Editorial: Administrator pay should reflect district achievement

The publication of school superintendent salary figures in Sunday’s newspaper was eye-opening for many readers. Several school board candidates have also highlighted the issue, noting correctly that accountability must be part of performance reviews.

If school boards adopted measurable, publicized benchmarks based on district outcomes, some of the current salaries might be justified. But the public has little knowledge of what targets – if any – superintendents are expected to hit to earn their pay.

Exacerbating matters is the fact that the state gives districts varying amounts for administrator pay. For instance, West Valley School District will get $61,727 per administrator and Spokane Public Schools will get $56,246 for 2011-’12. What districts choose to add to those amounts varies widely. For example, the top job in the West Valley School District nets about $90,000 more per year in total compensation than the superintendent of the similarly sized Cheney Public Schools.

Some of the explanations for superintendents’ pay are not compelling. Plus, the process of setting pay in some cases is less than rigorous.

West Valley Superintendent Polly Crowley receives the highest pay in the region, though several other districts are larger. She does her own bartering for pay and benefits, which totaled $241,577 for 2009-’10.

“It’s a very soft negotiation; it lasts about five minutes,” she told The Spokesman-Review.

Doug Matson, her deputy superintendent, noted that Crowley’s status as “senior superintendent of Spokane County” might be one reason her pay is tops. She’s held the job all of six years, so we hope that isn’t a factor. Matson, meanwhile, is the highest paid deputy superintendent in the county, making more than the Central Valley School District superintendent. If that is partly because of his boss’s pay, then it’s all the more reason for establishing better benchmarks.

Among other questionable metrics for pay are advanced academic credentials and years of experience. The state is beginning to downplay those factors in establishing pay-for-performance plans for teachers, because research has shown that advanced degrees and years in the classroom don’t necessarily translate into better student outcomes.

So, if a superintendent with a doctoral degree is shining, then pay for the results, not the degree. If that Ph.D. is the key to effective leadership, then it will become its own reward.

School districts are coming off some rough budgeting years, and the prospect of more cuts looms large. Meanwhile, public schools must do better, whether it’s improving college and workplace readiness or cutting the dropout rate. Taxpayers need greater value for each dollar spent. It isn’t good enough for boards to merely survey what other districts pay, because those districts may have different goals and challenges and different funding realities.

School boards can set an example for true accountability for their public school systems by tying superintendent pay to district performance.