SNAPSHOT 2012
The 8th Triennial Study of
the Superintendency in
New York
Principal Authors
Marilyn C. Terranova, Ph.D., Eastchester UFSD,
Author/Editor
Edward M. Fale, Ph.D., Valley Stream UFSD 24,
Co-Chair, Author
Robert R. Ike, Ed.D., Palmyra-Macedon CSD,
Co-Chair, Author
Contributing Authors
&Research Team
Gerald M. Cattaro, Ed.D.
David O’Rourke, Ph.D.
Fordham University
Erie II-Chautauqua-Cattaraugus BOCES
David Glover, Ed.D.
Maria C. Rice
Morristown Central School District
New Paltz Central School District
Phyllis Harrington, Ed.D.
Thomas L. Rogers, Ed.D.
Oyster Bay/East Norwich
Nassau BOCES
Bill Heidenreich, Ed.D.
Angela Trapani, Graduate Assistant
Valley Stream Central High School District
Fordham University
Roger Klatt, Ed.D.
Elaine Zseller, Ph.D., Program Supervisor,
Barker Central School District
Nassau BOCES
Purpose:
To describe the
Superintendency
as it currently exists in NYS
• Demographic & Gender differences by region
• General Contract Provisions
• Leadership Teams: Boards of Education and
Superintendents
• Recruitment and Longevity
• Focus on Student Achievement
• Recommendations for Future Study
Response Rate
•
•
•
•
8th iteration
Surveyed 706 superintendents
2012 response rate was 62%
1991 to 2012 response rate was
62% to 74.4%
• Electronic Survey (2009, 2012)
Percent of
Superintendents by Age
Proportion of veteran
superintendents
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Veteran
50%
New
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
New = < 6 years as superintendent
Differences Between New and Veteran
2009
NEW
2012
VETERAN
NEW
VETERAN
57 years
51.3 years
56.6 years
44.1 years
47.6 years
43.6 years
58.8%
19.1%
48.2%
Average years as a
superintendent
2.8
11.8
Average years in current
superintendency
2.8
6.9
Average current age 52 years
Average age at first 48.7 years
superintendency
Percent intending to retire 33.8%
within five years
New Superintendents (<6 years as a superintendent)
Age Ranges by Region
North
Country
Western
Central/
Sou. Tier
Capital
Region/
Mid-Hudson
Lower
Hudson/
Metro/
Long Island
Ages 32-40
4.6%
6.1%
4.7%
3.1%
1.9%
Ages 41-49
26.2%
30.3%
25.9%
25.0%
11.3%
Ages 50-58
44.6%
39.4%
49.4%
53.1%
27.4%
Ages 59-67
21.5%
21.2%
20.0%
17.2%
51.9%
Ages 68-76
3.1%
3.0%
0.0%
1.6%
7.5%
Personal Differences
Between The Genders
2009
2012
Women
Men
Women
Men
Average current age
55.5
53.8
55.5
53.3
Average age of first superintendency
49.2
45.4
48.1
44.7
White
95.6%
96.6%
96.4%
98.1%
African-American
2.9%
1.6%
2.9%
0.01%
Hispanic
1.5%
0.0%
0.01%
0.01%
Native American
0.7%
0.6%
0.00%
0.00%
Asian-American
0.0%
0.6%
0.00%
0.00%
Percent with Doctorate
31.4%
28.8%
36.6%
33.5%
First superintendency
77.2%
64.1%
74.0%
64.5%
Position in district immediately prior
42.3%
33.4%
38.2%
40.3%
Average # of years as superintendent
5.8
7.9
6.1
7.9
Ethnicity:
Family Differences
Between the Genders
2009
2012
Women
Men
Women
Men
Married
75.2%
90.4%
79.4%
89.4%
Divorced
12.4%
5.0%
9.2%
6.4%
Partnered
1.5%
1.2%
1.6%
0.0%
Never Married
7.3%
2.8%
3.8%
3.5%
Widowed
22.7%
9.3%
2.3%
0.0%
Percent with School Aged Children
14.6%
36.3%
13.0%
43.8%
Marital Status:
Gains Made by females
in Accessing the
Superintendency
Slight Gender
Differences
• More women than men have Doctorates.
• No statistical relationship between the gender
of the superintendent and how the search was
conducted. However,
Superintendent search was
conducted by a BOCES
superintendent
Female Male
44%
51%
No Gender
Differences
• Boards were rated as effective or ineffective in
the same proportion among males or females.
• No relationship between the gender of the
prior superintendent and the current
superintendent.
• No relationship between how the current
superintendent was invited to apply and the
gender of the current superintendent.
Spending time with
family…
• Highest response to how superintendents spent
their personal time (92%)
• 64% of Males indicated that 40% or more of
personal time was spent with family, but only
45% of females
• For superintendents who are married, fewer
females than males spend 40% or more of their
time with their families
Confidence to Apply for
First Superintendency
In order of perceived influence
On-the-job Experience
68.2%
Mentoring from Fellow Professionals
50.2%
Academic Preparation
34.5%
Encouragement from Colleagues
31.5%
Encouragement from Family
13.2%
Greatest Incentives
to Apply
Hesitancy Factors in Applying
for 1st Superintendency
Invitation to Apply
Alternative Pathways to
the Superintendency
• Most Superintendents disagreed with
creating alternative paths for noneducators to access the superintendency
(72%)
• Of this majority 35% strongly disagreed
with this proposal
• Only 18% believed non-educators should
have access to the top educator’s position
Social Media
60%
40%
20%
Male
0%
Female
Improved
Communication
Female
Disrupted
Communication
Heirarchy
Rapid Spread of
Rumors
Male
Stress – The Position is more
stressful than expected…
STRESS - THE POSITION IS MORE STRESSFUL THAN
EXPECTED
(HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE)
INDICATORS OF JOB SATISFACTION
INDICATORS OF JOB SATISFACTION
Are you required by contract to live in the district?
