Equity, Inclusiveness, and Cultural Responsiveness

Candidates who successfully complete a district-level educational leadership preparation program understand and demonstrate the capacity to promote the current and future success and wellbeing of each student and adult by applying the knowledge, skills, and commitments necessary to develop and maintain a supportive, equitable, culturally responsive, and inclusive district culture.

STANDARD 3 COMPONENTS

Component 3.1 - Program completers understand and demonstrate the capacity to evaluate, cultivate, and advocate for a supportive and inclusive district culture.

Component 3.2 - Program completers understand and demonstrate the capacity to evaluate, cultivate, and advocate for equitable access to safe and nurturing schools and the opportunities and resources, including instructional materials, technologies, classrooms, teachers, interventions, and adult relationships, necessary to support the success and well-being of each student.

Component 3.3 - Program completers understand and demonstrate the capacity to evaluate, advocate, and cultivate equitable, inclusive, and culturally responsive instructional and behavior support practices among teachers and staff.

In one of the courses, EDLE 76747 Personnel with Dr. Gornik, that served as a preparatory for the Superintendent's License, I was asked to perform a gap analysis in human resources using the METworks standards that were available at the time (NELP 3.2). The METworks℠ in Ohio provides an opportunity for district-level policymakers to more systemically improve teacher and school leader quality by exploring human resources policies, investigating components of best practice, and thinking systematically about the long-term needs of the school district in terms of employees and staffing, and what it takes to do all of that successfully (NELP 3.1).

The areas I explored centered around recruitment for teachers, the hiring cycle, induction, professional development, compensation, working conditions, and collective bargaining (NELP 3.2). At the time, and this is still true, the standards do not really address classified operations, but many areas and issues co-exist between the instructional staff and those that perform support functions like bus drivers, cooks, etc.

Each area and standard area (and the knowledge and evidence around it) was rated as unknown, not met, partially met, or fully met in a self-aware, but self-assessed manner. After speaking with those in the district with knowledge about some of the categories, I was able to puzzle together a good picture of the overall picture and got feedback from others to check my work.

All areas were tallied as part of the total number of indicators examined. 87 total indicators around these areas were examined, and combined scores for each category were presented as evidence.

In the table above, also present in the slides below, it's easy to see where some of the gaps are within the school district's policies and how it functions around human resources management (NELP 3.1).

Compensation, for example, had no areas met, and while those included raising salaries in general, it also focused on long-term incentives for teachers and performance-based salary increases, and most importantly in today's labor market - short-term incentives like hiring bonuses for teachers in high-demand positions - all still absent.

This report (below) was shared with district leadership at the time, but progress has been slow, and various other initiatives have taken priority. Once the pandemic hit, school districts like ours began to focus on just "running school" safely and effectively and providing as much protective equipment as possible, increasing cleaning and sanitizing, and just keeping up the "normal," than taking an extended look at how we compensate those actually doing the work.

Gap Analysis in HR, created using PowerPoint, and converted to Google Slides, and serving as a final project in EDLE 76747 Personnel with Dr. Gornik, in the fall of 2018.

Gap Analysis in HR - the actual data table, with raw data and performance metrics from the METworks standards, where each area was considered and collected. Compensation and Incentives for Teachers, for example, is an area that at the time was not met, and still isn't today.

While salaries have increased slightly based on contract negotiations, they don't meet the needs of any side - the teacher (employee), the market, or the district as an employer. This is true on the classified side of the house as well.

Post-pandemic, the labor market holding resources for school districts has changed dramatically, and we are now experiencing something we've never seen before - a real shortage of workers wanting to join a stable, reasonably well-paid, and with excellent health benefits school district.

In the current district, we have several positions open, and some have been open for 6+ months, with no real interest from candidates. When it comes down to it, we can't offer the price that the market demands - especially on the classified side of the school district - desperate for school bus drivers, custodians, cooks, and substitutes.

With the private marketplace offering wages far above what the school district can muster, candidates' first question is, and has been for some time: "How much am I getting paid?" Oftentimes, our offer, even with insurance available, union memberships, and other perks, is not even close to what a local carwash, fast-food, or delivery service is willing to pay.

School districts in general, in the state of Ohio, have been slow to react to this new labor market, often relying on past practice with lots of willing candidates (again, especially for classified operations) to cover the kitchen or drive a bus. Often those positions are entry-level, requiring little to no education beyond high school, and so districts have been able to rely on a steady stream of willing participants.

Now, with shopping behavior trending towards home delivery, food being brought to the doorstep, and public wages not being able to fill the gas tank, it's hard to compete and serve the kids and society in the way we designed it to be.

So how do we fix it?

It's not an easy question, but in Ohio, a first good step would be to examine how we fund schools and have a conversation about what really matters. States nearby have the option to raise the "income" of a school district at will (PA), and yet here, we're bound by age-old property taxes and stagnant support from state and federal sources.

And when we do get support, it's often for material, equipment, or programs that will enhance capital assets, and we have to compete for the few dollars and cents available through overly bureaucratic and pages-long complicated grant applications and assessment components.

Human resources then, the resource most needed and wanted by schools - because it's the people who make it work - is often forgotten, or we make an assumption that supply will always be there at a cheap cost. It won't, and it's drying up fast.