Untapped Talent: An 11-year Analysis of the Texas Superintendent Workforce by texaseducation

UNTAPPED TALENT An 11-year Analysis of the Texas Superintendent Workforce (2010-11 to 2020-21) Nov. 2023

David E. DeMatthews University of Texas at Austin Alexandra Aylward University of Nevada, Reno David Knight University of Washington Pedro Reyes University of Texas at Austin

T.E.L.L.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments

Glossary

Foreword

Voices From the Field

Executive Summary

Introduction

Literature Review: What do we know about the Superintendency?

Texas Superintendent Demographics

Superintendent Demographics by Context

Superintendent Turnover & Pay

Implications & Conclusion

References

104

Research Team

111

Appendix 1: Methods

113

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful and acknowledge the unique and important contributions of many individuals who made this report possible. We thank the leadership and staff at The Holdsworth Center including Lindsay Whorton and Pauline Dow for their generous support and thoughtful feedback and guidance throughout the process. We are also especially thankful to Namrita Chawla, Elizabeth Del Toro, Katie Jaron, and Crysta Polvinale. At the University of Texas, we are grateful for Celeste Alexander at the Texas Education Research Center for her support and expertise throughout the study. We are also grateful for Laura Costello for her effort supporting the program team’s data visualization efforts. We also have to thank Jinseok Shin from the University of Texas at Austin and Pooya Almasi from the University of Washington for their valuable contributions in providing technical support in using the ERC and coding advice and examples. We also thank Torri Hart and Kimberly Clarida at the University of Texas at Austin for revising and formatting the final report. Finally, we would like to thank research and policy experts who have provided support for the project’s scope, design, and potential impact. Rachel S. White at the University of Tennessee, Shelby Cosner at the University of Illinois Chicago, and Andrew Pendola at Auburn University provided multiple rounds of feedback and support throughout the study and reporting process.

UNTAPPED TALENT | 3

GLOSSARY ACADEMIC YEAR: The school year starting at the end of each summer and ending the following year in late spring or early summer. School year 2011 refers to the academic school year beginning in the Fall of 2010. We also refer to a school year as 2010-11. CITY: Territory inside a U.S. Census-defined Urbanized Area and inside a Principal City. The Census defines an Urbanized Area as a set of contiguous census tracks with a minimum population of 50,000 people. A Principal City refers to the largest city within a metropolitan area. HISPANIC: A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race LONGITUDINAL: Repeated measurements of the same data points over an extended period of time. RURAL: Census-defined rural territory SALARY: Total pay including supplements SUBURBAN: Territory outside a Principal City and inside an Urbanized Area SUPERINTENDENT: Chief executive officer of the local school district or charter organization. TOWN: Territory inside an Urban Cluster TENURE: The length of time a superintendent has held that role TURNOVER RATE: Percent of superintendents that exited their position in a given year

FOREWORD STRONG HEADWINDS HAVE BATTERED OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM OVER THE PAST THREE YEARS: COVID-19 disrupted student health and well-being and led to unfinished learning. Teacher and staff shortages are setting off alarm bells across the nation, and communities have become increasingly polarized over how to accomplish public school’s essential work. These forces have exacerbated longstanding vulnerabilities and inequities in the public education system that have built up over generations. Over the course of the pandemic and since, Texas has seen a wave of retirements that has left an increasing number of firsttime superintendents to navigate one of the most challenging periods in public education in the last half-century. We know leadership matters and that superintendents are vital community-based leaders. We also know that high rates of unplanned leadership turnover can negatively impact district culture, retention, and long-term improvement strategies, all of which are a detriment to the excellent and equitable outcomes we seek for students. Recent trends in the education profession – from the classroom to the superintendency – are troubling. A wave of resignations in certain parts of the state have prompted much handwringing and speculation. Has the superintendency become an impossible job? Will the chronic churn at the top of some school districts become part for the course or get worse? Will anyone want to take these jobs? Will a less experienced and less prepared cohort of new superintendents lead our public schools? These are important questions. And those who care about the future of public education in Texas are right to be concerned. These questions cannot be answered because data on the superintendency is largely absent. No publicly available state or national clearinghouse tracks superintendent demographics and career pathways. Interested stakeholders cobble together what they can, but it is difficult to get a clear picture of what is going on at the top of our state’s 1,2000 school districts. Up until now, we have not been able to answer basic questions like: • • • •

As the state’s student population becomes more diverse, is the superintendency following suit? What is the ratio of male and female superintendents and are those patterns stable or changing? How long do superintendents stay in the role within their districts? What factors are associated with longer or shorter tenures? What paths do aspiring superintendents take to their first superintendency? What might those pathways tell us about where barriers exist to high-potential superintendents moving into the role?

•

Are new superintendents getting younger or less experienced? If so, what implications might that have for how superintendents are developed, prepared, and supported?

The Texas Education Leadership Lab (TELL) was launched this year to conduct timely and rigorous research focused on district and school leadership to help improve Texas schools. We are actively studying the educator workforce, inclusive efforts to support students with disabilities and emergent bilinguals, school finance, and the influence of other state and local policies on the work of district and school leaders. Our efforts to improve Texas schools does not stop with a report – our team is committed to building deep partnerships, sharing information, communicating lessons learned, and advocating for evidenced-based policies. The findings from our first report highlight the challenges and opportunities of supporting and developing the potential of our state’s untapped leadership talent. Findings from the report suggest a need to focus more on supporting women and racially diverse education leaders. We are excited about sharing and translating this research with different audiences and tracking these challenges and opportunities into the future. We know so many people who care about public schools in Texas. We are grateful to the staff and leadership at The Holdsworth Center, The University of Texas College of Education, The Texas Education Research Center, and the many colleagues and experts who volunteered their time and expertise to support the design and production of this inaugural report. Grounded in data from this inaugural report, we are excited to chart a new course using evidence to inform education policy and practice in Texas and beyond. Sincerely, David DeMatthews Founder and Lead, Texas Education Leadership Lab

UNTAPPED TALENT | 5

VOICES FROM THE FIELD TO PUT THE DATA IN THE CONTEXT OF LIVED EXPERIENCE, we asked superintendents

and one deputy superintendent from across the state to share their perspectives on the seven findings. Our panel includes:

DR. STEPHANIE ELIZALDE Dallas ISD Student enrollment: 143,400 Years of superintendent experience: 3

DR. KATHY ROLLO Lubbock ISD Student enrollment: 25,600 Years of superintendent experience: 5

DR. SCOTT MURI Superintendent, Ector County ISD Student enrollment: 33,700 Years of superintendent experience: 8

DR. ELNA DAVIS Tarkington ISD Student enrollment: 1,800 Years of superintendent experience: 1

Dr. Scott Muri | Ector County ISD Student enrollment: 33,700 8 years of superintendent experience DR. TORY HILL Superintendent, Channelview ISD Student enrollment: 9,500 Years of superintendent experience: 6

DR. LUPITA HINOJOSA Spring ISD Student enrollment: 33,400 Years of superintendent experience: 1.5

Dr. Lupita Hinojosa | Spring ISD Student enrollment: 33,400 1.5 year of superintendent experience

DR. ROBERTA TREVINO Zapata County ISD Student enrollment: 3,300 Years of superintendent experience: 1

DR. STEPHAINE CAMARILLO Lockhart ISD Student enrollment: 6,100 Years of deputy superintendent experience: 1.5

Dr. Stephaine Camarillo | Lockhart ISD

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1,200

400K

5.4M

SUPERINTENDENTS

TEACHERS & STAFF

STUDENTS

In Texas, 1,200 superintendents work with school boards and communities to make decisions that affect the education and daily routines of 400,000 teachers, staff, and 5.4 million students. It is crucial to have a capable leader who can understand and support the community they serve. Yet, Texans know very little about the superintendent workforce. This report is the first of its kind and provides a detailed analysis of the Texas superintendent workforce between the 2010-11 and 202021 academic school years. Seven key findings describe the health of the state’s superintendent pipeline and how well it reflects state demographics. These findings have important implications for ensuring that every Texas community benefits from a great superintendent.

UNTAPPED TALENT | 7

FINDING 1

THE TEXAS SUPERINTENDENT WORKFORCE DOES NOT REFLECT THE STATE’S DIVERSE STUDENT POPULATION, ESPECIALLY AMONG HISPANICS. In the 2020-21 school year, 73 percent of students identified as Black, Hispanic or another non-White category compared to only 21 percent of superintendents. The disparity is biggest among Hispanics, who make up 53 percent of the student population but only 13 percent of the superintendent workforce. Percent of Texas Superintendents, Principals, Teachers and Students by Race/Ethnicity and Gender for the 2020-21 School Year

Superintendents

Principals

14%

Teachers

79%

13%

Hispanic

25%

53%

13%

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC) Note: All other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections

All other races

57%

27%

Students

Black

58%

28%

11%

White

During the 2020-21 school year, Hispanic students were the majority, while school leaders and staff were mostly White.

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

Students look at leaders to see what is possible for them. I know where I began. My parents are immigrants from Mexico. I’m a first-generation Mexican American. Education made a difference in my life and in my family’s life. That gets me up every single day believing that I’m doing the right work and I’m in the right trenches to make a difference in our children’s lives. DR. LUPITA HINOJOSA, SPRING ISD

UNTAPPED TALENT | 9

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

It is critical that we look not just at increasing diversity in leadership, but in education in general. And we must begin identifying diverse leaders, including at the teacher level, and investing in those people now so they can be the leaders of tomorrow. DR. TORY HILL, CHANNELVIEW ISD

FINDING 2

THE SUPERINTENDENCY IS SLOWLY BECOMING MORE DIVERSE, BUT THE PACE OF CHANGE NEEDS TO INCREASE, ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AREAS. Over the 11-year study period, the superintendent workforce saw small gains in diversity in cities, suburbs and towns. In rural areas, the racial makeup of superintendents barely budged. In rural areas, Black and Hispanic students now make up 50 percent of the population in rural areas, yet 90 percent of superintendents are White. Statewide, the percentage of women superintendents rose from 20 to 27 percent, while the percentage of Black and Hispanic superintendents inched from 19 to 21 percent. White women and Hispanic men accounted for most of this modest progress, which occurred largely in cities, suburbs and towns.

Changes in racial diversity over time for students and superintendents varied across locales between 2011 and 2021.

supts rural

Students

Superintendents

Students

100

80 Hispanic Hispanic

White Black All other races

White Black All other races 2011

2021

percentage

White percentage percentage

Rural districts saw the largest growth in Hispanic students between 2011 and 2021, but the lack of racial diversity among superintendents remained unchanged.

100

2011

2021

Hispanic Black All other races

UNTAPPED TALENT | 11

students - city

supts - city

Superintendents

Students Students 100

Hispanic

White Black All other races

percentage percentage

100

percentage percentage

City districts saw little change in student racial diversity over time, however, superintendents in these districts were more racially diverse compared to other locales. More than 25% of superintendents identified as Hispanic and 15% identified as Black.

Hispanic

2021

100

Hispanic

White Black All other races

White

percentage percentage

100

2011

2021

Hispanic

White

percentage percentage

Hispanic Black

2011

2021

Superintendents

White

Black All other races

2021

Hispanic Black All other races

Hispanic

Black All other races 2011

All other racesraces All other

supts town

100

White

Superintendents

100

Superintendents

Black All other races

Students

2021

Students

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

2011

students -town

Town districts saw increases in Hispanic students and superintendents and Black superintendents between 2011 and 2021. Black and Hispanic superintendents saw a 4 point increase.

All other races

Students

Black All other races

Black

supts -SUBURB Superintendents

students -SUBURB Students

Suburban districts had the greatest perentage of Black superintendents in 2021, although their representation declined slightly over time, whereas Hispanic superintendents grew by 3 percent.

White

White 40

White Black All other races 2011

Superintendents

2011

2021

Black All other races

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

Here’s how we crack the code for getting more diversity in rural communities: We prepare leaders to be able to serve in any type of community. You have to understand when you go into a community that it is their kids, their schools, their money. As the CEO, you are there to bring their ideas to life. My first superintendency was in a rural area in Brazoria County. I was the first Black superintendent in the district. But I was able to acclimate quickly because I had something in common with small-town Texas – being active in the church. I connected with pastors and community leaders and was able to unite the community using a cultural element that was part of who I am. I also knew the work I did would determine whether I was the last Black leader to serve that community. That is how we continue to see an increase in diversity, by doing the work so well that we leave the door open for others. When I left, a trustee told me, ‘You have opened our eyes to the power of having a diverse leader. DR. TORY HILL, CHANNELVIEW ISD

UNTAPPED TALENT | 13

FINDING 3

DESPITE SOME PROGRESS, WOMEN ARE STILL IN THE MINORITY AMONG SUPERINTENDENTS, THOUGH THEY MAKE UP A LARGE MAJORITY OF TEACHERS AND PRINCIPALS. In the 2020-21 school year, women accounted for 76 percent of teachers and 66 percent of principals in Texas public schools, yet only 27 percent of superintendents. That’s up from 20 percent in 2010-11, a small gain in the past decade. Black and Hispanic women are among the most underrepresented categories in the superintendent’s seat, making up a mere seven percent of the workforce. Percent of texas superintendents, principals, teachers and students by gender for the 2020-21 school year

Women

Teachers

Men

Principals

During the 2020-21 school year, the majority of teachers and principals were women, but superintendents were largely men.

Superintendents 20

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

VOICES FROM THE FIELD As a state, we are doing a disservice to our students by not tapping into our women leaders to be superintendents. In the classroom and in the principal’s seat, we have phenomenal women leaders. We’ve got to build better pipelines to the superintendency. DR. TORY HILL, CHANNELVIEW ISD There are women leaders in Ector County who are hungry for the opportunity to be superintendents. My job is to help them be prepared when the door opens. I believe they are ready, but would they be granted an interview by a board or search firm? I am not sure. Part of this equation is, ‘How do we help our boards become more diverse, not only in who they are, but in how they think?’ DR. SCOTT MURI, ECTOR COUNTY ISD Having a support network for women leaders is crucial if we are going to make a difference in this regard. I’m on a text thread with other women superintendents in Texas and we communicate regularly to help and encourage each other. I do see the ranks growing. It is refreshing to see women have more opportunities to lead and to be successful in this role. DR. KATHY ROLLO, LUBBOCK ISD

UNTAPPED TALENT | 15

FINDING 4

WOMEN, BLACK AND HISPANIC SUPERINTENDENTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO SERVE IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH THE HIGHEST AMOUNTS OF POVERTY. In Texas, 31 percent of Black superintendents and 21 percent of Hispanic superintendents lead districts in which more than 90 percent of students live in poverty, compared to just four percent of White superintendents. When broken out by gender, 13 percent of women and only six percent of men superintendents work in the same group of high-poverty districts. Percent of superintendents serving districts in which at least 90% of students are economically disadvantaged, by gender and race. Superintendents in districts where at least 90% of students are economically disadvantaged

100

percentage

Superintendents in all other districts

13% 0

6% Men

Women

31% 4% White

21% Hispanic

Black

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC) *Note: Percentages reflect within that demographic group (e.g., 12.9% of all female superintendents in 2021 were working in districts with more than 90% of students classified as economically disadvantaged).

