Who's Gonna
Fill Their Shoes?
by Dr. Gaylord Tryon, SAI Executive Director
In 1985, country and western singer George
Jones released his award-winning song "Who's Gonna Fill Their
Shoes." In the song, George Jones sings about some of the
legends who helped establish country and western music-like Hank,
Elvis, Marty, the man in black, the red-headed stranger, the Okee
from Muskogee, etc. He asks the questions, "Who's gonna fill
their shoes, who's gonna stand that tall, and who's gonna give
their heart and soul?"
The same questions can be asked about school administrators. While
I could very easily write (not sing!!) about some of Iowa's many
educational leaders who are regarded as legends in our business,
my comments here will focus more on the large number of anticipated
retirements and what the future might hold regarding the number
of individuals who choose to go into school administration. And
I wonder, who's gonna fill their shoes-the shoes of the many outstanding
people who have labored so hard to help shape and mold the excellent
K-12 educational program we have in Iowa?
In 1989, SAI conducted a comprehensive study (with the very able
assistance of Lee Morrison, now serving as superintendent, Hampton-Dumont)
to determine what the future might hold regarding administrator
retirements. Based on this study, we predicted that approximately
60% of Iowa's school administrators would retire by the year 2000
and that we would probably be experiencing a shortage of educational
leaders in the very near future. Well, here we are in the year
2000 and, indeed, we have had a huge number of educational leaders
retire from the profession in the last 10 years and we are now
experiencing a shortage of school administrators in Iowa.
In a study we just recently completed (in cooperation with the
Department of Education), we learned that an even larger proportion
of administrators would be retiring in the next three years. For
example, in 1998-1999, there were 1880 Iowa superintendents, assistant
superintendents, principals, assistant principals, AEA chief administrators,
and AEA division directors. Of these 1880 administrators, 674
(35.9%) will be eligible to retire under the Rule of 88 by the
year 2003. Based on survey results, we are projecting that 610
of the 674 administrators will retire by the year 2003 (32% of
Iowa's current school administrators). Even more alarming, approximately
435 of these individuals will be retiring all at one time-in 2003
when the state retirement system is scheduled to revert back to
a three-year final average salary for ALL public employees.
But, who's gonna fill their shoes? Who's gonna fill your shoes?
How many individuals are in the pipeline to get certified to serve
as school administrators in the next 3-5 years? Following are
the projected number of individuals who will be completing administrative
endorsements between now and the 2003-2004 school year. (Information
provided by the DE.)
K-6 Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Iowa State |
7 |
30 |
22 |
# |
# |
| Univ. of Iowa |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
15 |
| UNI |
7 |
10 |
13 |
# |
# |
| Buena Vista U. |
4 |
11 |
6 |
+ |
+ |
| Clarke College |
4 |
2 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
| Drake Univ. |
25 |
22 |
23 |
20 |
20 |
| Loras College |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
# |
| Totals |
66 |
94 |
88 |
44 |
40 |
7-12 Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Iowa State |
5 |
19 |
19 |
# |
# |
| Univ. of Iowa |
24 |
24 |
24 |
24 |
24 |
| UNI |
30 |
7 |
26 |
# |
# |
| Buena Vista U. |
5 |
7 |
13 |
+ |
+ |
| Clarke College |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
| Drake Univ. |
33 |
31 |
30 |
26 |
28 |
| Loras College |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
# |
| Totals |
100 |
91 |
118 |
54 |
54 |
Superintendent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Iowa State |
8 |
15 |
9 |
# |
# |
| Univ. of Iowa |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
15 |
| UNI |
0 |
40 |
16 |
# |
# |
| Buena Vista U. |
** |
** |
** |
** |
** |
| Clarke College |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
| Drake Univ. |
15 |
13 |
12 |
12 |
15 |
| Loras College |
** |
** |
** |
** |
** |
| Totals |
26 |
71 |
40 |
15 |
18 |
It's gratifying to see that we do have several people pursuing administrative endorsements. However, just because an individual receives an endorsement, that does not mean he/she will actually take a job as a school administrator. For example, the following tables list the number of individuals who are licensed as either an elementary principal, secondary principal, or superintendent, and are currently employed (either full-time or part-time) in K-12 education (public), but not serving as a school administrator.