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Yes
No
Length of contract by
experience
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
5 Year
50%
4 Year
3 Year
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
New
Veteran
Total
Annual renewal by
longevity
100%
90%
80%
70%
Renewal for a period other
than annual
60%
Annual renewal even if no
board action
50%
40%
Annual renewal with
affirmative board action
30%
No renewal clause
20%
10%
0%
1 - 5 years
6 - 10
years
11 - 15 16 or more
years
years
Total
District contributions to
health premium
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Prefer no answer
Less than 80%
50%
80-89%
90% - 94%
40%
95%-99%
100%
30%
20%
10%
0%
New Superintendent
(<6 years)
Veteran
Superintendent
Individual
Total
New Superintendent
(<6 years)
Veteran
Superintendent
Family
Total
INCENTIVE TO STAY
In What Year do you Plan to Retire?
Percentage of superintendents
who plan to retire
• Thirty percent (n=130) of current
superintendents plan to retire by 2016
Highest percentage by region:
• Lower Hudson/Metro/Long Island (26%)
• North Country (25%)
• Western NY (24%)
Post-Retirement
Plans
Post-retirement plans
of Superintendents
• 38% plan to serve as interim superintendents (40% in 2009
and 46% in 2006)
• Only 4% of respondents selected “unpaid work” (16% in
2009)
• 35% are undecided.
• 33% intend to teach at a college or take a professorship
• 31% selected volunteer work
• 8% plan to continue their career as a superintendent in
another state
Leadership Teams:
Superintendents and Boards of
Education
• Typical Board Characteristics
– Support superintendent.
– Reflect attitudes of the community.
– Have made community aware of the
Regents Reform Agenda.
– Meet 1 or 2 times with superintendent
for professional development.
My Board of
Education is…
My BOE is focused on closing the
achievement gap.
NYSSBA Code of
Conduct
• work with fellow school board members in a spirit of harmony and cooperation in
spite of differences of opinion that arise during vigorous debate of points at issue.
• base decisions upon available facts in each situation; to base each vote upon honest
conviction, unswayed by partisan bias; thereafter, to abide by and uphold the final
majority decision of the board.
• keep confidential matters pertaining to the schools, which are either legally required
to be kept confidential and/or, if disclosed, would needlessly injure individuals or the
schools.
• recognize that the primary function of a school board is to establish policies (which are
in conformity with applicable law and regulations) by which the schools are to be
administered, but that the administration of the educational program and the conduct
of school business shall be left to the superintendent of schools and his/her staff.
• strive to build and exercise a relationship with the superintendent that is constructive
and positive and which enables district staff to function as effectively as possible.
• welcome and encourage active involvement by citizens, including parents and
organizations in board activities regarding establishing school policy and developing
future plans.
Characteristics of Effective
and Ineffective Boards
Effective Boards
Ineffective Boards
Board members work in a spirit of harmony and cooperation
(strongly agree/ agree)
96%
33%
Board members keep matters confidential (strongly agree/ agree)
85%
23%
Board members base decisions upon available facts in each
situation (strongly agree/ agree)
90%
15%
Board members recognize that their primary function is to
establish policy (strongly agree/ agree)
80%
13%
Board members welcome and encourage active involvement by
stake holders (strongly agree/ agree)
90%
44%
Topics for Expanded
Board Training
• Role of board vs. role of the superintendent
• Governance
• Conflict resolution
• Meeting protocols
• Team building
• Special education law
Changing Role of
Superintendent
• More of a focus on finance
• Increased work load
• More NYSED mandates
• More union issues
• More focus on student achievement
Functions for Improving
Student Achievement
• Hiring/retaining competent staff
• Setting vision
• Providing data driven instruction
• Providing professional development
• Adhering to Common Core Learning Standards
• Focusing on acccountability
Emerging trends
Demographics
• Superintendents are younger with lower salaries and it
becomes questionable if the superintendency remains
the “capstone to a career," or becomes a career in itself
(as it most likely was with the early iterations). 61.69%
will work beyond 2016.
• More superintendents have school-age children.
• There are more female superintendents than there have
been in the past 10 years with the largest increase in
urban districts (white women).
Emerging trends
Contractual
• There are more superintendents with three year
contracts; thus we can assume there is less job security
for these superintendents than in previous iterations.
Veterans continue to have five year contracts.
• There are fewer contracts with a renewal clause and an
increase with NO evergreen clause.
• More superintendents are being required to contribute
more to their health insurance premiums.
Emerging trends
Boards of Education
• Since the last iteration, ineffective boards
became more ineffective with the respect
to the NYSSBA Code of Conduct.
Contact Information:
Ed Fale
supt24@aol.com
Bob Ike
robert.ike@palmaccsd.org