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

Leaders often gravitate toward – or get hired more easily in – districts that match their own background and upbringing, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But I think there’s also much to be gained from serving communities who don’t look like you. There’s value to the superintendent and the community if everyone has an open mind. When you’re on the home-school team that supports and anchors student success, you must listen deeply to all stakeholders so you understand the challenges and figure out how best to help. DR. ELNA DAVIS, TARKINGTON ISD

UNTAPPED TALENT | 17

VOICES FROM THE FIELD

Everybody wants a school district to deliver on student success. In high-poverty districts that have been underperforming, the pressure to do that – and quickly – is great. But change takes time. To stay the course, superintendents need more support. I would not have survived my first superintendency if I had not had a coach. Superintendents should start asking boards to include coaching as part of their compensation. DR. STEPHANIE ELIZALDE, DALLAS ISD It takes close to five years to really bring about cultural and academic change in a district. When you have a new superintendent with new ideas every couple of years, that doesn’t happen. Having more support for superintendents working in our most challenging districts is one way we could help keep them in those positions for longer. DR. KATHY ROLLO, LUBBOCK ISD

FINDING 5

HIGH-POVERTY DISTRICTS HAVE THE HIGHEST RATES OF SUPERINTENDENT TURNOVER. One in five high-poverty districts (where more than 90 percent of students were economically disadvantaged) experienced high churn in the top job — from four to seven superintendents over the course of the 11-year study. In affluent districts (where only 10 percent of students are economically disadvantaged), only 13 percent of districts experienced high churn over the same time period. Sixty-nine percent of affluent districts had only one or two superintendents over the study period compared with only 58 percent of high-poverty districts. Percent of districts experiencing highest and lowest levels of superintendent churn by student income levels over the 11 year study period (2010-11 to 2020-21). Turnover in Most Affluent Districts Districts with less than 10 percent of students who are economically disadvantaged.

1 Supt.

39%

Turnover in Least Affluent Districts Districts with more than 90 percent of students who are economically disadvantaged.

4-7 Supts.

1 Supt.

20%

22%

4-7 Supts.

20 percent of high poverty districts had a high churn of 4 to 7 superintendents over 11 years.

13% 3 Supts. 2 Supts. 3 Supts.

30%

17%

22.%

2 Supts.

36%

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

UNTAPPED TALENT | 19

FINDING 6

WOMEN, BLACK, AND HISPANIC LEADERS TOOK LONGER, LESS DIRECT PATHS TO THE SUPERINTENDENCY. Becoming a superintendent usually involves starting as a principal and either going directly to the superintendent seat or climbing the career ladder in central office before advancing to the top job. The study showed White administrators were much more likely to become superintendents directly from being a principal — 65 percent compared to 40 percent of Hispanic and 24 percent of Black administrators. Additionally, 35 percent of men transitioned from principal to superintendent within three years compared with 27 percent of women. Black and Hispanic superintendents also took longer to make the transition to the superintendency. Only half took fewer than six years to move up the ladder from principal, compared with 70 percent of White superintendents. Time from the principalship to the superintendency for men and women.

Men 30%

Women 7-10 years

46%

35%

4-6 years

27%

35%

<3 years

27%

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC) *Note: 140 females (43.8% of females in 2021 cohort) and 429 males (49.5% of males in 2021 cohort) served as principal, compared to 180 (56.3%) of females and 438 (50.5% of males) never serving as principals at some point.

Time from the principalship to the superintendency by race. 7-10 years

32%

46%

Hispanic Black

White

27%

4-6 years

3 years or fewer

14%

10%

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

34%

28%

20%

51%

30%

35%

40%

50%

60%

More than half of Black principals did not transition into the superintendency until 7-10 years.

VOICES FROM THE FIELD I think we are leaving great talent on the table when we judge someone based on the way they look rather than what skills they bring to the role. I don’t want to get a superintendent job because I am a Hispanic woman, I want to land the job because of my strong leadership, experience, and passion to do right by kids. DR. STEPHAINE CAMARILLO, LOCKHART ISD

UNTAPPED TALENT | 21

FINDING 7

WOMEN IN THE SUPERINTENDENCY MADE LESS THAN MEN REGARDLESS OF LOCATION, DISTRICT SIZE OR EXPERIENCE. Female superintendents tend to make less than male superintendents with similar levels of experience. Median salary in 2021 by gender for different professional level experience. $300K

Median Salary (2021 dollars)

0 142,00

0 145,00

0 148,62

125,00

4 136,36

7 126,51

0 109,40

125,40

$200K

$100K Women Men

$80K

$40K Less than 20

20-25 Years

26-30 Years

Experience

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Greater than 30

VOICES FROM THE FIELD The work is the work, no matter the gender. We all carry the same weight. If I am paid equally, it sends a message that my experience is valued and there is trust in the work I am doing. DR. ROBERTA TREVINO, ZAPATA COUNTY ISD It’s troubling, and perpetuates a stereotype that women are less. Their ability is less, their value is less. It sends the wrong message to society and to young women wanting to be leaders and could discourage them from seeking these roles. These findings make me think of the Edwards Deming quote, ‘Every system is perfectly designed to get the results it gets.’ Our pipelines to the superintendency are perfectly designed to get these results. We can’t just say, ‘Oh well, that’s just the way it is.’ If we want change, we must create different pathways and pipelines. We can and must do better to cultivate the diverse leaders our students need. DR. SCOTT MURI, ECTOR COUNTY ISD

rp3.education.utexas.edu UNTAPPED TALENT | 23

RECOMMENDATIONS The study’s implications are clear. For Texans to boast a strong, skilled workforce of superintendents who reflect the diversity of the state’s citizens in the future, we must start building the pipeline now.

1) Provide more support for aspiring superintendents from historically marginalized groups,

especially Black and Hispanic women. Ideas include strengthening hiring processes, proactively identifying high-potential candidates from diverse backgrounds earlier in their careers and creating mentoring and preparation programs to give them the skills they need to succeed in the role, plus supporting them once they are in the seat.

2) Help rural districts to diversify their superintendent workforce. Opportunities include supplementing pay for rural superintendents and strengthening recruiting and retention practices to include more candidates from diverse backgrounds. In high-churn districts, pay supplements could help lower turnover by increasing superintendents tenure and attracting experienced leaders. 3) Produce annual reports that give stakeholders important and timely information. This data can help guide targeted investments in the superintendent workforce, monitor progress along the way, and inspire other researchers to help analyze the data, gather insights from key stakeholders, and identify areas for improvement.

We hope this report, and our efforts to track this data over time, will spur more questions and study -- ultimately leading to positive changes that diversify and strengthen the superintendent workforce.

INTRODUCTION Key Takeaways: • A description of the study’s purpose, research questions, data, and methods. • Summary of the proceeding chapters.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Superintendents are in the apex position within public school districts. They work with their locally elected school boards to set district goals and are accountable to the state and their local community for ensuring each school provides the highest quality education to every child, regardless of their race, gender, income level, geographic location, disability, language, or any other marker of identity. An effective superintendent plays an important role in advancing student achievement, increasing district capacity and efficiency, and building community trust, especially if the superintendent is given the time and resources to be successful. Many superintendents follow a traditional pathway starting with serving as a teacher and then moving into school and district administration roles such as assistant principal, principal, and associate superintendent. This step-by-step trajectory is especially common in mid-size and urban districts where the size of the district provides multiple opportunities for promotion while superintendents in smaller districts may hold fewer positions before reaching the superintendency. In smaller districts, many superintendents may move from the principalship to the superintendency upon completing their superintendent licensure (Davis & Bowers, 2016). Given these pathways, we expect a healthy superintendent pipeline to: (a) include a diverse pool of leaders moving into the superintendency; (b) ensure effective aspiring superintendents are not denied or delayed access to the superintendency based on their race, gender, age, or other markers of identity; and (c) distribute the most experienced and effective superintendents across districts rather than concentrating the most experienced and effective within the most affluent and highest performing districts. How healthy is the superintendent workforce and pipeline in the U.S. or in Texas? This question is difficult to answer because federal and state data collection efforts to systematically track the superintendent workforce is limited. The federal government has not developed or supported a longitudinal database to track the superintendent workforce and pipeline. For decades, The School Superintendents Association (AASA) has surveyed the nation’s superintendents to collect demographic and tenure information, but without federal and state

Texas Education Leadership Lab

mandates for reporting, such efforts exclude thousands of superintendents due to low survey response rates. Education researchers have examined superintendent demographics and turnover in prior decades relying on longitudinal statewide datasets available in only a few states with relatively small population sizes. Fewer researchers have attempted to build their own datasets through the painstaking collection of publicly available data, but such efforts can be unreliable because certain data (such as race or tenure) might be missing or inaccurate on publicly available websites and documents. In Texas, the state created the State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS), which is housed by the Texas Education Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin. The SLDS is one of the nation’s largest and most complete longitudinal datasets in the nation. This report leverages the SLDS to provide a detailed statewide analysis of the Texas superintendent workforce between academic years 2010-11 through 2020-21. The report also utilizes publicly available data and state data from public records requests. This study is the first of its kind to assess the state’s superintendent pipeline and answers four main questions: · What are the demographics of Texas superintendents and how have they changed over time? · How do superintendent demographics vary by district context? · What are the trends in superintendent pay? · What is the superintendent turnover rate in Texas and how does it vary by context?

The answers to these questions are important not only for Texas, but also to other states

and districts across the United States. A national audience can learn from an analysis of the Texas superintendent workforce and pipeline given the state’s size, the diversity of its districts and workforce, and the racial and economic variation and segregation across districts. Texas is a oneof-a-kind laboratory for studying the superintendent workforce and pipeline with its 1,204 districts serving 5,427,370 million students. Texas school districts serve a diverse student population (52.7% Hispanic; 12.8% Black; 26.3% White; 4.8% Asian; 2.9% Multiracial) although many are racially and economically segregated. The economic and racial segregation of Texas districts allows for unique analyses that allow us to examine the extent to which districts get the most experienced, diverse, and highest paid superintendents. The state also has many city

Texas Education Leadership Lab

(210), suburban (141), town (212), and rural (652) districts that allow for comparisons across these contexts. Texas has 652 rural districts which dwarfs the number of rural districts in other rural states like Alabama (180 districts), Mississippi (157 districts), Montana (490 districts), and Idaho (159 districts). In sum, the sheer size and diversity of Texas allows other states to draw comparisons. Within Texas, an analysis of the superintendent workforce is also of great importance to many audiences. Texas has a long history of educational inequality, and each district is unique and subjected to education policy issues that have a distinctive local impact. For example, the state’s system of school finance is complicated and highly regressive, which means districts serving higher percentages of students from low-income backgrounds are less likely to receive adequate funding relative to more affluent school districts (Baker et al., 2022). Teacher salaries in Texas are generally low compared to other states, but the significant rise in cost of living in certain metropolitan areas or the remoteness of certain rural districts can make recruiting and retaining teachers more difficult. The state also has a shortage of general and special education teachers. Nearly 60% of current Texas teachers come from alternative certification pathways (Marder et al., 2022). Alternative certification teachers are more likely to work in schools serving low-income students of color and tend to have lower undergraduate grade point averages, attended less competitive universities, and lower levels of student achievement growth than their peers from traditional university-based programs (Marder et al., 2022). Urban and rural schools serving low-income communities and Black or African American and Hispanic communities are also more likely to have higher rates of principal and teacher turnover (DeMatthews et al., 2022). These challenges make studying the superintendent workforce even more important because highly effective executive leaders are better suited to navigate these complexities and make the best out of difficult situations. In what follows, we provide a brief overview of research on the superintendency in Section 2. The superintendent’s job duties and impact are presented to highlight the important work of superintendents. Next, we review research on superintendent

Texas Education Leadership Lab

demographics, which include a collection of national surveys and state-level studies spanning the last 100 years. Finally, we review what is known about superintendent turnover and its causes. Together, the review makes clear that a healthy superintendent workforce should be stable, provide sufficient tenure to sustain improvement efforts, and reflect the demographics of students, teachers, and principals in the state of Texas. In Section 3, we provide an overview of demographics for the U.S. and Texas. We also present U.S. and Texas teacher, principal, and student demographics so the reader can understand the changing demographics throughout the U.S. and in Texas. We also describe the demographics and trends of Texas superintendents over the 11-year study period. Section 4 closely examines trends in the superintendent workforce and how it varies by district context (e.g., student enrollment, district size, locale). Section 5 provides an overview of superintendent salaries and how they vary by race, gender, and district type over the 11-year study period. In Section 6, we present the superintendent turnover rates by year and by district size and locale. We also focus in on the state’s most affluent and least affluent school districts. Finally, Section 7 provides implications and conclusions based on the findings from this study. Specifically, we provide a set of recommendations for state policymakers, districts and school boards, and university-based preparation programs. We also provide brief recommendations for education researchers.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

LITERATURE REVIEW: WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE SUPERINTENDENCY? Key Takeaways • Superintendents play important roles within their district that are central to continuous improvement efforts. • Prior research suggests a lack of racial and gender diversity in the superintendency and relatively low levels of superintendent turnover. • Some districts have periods of higher than average turnover before shifting back to being more stable. • Researchers have been unable to accurately measure the effectiveness of superintendents using student achievement outcomes. Texas Education Leadership Lab

Superintendents are important executive leaders playing important roles within their districts. Thus, a stable and diverse superintendent workforce is critical to the success of Texas public schools given the importance of time and relationships to district success. This section draws upon existing research focused on the superintendent to answer five questions: · · · · ·

What are the job roles of superintendents? What influence do superintendents have on their organizations and student outcomes? Why does district context matter to superintendent leadership? What are the demographics of superintendents? What is superintendent turnover and why does it matter?

