Superintendent Office - Coursework Example

Superintendent office Introduction Education is a state and local responsibility primarily in the United States. The federal governments, alongside the local governments have the responsibility to institute guiding regulations and laws regarding the education process in the country. Notably, recent findings from research indicate that superintendents state that there is increasing responsibility and mandates within their districts of operation due to the developments in the state and federal laws. Such laws as established constitute the guidance for relating and engaging the stakeholders of the various learning institutions, including the board of governors, principles and students (Kowalski, 2005). Additionally, political developments within the district where the superintendents operate also infringe the course of service delivery and responsibility fulfillment by the representatives. Such politics include the processes of election leading to selection of board of governors alongside other education leaders in the district. These factors considered relate to the case that superintendent Mark faces within his locality of administration. Federal and state laws influence on superintendent office The federal and state guidelines institute the position of the Superintendent within the district to operate in their capacity of overseeing education in the district (Sofo, 2008). The Superintendent is he CEO of the district school board and manages the entire responsibilities spanning from hiring of staff to overseeing the education standards, budget, and resource planning and allocations and being the contact point to the government agencies (Sofo, 2008). Therefore, with these immense responsibilities, this core person in the education sector faces remarkably overwhelming challenges that institute the need to establish strong administrative guidelines. The federal and state laws are key in guiding the roles of the superintendent office, as they facilitate the regulatory frameworks of the office. First, the roles and responsibilities of the superintendent office are outlined within the confines of the federal law, and recognized accordingly by each of the state laws as established. Thus, the federal and state laws influence the role of the superintendent accordingly from this perspective, that they facilitate and ensure the protection of the office from abuse and malpractices (Meek, 2012). The establishment of the responsibilities means that the superintendent office enjoys protection from the political influences that may impair the course of the decisions that the person in the office makes regarding education. The processes of managing and allocating resources in the district among the institutions under the care of superintendent can prove remarkably challenging considering the development of stakes among the parties concerned (Jackson, 2009). Such developments face the superintended Mark, as the decisions regarding the closing of the school was to salvage on the resources spent while the institution had declining rates of student enrollment. Thus, the federal law regarding the duties of the office guided the decision that Mark made to close the institution. From this development, it is notable that the federal and states laws are essential in guiding the roles and activities that the superintended office exercises. Another development in the federal and state laws that influences the working of the superintendent is the creation of the No Child Left Behind legislation in the education sector (Jackson, 2009). This legislation sought to ensure that all children within the jurisdiction of the United States had access to affordable and quality education (Sofo, 2008). Thus, as the district superintendent representing the interest of the government in guaranteeing education for all the children, this law is remarkably influential to the roles of the office of superintendent. The law requires the superintendent to ensure that all the children gain education; hence, it facilitates the role of the office in assisting the students to gain education. The law guides the role of quality education o all children and student requirements within the various schools. With respect to the case of superintendent Marks, it is notable that the decision to close the elementary school received hostile reception as it infringed on the right of the students to have access to education (Sofo, 2008). From this perspective, this law influenced his decision in implementing his roles accordingly. Similarly, his decision to release the popular high school principal due to her unwillingness to implement board decisions regarding the curricular program as agreed was positive with respect to this law. The policy of ensuring that all children gain quality education gives the superintendent the position to make decisions regarding implementation of the necessary measures to ensure that the students receive the education programs as instituted by the board guiding the school activity. Additionally, the federal and state governments recognize the establishment of the ISLLC standards and provide a clear definition of these standards and their respective interpretation and implementation (Meek, 2012). These standards contain the moral and professional compass for directing the decisions of the superintendent within his capacity. The office requires him to institute strict and uncompromising stand regarding the developments that prove controversial in the sector. Therefore, the establishment of these guiding standards as part of the federal policies on education constitutes a major role in influencing the decisions of the superintendent. Therefore, Marks is aware of these factors and; therefore, he should ensure that he acts in manner to respect and adhere to the respective standards irrespective of the controversies that