- By Dan Veaner
- Opinions
Print 
EditorialIn the movie 'Groundhog Day' actor Bill Murray plays a weatherman who is doomed to spend the rest of eternity reliving the worst day of his life. Over and over he sees the same people doing the same things. Lansing now faces another search for a school superintendent for the fourth time in six years. When you ask people why each superintendent left, they describe a myriad of reasons that belie the notion that there is a pattern of driving superintendents away. In my opinion if there are good reasons to stay they are likely to override good reasons to leave. If Andrea Price, Robert Service, Corliss Kaiser, and Mark Lewis had good reason to stay wouldn't at least one of them still be here?
With 30 years in education Lewis was hired by a divided school board, with at least one member opposed to him from day one. Since then he has been attacked on a personal level in public meetings, and received spotty support from the people who hired him. While he has had a few missteps such as the quickly aborted attempt to move the fifth grade to the elementary school, he has demonstrably attempted to fulfill the will of the school board while being blamed for things that occurred before he even joined the district.
When Lewis started here a year ago last January in the midst of a controversial $40 million capital project, he noticed that the community had not been significantly involved in its development. He immediately suggested ways the district could reach out. It was too late for that project, but he came back with an approach to involve the community in the development of a new project. Yet he has been plagued with accusations that his administration is not communicative.
Even if they are justified, all I have observed is vitriol and accusations in school board and facilities committee meetings I have attended. I haven't noticed those accusing him of being uncommunicative trying to communicate with him in especially productive ways. Communication is a two way street.
As the local 'Jimmy Olsen' I have found Lewis quite communicative. He has made himself available for interviews, answered any and all questions, and even alerted me to school events. His column in this publication has been a way of reaching out to the community on a regular basis. I understand that this is just one of the relationships he maintains, and my experience may not be the same as everyone else's. But it suggests that the communication problem may be at least as perceptual as it is real.
Lansing Superintendents Revolving Door
|
Some teachers seem to have banded against Lewis, with a group of them cheering vocally at school board meetings last year when points were scored against him by speakers, including teachers, community members, and school board members. As recently as last week a parent mentioned overhearing a teacher say that if Lewis didn't tow the line he'd be out of here. Who is supposed to be casting the line, and who is supposed to be towing it?
The community has also been less than supportive, with some taxpayers quick to lay blame while not as quick to get the facts first. Some community members have assumed the worst without examining what is actually happening or attempting to work with Lewis to find common solutions.
The operative word in all of the above is 'some.' But it has been a vocal 'some,' and few have challenged them, at least publicly. Whether the lack of support is real or a perception fed by the 'vocal some' is irrelevant, because the net effect is lack of support. It seems to me that if you hire someone to lead a district, it means you are prepared to support his or her leadership. That is not to say that you abdicate responsibility for monitoring a superintendent's performance. But give the poor guy a chance to succeed or fail on his own merits. And if there is a problem deal with it professionally through a review process, not by personal attacks and campaigns.
The revolving door in the superintendent's office has done a lot of damage to the district. While the teachers have done a heroic job of maintaining the academic program, the lack of long term leadership and vision has put our school system at a crossroads where it could continue its reputation for excellence, or fall behind, becoming less competitive with other districts.
When we hire our next superintendent I think we need to give whoever it is a chance to succeed for the district. He or she will need time to learn about our school community before we demand a long term plan. We need a long term plan that is based on where we have been, where we are now, and where we are going. In order to develop that our new superintendent is going to have to be given time to learn about the first two before charting the third. As pressing as the district's problems are, I hope the next superintendent will be given a chance to do what new superintendents do before being plunged into controversy after controversy.
Part of Lewis' legacy is that every administrative position will be filled by a permanent employee (except, now, his own). After years of interim business administrators and three years with an interim elementary school principal, the potential is here for a working team of professionals who can help our next superintendent lead the district to maintain its excellence and improve its performance. That is, if we don't drive them away as well.
If we as a school board, school staff, and community can't throw our support behind the person we hire to lead the district, I think we should not hire that person. It is not fair to the superintendent and it is disastrous for us as a community. Let's admit that we share the blame and figure out how we can learn from the last six years. Again, support doesn't mean blindly accepting everything a superintendent does or wants. But it means that everyone should behave professionally and make the attempt to communicate effectively, sticking to the issues. Until we do we will be doomed to relive Groundhog day, watching ourselves repeat the same pattern over and over.
----
v3i19