The answers to these questions make clear that superintendents are key leaders within districts and communities who confront a broad array of challenges and opportunities in unique organizational and community contexts.

What are the job roles of superintendents? Superintendents are the chief executive officers (CEOs) of their school district. Just like their corporate counterparts, superintendents leverage their professional leadership skills and relationships to advance organizational priorities and enhance performance amid environmental opportunities and challenges (Hambrick, 2007; Shahab et al., 2020). Education researchers have described the superintendent as a “pivotal actor” in the “complex algorithm” of managing a district and the implementation of policies that enhance student experiences and outcomes (Björk et al., 2014, p. 444). They engage in a range of activities often conceptualized into five key leadership roles: (a) teacher-scholar; (b) manager; (c) democratic leader; (d) communicator; and (e) social scientist (Callahan, 1966; Björk et al., 2018; Fusarelli & Fusarelli, 2005; Kowalski & Brunner, 2011). One of the longest standing and most prominent superintendent roles is that of a

Texas Education Leadership Lab

teacher-scholar. Superintendents are responsible for the implementation of curriculum and related policies. They ensure their district and schools have a well-prepared and professionally supported staff to meet the diverse needs of each student. Part of fulfilling this role is overseeing and supporting efforts to identify and deliver appropriate instructional and socio-emotional programs to all students. In larger districts, associate superintendents or a chief academic officer may support some or all of this work. In smaller districts, superintendents may work closely with principals and teachers to make important instructional decisions. Superintendents also serve as the manager of district and school operations. They are responsible for day-to-day operations which include overseeing the district’s human, fiscal, and physical resources. The manager role requires attention to the budget, human resources, and facilities management. All districts experience staff turnover, degrading facilities, and a continued need to annually revise the budget. School safety is also part of the superintendent’s management responsibility and can include regular interactions with local police departments and efforts to upgrade infrastructure and school policies to protect educators and students from external threats like mass shootings. In larger districts, the superintendent may delegate some management duties to a chief operations officer, assistant superintendents, and departments within the organization. In smaller districts, more of these management responsibilities fall on the superintendent. The superintendency is subject to shifting political winds at the state and local level. As a result, superintendents play the role of democratic leader within their district, community, and among school board members. Most superintendents are appointed by a school board. A primary superintendent responsibility is working with the school board to develop and galvanize public support for district priorities which can include passing bonds to enhance the district’s

Texas Education Leadership Lab

infrastructure, making curricular and programmatic changes or adjustments, and modifying enrollment boundaries for local schools. Since school boards change with elections, superintendents often find themselves continuously cultivating and sustaining healthy relationships with board members and working to manage board member dynamics. Superintendents also play the role of communicator given their “pivotal organizational perch” with proximal access to board members, school and district personnel, business and community leaders, and residents (Bird et al., 2013, p. 77). They are responsible for developing a communication strategy and effectively communicating with all stakeholders and the broader public. Effective communication with stakeholders contributes to a healthy organizational culture that reinforces district values and priorities. Additionally, superintendents communicate to provide timely updates on district progress toward goals and share important information to create a sense of certainty and trust among district personnel and the broader community. The democratic leader and communicator roles go together, given the importance of building relationships to galvanize support for public education, especially amid politically contentious times where public education is attacked. A final role of the superintendent is the social scientist. The challenges confronting districts and schools are not always instructional or managerial in nature or strictly within a district’s immediate control. Superintendents are not in control of immigration, housing, or healthcare policies that have a powerful impact on families and students. Shifts in the cost of living in a region impact a district’s workforce, yet superintendents have very little control over regional increases in property values and living expenses. Racism, sexism, xenophobia, homelessness, homophobia, and other forms of marginalization can also impact the well-being of students within a district but, often, they manifest beyond the walls of the school. For example,

Texas Education Leadership Lab

students experiencing homelessness will likely struggle academically given their lack of access to adequate housing and a sense of certainty (De Gregorio, 2022), but homelessness is largely outside of the control of a school district. However, in this situation, superintendents can identify strategic partners within local government or in the non-profit and business communities to pool expertise, resources, and programs to support students and families experiencing homelessness. Thus, the role of the superintendent as a social scientist emphasizes an ability to understand and take strategic action on these complex social issues. The intractability of some social problems and related social inequities may require inquiry, problem-solving, and collaborative work with neighboring districts, local and state government agencies, universities, non-profit and community-based organizations, businesses, and other potential partners (Johnson & Fusarelli, 2003).

What influence do superintendents have on their districts and student outcomes? A small body of research has attempted to measure the impact of superintendent leadership on student achievement (e.g., Waters & Marzano, 2006). However, researchers have not been able to reliably measure or evaluate superintendent effectiveness or impact on student outcomes. Chingos et al. (2014) examined the extent to which superintendents deserve the credit or blame in their districts based on student achievement trends. Using statewide student-level data from Florida and North Carolina between academic years 2000-01 and 2009-10, Chingos and colleagues found that the typical superintendent only stayed on the job for three to four years and that student achievement did not seem to improve with superintendent longevity within a district or the hiring of a new superintendent. The study also found that superintendents account for a very small amount of student differences in achievement levels (0.3%). Most differences in

Texas Education Leadership Lab

student achievement are found in student characteristics or with teachers and schools. Consequently, the researchers concluded that “individual superintendents who have an exceptional impact on student achievement cannot be reliably identified” using sophisticated quantitative analyses (p. 1). Since schools and teachers have the greatest impact on student achievement, superintendents likely influence student achievement indirectly through the roles they play leading and managing their districts. Some studies suggest that superintendents have an influence on principals and teachers by communicating and translating state-level policy. For example, in a multi-case study of 14 Connecticut districts, superintendents framed aspects of a state’s new accountability and teacher evaluation policies which informed principal actions (Woulfin et al., 2016). Another study found that superintendents influenced their districts by determining the extent to which stakeholders could provide input in important district decisions and participate in feedback loops to inform implementation over time (Brazer et al., 2010). Superintendents also influence their districts through their commitments and values. For example, in the wake of a large-scale cheating scandal that pushed emergent bilinguals out of public education in the El Paso area, the superintendent and board adopted dual language education as the district’s language acquisition model, given the effectiveness of dual language when implemented with fidelity over multiple years and the need to value emergent bilinguals’ cultural and linguistic assets (DeMatthews et al., 2017). In a study of districts that showed strong academic growth for students with disabilities in California, Huberman and colleagues (2012) found district leadership was key to increasing inclusion and access to the core curriculum for students with disabilities as well as other efforts that supported improved student outcomes. Coviello and DeMatthews (2021) examined how superintendents leading large, high-profile, and

Texas Education Leadership Lab

politically complex urban districts made sense of their district-community context and advocated for equity-oriented reforms.

Why does district context matter to superintendent leadership? Each superintendent works in a unique organizational position accountable to numerous stakeholders which include students, teachers, principals, school staff, district administrators, school board members, families, local businesses, the state education agency, teachers’ unions, university partners, and non-profit organizations. Like corporate CEOs, superintendent leadership is highly contextualized and situated within a unique organizational, economic, and political environment. Generally, the superintendency is shaped by district context (e.g., size, history, demographics), public education’s multiple and often conflicting goals (e.g., future employment, democratic engagement), and federal, state, and local policies. Other emergent issues can also influence the superintendency such as the COVID-19 pandemic, economic recessions, and unwarranted attacks on public education. Texas school districts vary in size ranging from less than 100 to more than 200,000 students. In smaller districts, superintendents may be one of only a few central office personnel and even have teaching and school-level leadership responsibilities. In larger districts, superintendents may be more focused on political issues and have less time to work with principals and teachers. Districts also vary by their proximity to large metropolitan areas. Superintendents leading districts within or closer to large metropolitan areas like the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex can build relationships and leverage resources from a range of institutions to support district initiatives, such as large research universities, comprehensive hospitals, museums, non-profits and community-based groups, and large government agencies.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Superintendents in more remote districts have greater difficulty accessing and benefiting from these institutions and resources. Students and community members in more remote areas may also have additional unmet healthcare needs that can prompt superintendents to divert some resources and time away from instruction. Economic and racial segregation within a district and unequal power dynamics among privileged and marginalized families can also be a contextual challenge for superintendents. Such dynamics often create friction and mistrust between communities and school board members that increase the complexity of district leadership. Prior scandals and consecutive short superintendent tenures within a district can also impact community trust and make a new superintendent’s job more difficult. As a result, superintendents enter their positions with varying levels of trust and public support which makes each superintendency unique. School districts are public institutions accountable to democratically elected school boards, families and community members, and the state education agency. Corporate CEOs are responsible for one or two primary measures that are often aligned with each other: generating a profit for stockholders and growing the company or company’s market share. For superintendents, the aims of public education and measures of success are far more complicated, difficult to measure, and contested. Various stakeholders within a state, community, district, and school often hold competing definitions and understandings of public education’s role in society and how to assess effectiveness toward goals. Each state constitution calls for an adequate or quality education that prepares students to be good citizens of a democracy and productive workers and taxpayers that contribute to society. Public education is also viewed by many as serving a competitive function where individual students compete for future educational and economic opportunities that will provide access to more desirable social positions in life

Texas Education Leadership Lab

(Labaree, 1997). Superintendents spend time working with individuals and groups with different viewpoints across these three aims of public education which often creates conflicts, tensions, contradictions, and compromises that require steady leadership (Pitner & Ogawa, 1981). Differing and shifting community viewpoints are situated within a district’s historical context where diverse families, teachers, and communities are vying for what they believe is the most appropriate way to utilize a district’s limited resources. Measuring outcomes for these aims is also more difficult, given how much student outcomes (e.g., test scores, attendance, graduation rates) are associated with external factors outside of the school’s and district’s control. The superintendency is also shaped by federal and state educational and economic policies. The federal government enacts legislation that states comply with that subsequently shapes how schools engage in testing and accountability or serve students with disabilities and English language learners. State legislatures enact legislation that impacts how public education is funded and monitored while other state policymakers shape curriculum and testing standards, teacher and administrator certification requirements, and charter and voucher programs. While these policy decisions happen outside of the district, they often directly impact a school district’s funding, enrollment, curricular resources, and teacher and principal workforce. For example, superintendents serving in a state’s poorest districts will confront significant constraints when working to improve curricular programs and recruiting and retaining the highest-quality teachers, especially if that state adopts or maintains inequitable school finance policies or low standards for teacher preparation and certification. Superintendent leadership is also shaped by the uncertainty surrounding district leadership. Emergent issues can quickly surface and require a significant shift in attention, time, and resources. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions within

Texas Education Leadership Lab

school districts (DeMatthews et al., 2021). Superintendents quickly transitioned schools to virtual learning while adopting new health protocols and developing novel systems to provide students with meals, important information related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and other resources. Rapidly shifting COVID-19 policies at the federal, state, and local level (e.g., mask mandates, testing policies) and the ebb and flow of infection rates continuously impacted the daily work of superintendents. Natural disasters, school board elections, economic recessions, and school shootings are also events that shape the context in which superintendents lead. Finally, the superintendency is shaped by state and local perceptions of public education, especially since superintendents are hired, evaluated, and removed by democratically-elected school boards. Decades of survey research indicate that parents strongly support the public schools they send their children to, although support has been declining; broader community support is always lower than parental support (Brenan, 2021). When states and communities broadly support public education, superintendents can build upon prior achievements and leverage community trust to advance district priorities. In states and communities with growing distrust of public education, superintendents may be diverting time and resources to rebuild or repair trust or manage tense relationships. In Texas, a recent report highlighted a recent decline in teachers’ perception of parental and community support as well as support from state policymakers (Charles Butt Foundation, 2022). While each district is distinctive, effective superintendents learn about their communities and work collaboratively to find innovative ways to advance district priorities amid challenges and opportunities.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

What are the demographics of superintendents? The position of the superintendent has most often been held by White men who climbed the organizational ladder from teacher to principal to superintendent (Blount, 1998; Grogan, 1996; Finnan et al., 2015; Glass, 1992, 2000; Maranto et al., 2018; Sharp et al., 2004; Superville, 2016; White, 2021, 2023). School boards are tasked with hiring superintendents and search firms often help facilitate the recruitment and search process. Researchers have documented that some school boards maintain strong hiring preferences for: (a) high school principals, associate superintendents, and individuals with prior superintendent experience; (b) individuals with characteristics associated with being a man and masculinity; and (c) individuals who are younger and further from retirement age (Glass, 2000; Grogan & Brunner; Kamler, 2009; Kamler & Shakeshaft, 1999; Robinson et al., 2017; Shakeshaft, 1989; Tallerico & Blount, 2004; Tallerico & Burstyn, 1996). These biases often limit women from accessing the superintendency because men are more likely to hold high school principalships and prior superintendencies. Men are also more likely to be younger when seeking the superintendency due to their quicker ascendancy through the leadership roles. School board biases have also been reported as a barrier to hiring superintendents of color, although fewer studies have been conducted (Kamler, 2009; Tallerico, 2000). The consistent ascendency of White men in the superintendency continues into the present and is, perhaps, even more alarming since three-quarters of all teachers and about half of all principals in the U.S. are women (NCES, 2022a; 2022b). Likewise, approximately 20% of teachers and 22% of principals are people of color (NCES, 2022a; 2022b). Researchers and policymakers may be aware of this issue, but the lack of a national longitudinal dataset that includes superintendent demographics has hampered efforts to gain

Texas Education Leadership Lab

insights into why women, people of color, and women of color rarely reach the superintendency. Researchers have found less accurate ways to track superintendent demographics for decades using surveys or state-level data systems in smaller states. In a review of superintendent demographic research, White (2021) identified only two national, non-survey-based studies of superintendent gender with a robust dataset. Blount (1998) examined superintendent names in the years 1910, 1930, 1950, 1970, and 1990. She found that women superintendents across all district types surged above 10% during the Great Depression but then declined. Between World War II and 1970, the number of women in superintendent positions dropped from 9% to only 3%. Fishel and Pottker (1974) reported that, in 1972, only one state had a woman as the state’s chief state school officer. They also found that 99.9% of all superintendents and 94% of all deputy and associate superintendents were men. At the time, out of 13,037 superintendents, just 65 were women. Perhaps the most prominent study on superintendent demographics comes from the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), which annually surveys all superintendents to gather information about their race and gender. Unfortunately, response rates are relatively low, which means most superintendents are unaccounted for in the studies. The most recent AASA decennial survey on superintendents included 1,218 participants of the nation’s more than 13,000 superintendents. While the response rate is low, the findings still provide some insight into superintendent diversity. For example, just 8.7% of superintendents were people of color (1.76% Native American or Native Alaskan; 0.16% Asian; 3.43% Black or African American; 0.16% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; 2.51% Hispanic; 91.3% White; 0.67% Other) (Tienken, 2021). Approximately 25% of superintendents who participated in the survey were women, but only 1.5% identified as Black or African American women and 1.09% identified as Hispanic women.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

