Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Education is so different from business, I think I'd like to see my school sup. have some background in education, or education management.
BTW, one time DH had a boss for his engineering group who was not an engineer. DH said they used to push him around a little b/c he had so little knowledge of what they were actually doing. The same could happen in a school system.
I think one of the problems with education is it isn't run like a business. It's run like a black hole sucking money. I think my old manager could run a school system and, probably, do a better job than most superintendents. As I said, a good manager listens to his people. If you don't have the support of the rank and file, it doesn't matter how great your ideas are. They will never get off the ground.
That shouldn't happen. That's very childish behavior. Managers manage people and businesses. The rank and file get the job done. That's the way it's supposed to work. I really don't see the point in promoting someone into a management position based on whether or not they've done the job before. It makes more sense, to me, to pick a good manager regardless of whether or not he's done the job before. Most of my managers never did my job. Some were good and some weren't but that had nothing to do with whether or not they'd done my job before. It had to do with their ability to manage. A good manager knows he's only as good as the people he manages and his job is to make them shine.
I think one of the problems with education is it isn't run like a business. It's run like a black hole sucking money. I think my old manager could run a school system and, probably, do a better job than most superintendents. As I said, a good manager listens to his people. If you don't have the support of the rank and file, it doesn't matter how great your ideas are. They will never get off the ground.
That shouldn't happen. That's very childish behavior. Managers manage people and businesses. The rank and file get the job done. That's the way it's supposed to work. I really don't see the point in promoting someone into a management position based on whether or not they've done the job before. It makes more sense, to me, to pick a good manager regardless of whether or not he's done the job before. Most of my managers never did my job. Some were good and some weren't but that had nothing to do with whether or not they'd done my job before. It had to do with their ability to manage. A good manager knows he's only as good as the people he manages and his job is to make them shine.
How do you mean, run a school district like a business? SDs don't sell a product; their income is dependent on property taxes and other govt. funds, whatever the state decides to appropriate. They can't raise prices if costs go up; they have to go to the voters for a tax increase that is collected after the fact.
How do you mean, run a school district like a business? SDs don't sell a product; their income is dependent on property taxes and other govt. funds, whatever the state decides to appropriate. They can't raise prices if costs go up; they have to go to the voters for a tax increase that is collected after the fact.
I know one school that is run like a business. They identify the real issues in the classroom and train teachers to handle them. They have a grant writing office because they realize their teachers don't have time for grants but there is money out there. They look at the competition and copy successful practices. They do not allow their teachers to take the attitude that their lesson plans are theirs. In business, if you are paid to write a report, spec, test plan, whatever, the company owns it. In business, seasoned employees train the rookies. You don't hand them a set of keys, show them their room and tell them to have at it. You teach them how the successful workers do things first. In industry, you work to standards and are evaluated on how well you met those standards. Teaching should be no different. Yet, teachers act like their tests are personal posessions. You should have seen the look on the exiting teacher's face when I asked for her old tests. Her tests would have told me the level I needed to teach to. Instead, I'm hitting around the mark but keep missing it. I, usually, come in too low but have come in too high a couple of times. (I'm struggling with finding the mark because my students are much more capable than I'm used to. 40% of my students could get A's in my old school.) In industry, you'd use data to drive change. I should be doing an item analysis for every test I give (no time to do them). My tests should be aligned to the standards (working on it). And teachers should work collaboratively not in isolation. Much of what teachers do would not be tolerated in industry.
There is a lot education could learn from industry or even, successful, non profit organizations that also don't sell a product.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 11-29-2010 at 07:01 PM..
Education is so different from business, I think I'd like to see my school sup. have some background in education, or education management.
BTW, one time DH had a boss for his engineering group who was not an engineer. DH said they used to push him around a little b/c he had so little knowledge of what they were actually doing. The same could happen in a school system.
I don't see that education is any different than a business, in the end you are managing people and resources. Engineering can be much more complicated than teaching and I don't really see someone pushing this chancellor around. Also depends on the staff you hire, if you put qualified people in positions then you will get results.
