The Heavy Hand of Autocracy
By CSA President Jill Levy
What does one call a governance structure or governing body
that does not respect dissent, discourse and the free flow
of ideas and information?
Several months ago the media was bombarding the
union with requests for access to Principals and Assistant
Principals in their schools without DOE orchestration. Ultimately,
their requests led me to invite a radio reporter to join me
at a scheduled meeting with CSA members from the Bronx. Rather
than face the possibility of any confrontation with officials,
CSA asked for permission for the reporter to accompany me and
have access to the school. Permission was granted.
Upon my arrival, several CSA members greeted me and a number
of my staff who had accompanied me.
During a private conversation between myself and an AP the
Learning Instructional Superintendent (LIS) appeared and made
his presence unmistakably apparent.
Meanwhile, the reporter tried to interview the Principal.
I say “tried” because the LIS did more than hover
in the background; he placed himself uninvited into the conversation.
It was abundantly clear that the LIS was not going to allow
the reporter access to the school or the Principal alone. The
LIS’s physical presence was intrusive and his verbal
responses pre-empted those of the Principal. Yet, the reporter
continued to be polite, calmly asking questions and recording
the responses. The Principal deferred to the LIS.
When all the expected CSA members were present, we introduced
the reporter and began our private meeting. Shortly thereafter,
the LIS came into the conference room. The atmosphere changed
from conversation to abject silence. I asked the LIS to please
come outside with me and told him that this was a CSA meeting
to which he was not invited. He replied: “My orders are
that wherever she goes, I go. Otherwise she will have to leave.” I
asked him what he was afraid of and he responded that he had
his instructions.
Not wanting to make a scene and knowing this reporter fairly
well, I suggested that she accompany the LIS on a walkthrough
and proceeded to hold a privileged CSA meeting. The tension
in the room was palpable. It was several minutes before people
felt comfortable enough to begin talking about the concerns
and issues that they confront on a daily basis.
Safety matters, personnel, budget, school closings, excessing
rights, contract negotiations, filling vacant positions, and
professional issues consumed the conversation. It was clear
that their willingness to speak openly about issues, engage
in a discourse about professional matters and be critical were
stifled by the presence of the very person who should encourage
an open dialogue and respect their professional suggestions.
What kind of leadership do we call that?
What does one call a governance structure or governing body
that places a greater value on silent compliance than the freedom
to speak?
I am not pointing a finger at those who have the self-esteem
and leadership skills to support the Principals in their assigned
schools, but at those who crush individuality, discourse and
dissent through micro-management and punishment.
Indeed, there is, and has been now for three years, a disconnect
between the public statements and pronouncements that the Chancellor
makes and the reality experienced under the thumb of regional
personnel. Fear is insidious and does not serve our citizens
well, whether they are employees or stakeholders in a public
school system.#
Jill Levy is the President of the Council of School Supervisors
and Administrators.