In a newly developed national dataset focused specifically on gender, White (2021) found that women make up 26% of public school district superintendents. Shockingly, she reported that in the 2019-20 school year “the total number of female superintendents leading public school districts (n=3,254) was nearly equal to the number of male superintendents with just twelve names (n=3,253): Michael, John, David, Robert, James, Jeff, Steve, Mark, Brian, Scott, Richard, and Christopher. In that year, White reported that “David” was the most popular name for a Texas superintendent. Several state-level analyses have focused on gender and race. In Wisconsin between 1940 and 1972, March and March (1977) found that only three or four individuals were not White males, out of more than 1,500 individuals holding the superintendent role. An updated study of Wisconsin is not available, but a similar study from 2021 in Michigan revealed strikingly similar results: approximately 95% of superintendents identified as White, while just 4% identified as Black and 0.3% identified as Asian (French & Halpert, 2021). In Michigan’s 578 traditional districts, just 22 superintendents were Black. Michigan did not have a Hispanic superintendent and only 23% of superintendents were female. Using data from Texas between 2000-01 and 2014-15 school years, Davis and Bowers (2019) found that the most common pathway for a superintendent was through the principalship (36.94%) and central office administrative roles, but women and people of color were more likely to go from principal into the assistant superintendency before becoming a superintendent.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

What is superintendent turnover and why does it matter? A superintendent’s tenure typically begins with being hired by a school board and ends with the superintendent deciding to leave or retire or the school board’s decision to remove the superintendent or not renew their contract. Superintendents may choose to leave their district for another leadership opportunity, to change professions, or retire. School boards may choose to remove or non-renew the superintendent’s contract in favor of having a new superintendent. The subject of superintendent tenure and turnover tends to be covered by local media closely, especially in larger, high-profile urban school districts like New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and the District of Columbia. The assumption is that superintendent turnover is bad, although some turnover is healthy, especially if the district has a succession plan and would benefit from the insights and experiences of a new leader. Part of the high-profile coverage stems from the fact that superintendents are the highest ranking, highest paid, and most visible employees within a school district. Therefore, superintendents tend to get a lot of the credit when things go well in their districts and receive the much of blame when things do not go well. Such attention has created a sense among the public and media that the superintendency is a short-term position, doomed within a few years, given the unmanageability of districts, shifting school board dynamics, and uncertain political winds. The doom and gloom description of the superintendency is not new. Callahan (1962) documented similar concerns in the early 1900s: Tenure of the school superintendent is an uncertain one and his position is attended with vexatious conditions. These upheavals are so frequent and the discussions which find their way into the public press, so painful to the victim and disturbing to the school

Texas Education Leadership Lab

system, as to excite more than ordinary interest … That the official life of the superintendent is a short one has been amply demonstrated. (p. 53) Yet, research on the turnover has revealed that the superintendency is relatively stable, and superintendent and board relations are not always rocky, problematic, and confrontational. Some large urban districts have a history of high turnover rates that reflect media descriptions. As Grissom and Anderson (2012) pointed out, some districts have become a revolving door for superintendents such as St. Louis Public Schools that had eight superintendents in a 5-year stretch or Kansas City, Missouri’s school district having 25 superintendents in 40 years. This type of chronic turnover is disruptive to medium- and longterm improvement and raises expectations among district personnel that more turnover is inevitable. Other studies have highlighted that superintendent tenure has dropped since the 1970s but has also remained relatively low and stable since then across urban, suburban, and rural districts. Yee and Cuban (1996) reviewed superintendent tenure in the nation’s largest 25 school districts between 1900 and 1990. They found that tenures have declined over the century although there were “multiple cycles of decline, stability, and increase embedded within an overall downward trend in longevity over the century” (p. 624). From 1965 to 1990, the average tenure shifted from 6 years to about 5.8 years, reflecting a relatively stable superintendent workforce. In a more recent study in California, Grissom and Andersen (2012) found that, among 215 superintendents beginning their tenure in 2006, approximately 45% exited within 3 years. They also found that how highly a school board rates its own functioning and superintendent predicts non-retirement exits 3 years later. Lastly, the researchers found that superintendents who move migrate toward larger districts that are higher paying in urban and suburban locations and

Texas Education Leadership Lab

away from remote rural districts. In a more recent study, Grissom and Mitani (2016) found that superintendent turnover is higher in districts with both low and higher performance levels. Higher paid superintendents tend to stay longer, especially in high-performing districts. When superintendents move, Grissom and Mitani (2016) found that they often receive substantial salary gains.

Summary This section highlighted the important roles and influence of superintendents as well as the contextual challenges and opportunities that are inherent to district leadership. While much is known about the roles of superintendents and the complexity of district leadership, research on superintendent demographics has been limited due to a lack of access to comprehensive longitudinal data systems and low-response rates on national superintendent surveys. Available evidence suggests that White men continue to hold most superintendent positions across the U.S. and that superintendent turnover is between 15-20% annually. Researchers know less about recent shifts in demographics or other important trends. The next section examines Texas demographics which are critical for understanding the state’s superintendent pipeline.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

TEXAS SUPERINTENDENT DEMOGRAPHICS Key Takeaways: • Texas is a racially diverse state that is rapidly growing. More than 52% of Texas students are Hispanic while most other racial groups within the state are holding steady or declining. • Nearly 57% of teachers and 58% of principals are White which is not representative of the state’s adult or student populations. • Nearly 80% of Texas superintendents are White and 73% are men. Very few women of color currently serve in the superintendency. • Texas has so few superintendents who identify as American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or Two or More Races that they cannot be included in the study due to research policies protecting the anonymity of superintendents. Texas Education Leadership Lab

Texas is a racially diverse state. The superintendent workforce should reflect that diversity. This section begins with a brief overview of demographics and changes among the U.S. and Texas populations. Next, Texas principal and teacher demographics are presented because virtually all Texas superintendents were at one time a teacher and principal. Regional variation across the regional Education Service Centers (ESCs) is also presented given the large geographic size of Texas. To follow, this section provides the racial and gender demographics for the state’s superintendents – providing unique insights into how the superintendent workforce can be strengthened. Finally, a summary of takeaways concludes this section.

Texas Demographics The populations of Texas and the United States are changing. To draw appropriate conclusions about the Texas superintendent workforce, it is important to know how the state’s demographics have changed over the study period. According to the U.S. Census, in 2021, 59.3% of persons in the United States identified as White (not Hispanic), 18.9% as Hispanic, 13.6% identified as Black or African American, 6.1% as Asian, 2.9% as Two or More Races, 1.3% as American Indian or Alaskan Native, and 0.3% as Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). Texas shares some demographic characteristics with the U.S. but also differs in several areas. The population of Texas is similar in representation for Black or African American, Asian, Two or More Races, American Indian or Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. However, in 2021, 40.2% of Texans identified as Hispanic – more than double the national percentage. People who identify as White made up only 40.3% of the Texas population. Texas has seen a population boom and has become more diverse during the 11-year study period.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

The population grew 17% to 29.5 million from 25.2 million people in 2010, more than double the 7.3% population growth in the U.S during the same time period. In 2021, the share of the population in Texas that was Hispanic grew 2.5%, while the White (non-Hispanic) group declined to 40.3% of the population from 45.3% in 2010 (USA Facts, 2022). Texas Public School Demographics. The statewide enrollment in Texas public schools also grew and became more racially diverse during the 11-year study period. The number of students in Texas public schools grew from 4,933,617 to 5,371,586 – representing almost 9% growth. During this 11-year span, Black or African American and Hispanic enrollment increased from 637,722 to 681,401 and 2,480,000 to 2,840,982 students. Also, Asian enrollment increased from 169,338 to 254,163 (proportionally 3.4% to 4.7%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander increased from 6,127 to 8,271 (proportionally 0.1% to 0.2%), and Two or More Races from 78,419 to 143,763 (1.6% to 2.7%). However, American Indian students decreased from 23,602 to 18,755, from 0.5% to 0.3%. The proportion of Hispanic students across the state grew from 50.3% in 2011 to 52.9% of all students in 2021 while Black or African American student enrollment fell from 12.9% to 12.7%. White student enrollment declined by 7.4% over the same time period. The proportion of White students also declined from 31.2% to 26.5% of all students (Texas Education Agency, 2021). Teacher demographics in Texas are not aligned with the demographics of students, which represents a problem for the future of the superintendent workforce. Among the 375,068 teachers working across the state, the majority identified as White (57%). Just 28% identified as Hispanic and 11% identified as Black or African American. The demographics of Texas principals also did not align with demographics of students although they matched more closely with teachers. In 2021, 58% of principals identified as White, 28% identified as Hispanic, and 14% identified as

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Black or African American. However, the representation of principals identifying as people of color increased from 35% to 42% between 2011 and 2021. Regional Variation in Demographics. Significant variation exists between different geographic regions like the Texas Panhandle, Deep East Texas, or South Texas. Some parts of Texas are also urban and suburban while other parts are rural and geographically isolated. In other words, to understand the superintendent workforce, it is also important to understand regional variation by locale and within ESC regions. Figure 3.1 depicts the variation for student racial/ethnic demographics across all locale types in Texas during the 2020-21 school year. The majority of students in city and town districts were Hispanic (57% and 52%). Whereas there were nearly equal proportions of White and Black or African American students in city districts, 17% and 19% respectively. In town districts, White students made up 37% and Black or African American students were 7% of the student population. In contrast, White students were the majority in rural districts (57%) while 35% of students were Hispanic and 4% of students were Black or African American.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 3.1. Variation in Student Racial/Ethnic Demographics Across Texas Locales during the 2020-21 School Year.

Hispanic students were the majority across all locales except rural districts.

Racial/ethnic demographics of Texas Students by locale for the 2020-21 school year. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2022 Note: All other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections.

Figure 3.2 depicts ESC variation and the percent of students who identify as Black, White, Hispanic, and all other racial groups. Student racial demographics vary by region. For example, the percentage of White students ranged from a low of 2% in Region 1 to a high of 69% in Region 9. In Regions 1 and 19, which are regions along the U.S.-Mexico border, more

Texas Education Leadership Lab

than 90% of students were Hispanic. Regions 10 and 4 had the highest percentage of Black or African American students. Figure 3.2. ESC Regional Variation in Student Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity during the 2020-21 School Year.

Student racial demographics varied by region. In Regions 1 and 19 along the U.S.-Mexico border, more than 90% of students identified as Hispanic.

Percent of Texas students by race/ethnicity for the 2020-21 school year. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2022 Note: All other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Texas Superintendent Demographics Racial Demographics. During the 2020-21 school year, Texas had 1,204 superintendents, including interim superintendents, serving school districts across the state. Eleven districts had multiple individuals serve as superintendent during the year and 13 people served as superintendent in multiple districts. The majority of Texas superintendents identified as White (78%). Nearly three-quarters of superintendents were men (73%). A little more than one-quarter of superintendents were women (27%). Figure 3.3 shows the racial demographics of students, teachers, principals, and superintendents across the state. As discussed above, Texas is a diverse state with a rapidly changing population, but the state’s education workforce does not reflect the changing population. The superintendency is far less diverse than principals, teachers, and students. In 2020-21 school year, among the 1,187 superintendents in our sample, for which only one superintendent was counted per district, approximately 21% of superintendents were people of color, even though nearly three-quarters of children in Texas schools are students of color. Principal and teacher demographics are relatively similar, and do not reflect the state’s student demographics.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 3.3. Racial Demographics of Texas Students, Teachers, Principals, and Superintendents.

Racial mismatch between school leaders and students. During the 2020-21 school year, over half of students identified as Hispanic, while most school leaders and staff identified as White.

Percent of Texas Principals, Superintendents, Teachers and Students by race/ethnicity for the 2020-21 school year. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2022 Note: All other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections.

The superintendency has become somewhat more diverse during the study period. Figure 3.4 highlights the increase in racial diversity among superintendents and principals during the 11-year study period. Between 2011 and 2021, the representation of superintendents and Texas Education Leadership Lab

principals of color has increased. In 2011, only 19% of superintendents and 35% of principals identified as people of color. By 2021, 21% of superintendents and 42% of principals identified as people of color. The gap between White and all other racial groups in the superintendency narrowed by just 4% in the past 11 years. The gap between White and all other racial groups of principals narrowed by 14%, which reflects a more positive trend. Figure 3.4. Superintendent and Principal Racial Demographic Change Between 2011 and 2021.

People of color among Texas school leaders saw slight increases. While representation of people of color among superintendents and principals increased between 2011 and 2021, there remains substantial racial diversity gaps.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2022 Note: People of Color include any combination of Hispanic/Latina/o, Black or African American, Asia or Asian American, and/or American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.

Gender Demographics. Superintendent workforce data tells a slightly different story for gender representation. The proportion of males serving in the superintendency decreased from 80% in 2010-11 to 73% by 2020-21, representing a narrowing of the gender gap by 14%. The proportion of female principals grew from 60% in 2011 to 66% in 2021, representing an

Texas Education Leadership Lab

expanding gap between the number of male and female principals. Females are the majority among Texas principals, but the minority among Texas superintendents, which points to a clogged pipeline for women who are principals aspiring to be superintendents. However, the growing number of female principals could potentially lead to more female superintendents in the future. Figure 3.4. Superintendent and Principal Demographic Change between 2011 and 2021.

Females remained underrepresented in the superintendency. Although female representation increased in both the superintendency and principals between 2011 and 2021, there remains substantial gender gaps.