Number of Individuals Licensed as
Elementary Principal
| Employed |
Full-Time | Employed |
Part-Time |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Individuals Licensed as
Secondary Principal
| Employed |
Full-Time | Employed |
Part-Time |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Individuals Licensed as
Superintendent
| Employed |
Full-Time | Employed |
Part-Time |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Full-Time |
|
Part-Time |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sexual
Harassment in the Workplace: What It Is and What It Isn't
by Kathy Lee Collins, J.D., SAI Director of Legal Services
Listen up. Here's the nutshell version of sexual harassment
in employment, using a Title VII analysis. (See pages 26-30 in
your Iowa School Administrator's Legal Guide.)
The shorthand definition of sexual harassment is "Unwelcome
Sexual Advances." (I tell my students to remember "U.S.A.!"
It seems to work.) Obviously the legal definition is considerably
longer, but if you understand that the key to true sexual harassment
is unwelcomeness coupled with either actions or verbiage of a
sexual nature, you'll be able to pass the test.
There are two kinds of sexual harassment: "quid pro quo"
and "hostile environment." Both, if proven to have affected
the "victim's" working conditions, are violations of
the Equal Opportunities Employment Act prohibiting discrimination
on the basis of sex (Title VII).
Quid pro quo means "something in exchange for something
else," or as I like to say in the training I do, "tit
for tat." (Sick lawyer humor.) Quid pro quo harassment occurs
when a person in a supervisory position over another person uses
that position in an attempt to exact sexual favors. It occurs
in either of two situations: either the employee is threatened
with negative employment consequences ("If you don't sleep
with me, you'll be fired.") or coerced into sex or tolerating
sexual behavior with a promise of positive employment treatment
("If you want to be department chair, you'll see to it that
I'm satisfied."). Quid pro quo doesn't work if the
parties are of equal employment status. Obviously, if you are
my equal in the workplace, you can't affect my employment status
positively or negatively. This form of sexual harassment is about
power.
In theory, one incident of quid pro quo harassment is enough to
result in liability for the employer. But it would probably have
to be pretty nasty or a denial would have to actually result in
a negative employment consequence, e.g., being demoted, passed
over for promotion, fired, etc.
Hostile environment sexual harassment can occur between
supervisor and supervised or between equals, co-workers. The key
is, of course, that no small-p political power is used (whether
it exists or not) to try to coerce sexual favors. Instead, it's
just irritating sexual touching or verbal banter. Remember when
Clarence Thomas was nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court and Anita
Hill, a former co-worker of his, came forward. (She worked under
him, no pun intended, at the EEOC, of all places - an agency charged
with investigating alleged Title VII violations!) She said figuratively,
"This is the kind of man you're contemplating confirming
as a Supreme Court Justice." And she proceeded to tell about
inappropriate verbal remarks he allegedly made in the workplace.
Who can forget "Long Dong Silver" and the "pubic
hair on the Coke can?"
Despite being supervised by Mr. Thomas, Ms. Hill's allegations
were of the "hostile environment" type; he hadn't used
his position as her supervisor to try to exact sexual favors.
He just (allegedly) made crude sexual comments in the workplace
that everyone felt they had to put up with.
The essence of "hostile environment" sexual harassment
is that it's on-going. One incident is not going to be sufficient
to create an "environment" that is sexually hostile.
A person who wishes to pursue a claim of Title VII hostile environment
sexual harassment has to prove that the conduct of the offending
person(s) was "severe or pervasive." You aren't likely
to prove that with one or two incidents. Especially not over 2-5
years.
Now be a good Doo-Bee and go back and read the above paragraphs
until you get it.
Here's the first Quiz Question: Did Bill Clinton sexually harass
Paula Jones in violation of Title VII?
Answer: No. If you believe that the incident occurred (where he
used his security man to invite Ms. Jones, an Arkansas state employee
theoretically "under" Governor Clinton, to a hotel room
where he allegedly propositioned her), you still have to evaluate
the situation legally. While such a proposition from a supervisor
would meet the threshold definition of sexual harassment (unwelcome
sexual advances), we need to know more. Because he was Governor
and she was a clerk for some agency of state government, he was
in a position to "quid pro quo" harass her. Did he?
You have to ask whether she suffered any negative employment consequences
after her rejection of his request. Paula Jones was unable to
show she suffered any work loss. So maybe it was "hostile
environment" then? Oops! We only have one incident. As we
learned above, one incident isn't enough to create a hostile environment.
That's why Ms. Jones lost her Title VII lawsuit against the former
governor.
Question #2: Did Bill Clinton sexually harass Monica Lewinsky?
Answer: No. Why not? Because she was a willing participant. There
was no unwelcomeness, so the threshold "USA" definition
isn't even met here.
