The Downside of Mayoral Control: Can Political Agendas Drive Education Policy?
For a millennium superintendents, selected by elected lay school boards managed schools. Educational policy was set by the neighbor down the block and his/her neighbors who had the political smarts to get elected in non-partisan elections commonly held in May, with low voter turnouts. Superintendents walked a thin line, satisfying a school board, negotiating a labor agreement, and making educational decisions that result in “progress.”
In the nineties a few urban school districts began to move to mayoral control; the mayor appoints the superintendent and the superintendent, in effect, serves as a deputy mayor for education.
Kenneth Wong in The Education Mayor wrote,
… although mayoral control of schools may not be appropriate for every district, it can successfully emphasize accountability across the education system, providing more leverage for each school district to strengthen its educational infrastructure and improve student performance.
Diane Ravitch, on the other hand, is sharply critical of the Bloomberg iteration of mayoral control and suggests a mayoral control model with strong checks and CONTINUE READING: The Downside of Mayoral Control: Can Political Agendas Drive Education Policy? | Ed In The Apple