Percent of Texas superintendents and principals who identified as male and female between 2010-11 and 2020-21 school years. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2022

Race and Gender among Texas Superintendents. While the state has made progress in hiring more women, women of color are significantly underrepresented in the state’s superintendent workforce. Figure 3.5 highlights the increase of White women in the superintendency but the lack of women of color moving into the superintendency over the 11-

Texas Education Leadership Lab

year study period. Between the 2010-11 and 2020-21 school years, among all superintendents, the representation of Hispanic female superintendents only increased from 3% to 4% while the representation of Hispanic male superintendents increased from 7% to 10%. In contrast, the percent of Black or African American female superintendents declined between 2011 and 2021, from 3% to 2%, and increased marginally for Black or African American males (3% to 4%). White female superintendents saw the greatest increase in representation, growing from 14% in 2011 to 20% in 2021. Figure 3.5. Racial and Gender Demographics Shifts for Texas Superintendents: 2010-2021.

Underrepresentation of women of color in the superintendency remained static. White females in the superintendents had the greatest increase from 2011 to 2021.

Percent of Texas superintendents by gender from 2011 to 2021. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2021 Note: Other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections.

Summary

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Demographics are characteristics of a population that help provide a basis for understanding a nation, state, community, or workforce. Tracking demographic trends can provide useful information for government agencies, policymakers, journalists, and researchers because they provide basic insight into important changes in society. This section began by highlighting the increasing diversity within the state of Texas and how diversity among students, teachers, and principals varied by geographic region. Next, superintendent demographics were presented that highlighted a significant overrepresentation of White men. This finding should be of no surprise given prior research on superintendent demographics; however, the superintendency has more women and people of color than ever before. During the 11-year study period, some improvement has been made concerning the racial and gender diversity of superintendents, but Texas should be concerned with the significant lack of women of color in the superintendency, which has shown very little change in 11 years. In particular, the lack of Hispanic women in the superintendency stands out given the rapidly growing Hispanic student population and the higher percentage of Hispanic women in the principalship.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

SUPERINTENDENT DEMOGRAPHICS BY CONTEXT Key Takeaways • In 2021, Hispanic superintendents were geographically clustered around the U.S.Mexico border. Black superintendents were only working in the Eastern and Central parts of the state. • In the state’s largest 20 districts, only seven of the superintendents were women and only nine identified as Black or African American or Hispanic. • Women and people of color tend to take more time to become superintendent in comparison to White men. • Superintendents of color and women are more likely to serve in districts with more economically disadvantaged students. Superintendents of color rarely serve in affluent, majority-White districts. Texas Education Leadership Lab

Texas is a diverse state with approximately 1,200 unique districts. Each of these districts have their own set of opportunities and challenges. This section provides a detailed analysis of the Texas superintendent workforce by context. Specifically, we examine trends in superintendent hiring and turnover by district size, student demographics, and by ESC regions. In addition, this section outlines the pathways superintendents take to become superintendents and how those pathways vary by racial and gender identities. This section concludes with a summary of key takeaways.

Racial and Gender Demographics by District Geography matters in Texas, even when it comes to hiring a superintendent. Figures 4.1 and 4.2 are maps of Texas and the enrollment boundaries of each district. Figure 4.1 is colorcoded with the racial background of the superintendent serving in that district during the 2020-21 school year. Hispanic superintendents are clustered along the U.S.-Mexico border while Black or African American superintendents are only working in Central and East Texas. Figure 4.2 is color-coded with the gender identity of the superintendent serving in that school district during the 2020-21 school year. There is no apparent pattern to areas of the state where women are more or less likely to be hired.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.1. Racial Demographics of Superintendents serving Texas School Districts in 2020-21 school year.

Hispanic superintendents are clustered around the border while Black or African American superintendents are only working in the eastern part of the state.

Source: TEA PIR, 2020-2021 academic year data Note: All other races include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Multiracial, combined due to FERPA protections.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.2. Gender Demographics of Superintendents serving Texas School Districts in 2020-21 school year.

Female superintendents work throughout the state, but their representation is lacking.

Gender identification of superintendents in each district during the 2020-21 school year Source: TEA PIR, 2020-2021 academic year data

The 20 largest school districts in Texas served 1,551,102 students in the 2020-21 school year, which is approximately 28.8% of the state’s total student enrollment. Table 4.3 provides a list of the superintendents of the state’s 20 largest districts along with their racial and gender demographics. Austin ISD had two superintendents during the study period, which means 21 superintendents served in the 20 largest school districts in 2021. During the 2020-21 school year, only seven of 21 or 33% of the districts were led by females (Aldine ISD, Austin ISD, Houston Texas Education Leadership Lab

ISD, IDEA Public Schools, Klein ISD, Pasadena ISD, Plano ISD). Only three superintendents in this group identified as Black or African American (Aldine ISD, Fort Bend ISD, and Houston ISD). Six superintendents identified as Hispanic (Arlington ISD, Austin ISD (2), Dallas ISD, El Paso ISD, Garland ISD, IDEA Public Schools) and ten identified as White (Conroe ISD, Cypress-Fairbanks ISD, Frisco ISD, Katy ISD, Klein ISD, Lewisville ISD, Northside ISD, Northeast ISD, Pasadena ISD, Plano ISD). Just four of the superintendents were women of color – two Hispanic women (Austin ISD, IDEA Public Schools) and two Black or African American women (Aldine ISD, Houston ISD).

Table 4.3. Superintendents in the 20 Largest School Districts in 2020-21 school year. District (ESC Region) Superinte Gender Race Experienc Student ndent e in TX Enrollmen Name School t System Aldine ISD (4) Female Black or 2 63,302 Latonya African Goffney American Arlington ISD (11) Austin ISD (13)

Jose Cavazos Pablo Cruz

Male Male

Hispanic/ Latino Hispanic/ Latino

56,840

74,871

Stephanie Elizalde (Interim)

Female

Hispanic/ Latina

Conroe ISD (6)

Curtis Null

Male

White

64,563

Cypress-Fairbanks ISD (4) Dallas ISD (10)

John Henry Eliu Hinojosa Juan Cabrera Charles Dupre

Male

White

114,881

Male

Hispanic/ Latino Hispanic/ Latino Black or African American

145,113

50,661

76,735

El Paso ISD (19) Fort Bend ISD (4)

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Male Male

Fort Worth ISD (11)

Kent Scribner

Male

Hispanic/ Latino

76,858

Frisco ISD (10)

Michael Waldrip

Male

White

63,493

Garland ISD (10)

Ricardo Lopez

Male

Hispanic/ Latino

53,921

Houston ISD (4)

Grenita Lathan

Female

196,943

IDEA Public Schools (1)

Jo Ann Gama Kenneth Gregorski

Female

62,158

Male

Black or African American Hispanic/ Latina White

84,176

Jenny Mcgown Tommy Rogers

Female

White

52,824

Male

White

49,361

Brian Woods Sean Maika Ellen Powell

Male

White

103,151

Male

White

60,483

Female

White

50,614

Sara Bonser

Female

White

50,154

Katy ISD (4) Klein ISD (4) Lewisville ISD (11) Northside ISD (20) North East ISD (20) Pasadena ISD (4) Plano ISD (10)

Source: Texas Education Agency PIR

Locale

In the 2020-21, the state had 210 city districts, 141 suburban districts, 212 town districts,

and 652 rural districts. Thus, the majority of Texas superintendents work in rural districts. Across all Texas locales, students in most districts are relatively diverse, yet the superintendency does not reflect that diversity in any of the locales. Figure 4.4 details the racial demographics of students and superintendents by locale type. White superintendents are the majority across all four locales although Hispanic superintendents in cities saw the largest growth between 2011 and 2021. In rural districts in 2021, 90% of the superintendents identified as White even though 50% of the student population in the rural locale identified as White. Black or African American

Texas Education Leadership Lab

superintendents saw a decline in superintendents within city districts and have remained relatively static in the state’s suburban districts.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.4. Racial Demographics of Superintendents and Students by Locale in 2020-21 school year.

Hispanic superintendents in city districts saw the largest growth between 2010-11 and 2020-21. Direction of data points represents change over time Percentages shown represent 2021 snapshot

Percent of Texas superintendents and students by racial group and locale between 2010-11 and 2020-21 school years. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2021

ESC Regions within Texas

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Similar to locale, the demographics of superintendents vary across ESC regions. Table 4.5 highlights the differences in superintendent demographics across ESC regions. Most superintendents were male within every ESC region in 2020-21. However, three regions had greater gender parity and 40% of superintendents were female in Regions 1 and 2 respectively. 46% of superintendents were females in Region 4. In contrast, 80% or more of superintendents were male in Regions 6, 9, 14, 15, and 17. Additionally, in regions where the majority (>50%) of students served identified as Hispanic in 2021, including Regions 1, 2, 3, 17, 18, 19, and 20, only two regions, Region 1 and Region 19, had a majority of superintendents who were Hispanic, whereas all other regions were overrepresented by White superintendents. Less variation was evident in average years of professional experience, as the mean ranged from 6 to 13 years across regions. In 2021, all regions had at least one superintendent in their first year serving Texas school districts but many had superintendents with 20 or more years of experience in the school system. Table 4.5: Differences in Superintendent Demographics between ESC Regions REGION

PERCENT HISPANIC

PERCENT WHITE

PERCENT MALE

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

88.4 40.0 7.7 11.5 8.3 <=1% 1.0 <=1% 2.7 6.3 5.6 1.2 14.1

9.3 53.3 87.2 60.9 77.8 90.0 89.2 97.8 97.3 78.4 88.9 92.6 80.3

58.1 60.0 69.2 54.0 75.0 83.3 75.5 65.2 91.9 68.5 74.4 79.0 70.4

Texas Education Leadership Lab

MEDIAN YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 4 3 5 9 7 5.5 6.5 10.5 4 7 6 8 6 66

14 15 16 17 18 19 20

<=1 11.6 8.2 6.8 22.2 88.2 29.6

>=99 88.4 91.8 91.5 77.8 11.8 59.3

85.7 88.4 72.1 86.4 72.2 76.5 71.6

5 5 7 6 5 6 5

Superintendent Demographics by District Student Population Superintendents of color are more likely to serve districts with more economically disadvantaged students. White superintendents were more likely to be leading districts where the majority of students were White. During the study period (in aggregate), Black or African American and Hispanic superintendents were serving in districts where the average enrollment of economically disadvantaged students was 76.1% (SD = 18.7) and 75.0% (SD = 19.1) respectively. In contrast, White superintendents served in districts with an average of 55.9% (SD = 19.3) economically disadvantaged students. These differences did not vary substantially over time. Furthermore, White superintendents tended to work in smaller districts with a mean student enrollment of 3,601 (SD = 56), whereas Hispanic superintendents worked in the largest districts with an average student enrollment of 8,402 (SD = 75) and Black or African American superintendents in districts with a mean student enrollment of 6,952 (SD = 76). In districts where 75% or more of students were White in the 2020-2021 academic year, nearly all superintendents working in those districts were White (98%). In contrast, in districts with fewer than 25% White students, there was greater racial diversity among superintendents: 16% identified as Black or African American, 36% identified as Hispanic, and 46% identified as White. Across the state, 23 districts have less than 10% of their students classified as economically disadvantaged. Within these 23 affluent districts during the 2020-2021 academic year, less than 1% of superintendents were Black or African American, 9% of superintendents Texas Education Leadership Lab

were Hispanic, and 87% were White. In contrast, 95 districts have more than 90% of students classified as economically disadvantaged. Within these 95 economically disadvantaged districts, 25% of superintendents were Black or African American, 37% were Hispanic, and 36% were White. Additionally, 44% were female in these 95 districts, while 48% were female in the 23 most affluent districts. Thus, women and people of color were more likely to serve in districts with the highest proportions of low-income students (Figure 4.6). The story is somewhat different when we examine how different racial/ethnic groups among superintendents are distributed across the most versus least affluent districts. Thirteen percent of all female superintendents in 2020-21 were in the highest poverty districts (where more than 90% of students were economically disadvantaged), whereas just 6% of males were serving in the highest poverty districts. Additionally, 31% of Black or African American superintendents and 21% of Hispanic superintendents in Texas during the 2020-21 academic year were in high poverty districts, compared to <1% of Black or African American and 1% of Hispanic superintendents serving the most affluent districts (where less than 10% of students were economically disadvantaged). Only 4% of all White superintendents were working in the highest poverty districts. Furthermore, superintendents working in the highest poverty districts had, on average, lower pay than those working in the most affluent ($153,000 vs. $173,000). However, there was less discrepancy in mean years of experience between the poorest and most affluent districts in Texas in 2021 (21 years compared to 25 years, respectively).

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.6. Regardless of How Poverty is Measured, Female Superintendents and Superintendents of Color are More Likely to Serve in the Least Affluent Districts.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC) Note: Percentages reflected within demographic group (e.g., 12.9% of all female superintendents in 202021 were working in districts with more than 90% of students classified as economically disadvantaged).

The 100 Largest and 100 Smallest Districts and Their Superintendents Differences in superintendent and student demographics emerge when comparing the 100 largest and 100 smallest districts. The mean total enrollment for the largest 100 districts was 35,429 students (SD =28,283.3) in academic year 2020-21. On average, White students were the minority (23.4%) of the student population in the largest districts, and White student enrollment ranged from <1% to 61%. Hispanic students were the majority (54.5%) in the 100 largest districts in 2021, and some of these districts were nearly 100% Hispanic. More than half of students (58.8%) were classified as economically disadvantaged in the largest districts. The 100 smallest districts differed significantly. The mean total enrollment for the smallest 100 districts was 111 (SD = 35.4). White students were the largest group of students in the smallest 100 districts (49.8%), although White student enrollment ranged from <1% to 97.8%, as a few of these smallest districts were more than 90% Hispanic. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of students in the smallest districts were classified as economically disadvantaged. There were proportionally more White superintendents and little movement in diversity in the smallest 100 districts over the 11-year study period compared to the 100 largest districts. Texas Education Leadership Lab

In 2011, 83% of superintendents in the smallest 100 districts were White and in 2021, 81% were White. Comparatively, in the largest 100 districts, 75% of superintendents were White in 2011 but decreased to 64% in 2021.

