Two-Way Conversations

How first-year superintendents are using data to build political capital that enables system change

When new superintendents first step into their offices, they often are taking charge of systems badly in need of an upgrade, with structures and practices left over from the 20th century.

In the Hollywood version, the new leaders speak truth to power, break down longstanding barriers to change and radically remake the system so all children can learn. This new kind of school system allocates its people, time and money equitably and transparently, with flexibility for school teams to pursue strategies that will have the greatest impact on their students.

And then (roll credits!), one small corner of the world is forever changed for the better.

Complicated Reality

The real world, we know, is different. Faced with complex political realities, a leader’s grand vision of transformation often plays out as incremental wins — a contract revision here, a program extension there. But how do some system leaders turn a potential political minefield into a flywheel for positive change?

At Education Resource Strategies, where we have worked with leaders of more than 30 mostly large, urban systems over the past 10 years, our staff recently interviewed a dozen current and new superintendents. As the “listening tour” has become de rigeur, new school system leaders often invest more than half of their long working hours in building relationships and developing a deep understanding of local power structures, a/k/a how we do things here.

But the politically savvy superintendent seeks not only to learn. She or he brings new facts about the district to each conversation. One-directional listening becomes two-way dialogue, helping to fertilize the ground for the superintendent’s progressive agenda. As one first-year superintendent put it: “I need to understand the politics. But if that is my first lens, I’m taking my eye off the ball for kids in the district.”

Five Examples

How does this two-way conversation work in practice? Here are five “ripped from the headlines” examples from the superintendents we interviewed.

 Obtaining quick wins. When Lewis D. Ferebee was named superintendent of Indianapolis Public Schools in 2013, the district faced a $30 million deficit. As he spoke with local constituents, Ferebee tried to understand the district’s financials in greater detail. The result: Contrary to what the community believed, the school district actually ended the year with an $8.4 million surplus. Immediately, local media declared in a headline “IPS audits confirm no deficit: overhaul, possible teacher raises coming.”

Ferebee was able to negotiate a teacher contract that provided Indianapolis teachers with a much-needed raise, their first in five years, while introducing new leadership opportunities for teachers and future raises tied to effectiveness.

 Shaping the conversation. When Tommy Chang took over as superintendent of Boston Public Schools in 2015, he embarked on a listening tour that reached more than 1,500 constituents. In meeting after meeting, Chang heard that the district was strapped for resources, with schools projecting painful cuts to cherished programs.

At the same time, Chang saw that Boston’s district budget — at $1 billion, or nearly $20,000 per student — was higher than ever, while enrollment remained steady. Facing these two disparate “realities,” Chang posed a basic question: “If we’re so rich, why does everyone feel so broke?”

ERS worked with Chang and his team to provide a clear and detailed account of how the Boston Public Schools uses its resources and how those practices compare to other large urban districts. Armed with the data, Chang was able to put his proposed budget in a broader context, passing a plan that included some reductions but also a path for transforming the system.

 Establishing trust. As Patrick Sanaghan, a Pennsylvania-based education consultant, has written for the AASA website, transparency about decision making is one of the best ways to build “relational capital” to get things done.

We interviewed one superintendent who felt intense pressure to demonstrate progress in his first year. Recognizing the long history of factional battles that stymied action in his new community and seeking to build trust, he first identified two leading indicators that everyone could agree needed attention — student attendance and long-term suspensions.

Sharing current data with principals, the superintendent made clear he expected them to implement strategies to improve the numbers — and he would be tracking it with them on an ongoing basis. As suspension and chronic absenteeism declined, the superintendent had a base of political support for more challenging systemic improvements.

 Challenging conventional wisdom. Another first-year superintendent with whom we worked believed he had inherited a large and expensive central office. However, a key longtime leader on his team didn’t agree. Sure enough, our analysis of the district’s central office spending compared to similarly sized districts facing similar student academic and social challenges bore out the superintendent’s hypothesis.

Engaging deeply in the analysis, the skeptical team leader eventually had his “aha” moment. Quickly, he took ownership over the process for reallocating resources from central office to schools, guiding his own department and others through painful but necessary tradeoffs. Using data and analysis — and not just a fresh set of eyes — to challenge conventional wisdom was helpful to bring others along and forge relationships to support positive change.

 Providing cover. One new superintendent arrived in a district where the mayor, who also chaired the school committee, faced a tough re-election battle. At the same time, several elementary schools were increasingly overcrowded, requiring rapid attention to what could quickly become a political hot-button issue.

To create space for action, the superintendent worked with PTO leaders and several principals to clearly understand existing school designs, school-level resource decisions and options for managing the overcrowding. The new shared fact base helped unite the PTO and school leaders behind a proposal from the superintendent to change boundary lines for schools, making it possible for the mayor to support this change during a tough election year.

New Relationships

The reality is that transforming school systems requires both powerful, research-based strategies and significant political capital. But, as more and more superintendents are finding, building that political capital does not need to precede the change process.

Instead, politically savvy system leaders are gathering hard data on how their district works in parallel with the upfront relationship-building work. They are bringing those facts to bear to make the case for change, align diverse constituencies around a shared vision for that change and even to jumpstart the transformation process. Maybe even Hollywood would buy into that version of the story.