Purse Strings for Principals
Re “Financial Empowerment a Mixed Bag for Principals,” Feb. 9: Education Secretary Richard Riordan’s proposal to expand the role of the principal sounds brilliant -- on its surface. On closer examination, however, any realistic person would agree that expecting a principal to be an instructional leader, certified accountant, father/mother confessor, accountability/standards and testing expert, human resources operative, committee coordinator/leader/juggler and conciliator, public relations spinmeister, PTA and union collaborator, teacher evaluator and disciplinarian, latrine and grounds supervisor, state and federal legislative expert, school board and superintendent kowtower, fundraiser and school/student/teacher cheerleader, motivational speaker and community listener -- among other assigned and expected duties and responsibilities from local, state and federal bureaucracies and bureaucrats -- would come to the conclusion that Riordan is far too simplistic and unrealistic in his proposals and expectations.
May I respectfully suggest that Riordan tell us what he expects of principals in our schools?
Chuck Sambar
Retired Teacher and
Administrator, La Canada
Your article on Riordan’s proposal to expand principals’ power over budgets and staffing neglects to mention even one of over 60 charter schools in Los Angeles County where entrepreneurial, empowered public school principals and teachers are changing the lives of their students. Empowering principals to make decisions on behalf of students, instead of forcing them to ask for permission from a distant, impersonal school district bureaucracy, is good for public education. In fact, it is leading to improved student achievement in California’s charter schools -- especially for disadvantaged students.
California’s legislative analyst concluded in January that “charter schools are a viable reform strategy -- expanding families’ choices, encouraging parental involvement, increasing teacher satisfaction, enhancing principals’ control over school-site decision-making and broadening the curriculum without sacrificing time spent on core subjects.” California’s charter schools have consistently proven that there is merit to cutting the bureaucracy and giving local communities, rather than Sacramento, more control. It’s about time we give this freedom to all public schools.
Caprice Young
CEO, California Charter
Schools Assn., Sacramento
It was interesting to see that at least two principals interviewed in your story said that they wanted to be “educational leaders,” not “bureaucrats” or “managers.” If that is the case, they should have remained in the classroom, where educational leadership really takes place.
If Riordan’s plan is to put more financial decision-making in the hands of principals, principals need to be more adequately steeped in accounting and school finance practices than they are in the typical curriculum for master’s and doctoral degrees in school administration. Their little-or-nothing knowledge of school finances is no doubt one of the reasons for public mistrust of school spending. If a person needs several courses in accounting to become a controller in a corporation, why shouldn’t a similar level of competence be required of school money managers, including the superintendent?
Local financial control would have other efficiencies. For example, on-the-spot funding approval for a teacher to attend a conference could be made, rather than requiring him to submit triplicate forms 30 days in advance and then requiring additional follow-up forms to get his money reimbursed. School site work orders and materials could be attended to right then, rather than getting lost in the financial-approval quagmire of a district office. Teachers might even be able to get hot water and exhaust fans in the staff restrooms -- something that I didn’t have in 34 years of teaching.
Bill D. Holder
Cypress