Pathways to the Superintendency and Variations by Race and Gender Among the 2021 group of superintendents, nearly one-third served as deputy or assistant superintendent (26.9%), approximately 47.9% served as principals and 13.8% served as assistant principals during the time frame of our study. The number of years it takes for an assistant principal or principal to transition into the superintendency varies by gender and race. Figures 4.7 and 4.8 show the length of time between the first time serving as a principal or assistant principal to the first time serving as a superintendent for males and females. For those in the 2021 cohort of superintendents, only 26% of females as opposed to 35% of males made the transition to superintendent from principal within 3 years (Figure 4.7). Instead, nearly half of female superintendents from the 2021 cohort who served as a principal during the study period waited 7-10 years to transition into the role of a superintendent. However, there was greater gender parity among the 2021 cohort of superintendents who served as an assistant principal during the study period (Figure 4.8). Approximately half of females and half of males moved into the superintendency within 6 years, although a larger proportion of females made this transition within 3 years.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.7 Time to Superintendency from Principalship for Superintendent Cohort 2020-21.

Nearly half of females versus a third of males take 7-10 years to transition into the superintendency.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2021

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.8 Time to Superintendency from Assistant Principalship for Superintendent Cohort 2021.

Nearly equal proportions of males and females move into the superintendency within 6 years.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2021

In addition to females taking more time to become a superintendent in comparison to males, their pathways are less direct. Figure 4.9 shows that, whereas 61% of males from the 2021 cohort moved directly into the superintendency from principalship, only 51% of females made this direct transition, and females were more likely to hold another administrative position first. 49% of women move into the superintendency after serving in other roles, such as assistant or associate superintendent positions or other school district positions.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.9 Career Pathway from Principal to Superintendents by Gender for the 2021 Cohort of Superintendents.

Findings reveal that among the 2021 cohort of superintendents, different racial groups transitioned from the principalship to the superintendency at varying rates. As shown in Figure 4.10, White principals, on average, make the transition to superintendent quicker than people of color. 35% of White principals become superintendents within 3 years (the shortest time frame in our analysis), compared to only 14% of Black or African American and 28% of Hispanic principals who ultimately become superintendents in the same time frame. Conversely, more than half of Black or African American principals (51%) and 46% of Hispanic principals did not transition into the role of superintendent until 7-10 years, compared to less than one-third of White superintendents (32%) in the same amount of time. The results of the analysis are sensitive to small sample sizes when examining those who served as assistant principals during Texas Education Leadership Lab

the study period, thus time to superintendency from assistant principalship for different racial groups cannot be reported here. Figure 4.10. Time to Superintendency from Principalship by Race for 2021 Cohort of Texas Superintendents. Time to superintendency varies among Hispanic, Black or African American, and White principals.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC), 2021

In addition to variation between racial groups in the time from principal to superintendent, there is variation in the pathways. Figure 4.10 shows how White administrators are more likely than Hispanic and Black or African American administrators to transition directly from principal to superintendent, 65%, 40%, and 24%, respectively. Furthermore, Black or African American and Hispanic principals are more likely to hold some other administrative role prior to the superintendency.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 4.10. Career Pathway from Principal to Superintendents by Race for the 2021 Cohort of Superintendents.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

For the 2020-21 cohort of superintendents who began as assistant principals, women are slightly more likely to go straight to superintendent than men (1.9% of all females vs. 1% of all males), whereas men are more likely to follow the traditional assistant principal-principalsuperintendent pathway (6.7% of males vs. 2.8% of females). Six women and ten men from the 2021 group of superintendents took the direct path from assistant principal to superintendent during our study period. The most common pathways for Black or African American superintendents who began as principals during the 11-year study period is principal to assistant superintendent to superintendent (25%) and principal to superintendent directly (24%). In comparison, 40% of Hispanic principals and 65% of White principals transitioned directly from the principalship to the superintendency.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Summary A healthy state context for superintendent leadership is one where diversity and experience are equitably distributed across all parts of the state and not concentrated in areas with the greatest resources and privilege. The lack of diversity in the superintendency is apparent across different district types, including the 20 largest Texas districts. Just 33% of these large districts are led by women and only four of these districts were led by women of color. Across different locales, people of color remain underrepresented – even in districts that serve large proportions of students of color. However, superintendents of color are more likely to serve in districts that serve more economically disadvantaged students. White superintendents are significantly more likely to work in the most affluent and White school districts. Women and people of color also tend to take more time getting to their first superintendency relative to their White male peers. These trends suggest that high-quality aspiring superintendents who are not White men may be missing opportunities to lead districts, which should be concerning to policymakers, school boards, and other stakeholders.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

SUPERINTENDENT TURNOVER AND PAY Key Takeaways • Superintendent turnover rates are relatively low (between 15-19% annually) between 2010-11 and 2021-22 across all district sizes and locales. • Superintendent turnover rates are elevated only in a very small group of districts serving the largest proportions of students classified as economically disadvantaged. • Superintendents tend to make more money based on the size of their district and their years of experience. • Women superintendents tend to get paid less than men even with similar years of experience and in similarly sized districts. Superintendent pay is comparable across White, Black or African American, and Hispanic superintendents. Texas Education Leadership Lab

Turnover and retention are important aspects of the superintendency because all districts require stability to effectively plan, implement, and make meaningful progress toward goals. However, sometimes a change in leadership is a good thing, especially if a leader is unequipped for their position or if the district has a succession plan and can hire a qualified individual to take the lead. This section focuses on superintendent turnover and a factor that is related to turnover – superintendent salaries. First, the section highlights the overall retention rates and predictors of superintendent turnover (e.g., student demographics, district size, locale). Next, findings are presented on superintendent salary. Specifically, the section provides an analysis of pay gaps by race, gender, superintendent experience, district size, and district student demographics. Finally, this section concludes with key takeaways. Superintendent Retention Rates Retention rates, operationalized as a superintendent staying in their same role in the same district each year, have remained relatively high and stable during the 11-year study period. As evident in Figure 5.1, the annual retention rate was relatively stable during the study period, between 80 and 84%. It dropped slightly to 79.6% between 2014-15 and 2015-16 school years but increased to 84% during the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school years. In contrast, the vacancy rate has been steadily declining from a high of 5.6% in 2010-11 to low of 0.3% in 2020-21, apart from a small increase in 2016 (Figure 5.1). Superintendents eligible for retirement in a given year are more likely to leave their position than those not eligible for retirement, with the exception of 2017. As Figure 5.2 shows, the annual rates among those eligible for retirement ranged between a low of 16.1 in 2017 and a high of 28.6 in 2018.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 5.1. Annual Turnover and Vacancy Rate by Year.

Note: vacancy refers to instances where no superintendent was reported for a district but at least one year during the study period had a superintendent.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 5.2. Annual Rates of Turnover among Texas Superintendents Eligible for Retirement.

Source: TEA Public Information Request (PIR)

At the start of the 11-year study period, 82% of all superintendents from the 2010-11 year remained in their position in the following school year of 2012. Figure 5.3 shows the percentage of superintendents who stayed in their district, left the Texas public education system, or made a lateral shift to another district during the 11-year study period. Among the 1,135 superintendents in the 2011 cohort, 826 remained after 3 years. That number declined to 648 after 5 years. By the 2020-21 school year, 838 (74%) superintendents from the 2011 cohort left the Texas public education system. Additionally, there was mobility within the system (e.g., superintendents moving from one district to another in the state). For example, 95 superintendents (8.4%) switched districts between 2011-12 and 2012-13. Annually, approximately 82% stayed in their position in their district. Nearly 12% of superintendents served all 10 years in one district and 44.5% served for 5 years or more in their one district. Among the 2011 cohort, the average tenure in a district was 5 years, regardless of racial background.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 5.3. Superintendent Mobility from the 2011 Cohort of Superintendents.

Nearly three-quarters of all superintendents left the Texas education system after 9 years. Of the superintendents who were employed in 2010-11, 74% left the Texas education system by 2020.

Percent of Texas superintendents who left and were still employed in the Texas education system from 2011 to 2020. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Superintendent Retention and District Context Superintendent retention was relatively stable regardless of context, but some differences were apparent in the extremes of economic privilege and disadvantage. The majority of the most affluent 10% of districts (n = 120), where less than 31% of children were economically

Texas Education Leadership Lab

disadvantaged, as well as the majority of the least affluent 10% of districts (n = 121), where more than 88% of children were economically disadvantaged, had only one to two superintendents during the study period (61% and 56% respectively). However, 8.4% of these least affluent districts compared to 2.8% of the most affluent 10% of districts had five or more different superintendents between 2011 and 2021. A closer look shows additional differences in superintendent retention by context. Among districts with fewer than 10% of students being classified as economically disadvantaged (n = 23), 70% had only one or two superintendents during the 11-year study period and no more than five district superintendents. Conversely, 58% of districts with more than 90% of students being classified as economically disadvantaged (n = 95) had two or fewer superintendents and 3% had six or more different superintendents during the 11-year study period. Table 5.1 and Figure 5.4 contrast districts with higher and lower rates of superintendent turnover (high- and low-churn) over various demographics and locales. During the 11-year study period, 35% of districts had two superintendents and 27% had three superintendents. Almost 18% of districts had four superintendents and some districts had seven superintendents, henceforth referred to as high-churn districts. Compared to low-churn districts, or those with three or fewer superintendents between 2011 and 2021, the median salary in high-churn districts was nearly $10,000 less and there were proportionally fewer Black or African American and Hispanic superintendents in high-churn districts (Figure 5.4).

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Table 5.1. Districts with High and Low Rates of Superintendent Turnover by Locale and Student Demographics. High Churn (four or more superintendents during study period)

Variable District Characteristics Locale % within City Suburb Town Rural Charter Type Charter Superintendent Characteristics Superintendent Race Black Hispanic White Other Female Salary (mean) Years of Experience (mean) Student Characteristics Total enrollment (mean) Mean Percent White Mean Percent Economically Disadvantaged

Texas Education Leadership Lab

12.6 7.8 21.2 58.4

Low Churn (one to three superintendents during study period) % within

17.1 12.2 16.8 53.9

6.1

16.0

3.9 16.9 78.4 0.9 27.3 $145,889.9

6.9 12.5 78.9 1.7 26.9 $156,304.5

21.9

24.1

3709.3 41.4

4644.5 44.2

63.8

59.2

Figure 5.4. Student Characteristics within High Churn Districts (four or more distinct superintendents between 2011 and 2021) compared to Low Churn Districts (three or fewer district superintendents between 2011 and 2021).

Note: Frequencies refer to 2021 district data.

Additionally, the annual turnover rate of superintendents did not vary in any significant way between the 100 largest and 100 smallest districts, but there was higher superintendent turnover in the smallest districts. The average retention rate across all years in the smallest 100

Texas Education Leadership Lab

districts was 80% compared to 83% in the largest 100 districts. Additionally, superintendents remained in their district for a year longer, on average, in the largest 100 versus smallest 100 districts (4.1 years vs. 3.6 years). The average salary for superintendents in the largest 100 districts was more than $200,000 higher than in the smallest Texas districts ($308,488 vs. $97,088). Black and Hispanic superintendents had the highest median salaries in the largest districts ($370,229 and $323,454 compared to $300,459 for White). In contrast, the median salary was the highest for White superintendents at $96,100 compared to $76,500 for Black or African American and $93,872 for Hispanic in the smallest 100 districts in 2021. Superintendent Turnover Predictors Using inferential statistics, we investigated how different factors at the superintendent and district levels relate to superintendent turnover each year in Texas, during the 11-year study period, and separately for traditional public school districts. Again, turnover refers to a superintendent leaving their current district. Details of our methodology are provided in the Appendix. Tables 5.2 and 5.3 provide the results, in odds ratios for ease of interpretation.

Table 5.2. Results from Conditional Logistic Fixed-Effect Models of Superintendent Turnover within Traditional Public School Districts Variable Model 1

Model 2

Model 3

Model 4

Superintendent Salary 0.99***

0.99***

Superintendent Level of Experience Quartiles 1 (Mean = 4.5 years) 2 (Mean = 7.7 years) 3 (Mean = 9.7 years) 4 (Mean = 13.8 years)

Ref. 0.93 1.51*** 4.22***

Ref. 0.93 1.51*** 4.24***

Ref. 0.99 1.60*** 4.62***

Ref. 0.92 1.48*** 4.12***

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Superintendent Sex Female Male

0.73*** Ref.

0.72***. Ref.

0.73***. Ref.

Superintendent Race Black Hispanic White Other

0.80 0.80 Ref. 1.04

0.80 0.80 Ref. 1.06

0.83 0.84 Ref. 1.02

Percent of Students Economically Disadvantaged

0.99

Total Enrollment <=500 >500 & <=2500 >2500

Ref. 0.73 0.52

Ref. 0.74 0.52

0.98*

0.98* 0.34*** 0.43*

9019 6176.18

8484 5666.47

Percent White Principal Retention Teacher Retention N 9019 BIC 6124.71

9019 6146.79

*Results for year dummies are suppressed for simplicity of presentation *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001

Interpreting the best-fitting final Model 4, the analysis indicates that among regular public school districts, both demographic characteristics of the superintendent (including salary, experience, and gender) and contextual characteristics of the district (including staff turnover and percent of student body identifying as White) were related to an increase in the likelihood of annual turnover. Specifically, as salary increases, turnover is less likely in a given year (OR = 0.99, p < .05). The odds of a superintendent leaving are significantly higher in districts with more experienced superintendents than in districts with the least experienced superintendents in the Texas Education Leadership Lab

Texas system. Compared to the first quartile of years of experience, or the least experienced superintendents with an average of 4.5 years of professional experience, the odds of leaving for those in the third quartile of experience are about 60% higher (OR = 1.60, p < .001). For those in the highest quartile, or most experienced, the odds of leaving are 4.62 times as large as the odds for the least experienced. Additionally, if a district has a female compared to a male superintendent, the odds of turnover is 27% lower (OR = 0.73, p < .001). The likelihood of turnover declines as the proportion of White students enrolled increases. For every 1% increase in White student enrollment, there is a 2% decrease in the odds of superintendent turnover (p < .05). The likelihood of turnover also declines in districts with higher principal retention and higher teacher retention. Holding all other variables in the model constant, we will see a 66% decrease in the odds of turnover for a 1-unit increase in principal retention (p < .001) and a 57% decrease in the odds of turnover for a 1-unit increase in teacher retention (p < .05). However, superintendent race, district size as a categorical variable, and percent of students identified as economically disadvantaged were not significant predictors of turnover.

