board and legislation in order to reach a positive conclusion. 

4) Discuss the possible solutions with representatives from the teacher’s association & relevant parents’ associations. Teachers will be implementing the change in policy to allow more one-on-one instructional time for students with autism. Therefore, teachers need to buy-in for this change to be successful. Support is also needed from the parents’ association. It is always prudent for superintendents to maintain positive relationships with parents by communicating about important matters early and often. 

5) Formulate a solution that will both benefit the Advocacy group, the district, and collective agreement stakeholders all while considering resources, legislation, and community relations. Meet with the advocacy group to reveal the solution that has been created. 

6) Reflect and revise. There is plenty that can be gleaned from the reflection phase of a problem solving process (Lambert, 2000). After the periods of planning and implementation, the solution should be evaluated in order to gauge its effectiveness. The advocacy group should be kept in constant communication throughout the implementation and evaluation to know their level of satisfaction with the change. 

A Template for Future Cases

Superintendents can use the above steps as a template to carefully reach solutions with advocacy groups. It is no secret that the job of a superintendent is to do a lot with little resources, while juggling the desires of many (Leithwood, 1995; Hayes, 2019a). This is honorable work that should be taken with the utmost professionalism and skilled communication. Ultimately, all stakeholders need to know and be frequently reminded that superintendents have the best interests of the children in mind (Hayes, 2019b). 

References

Hayes, F. (2018). [Review of the book Systems Thinking for School Leaders: Holistic Leadership for Excellence in Education, by H. Shaked and C. Schechter]. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(4), 647-649.

Hayes, F. (2019a). Group A: Tuesday, May 14. Retrieved from https://player.vimeo.com/video/336315504

Hayes, F. (2019b). Group B: Tuesday, May 28. Retrieved from https://player.vimeo.com/video/339104596

Lambert, L. (2000). Framing reform for the new millennium: Leadership capacity in schools and districts. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, (14).

Leithwood, K. (Ed.). (1995). Effective school district leadership: Transforming politics into education. SUNY Press. Opfer, V.D. (2005). Personalization of interest groups and the resulting policy nonsense: The Cobb County school board’s evolution debate. In Peterson, G.J. & Fusarelli, L.D. (Eds.), The politics of leadership: Superintendents and school boards in changing times. (pp. 73-93). Greenwich, CT: IAP.

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. It was a pleasure spending time with you today.

Peace & Blessings, 

– Josiah