Now lest you begin thinking I am condoning this behavior, understand
that I do not. I believe there should be negative employment consequences
(aka "discipline") for the employee who engages in such
inappropriate behavior. If any of us had the ability to suspend
Clinton without pay for a couple of weeks and order him to counseling
for having sex in the workplace, that might have been an appropriate
sanction. But let's not call it sexual harassment. It was a consensual,
sexual relationship between two adults. Immoral? Sure. Inappropriate?
Absolutely. But not illegal nor a violation of her civil rights.
There are two other things people have trouble understanding.
First, the plaintiff ("victim," the person bringing
the lawsuit) has to sue the employer; they don't sue the
person responsible for the harassment. And they have to show that
the employer "knew or should have known" about the harassment
and let it go on. Second, although there is a crime called "harassment,"
most sexual harassment is not criminal. Thus, you sue in civil
court seeking money damages (or the promotion you were denied,
or your job back, or whatever) rather than going to the police
or sheriff. The exception would be any forced physical sexual
behavior. In other words, rape is the ultimate form of sexual
harassment. If I were raped by a co-worker or boss, I would definitely
report it to the police or sheriff. But the verbal banter that
typically forms the basis for sexual harassment claims is not
a crime. If it meets the requirements of Title VII, it's a violation
of a civil rights law.
When I first arrived at the Department of Education, a former
superintendent sought a hearing with the State Board in an attempt
to get his suspended license reinstated. That was my first (pardon
the pun) exposure to workplace sexual harassment. (This was in
the mid-80s and "harassment" was just beginning to surface.
It literally exploded as a legal issue within a very few years.)
The superintendent had lost his license for behavior such as the
following:
- inviting a teacher to stay with him in a hotel room; grabbing
her breasts; putting hands down her clothes and on her crotch,
and forcing her to touch him sexually; asking "when are we
going to get together?"
- forcing a kiss on another teacher, grabbing her buttocks, holding
her in a bear hug;
- staring at and then touching another teacher's pelvic area and
then pushing her toward a bed in the nurse's office; visiting
her at home and moving his hand from her waist to her breast;
- pinching, grabbing, and sexual innuendo toward another teacher;
calling her out of her classroom to ask if she would join him
at a hotel room;
- pulling another teacher into a cloak room and trying to kiss
her; touching her breasts, thighs, and buttocks;
- "kiddingly" suggesting that a teacher give him the
opportunity to measure her for new undergarments and a dress.
Now THAT is a sexually hostile environment. Repeated incidents;
multiple "victims," unwelcome sexual advances all over
the place. Pretty shocking. But note: not one teacher claimed
that he threatened or promised negative or positive job consequences.
So what kind of sexual harassment was it? Hostile environment.
There was no suit of which I'm aware. I'm not even sure whether
he resigned or was fired by his board. I do know it was a long
time before he was reinstated, and he has never practiced in Iowa
since then.
So why am I bringing all of this up now? Because there have been
three or four situations recently where some of our members have
used admittedly bad judgment and made sexual advances toward a
teacher. In a couple of cases, there was a consensual sexual
relationship between the administrator and a teacher, one
that ended years ago, but the teacher is now coming forward to
complain, presumably out of fear that her job is in jeopardy.
(It isn't.) And the relationship - as she describes it - has changed
character. She is now saying the administrator "coerced her"
into a sexual relationship. And this lasted for a year.
And what's happening as a result of these overt, blackmail-type
threats? Instead of being appropriately disciplined, the administrators
are being forced to resign or take early retirement.
I'm angry, folks! Sure I'm upset that these individuals used such
poor judgment, but that's not the half of it. What really gets
my goat is that the teachers and their representatives are coming
forward demanding the termination or resignation of the
administrator. Based on a single incident. A proposition that
was rebuffed. A dirty joke that wasn't appreciated. And they're
getting what they ask for! The threat has been effective; the
members have resigned.
As a lawyer, it drives me crazy. The teachers are clearly threatening.
("I demand his resignation within 48 hours!") I want
to say, "Or what? If you're threatening to sue, come and
get us. You aren't going to win." But the unspoken "or
else" is not a lawsuit. The threat is that the teacher will
"go public" about the offensive joke or the touch on
the thigh, or the fact of the relationship.
Unfortunately, as is so often the case in these situations, the
primary concern of the situations, the primary concern of the
district is not a lawsuit but the bad P.R. The concern of the
administrator is protecting his family and friends and the district
from a scandal. This is an area where laws don't mean squat. It's
human emotions that rule. And while I understand not wanting this
type of situation to get out into the community, the lawyer in
me can't agree that firing someone or forcing his resignation
over one or two mild incidents of the hostile environment type
of sexual harassment is the appropriate remedy.