surround his decisions. Research-based advice to Superintendent Marks on the campaign and elections Election period marks the beginning of compromises for many aspirants as they seek to capture the position to head various offices. The federal and state elections have their consequential developments. Similarly, the elections within the education ministry for the various posts also constitute heated divisions and campaign modes from the aspirants as they seek to gunner the support of the people. Currently, the superintendent office is attracting several candidates who continue to foster their ambitions to head the office (Jackson, 2009). Marks is seeking re-election for the office, making him a contestant in this race. Notably, the federal and state laws have their regulatory measures regarding the process of elections, which act as the standards for fair elections. Therefore, for the superintendent, these guidelines are essential to ensure absence of malpractices that may impair the process of re-election. Notably, as the current superintended, there is temptation to use underhand means such as the state resources to foster his campaign. However, with this respect, this can earn Marks a direct disqualification. Therefore, from this perspective, I advice that he steers clear of any activities that may cause him disqualifications as each candidate will continue looking for loopholes within his conduct to add to the controversies he faced while in office to disqualify him. Secondly, in progressing his ambitions towards reelection for the post, Marks has an added advantage, which could also double as a limitation unless capitalized well. Notably, running for an office in the education board is a responsibility that each citizen factors as key in guiding the education of the state ahead (Meek, 2012). Marks as a sitting superintendent, he has a record of accomplishment of the activities and decisions he engaged while in office ahead of his campaign. Notably, there are aspects from which his bid appears deficient considering the controversial decisions he made while in the office. Notably, the various stakeholders already hold varied perspectives towards his leadership and decision-making (Kowalski & American Association of School Administrators, 2011). Therefore, beginning from this perspective, Marks should conduct a review of his current leadership style and seek the impact it has on his prospects. He should review the reception he has within the stakeholders that will influence the elections accordingly, including his controversial decisions and the impact they had on the education section. After observing the position and reception he has from his current position and service, he will then institute a bid to re-structure his leadership points and focus, to ensure that he establishes a re-election bid that wins the support of the people that will vote. Mark should embark on clarifying the controversial decisions he made to ascertain his credibility in holding and practicing the responsibilities of the office (Patillo, 2008). Moreover, Mark can establish a strong bid from the current stakeholders that supported his decisions while in office to ensure he maintains their votes accordingly. The bid to gain the re-election to the superintended office also evolves from the understating of the responsibilities of the office as he holds currently (Meek, 2012). Primary election candidates will present their bids from the perspective that Marks is failing in implementing the roles of the post accordingly. However, Marks can develop a structured understanding of the roles of the superintendent post to counter the competitors and institute his bid strongly to win the elections. This approach from evidence-based establishments is key to ensuring successful re-election for Marks to the position of Superintendent in the board. Conclusion The superintendent works alongside the trustees, the board of governors and parents to ensure that students gain the quality of education as defined from the federal and state policies. Stakes within the entities contained in the education sector are influential in the decisions made regarding the developments in the various state education facilities. Therefore, as the superintendent, the roles of managing the education sector in the district remain crucial to the quality of education the students receive (Kowalski & American Association of School Administrators, 2011). The election of the superintendent in this office follows the guidelines of the state elections board; hence, Marks should continue developing his strategies from the research based evidence to attain re-election. References Jackson, B. L. (2009). Balancing act: The political role of the urban school superintendent. Washington, D.C: Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. Kowalski, T. J., & American Association of School Administrators. (2011). The American school superintendent: 2010 decennial study. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Kowalski, T. J. (2005). The School Superintendent :Theory, Practice, and Cases. Sage Publications June 2005. Meek, A. (2012). The American school superintendent: Leading in an age of pressure. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 106. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224856600?accountid=458 Patillo, A. (2008). Departure beyond dismissal: Influencers of superintendents of schools' departure from position of superintendent. (Order No. 3324202, Saint Louis University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 167-n/a. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304457273?accountid=458. (304457273). Sofo, R. (2008). Beyond NCLB and AYP: One superintendent's experience of school district reform. Harvard Educational Review, 78(2), 391-409,430. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/212261043?accountid=458 Read More