Superintendent Pay Superintendent salary is always a topic of great discussion. The average superintendent salary in 2020-21 was $153,543. However, adjusted to 2011 dollars, salary only increased by $12,357 over an 11-year study period or $116,543 to $128,900 across all districts. Salary among Texas superintendents scales with student enrollment (Figure 5.5). In 2021, the median superintendent salary for superintendents within the largest decile of districts (n = 120) was $294,859, while the median salary in the smallest decile of districts was $96,400, Yet in the

Texas Education Leadership Lab

largest 30 districts, with enrollment between 40,000 and 196,943 students, the median salary was $344,730.

Figure 5.5: Median Salary (unadjusted) of Texas Superintendents by Student Enrollment during the 2020-21 School Year.

Additionally, superintendent pay varies based on other variables. In what follows, we show how pay varies by gender, race, experience, locale type, and at the intersection of some of these variables. Superintendent Gender and Pay. Figure 5.6 provides the average pay of male and female superintendents adjusted to 2011 dollars. In the aggregate, the salaries for female superintendents consistently lagged behind male superintendents in the state between 2011 and 2021 (Figure 5.6). In 2021, the median salary for females was $121,278 and $137,016 for males. However, the gap

Texas Education Leadership Lab

in pay between males and females shrinks as years of professional experience increase. As evident in Figure 5.7, which relies on 2020-21 data, there is closer parity between males and females with roughly 30 or more years of experience; however, the maximum salaries (unadjusted) are consistently higher for males across most years of experience. Nevertheless, this parity in salary between males and females at the highest levels of experience only holds true in town and rural districts, as males earn more with more years of experience in city and suburb districts (Figure 5.8). Figure 5.6. Male and Female Superintendent Pay by Year, in 2011 dollars.

On average, female superintendents earned less than males. While female superintendent pay in Texas increased between 2011 and 2021, there remains substantial gender pay gaps.

The average pay among Texas superintendents by gender from 2011 to 2021. Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Figure 5.7. Salary in 2021 by Gender for Different Levels of Professional Experience Median Salary by Gender in 2021 dollars.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Despite similar years of experience in the Texas education system, for the most part, males earn higher salaries than females. This inequity is particularly acute in city and suburban districts, whereas the gaps in pay are smaller in town and rural districts. Figure 5.8, a box and whisker plot, also referred to as a boxplot, provides evidence that when comparing females and males with similar years of experience, the median salary for male superintendents (indicated by the blue horizontal line in the blue boxes) and the maximum salary for males excluding outliers (indicated by the top whisker on the blue boxes) are generally higher than they are for female superintendents (indicated by green), regardless of locale. With equivalent years of experience, Texas Education Leadership Lab

males consistently command higher salaries, especially for superintendents with fewer years in the Texas system.

Figure 5.8. Superintendent Salary by Gender, Experience, and Locale in 2021.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Superintendent Race and Pay. Racial gaps in superintendent pay largely persist across levels of experience. Figure 5.9 depicts superintendent salary, race, and experience in 2021 for every superintendent, denoted by a cross and color-coded by racial group. The gap between Black or African American and White superintendents is relatively stable, indicated by the colorcoded line representing a locally weighted regression for a better fit to the raw data, but Hispanic superintendents earn higher pay than their Black or African American and White peers at greater years of experience. However, like gender, these results vary across locales. Figure 5.10 again depicts superintendent salary, race, and experience, but, this time, by locale in 2021, using the Texas Education Leadership Lab

same graphical techniques as Figure 5.9. Among those with fewer years of experience, Black or African American superintendents earn a higher salary in rural districts, but White superintendents earn more in suburban districts.

Figure 5.9. Superintendent Salary, Race, and Experience in 2021.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Figure 5.10 Superintendent Salary, Race, and Experience by Locale in 2021.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Superintendent Pay at the Intersection of Race and Gender. Female superintendents of color tend to earn more than White female superintendents but less than White male superintendents. The median salary of female superintendents of color was $131,073 compared to $120,000 for White females and $133,500 for White males. Male superintendents of color earned the highest median salary at $168,100; however, these salaries varied by locale. Median salaries were lower for male and female superintendents of color in suburban districts, and the range of salaries was greater in suburban and city districts. Greater equality in pay existed in rural and town districts with smaller ranges in pay differences by race and gender, but there were also a substantial number of outliers in rural districts, where several White female and White male superintendents earned very high salaries. Figure 5.11, a box and whisker plot, provides visual evidence of the disparities and variation in salary at the intersection of race and gender. The median salaries for males compared to females in the four different locales of city, suburban, town, and rural are indicated by the horizontal line that splits each box into two. Also, 50% of Texas Education Leadership Lab

observations for each group are located within the box (the interquartile range) and observations that are outliers are indicated by dots on the plot.

Figure 5.11. Variation in Superintendent Salary at the Intersection of Race and Gender in the Four Major Locales during the 2020-21 School Year.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Superintendent Pay by District Size. Superintendent pay gaps, by both race/ethnicity and gender, were also present at different values of student enrollment. White superintendents consistently earned more than their Black or African American and Hispanic peers in the largest districts and the gap grows as enrollment increases (Figure 5.12). However, there was equity in pay within districts with fewer than 25,000 students enrolled or within most districts in Texas. Less than 5% of districts in Texas have 25,000 or more students; most districts in Texas (95%) have fewer than 25,000 students. In contrast to racial patterns in pay, males earn more than females, regardless of district size, and the gap widens as enrollment increases (Figure 5.13). These findings indicate that disaggregating data by district demographics is essential to document, understand, and address inequitable gaps in pay across “unmalleable” superintendent characteristics.

Figure 5.8. Superintendent Pay by Race and District Size.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Figure 5.13. Superintendent Pay by Gender and Student Enrollment.

Source: Texas Education Research Center (ERC)

Texas Education Leadership Lab

Summary Superintendent turnover is often widely covered by national and local media outlets with claims that turnover rates are high and tenure is low, yet the data and findings indicate that the superintendency has been relatively stable during the 11-year study period in Texas. Some districts have higher rates of superintendent turnover, which should be of concern to policymakers, school boards, principals, teachers, and families. Researchers have found that superintendents often pursue higher paying superintendencies, which are often in more affluent communities. Our findings are consistent with prior research. In Texas, superintendent pay gaps exist between gender and racial groups and these gaps vary by experience, district size, and locale type.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Texas Education Leadership Lab

This study has provided significant insight into the superintendency in Texas. The most significant findings are as follows: •

The Texas superintendent workforce does not reflect the state’s diverse student population.

•

The Texas superintendent workforce is slowly becoming more diverse because Hispanic men and White women are increasingly more likely to be hired as superintendents.

•

The Texas superintendent workforce is becoming more diverse in city, suburban, and town districts, but not in rural districts.

•

The career pathway to the superintendency is varied but typically includes the principalship and tends to take longer for women and people of color.

•

The annual superintendent turnover rate has been relatively low and stable between 201011 and 2021-22 school years.

•

Superintendents serving in larger districts and superintendents with more experience make more money than their peers. Women in the superintendency tend to make less than men, regardless of district size or experience.

These findings have important implications for policymakers, school boards and search firms, educators and administrators, as well as families who rely on the public school system. The findings from this report clearly show that the superintendent workforce is slowly becoming more diverse, but the pace of change needs to increase. In the current system, women of color who are qualified for superintendency positions are likely being denied access to jobs. The lore that the superintendency is short-lived does not match the findings in this report, which suggests that superintendents have time to think carefully and strategically as they work with school

Texas Education Leadership Lab

boards, educators, and families to improve public education in their communities. Yet, despite this stability, inequities exist across the state due to issues with equitable pay and increased rates of superintendent turnover in the most challenging districts. A small group of districts had as many as seven superintendents in 11 years, which likely reduces a district’s ability to adequately plan, efficiently utilize resources, build relationships, and engage in continuous improvement efforts. In response to these findings, we conclude with four recommendations for immediate action to strengthen the state’s superintendent pipeline and help ensure that every Texas student has stable district leadership and a high-quality superintendent. •

Recommendation 1: Additional support is needed for aspiring superintendents from historically marginalized groups, especially women of color. In particular, the state should be concerned that so few superintendents are Hispanic women, given the growing population of Hispanic students and the larger proportion of Hispanic women serving as principals. Below are several steps key stakeholders can take to diversify the superintendency: o The state department of education and school board associations can issue guidance on engaging in non-discriminatory hiring processes to districts and school boards. In addition, the state department of education and other statewide entities can partner and develop mentoring academies for aspiring superintendents from diverse backgrounds. These academies can cover content on professional networking, cultivating mentoring relationships, and interview and search processes.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

100

o Universities that prepare and license aspiring superintendents can audit their current recruitment and admissions processes as well as their graduation and placement success. By disaggregating their student and graduate demographic data, they can assess the degree to which their program is equitably serving historically marginalized groups. In addition, exit surveys with students can provide greater insights into the mentoring and professional development needs of their candidates. o State associations that support or represent school and district administrators can proactively identify talented education leaders from diverse backgrounds. In doing so, they can create their own mentoring and training programs or connect candidates with existing training, mentoring, and networking opportunities to help them access the superintendency. o School boards and the search firms they hire should be more attentive to race and gender in the hiring dynamics. Prior research suggests that both school boards and search firms may recruit superintendent applicants from their own personal and professional networks, which are often disproportionality White and male. Both school boards and search firms should be intentional about efforts to recruit from broad pools and look for talented individuals within their districts, many of whom are likely women and people of color given the shifting demographics in the state. •

Recommendation 2: Superintendent recruitment, selection, and retention are a critical issue for rural Texas, particularly in the state’s most geographically isolated regions. The findings in this report indicate a shockingly stagnant rate of superintendent diversification over the past 11 years, despite the fact that half the students in rural schools are students

Texas Education Leadership Lab

101

of color. In addition, rural districts often serve some of the state’s poorest communities and pay lower salaries making it difficult to recruit and retain talented leaders. The state serves more than 600,000 students in rural schools and these students and their families deserve a stable and high-quality superintendent workforce. Below are several steps the state can take to support rural school districts: o School boards and job search firms working in rural areas should be mindful of shifting demographics in rural communities and work to recruit, hire, and retain a more diverse pool of superintendents. o The state legislature should consider providing additional funds to support superintendent pay and retention in the state’s smallest rural communities, especially considering rural superintendents working in remote areas may incur additional costs moving or commuting to their jobs. o University-based superintendent preparation programs and state associations for superintendents should develop targeted trainings and support for rural districts, especially since rural superintendents make up the largest group of superintendents in the state. •

Recommendation 3: Superintendent demographic trends and turnover rates are currently not tracked publicly, which is why this report is so valuable to Texas. The state should work with researchers, state associations for superintendents and school boards, and other interested parties to cultivate publicly available reports that identify emerging trends in superintendent demographics and turnover. Annual reports can provide policymakers and other stakeholders with important and timely information to strengthen their investments into supporting the superintendent workforce. Below are several steps that can be taken:

Texas Education Leadership Lab

102

o The state department of education can provide funding for additional longitudinal research on the superintendent workforce that identify areas of strength and improvement. Funds could support the design of rigorous research studies using longitudinal datasets, but also include insights from key partners such as school districts, school board members, search firm leaders, families, and non-profit organizations. o In districts struggling to retain superintendents, the state department can offer additional support to school boards and families, which could include short-term stipends to increase superintendent retention rates in the hardest to staff districts. o An annual public review of superintendent workforce data can be presented and reviewed at key state conferences where state policymakers, superintendents, and other key stakeholders are present. These recommendations provide some important initial steps that can allow the state to continue to diversify the Texas superintendent workforce and support districts with the highest rates of turnover and with the greatest need. We hope these steps and others are taken to ensure that every Texas child attends a school district with a high-quality superintendent prepared to succeed.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

103

REFERENCES Baker, B., Di Carlo, M., & Weber, M. (2022). The adequacy and fairness of state school finance systems: School year 2019-20. Albert Shanker Institute. Bird, J. J., Dunaway, D. M., Hancock, D. R., & Wang, C. (2013). The superintendent's leadership role in school improvement: Relationships between authenticity and best practices. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 12(1), 77-99. Björk, L. G., Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Kowalski, T. J. (2014). The superintendent and educational reform in the United States of America. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 13(4), 444– 465. Björk, L. G., Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Kowalski, T. J. (2018). Superintendent roles as CEO and team leader. Research in Educational Administration and Leadership, 3(2), 179–205. Blount, J. M. (1998). Destined to rule the schools: Women and the superintendency, 1873–1995. State University of New York. Brazer, S. D., Rich, W., & Ross, S. A. (2010). Collaborative strategic decision making in school districts. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(2), 196-217. Brenan, M. (2021, August 21). K-12 parents remain largely satisfied with child’s education. Gallup. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/354083/parents-remain-largelysatisfied-child-education.aspx Callahan, R. E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency: A study of the social forces that have shaped the administration of public schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Callahan, R. E. (1966). The superintendent of schools: A historical analysis. Unpublished

Texas Education Leadership Lab

104

manuscript, Graduate Institute of Education, Washington University, St. Louis, Mo. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 0104 410). Charles Butt Foundation. (2022). The 2022 Texas teacher poll: Persistent problems and a path forward. Charles Butt Foundation. Retrieved from https://charlesbuttfdn.org/whatwere-learning/2022txteacherpoll/ Chingos, M., Whitehurst, G., & Lindquist, K. (2014). School superintendents: Vital or irrelevant? Brookings Institute. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/SuperintendentsBrown-Center9314.pdf Coviello, J., & DeMatthews, D. E. (2021). Knowing your audience: understanding urban superintendents' process of framing equitable change. Journal of Educational Administration. Davis, B. W., & Bowers, A. J. (2019). Examining the career pathways of educators with superintendent certification. Educational Administration Quarterly, 55(1), 3-41. De Gregorio, S., Dhaliwal, T. K., Owens, A., & Painter, G. (2022). Timing and duration of student homelessness and educational outcomes in Los Angeles. Educational Researcher, 0013189X221091232. DeMatthews, D. E, Izquierdo, E., & Knight, D. S. (2017). Righting past wrongs: A superintendent’s social justice leadership for dual language education along the USMexico border. Education Policy Analysis Archives/Archivos Analiticos de Politicas Educativas, 25, 1-32. DeMatthews, D., Reyes, P., Solis Rodriguez, J., & Knight, D. (2021). Principal perceptions of the distance learning transition during the pandemic. Educational Policy, 08959048211049421.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

