(This is a continuation of the article from last week, discussing the need to rethink some of our assumptions about schools post-Covid).
Assumption #6: A full-time admissions/advancement person is a luxury we cannot afford.
An interested parent calls the school to inquire about enrolling. To whom do we transfer that call? Does the secretary, with two kids and a parent waiting at the counter, answer questions herself? Does she send it to the principal, who’s scrambling to cover for a teacher who called in sick or a disciplinary situation in 7th grade? Do we kick it over to voicemail? Parents often judge us on first impressions. How do we handle these first inquiries? Who shows a parent around when he or she just ‘pops in’ to see us?
We tend to regard admissions/advancement persons as an extravagance that only high schools can afford. Yet on our staff we have teaching aides, music and P.E. teachers and guidance counselors. It’s good to have those positions, but if it’s an either-or, it’s a slam dunk choice: full time admissions/advancement persons work on the two things our schools need most to operate: student enrollment and philanthropy. A good hire will pay for his or her position many times over through the years.
Assumption #7: The principal must be the “trigger” for everything.
I know principals who believe it’s their responsibility to open the school in the morning and lock it up at night, who must be at every sporting event, who must greet parents in pickup and drop-off lines, be present in the classrooms and hallways throughout the day, act as the school’s chief disciplinarian, answer phone calls and emails from parents almost immediately, hire, supervise and hire teachers, and also engage as the school’s chief fund-raiser and communicator—just to name some of their responsibilities!
This “superman” or “superwoman” model of principal is unsustainable—something’s gotta give, and it’s usually the principal’s mental and physical health first, and various elements of the school next. In contrast, I once listened to podcast featuring the CEO of Southwest Airlines, whose advice to leaders was “Do the things only you can do as the leader, and delegate everything else.” When I first heard that I thought, “Yes, it would be nice to have the staff that Southwest Airlines does!” But if the principal sets up recurring processes, the more automatic the better, such that subordinates can administer these processes, he or she has more time to focus on a more specific set of responsibilities. A teacher who likes coming to school very early to get work done can open the school. A coach with a late practice can lock it down. Teachers can rotate the meet and greet in the parking lot each day. If we can’t afford an assistant principal to handle routine discipline, we can create “team leaders” at the K-2, 3-5, 6-8 level and stipend them a little bit, and ask them to be the “first responder” to situations of discipline at their level, leaving principals the less frequent task of dealing with the most serious issues where suspensions and expulsions are at question.
What are those things that “only principals can do?”: I think there are five broad areas that should occupy most of our time:
- Architect and caretaker of the school’s culture
- Chief communicator/story-teller
- Hiring, supervision and removing teachers and staff
- Creation (with Board) and oversight of the school budget
- Philanthropic outreach, especially with major donors
If we delegate well, we will have time for these things. But we're not very good at delegating!
Assumption #8: Fund-raising = Philanthropy
No. Fund-raising activities are the magazine sales, bake sales, car washes, aimed at a specific purpose or club. Philanthropy refers to donations given to the school to support the school’s mission, usually for a broad purpose like financial aid. Whereas in fund-raising a customer buys something, in philanthropy, the donor becomes a kind of investor in our mission--a partner, almost. A philanthropist may give to the annual fund, or even better, make a gift in his or her will. As a general observation, we spend too much time in Catholic schools on fund-raising and not enough on philanthropy. No doubt we need fund-raisers, but the principal’s time is too precious to be planning or executing $200 OR $300 fund-raisers. Instead, he or she should aim at building a culture of philanthropy. I explain my thoughts on this here.
Assumption #9: The hiring process we’ve been using for years to hire faculty and principals is still the most effective way to do so.
The traditional way of hiring is essentially this: We post a functional job description with general requirements, invite people to apply by sending in all the paperwork (including resume, cover letter, 2-3 letters of reference, consent form for background search, verification of experience form, consent to a diocesan “life-style” form, and verification of finger printing)—all before we decide to interview them.
The presumption of this process is that the candidate REALLY wants a job with us! Why else would he or she spend hours filling out the paperwork, even if he or she is unsure we are interested? But I think this presumption is wrong, especially with a really talented candidate. Such a candidate has “options,” and if we bury him/her in paperwork on the front end, he or she may choose not to apply, and we’d never even know it. We are competing for that person against other schools! I advocate, as a first step, that we should spend some time crafting an optimistic, enthusiastic presentation of what we expect of all teachers on an "employment link" on our web page (see ours here), and then underneath that, the specifics of the particular job that's open. Ask only for a resume and cover letter at first. Then, if we like what we see, we can invite the candidate for an interview. And if he or she is a finalist, then we can ask them to complete the necessary paperwork. I outline the steps of advertising for a job, interviewing the candidate and closing the deal in three short blog articles, here, here and here.
Assumption #10: Catholic schools should accept every student, as a function of our mission.
Though we are not a private school with exclusive admissions, I believe it’s a mistake to believe that we are the opposite and should take everyone! Can a student thrive in our environment? If not, we must be bold enough, and I’d argue kind enough, to say so. Far worse to take him, let him develop friendships in our schools, and then rip him away from his “home” with us by having him flunk out. When evaluating an applicant with a very weak academic background, I believe we should ask three important questions: First, are the parents going to be “value-adds” or “value-negatives?” I have worked with heroic parents who sit down with their child every night for homework and through sheer force of will, persistence and grace, helped their child work his way through school, never blaming the teacher, never regarding the school as the enemy. And I have seen only slightly impaired students with parents who understand themselves as advocates for their child against the school and teachers, whose children never make it. In the admissions interview with the weak candidate, I ask our admissions director to do her best to discern whether the parents will be +/- in the equation. If negative, it’s a simple “We’re sorry. We don’t believe we can meet your child’s needs”. Second, are the applicant and family practicing Catholics? If so, we will be more generous in our assessment, as our primary mission is to serve the parish families. Third, will the child require special services? If so, do we offer that in our school, or can we afford to create that? Special services are costly, and if creating a program drives the tuition higher than our average family can afford, we probably cannot serve that child. It breaks our heart, but we are being truth-tellers, even if we don’t like the truth we are telling.
-----
No doubt, it’s hard to break away from our presuppositions. Most of us who lead Catholic schools were successful in them as children, and we have a tendency to default to the way we were raised and replicate the schools we know. But just as Covid has forced us to do things differently—and we have succeeded in doing so in a way that is truly praiseworthy!—so must we be willing to rethink, re-energize and re-create our schools with new ways of operating.
May God give us the wisdom and fortitude to do so.
No comments:
Post a Comment