Oh please. The fact that the average tenure of these people is 2-3 years isn't relevant?
What we know, is that the average tenure for a superintendent is 2-3 years (I'll take Dennis's number). But, he takes that number and jumps to the following assumptions:
a) That superintendents are leaving after 2-3 years
for a new superintendent job with better pay.
Now, this may be true, but I haven't seen the evidence. Maybe, many of these folks are just giving up, because
the pressure and public scrutiny, isn't worth the
compensation. b) He then assumes, that if they are moving from job
to job, that they are doing so in a cynical effort
to milk the public for better contracts.Anyone with the skills to manage a major metropolitan school district could double their pay, any day of the week, in the private sector. So, why then would they be jumping from one superintendents job to another - where they have to survive under the microscope of public opinion, just for the pay.
Dennis makes the assumption that superintendents are overly paid employees jumping from job to job to increase their paycheck. This assumption makes great political sense to folks who question everything about government, but it makes no sense given the realities of life as a superintendent or the market economy.
Every report or indication that I have, suggest a huge shortage of qualified superintendents. Why would this be so - if the pay packages are so lucrative and the ease of transition from job to job, so easy.
When I look at the kind of work that a district superintendent is supposed to do and the level of public scrutiny that they must work under, I'm amazed that anyone would take the job. No one with the qualifications, would ever take the job for the paycheck alone. I honestly believe, that anyone willing to take on the responsibility of managing the St. Paul Public Schools, by definition has a commitment to education that runs far deeper than Dennis, and his peers, are willing to give them credit for.
I'm not defending this particular contract, I'm simply offended at the casual manner in which some people make assumptions about government or school district officials, just because its suits their political pre-conceptions.
I'd like to hear a serious discussion about the superintendents contract that doesn't rely on false rumors of "jaguars" and superficial assumptions about the character of all/most school superintendents.
Now, back to my coffee......
Best wishes,
Tim Erickson Hamline Midway [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
=================================================
Tim Erickson http://www.politalk.com St. Paul, MN - USA 651-643-0722
[EMAIL PROTECTED] iChat/AIM: stpaultim
=================================================
_____________________________________________
To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