105

DeMatthews, D. E., Knight, D. S., & Shin, J. (2022). The Principal-teacher churn: Understanding the relationship between leadership turnover and teacher attrition. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(1), 76-109. Glass, T. E. (1992). The 1992 study of the American school superintendency: America’s education leaders in a time of reform. American Association of School Administrators. Glass, T. E. (2000). Where are all the women superintendents? American Association of School Administrators. Griffin, G., & Chance, E. W. (1994). Superintendent behaviors and activities linked to school effectiveness: Perceptions of principals and superintendents. Journal of School Leadership, 4(1), 69-86. Grissom, J. A., & Andersen, S. (2012). Why superintendents turn over. American Educational Research Journal, 49(6), 1146-1180. Grissom, J. A., & Mitani, H. (2016). Salary, performance, and superintendent turnover. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(3), 351-391. Grogan, M. (1996). Voices of women aspiring to the superintendency. SUNY Press. Grogan, M., & Brunner, C. C. (2005). Women leading systems: Latest faces and figures on women and the superintendency. The School Administrator, 62(2), 46–50. Finnan, L. A., McCord, R. S., Stream, C. C., Petersen, G. J., & Ellerson, N. M. (2015). 2014 AASA superintendents salary & benefits study: Non-member version. AASA, The School Superintendent's Association. Fishel, A., & Pottker, J. (1974). Women in educational governance: A statistical portrait. Educational Researcher, 3(7), 4-7. French, R., & Halpert, M. (2021). Michigan school superintendents: Mostly male, nearly

Texas Education Leadership Lab

106

all white. Bridge Michigan. https://www.bridgemi.com/talent-education/michigan-schoolsuperintendents-mostly-male-nearly-all-white Fusarelli, B. C., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2005). Reconceptualizing the superintendency: Superintendents as social scientists and social activists. In L. G. Björk & T. J. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary superintendent: reparation, practice, and development (pp. 187–206). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334-343. Huberman, M., Navo, M., & Parrish, T. (2012). Effective practices in high performing districts serving students in special education. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 25(2). Johnson, B. C., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2003, April). Superintendent as social scientist. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Kamler, E. (2009). Decade of difference (1995-2005): An examination of the superintendent search consultants' process on long island. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(1), 115–144. Kamler E., & Shakeshaft C. (1999). The role of search consultants in the career paths of women superintendents. In Brunner C. (Ed.), Sacred dreams: Women and the superintendency (pp. 51–62). Albany: State University of New York Press. Kowalski, T. J., & Brunner, C. C. (2011). The school superintendent: Roles, challenges, and issues. In F. W. English (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of educational leadership (2nd ed., pp. 142–134). Sage.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

107

Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39-81. Maranto, R., Carroll, K., Cheng, A., & Tedoro, M. P. (2018). Boys will be superintendents: School leadership as a gendered profession. Phi Delta Kappan, 100(2), 12–15. March, J. C., & March, J. G. (1977). Almost random careers: The Wisconsin school superintendency, 1940-1972. Administrative Science Quarterly, 377-409. Marder, M., Reyes, P., Marshall, J., Alexander, C. (2022). Texas educator preparation pathways study: Developing and sustaining the Texas educator workforce. University of Texas at Austin, College of Education. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/texaseducation/docs/texas_educator_prep_pathways_study_issuu Miles Nash, A., & Grogan, M. (2022). Leadership and the US Superintendency: Issues of race, preparation and impact. School Leadership & Management, 42(1), 24-43. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Characteristics of public school principals. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Characteristics of traditional public, public charter, and private school teachers. Condition of Education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Orr, M. T. (2007). Learning advanced leadership: Findings from a leadership development programme for new superintendents. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 35(3), 327-347. Pitner, N. J., & Ogawa, R. T. (1981). Organizational leadership: The case of the school superintendent. Educational Administration Quarterly, 17(2), 45-65.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

108

Robinson, K., Shakeshaft, C., Grogan, M., & Newcomb, W. S. (2017). Necessary but not sufficient: The continuing inequality between men and women in educational leadership: Findings from the American Association of School Administrators mid-decade survey. Frontiers in Education, 2(12). Shahab, Y., Ntim, C. G., Chen, Y., Ullah, F., Li, H. X., & Ye, Z. (2020). Chief executive officer attributes, sustainable performance, environmental performance, and environmental reporting: New insights from upper echelons perspective. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1), 1-16. Shakeshaft, C. (1989). The gender gap in research in educational administration. EducationalAdministration Quarterly, 25(4), 324–337. Sharp, W. L., Malone, B. G., Walter, J. K., & Supley, M. L. (2004). A three-state study of female superintendents. Educational Research Quarterly, 27(3), 22–37. Superville, D. R. (2016). Few women run the nation’s school districts. Why? Education Week, 36(13), 1, 10–11, 13. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/few-women-run-thenations-school-districts-why/2016/11 Tallerico, M. (2000). Gaining access to the superintendency: Headhunting, gender, and color. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(1), 18–43. Tallerico, M., & Blount, J. M. (2004). Women and the superintendency: Insights from theory and history. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(5), 633-662. Texas Education Agency. (2021). Enrollment in Texas public schools, 2020-21. (Document No. GE21 601 08). Author. Retrieved from https://tea.texas.gov/sites/default/files/enroll2020-21.pdf Tienken, C. H. (2020). AASA decennial study of the superintendent. AASA, The School

Texas Education Leadership Lab

109

Superintendents Association. United States Census Bureau. (2022). Quick facts: United States. Author. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221 USA Facts. (2022). How has the population changed in Texas? Author. Retrieved from https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-society/population-and-demographics/ourchangingpopulation/state/texas?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=NDDemPop&gclid=Cj0KCQiA-JacBhC0ARIsAIxybyN1rs0kVDQe4jDuzTACcJO8FQEEg9o9KhmJxBKKTiiQ07J2LGOQa8aApN1EALw_wcB Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School district leadership that works: The effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. McREL. White, R. S. (2021). What’s in a first name? America’s K-12 public school district superintendent gender gap. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1-17. White, R. S. (2023). Ceilings made of glass and leaving en masse? Examining superintendent gender gaps and turnover over time across the United States. Educational Researcher, 0013189X231163139. Woulfin, S. L., Donaldson, M. L., & Gonzales, R. (2016). District leaders’ framing of educator evaluation policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(1), 110-143. Yee, G., & Cuban, L. (1996). When is tenure long enough? A historical analysis of superintendent turnover and tenure in urban school districts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 615-641.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

110

RESEARCH TEAM

David DeMatthews is an associate professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy at the University of Texas at Austin. He is the Joe R. and Teresa Lozano Long Endowed Faculty Fellow and holds a courtesy appointment in the Department of Special Education. Prior to arriving at UT-Austin, DeMatthews was an assistant professor at the University of Texas at El Paso. He began his career in education working as a teacher, campus leader, and district administrator in Baltimore City Public Schools and the District of Columbia Public Schools. DeMatthews' research focuses on equitable and inclusive school improvement, with an emphasis on leadership and policy. More specifically, he aims to understand how districts and schools create equitable and inclusive schools at the intersections of race, social class, language, and other markers of identity. Given the importance of stable school leadership to school improvement processes, he has also cultivated a stream of research focused on principal career pathways, job-related stress and burnout, and turnover.

Alexandra Aylward, Ph.D., is an assistant professor at the University of Nevada at Reno. Prior to her current position, Dr. Aylward was a research scientist at the University of Texas at Austin in the Texas Educational Leadership Lab. With her degree in Sociology of Education from New York University, Dr. Aylward’s research relies heavily on quantitative and mixed methods approaches to investigate the relationship between social contextual factors and racial/ethnic inequity in educational opportunity. Currently, Dr. Aylward is leading the quantitative analyses, which draws on the Texas Education Research Center (ERC) longitudinal datasets, to provide

Texas Education Leadership Lab

111

insights into diversity and turnover of school leadership within Texas schools and how this relates to gaps in educational opportunity.

David Knight, Ph.D. is an associate professor of education finance and policy at the University of Washington College of Education. His research focuses on the economics of education and school finance. He studies educational systems through the lens of economic theory and methodologies. His work emphasizes distributive justice, racial/ethnic and socioeconomic finance equity, systematic racial segregation into under-resourced school districts, and policies aimed at reducing inequality and addressing longstanding racial and income-based disparities in educational opportunity.

Pedro Reyes, Ph.D., is passionate about teaching and research on student success. In his writing, Dr. Reyes focuses on Education and Opportunity, particularly on student success for children experiencing poverty. His work is focused on the intersection of leadership and policy with focus educator and administrator turnover and burnout. His research has focused on culturally and linguistically diverse, and often marginalized students such as, urban students, language learners, migrant students, and border students, among others. His academic work has transcended the "the blaming game" and has focused on what is possible with these students and their success in schools.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

112

APPENDIX 1: METHODS

Overview Data for this study was provided by the Texas Education Research Center (ERC). The ERC is a research and evaluation center that provides access to high quality, longitudinal data from the Texas PK-12, Texas higher education, Texas workforce, and other data for the state of Texas. The ERC’s mission is to maintain a longitudinal data system for the state and to provide social scientists and other researchers access to study and analyze significant questions to improve educational policy and outcomes. For this study, we included data from the 2010-11 through 2020-21 school years on superintendent sociodemographics, district demographics, professional roles occupied each year, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) locale identifiers, and annual district-level turnover for principals and teachers. Data through the ERC was cleaned and analyzed using Stata v.17.0 and publicly available data was analyzed using R Studio. In Section 3 of the report that focused on superintendent demographics, we relied on additional publicly available data sources, including the U.S. Census Bureau, NCES, and the Texas Education agency (TEA). From the U.S. Census, we examined national and state-level population estimates and racial/ethnic demographics for the 2010 and 2021 years (USA Facts, 2022; U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). For statewide enrollment trends, we relied upon TEA (Texas Education Agency, 2021). These data are also available on the ERC but using additional sources, such as the TEA reports, provides an important data quality check and wider access. From NCES, we merged in district-level locale identifiers. According to NCES (n.d), “The NCES Texas Education Leadership Lab

113

locale framework is composed of four basic types (City, Suburban, Town, and Rural) that each contains three subtypes. It relies on standard urban and rural definitions developed by the U.S. Census Bureau…These subtypes are differentiated by size (in the case of City and Suburban assignments) and proximity (in the case of Town and Rural assignments)” (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/edge/docs/locale_classifications.pdf). In addition to reporting aggregate statistics, we disaggregated the data by Texas ESC Region and NCES locale. We used the four basic types of City, Suburban, Town, and Rural to avoid problems of small n sizes, which would require appropriate masking. In Section 4, focused on superintendent demographics by context, we relied on the ERC, but we also used data from TEA received through a Public Information Request submitted on 9/8/2022 and with data received on 10/21/22. These data included superintendent names, district, race/ethnicity, gender, and tenure for school years 2010-11 through 2020-21 With these data, we created maps and tables at the district-level for more refined visuals. To examine pathways to the superintendency, we examined the group of superintendents from the 2020-21 school year over the course of our study and conducted two complimentary analyses using the role files from PEIMS in the ERC. The first analysis calculated length of time (years) between serving as an assistant principal to serving as a superintendent and the time between serving as a principal to superintendent. Although there were often interim steps, we were only interested in number of years between these positions and how these varied across superintendent demographics. The second approach used sequence analysis for a more detailed picture of the specific paths to the superintendency for every 2021 cohort member during the study time frame. As cohort members sometimes occupied multiple positions in a district, we selected their highest role in each year for the data point. We again analyzed the pathways from assistant principal to superintendent and

Texas Education Leadership Lab

114

principal to superintendent. For example, a pathway could look like 03 03 20 20 20 04 04 27 27 27 27, which can be understood as 2 years as assistant principal, 3 years as principal, 2 years as deputy/associate superintendent, and 4 years as superintendent. In Section 5, which was focused on both superintendent turnover and pay, we created dichotomous variables indicating whether a superintendent was still employed (retained) in their district at the end of the school year, whether they switched to a different district, and whether the left the Texas system all together. Additionally, we followed the 2011 cohort to provide a closer examination of superintendent mobility. To understand how different factors relate to the likelihood of superintendent turnover between the 2010-11 and 2020-21 school years, we fit conditional fixed-effect models with standard errors clustered at the district level. We used district fixed effects to eliminate unmeasured time invariant district characteristics, such as working conditions, that could be associated with turnover and the election of superintendents to schools. Fixed effect models provide a means for controlling for omitted variable bias, as subjects serve as their own controls. In all models, we used p < .05 as the cutoff for statistical significance. Conditional logistic fixed-effect models control for time-invariant unmeasured heterogeneity in the sample; however, unobserved factors that vary over time can bias the estimated coefficients. Separate analyses for charters and regular public school districts were necessary as charter status is constant overtime and a characteristic that is constant cannot explain variability in the dependent variable (turnover). Charters accounted for 19% of our sample. The first model includes dummies for each year of the study. The second model adds the superintendent characteristics of salary (group mean centered at county- and year-level) and quantiles of years of experience working in the Texas school system (with the first quartile as the reference group).

Texas Education Leadership Lab

115

The third model adds the superintendent demographic variables of race (Black or African American, Hispanic, White, and Other serves is the reference group) and gender (male and female, where the latter serves as the reference group). The fourth model adds district characteristics of percent of student body that is White, percent economically disadvantaged, and a categorical variable of total enrollment which breaks districts into <=500 (reference group) , >500 & <=2500, and >2500. The final model adds rates of principal turnover and teacher turnover. To choose our final model, we relied upon Bayesian information criterion (BIC), where lower values indicate a better fit to the data. We also investigated the need for interactions between gender and experience and salary and gender, but none were significant in the final model. There were small changes in sample size as we added more variables to the model due to some superintendents missing data on key predictors. As a robustness check, we re-ran the models with only the subsample of observations included in Model 5. Results for regular school districts – both the odds ratios and levels of significance – were nearly identical. Results are reported in odds ratios, where, for each categorical variable, if a category has an odds ratio greater than one, then districts in that category are more likely to have a superintendent leave their district than districts in the reference category. If a category has an odds ratio that is less than one, then districts in that category have lower odds of a superintendent leaving their district in a given year than districts in the reference category. For continuous predictors, if the odds ratio is greater than one, as the continuous variable increases, having a superintendent leave a district is more likely to occur. If the odds ratio is less than one, as the predictor increases, turnover is less likely to occur in a given year. The odds ratio for the intercept shows the odds of turnover in a district relative to the odds of not having turnover.

Texas Education Leadership Lab

116