My wish? That if this happens to one of your administrators, don't
panic. Don't promise anything out of the chute. Contact your attorney.
Conduct an investigation or have one done by reputable, established
persons with a track record. Place the administrator on administrative
leave during the investigation. But don't force a resignation,
don't roll over right away, and don't give in to not-so-veiled
threats or "demands."
And we might remind the teachers that in general, there are many
more allegations of inappropriate conduct or remarks on their
part, typically toward students, than administrators could keep
up with. If one or two incidents of poor judgment by an adult
toward another adult in the workplace constitute grounds for the
termination of an administrator, the same behavior by teachers
toward students should get the same treatment. In other words,
they should be careful what they ask for. What goes around comes
around.
Top
Odds & Ends
by Dr. Marcus Haack, SAI Associate Executive Director
Budget Battles
The closing weeks of the 2000 legislative session are shaping
up as a battle over the state's budget. Democratic Governor Tom
Vilsack continues to push his $4.8 billion spending plan that
he says is needed to move Iowa forward and to resolve a number
of problems the state is facing. Those problems include environmental
concerns (especially polluted waterways), increasing reports of
child abuse, young people leaving the state for "greener
pastures," an aging population, deteriorating school infrastructure,
a lack of recreational opportunities for Iowa's residents, etc.
The list goes on.
Republicans, on the other hand, charge that the governor has submitted
a budget that is too large and that violates current state laws.
They also believe they've already given too much on the governor's
education platform. (Of course, from our point of view, that position
is certainly debatable!) They also feel they've been forced to
give in on certain environmental issues, and they're no longer
in a mood to compromise. According to House Speaker Brent Siegrist,
"The Republican budget proposal is fair, honest, and reflects
the priorities of Iowa families."
Look for increasing fireworks over this issue as the session winds
down. . . and heats up!
IPERS
It's been a long, hard battle, but if things remain the way they
are as of this writing, there will be substantive and positive
changes in the final version of this year's IPERS bill. Are we
getting all we want (the immediate implementation of the three-year
average)? No. Did we make progress? We certainly did.
SAI's top priority for IPERS changes going into this session was
to improve the death benefit for surviving beneficiaries of IPERS
members. We won on that important issue. No longer will public
employees who are suffering from terminal diseases have to go
through the agonizing decisions and bureaucratic processes required
to complete retirement before their illness claims them. No longer
will survivors be cheated out of their financial security.
As for the three-year average, it was an uphill battle all the
way. However, obtaining a six-year average ending Jan. 1, 2002,
accompanied by annual increases of $10,000 in the $55,000 default
factor, can certainly be viewed as a partial victory.
Local Control?
When it comes to educational funding and initiatives, the legislature
has been famous for espousing "local control" in its
legislative programs. Want more money for schools? The legislature
will authorize districts to enhance funding through additional
property tax levies in the name of local control.
Need to fix crumbling buildings? Once again the legislature is
right there saying the funds are available through a local option
sales tax. No need for the state to provide assistance when there's
a legislated local alternative. Worried about teacher and administrative
shortages? The legislature is quick to provide legislative alternatives,
including relaxed licensure standards, since local school boards
should have the right to hire whomever they want to fill vacancies.
So where did SF 2267 (Parental Contracts/Social Promotions) come
from? This bill is one of the most blatant examples of state meddling
in local school district operations that I've seen. Undoubtedly
it will be watered down before the session ends. However its contents
are frightening, and certainly not in keeping with "local
control."
Check Out Their Votes
The general election is still seven months away and memories are
short. So resolve now to check out who's voting for what. It's
easy to find your senator's or representative's voting record
on any bill. Simply go to the general assembly's web site, go
to the bill in question and click on bill history. Then click
on SJ (Senate Journal) or HJ (House Journal) following the line
that indicates a bill was approved by one of the chambers. There
it is, a record of how each legislator voted on the bill.
Check out the voting record on each of the bills important to
you. Make a list. Were these legislators pro-education? Were they
supporters of school administrators? If not, look over your list
in November just before you go into the voting booth.
Top
Aspiring
by Dr. Elaine Smith-Bright, SAI Director of Professional Development
Remember when you were so anxious to get that first administrative
job? You wondered if anyone would ever hire you. You just knew
you could make a difference if someone would just give you the
chance. On Tues., Feb. 29 we held our Aspiring Administrators
Leadership Lab here at the SAI office. Thirty-seven bright and
eager future administrators attended. For those of us who are
veterans and have weathered some of the storms and challenges
of everyday administration, it was a joy to listen to and work
with this group.