I know one school that is run like a business. They identify the real issues in the classroom and train teachers to handle them. They have a grant writing office because they realize their teachers don't have time for grants but there is money out there. They look at the competition and copy successful practices. They do not allow their teachers to take the attitude that their lesson plans are theirs. In business, if you are paid to write a report, spec, test plan, whatever, the company owns it. In business, seasoned employees train the rookies. You don't hand them a set of keys, show them their room and tell them to have at it. You teach them how the successful workers do things first. In industry, you work to standards and are evaluated on how well you met those standards. Teaching should be no different. Yet, teachers act like their tests are personal posessions. You should have seen the look on the exiting teacher's face when I asked for her old tests. Her tests would have told me the level I needed to teach to. Instead, I'm hitting around the mark but keep missing it. I, usually, come in too low but have come in too high a couple of times. (I'm struggling with finding the mark because my students are much more capable than I'm used to. 40% of my students could get A's in my old school.) In industry, you'd use data to drive change. I should be doing an item analysis for every test I give (no time to do them). My tests should be aligned to the standards (working on it). And teachers should work collaboratively not in isolation. Much of what teachers do would not be tolerated in industry.
There is a lot education could learn from industry or even, successful, non profit organizations that also don't sell a product.
Fully agree! I spent 32 years in the Army and whenever some leaders tried to use business practices the units improved. The Army is not a for profit organization and I used a lot of those ideas in the last 6 years of my career. Customer service is the same whether you deal with a business customer or a Soldier, they have the same human traits, take care.
I don't see that education is any different than a business, in the end you are managing people and resources. Engineering can be much more complicated than teaching and I don't really see someone pushing this chancellor around. Also depends on the staff you hire, if you put qualified people in positions then you will get results.
Our district hired an ex-Navy manager of some sort once to be superintendent. He did an OK job, but it was acknowldeged by many that he had a big knowledge gap. I mean, you are dealing with adults in the Navy, you don't have special ed, lots of things. He went back to school to get an education management degree.
Our district hired an ex-Navy manager of some sort once to be superintendent. He did an OK job, but it was acknowldeged by many that he had a big knowledge gap. I mean, you are dealing with adults in the Navy, you don't have special ed, lots of things. He went back to school to get an education management degree.
The administration already has psychologists, laywers, budget administrators and department chairmen, if you are a good manager with people skills and know how to motivate then you will do well.
Special Ed is far from an exact science from what I have seen as far as the level of care and determining factors.I agree you need to have some understanding but overall I don't see that someone from inside the system would necessarily be the best candidate.
From what I have seen a professional manager at least for budget such as the city manager form of governamnt is much better. Many of the problems I have seen is educators are very bad managers oif moeny. It takes some of the politics out of managinhg schools which is why so many spend so much for such poor results compared to other countires.
From what I have seen a professional manager at least for budget such as the city manager form of governamnt is much better. Many of the problems I have seen is educators are very bad managers oif moeny. It takes some of the politics out of managinhg schools which is why so many spend so much for such poor results compared to other countires.
Large districts do have CFOs, accountants, and the like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
The administration already has psychologists, laywers, budget administrators and department chairmen, if you are a good manager with people skills and know how to motivate then you will do well.
Special Ed is far from an exact science from what I have seen as far as the level of care and determining factors.I agree you need to have some understanding but overall I don't see that someone from inside the system would necessarily be the best candidate.
I don't know what you mean by the first paragraph. The special ed example, was just that, an example. That's just one of the differences in a school population and the general public. Also the fact that schools are dealing with minor kids, and their parents. It's just way different from making/selling computers, or cell phones, or whatever.
Large districts do have CFOs, accountants, and the like.
I don't know what you mean by the first paragraph. The special ed example, was just that, an example. That's just one of the differences in a school population and the general public. Also the fact that schools are dealing with minor kids, and their parents. It's just way different from making/selling computers, or cell phones, or whatever.
I just meant you have a staff of professionals and shouldn't need to get involved in details if your staff does it's job.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
