Nov. 11, 2007 — When the Senate rejected Acting Commissioner Lynne Spampinato’s nomination to be permanent Virgin Islands Education Commissioner, it was a political rather than an educational act.
Dr. Spampinato is now gone from the territory, and people will – correctly – say that it is time to move forward. But before doing so, it is worth noting that her rejection is quite certain to have important repercussions for the Virgin Islands’ deeply troubled educational system. Because these repercussions and consequences are in the future, we don’t know exactly what they will be. In the worst-case scenario, the decision will produce exactly what the Senators who voted against her wanted: a perpetuation of the catastrophic status quo.
Why was Dr. Spampinato rejected by the Senate? Was it her track record as an educational change agent? Was it her credentials? These were the reasons given by her opponents, who went far out of their way to challenge both her experience and credentials. The next commissioner will almost certainly be a Virgin Islander with less experience as an educational change agent. Here is a prediction: the Senators who voted against Dr. Spampinato will support the next candidate, and the level of scrutiny will be far lower than it was for her.
There appear to be at least three reasons why 11 Senators voted against Dr. Spampinato. First, she was an outsider, not “born here.” Second, she is white. But, probably most important, as acting commissioner, she had given clear signals that she intended to bring about real change. Those changes would have benefited the public school children of the territory, many of whom have no alternative to the failing schools that they attend. Improving this system and the education that these kids receive would have meant taking on entrenched interests and ways of doing things. These interests have ties to individual senators and are represented by a union that appears willing to defend the indefensible to the bitter end. They are the status quo. They have won this round.
The rejection of Dr. Spampinato carried two strong messages. First, no “outsiders” need apply, a goal that the character-assassination-based campaign against the acting commissioner will certainly help achieve. As soon as Dr. Spampinato got on the plane to leave the territory, the pool of willing — or even potentially interested — outsiders shrank dramatically. As President Bush might say, “Heckuva job, Senate.”
Then, there is a warning to the next commissioner, a warning that he or she must ignore if the interests of children and families are going to be served. It is the warning that, if you try to bring about real change, if you confront the low standards, the waste, the lack of effort and indifference that are rotting out this system, your days will be numbered too. And, unlike Dr. Spampinato, you have to live here.
The behavior of the Senate in this matter recalls a quotation from F. Scott Fitzgerald, in "The Great Gatsby." “They were careless people,… they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess that they had made….”
The problem for the Virgin Islands is that it isn’t clear, especially in the absence of any community outrage, who will clean up the mess, and what support they will have to do it.
If there is to be a starting point in moving forward, it should be an acceptance of reality, a not-very-pretty reality that consists of the following problems:
— Low standards, a problem that is fueled by low expectations and a sense of pessimism. These standards should be a source of embarrassment for everyone living in the Virgin Islands, whether they have children in public school or not.
— Lack of a clear strategy. Simply stated, how do those who rejected this nominee propose to approach the challenges facing the system? What is their vision for the future, and what are the strategies that they feel will lead to fulfillment of that vision? What would they do differently from what Dr. Spampinato was attempting to do?
— A skills gap; there are not enough of the right people with the right skills and commitments in all kinds of positions. It is important to note that this does not mean that there aren’t a lot of good people working in the school system. It is, however, to say that there appears to be an extraordinary number of unproductive ones, and it is very difficult to move them. In a fundamental sense, the Virgin Islands’ problem is that it has traded in an educational system for a jobs program. It doesn’t work. You cannot have both.
— A lack of basic systems and processes, the operational essentials that make any system work, and that, in this case, will provide principals and classroom teachers with the support and resources that they need to succeed in teaching children.
— Indifference, in the form of apathy. At some point, parents have to get involved, especially in the most basic of requirements: making sure that their kids study. If people believe the (accurate) cliché that “the children are our future,” they need to act as if they believe it.
— Over-politicization. In school systems everywhere, there is a direct correlation between low achievement and the politicizing of education. It is hard enough educating children without politics intruding at every turn.
A final starting point, one that cuts across all of the items listed above, is to move from the behaviors of a blaming culture to one that focuses on solving problems. It would be interesting to review all of the commentary leading up to Dr. Spampinato’s rejection and try to find one discussion that was forward-looking or that focused on solving the daunting problems facing a system whose success is critical to the future of the territory.
Trashing people will not solve any of these problems. A clear strategy, good people and a sharp focus on change management and operations will. Anyone interested?
Frank Schneiger is the president of Human Services Management Institute Inc., a 25-year-old management-consulting firm that focuses on organizational change. Much of his current work is in the area of problems of execution and implementing rapid changes as responses to operational problems.
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to source@viaccess.net.