Betty Steffy, professor of Educational Administration, and Don
Hackmann, assistant professor of Educational Administration, at
Iowa State University joined Marc Haack and me in presenting the
agenda for the day. Between the four of us, we represented experience
at every level of K-12 school administration, central office and
state agency administration, experience at higher education institutions
and experience in six states. There wasn't a question they asked
that one of us couldn't answer. We laughed at the end of the day
about how many years that experience represented and assured ourselves
we weren't that old!
During the lab we covered the routine "must have" topics
like resumes, letters of application, credentials, references,
etc., along with an opportunity for participants to have their
resumes and letters critiqued by one of us. They really seemed
to appreciate the personal attention and enjoyed talking about
their qualifications. Betty Steffy shared a segment on portfolios
that included specific suggestions on content and a display of
examples. Marc and I did a session on interviewing. We role-played
what an interview SHOULD NOT look like. It was a fun way of making
a serious point about how important first impressions are, and
how critical the interview can be, to the success of landing the
job. Betty and Don had surveyed 50 districts and compiled a list
of the most commonly asked interview questions. So next on the
agenda, participants were given a chance, in small groups, to
practice their answers to those questions. On the evaluation forms,
this turned out to be one of the most valued activities.
As a closing to the day, we took the opportunity to share our
beliefs, in how important it is to belong to your professional
organizations. We explained how they not only provide information,
excellent publications, leadership development classes, recognition,
and lobbying efforts; they provide collegial support. Specifically
for SAI, I encouraged them to become members in our Aspiring category.
As an aspiring member, for $50 they receive all of our publications,
can attend any workshop for half price, and the big conference
in August is free to them.
We've all heard enough about the future shortage of administrators
to know we need to attend to those who express an interest. So
my purpose in writing this article was two-fold. If you know of
an aspiring administrator, mentor and support them. If you are
already mentoring someone, excellent! Second, consider encouraging
them to become an Aspiring member so they can begin to experience
the benefits of belonging. After all they get to associate with
all of us veterans. And, what better way for us to share our knowledge
and expertise than to champion a new administrator on their way!
It not only helps them, it renews us as we reaffirm our beliefs,
triumphs, skills and experiences.
Going where no people had gone before, most of Iowa's schools
have explored the Internet frontier. We hurled the first generation
of Web sites out there, and patiently waited for contact by other
Internet explorers. We enjoyed the openness and peacefulness of
Internet space. That was then. This is now.
The general population has caught on to the Internet in amazing
numbers. Now, if people can't find what they're looking for on
a Web site in a matter of seconds, they're outta' there, on to
another site. If they don't
get good customer service, they never go back to that site again.
Ever. If the last time a Web site was updated was September 1999,
people roll their eyes and ridicule the organization posting the
site. Our school and agency Web sites receive the same type of
scrutiny. We need to keep up. We need to move on.
If the purpose of a first generation Web site was to explore the
Internet frontier, the second generation Web site's purpose is
to adjust as a result of the exploration's findings. What have
our first generation explorers learned so far?
1) Nothing replaces good customer service. Like all forms
of communication,
a Web site does not replace real relationships. Don't let technology
make your school or agency impersonal. Always provide complete
contact information on your site like names, addresses, cities,
phones, faxes, e-mails, and maps.
2) Remodel sites from the outside, in (or love your customers
more and your
products less). Focus on resources and news your customers
can use. While a Web site is a great opportunity to get your message
out, you also need to also look at your customers' cares, concerns,
values, and interests. Track what people are using on your site.
Don't simply repeat your district or agency's promotional brochure.
3) Make it interactive and keep it fresh or don't bother. This
is pretty self-explanatory. Who has time to be bored? And why
should you take the time to keep up a site if nobody is using
it?
4) Opinion leaders and media look to the Internet. You'd
better believe it. Your community's leaders and media use the
Internet to research, monitor, and respond to issues. Mold your
Web site into a useful tool for them, so they have good, education-based
information with which to work.
5) Students should not be forgotten. Have you ever noticed
how noticeably absent students are from many school districts'
Web sites? What communicates more: Itemizing your local district's
academic standards in mind-numbing detail? Or using words, full-color
photos, and the interactivity of the Web to "walk" visitors
through a typical day during which a 4th-grade class is learning
the things the standards support? Protecting students' privacy
and keeping photos and identities safe is critical, but that doesn't
mean we have to keep their achievements off the Web.
Now that Iowa's educators have explored and learned from first generation Web sites, it's time to set course for exciting second generation coordinates. The journey will be well worth the effort. And the results for our crews will be astronomical.