Paul Anthony and Steve Buel
The Portland School Board has decided that its search for a new superintendent should take place in secret with the only community involvement being an appointed committee – a committee that will also meet in secret. Three board members (Paul Anthony, Steve Buel and Tom Koehler) opposed this mistake. A proposal to have the three finalists speak and answer questions in public was voted down by the remaining four board members.
The point of a secret search is supposedly to increase the number of candidates willing to apply for the position, as making names public can make it more difficult to poach another district’s superintendent. But if we can neither evaluate how a candidate relates in public nor be able to talk candidly to people in a candidate’s district, it won’t matter how many candidates we have, because we won’t be able to tell one from the other.
School board members may not call and vet candidates, since that would reveal to people outside the board that a particular candidate is considering the position. A secret approach creates a situation where candidates are judged only on their resumes, carefully chosen recommendations and their interviews. Any person who has reached the role of school superintendent can easily create a sparkling resume and certainly knows how to interview. Picking a superintendent on these qualities alone limits the chances of getting the best superintendent we can.
A secret search creates additional problems, not the least of which is that the community will play no active role in the selection. This is a slap in the face to those people who believe the school board should be open and transparent.
There are other difficulties created by a secret search. It is harder to make sure the search is not unduly influenced by the search firm, which could push forward candidates with whom they have a relationship. It makes it easier for board members who want control developments and don’t like their decisions to be scrutinized in public. It confirms much of the public’s apprehension that the Portland School Board doesn’t value community input to the degree it should. It squanders the opportunity for the prospective candidates to build community support and goodwill at the beginning of their term. Neither does it show that the board is serious about equalizing educational opportunities across the district: A small private committee can’t possibly create the input of a large meeting where anyone may attend and make their voice heard.
A public search brings the diversity, the passions and the dreams of the community together to find and vet a successful candidate to care for our school children. A public search weeds out applicants who might successfully hide dirty laundry. A public search brings out candidates who are on good terms with their districts and who have strong relationships with their boards. A public process discourages applicants who are not good at communicating with and responding to the public. And since administrators of color often face institutional barriers to traditional professional advancement and so appear less experienced, candidates of color are less likely to be disproportionately eliminated from consideration in a public search.
Having the best superintendent we can get is paramount to finishing the work we’ve begun in turning around the culture of our district and improving the education for our children. We call on each person in Portland to write to board members and speak out to tell the school board this is not the way we want our elected officials to act.
Paul Anthony and Steve Buel are members of the Portland School Board.
Our editors found this article on this site using Google and regenerated it for our readers.
