This article presents the findings of a random national sample of 1,719 superintendents, using a 67-item survey instrument called the Superintendents’ Professional Expectations and Advancement Review (SPEAR), which measures superintendents’ occupational perceptions, career satisfaction, and job mobility. The study's major findings include that superintendents perceive the quantity of applicants for the superintendency to have decreased in recent years and are concerned about high turnover of superintendents. However, superintendents are less worried about the quality of applicants for vacancies. Contrary to popular perception, superintendents report significant career satisfaction, particularly in the nation's largest districts. The study concludes by offering possible explanations for the widespread public perception of a crisis in the superintendency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlstonJ. A., & JonesS. N. (2002). Carrying the torch of the Jeanes supervisors: 21st-century African American female superintendents and servant leadership. In CooperB. S., & FusarelliL. D. (Eds.), The promises and perils facing today's school superintendent (pp. 65–75). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
2.
BestJ. (2001). Damned lies and statistics.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
3.
BlountJ. M. (1998). Destined to rule the schools: Women and the superintendency, 1873–1995.Albany: State University of New York Press.
4.
BlumbergA. (1985). The school superintendent: Living in conflict.New York: Teachers College Press.
5.
BrunnerC. C. (Ed.) (1999). Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency.Albany: State University of New York Press.
6.
BrunnerC. C. (2002). Bane or benefit? Considering the usefulness of research focused on female superintendents. In CooperB. S., & FusarelliL. D. (Eds.), The promises and perils facing today's school superintendent (pp. 221–246). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
7.
CarlsonR. O. (1966). Executive succession.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
CarlsonR. O. (1972). School superintendents: Careers and performance.Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
9.
CarterG. R., & CunninghamW. G. (1997). The American school superintendent.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
CochranR. F. (1977). California school superintendents like their jobs. Phi Delta Kappan, 58(10), 777.
11.
CooperB. S., FusarelliL. D., & CarellaV. A. (2000). Career crisis in the school superintendency? The results of a national survey.Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
12.
Council of Great City Schools. (1990). The coalition of education in the Great City Schools: A ten-year statistical profile, 1980–1990.Washington, D.C.: Author.
13.
CubanL. (1976). Urban school chiefs under fire.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
14.
CubberleyE. P. (1922). Public school administration.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
15.
CunninghamW. G., & BurdickG. R. (1999). Empty offices. American School Board Journal, 186(12), 25–30.
16.
CunninghamW. G., & BurdickG. R. (2000, October). In search of future superintendents: Is the pipeline running dry? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration, Albuquerque, NM.
17.
DaleyS. (1990, December 26). School chiefs dropping out, plagued by urban problems. New York Times, p. B4.
18.
EsparoL. J., & RaderR. (2001). The leadership crisis: The shortage of qualified superintendents is not going away. American School Board Journal, 188(5), 46–48.
19.
FusarelliL. D., CooperB. S., & CarellaV. A. (2001). Leadership and job satisfaction in the school superintendency. In KowalskiT. J. (Ed.), 21st century challenges for school administrators (pp. 260–271). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
20.
FusarelliL. D., CooperB. S., & CarellaV. A. (2002). Dilemmas of the modern superintendency. In CooperB. S., & FusarelliL. D. (Eds.), The promises and perils facing today's school superintendent (pp. 5–20). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
21.
GlassT. E. (1992). The 1992 study of the American school superintendency.Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
22.
GlassT. E. (2000, November 8). The shrinking applicant pool. Education Week. Retrieved September 20, 2002, from http://www.edweek.org
23.
GlassT. E. (2001a). The superintendent crisis: A review by search consultants.Denver: Education Commission of the States.
24.
GlassT. E. (2001b). State education leaders view the superintendent applicant crisis.Denver: Education Commission of the States.
25.
GlassT. E., BjörkL., & BrunnerC. C. (2000). The study of the American school superintendency 2000.Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
26.
GradyM., Ourada-SiebT., & WessonL. (1994). Women's perceptions of the superintendency. Journal of School Leadership, 4(2), 156–170.
27.
GroganM. (1996). Voices of women aspiring to the superintendency.Albany: State University of New York Press.
28.
HodgkinsonH. L., & MontenegroX. (1999). The U.S. school superintendent: The invisible CEO.Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.
29.
HoustonP. D. (1998, June 3). The ABC's of administrative shortages. Education Week, 32, 44.
30.
HoyleJ. R. (2002). Superintendents for Texas school districts: Solving the crisis in executive leadership.Fort Worth, TX: Sid W. Richardson Foundation.
31.
JacksonB. L., & CibulkaJ. G. (1992). Leadership turnover and business mobilization: The changing political ecology of urban school systems. In CibulkaJ. G., ReedR. J., & WongK. K. (Eds.), The politics of urban education in the United States (pp. 71–86). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
32.
JohnsonS. M. (1996). Leading to change: The challenge of the new superintendency.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
KowalskiT. J. (1995). Keepers of the flame: Contemporary urban superintendents.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
34.
MontenegroX. (1993). Women and racial minority representation in school administration.Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
35.
National School Boards Association. (2002). Superintendent tenure. Retrieved September 21, 2002, from http://www.nsba.org
36.
NatkinG., CooperB. S., FusarelliL. D., AlboranoJ., PadillaA., & GhoshS. (2002). Myth of the revolving-door superintendency. School Administrator, 59(5), 28–31.
37.
OrtizF. I. (2002). Executive succession processes and management success for Latina superintendents. In CooperB. S., & FusarelliLance D. (Eds.), The promises and perils facing today's school superintendent (pp. 21–40). Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
38.
RamseyK. (2000). The interim superintendency. School Administrator, 57(3), 26–28, 30–32.
39.
RichardA. (2000, March 1). Studies cite lack of diversity in top positions. Education Week. Retrieved September 21, 2002, from http://www.edweek.org
40.
SarasonS. (1985). Foreword. In BlumbergA. (Ed.), The school superintendent: Living in conflict (pp. i–xi). New York: Teachers College Press.
41.
SergiovanniT. J., BurlingameM., CoombsF. S., & ThurstonP. W. (1999). Educational governance and administration (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
42.
ShakeshaftC. (1989). Women in educational administration.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
43.
ShakeshaftC. (1999). The struggle to create a more gender-inclusive profession. In MurphyJ., & Seashore LouisK. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp. 99–118). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
44.
SkrlaL. (2000). The social construction of gender in the superintendency. Journal of Education Policy, 15(3), 293–316.
45.
TallericoM. (1999). Women and the superintendency: What do we really know? In BrunnerC. C. (Ed.), Scared dreams: Women and the superintendency (pp. 29–48). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
46.
WessonL. H., & GradyM. L. (1994). An analysis of women urban superintendents: A national study. Urban Education, 28(4), 412–424.
47.
YeeG., & CubanL. (1996). When is tenure long enough? A historical analysis of superintendent turnover and tenure in urban school districts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(Supplement), 615–641.
48.
YoungM. D. (in press). Troubling discourse: Gender, constructions, and the leadership crisis. In YoungM. D., & SkrlaL. (Eds.), Re-examining feminist research in educational leadership.Albany: State University of New York Press.
49.
YoungM. D., & McLeodS. (2001). Flukes, opportunities, and planned interventions: Factors affecting women's decisions to become school administrators. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(4), 462–502.
