BY ERIC HOOD

During the “lame duck” final months of George Bush’s presidency would we have thought it reasonable for Bush to choose incoming President Obama’s cabinet? Of course not. It would have reeked of an egotistical desire to maintain an ineffective and corrupt status quo.

Should the incoming school superintendent and the South Whidbey learning community be saddled with the outgoing Superintendent Fred McCarthy’s choices of administrators? McCarthy thinks so: In response to a request that the school board delay approval of his hand-picked administrators until after the new superintendent is hired, he testily replied that “the public” would not have “wholesale say” in this crucial decision.

McCarthy’s decisions, like those of other deciders, have not always borne the best fruit.

The district did not meet state-measured “adequate yearly progress,” many students continue to enroll in local private schools or mainland public schools, “consolidation plans” resemble waffles, the high school day — four or six period? — is again being debated, the Record cites “lack of trust” as the reason for the recent bond failure, teacher morale is probably at its lowest in decades, the district again projects a huge budget shortfall, and student reading and math scores have declined significantly compared to 2007-’08 scores.

In response to these challenges, the superintendent and school board recently proclaimed, “Necessary program reductions must involve reductions in the numbers of non-supervisory certificated staff personnel.” In other words, if necessary, teachers but not administrators will be cut.

While this proclamation testifies to the administrators’ wagon-circling loyalty, what do lackluster academic achievement, fleeing students, low staff morale, and annual shortfalls say about administrators’ effectiveness?

Since school administrators can be both illuminating beacons and lightning rods, their length of tenure at one school indicates some measure of success in shining a light or grounding bolts.

Consider the erratic tenures of some of McCarthy’s choices: Eric Nerison started as vice principal at the high school for two years before being assigned as the Intermediate School principal where he lasted only two years. After filling various administrative positions for the past few years he is now approved as the middle school principal.

Scott Mauk directed Bayview for two years before being transferred to Intermediate School vice principal for one year, then to the Whidbey Island Academy and special education director for one year, and now he is assigned as vice principal and athletic director of the high school.

David Pfeiffer, after transforming Bayview and Cedar alternative schools from arts-focused, hands-on classes into far more traditional classes with heavy emphases on computer learning, is set to assume the direction of WIA, Bayview and technology — all jobs done by teachers in the past — where he will earn administrative pay to supervise a few teachers and likely less than 90 students. (By contrast, the female elementary school principal — the only principal who will lack an administrative assistant if McCarthy has his way — will supervise a staff of dozens and a population of more than 500 students in the district’s largest school.)

Other than hat-wearing ability, what does all this shuffling say about these administrators’ performance? Have they distinguished themselves through innovations or creative organization or the devotion of school staff? Are the schools and programs they’ve administered more efficient or better because of their management?

And how much financial sense does it make to pay administrators to do what teachers have traditionally done? The district doesn’t lack “ol’ boys” but shouldn’t we be sure they are good? The stakes — public money and our children’s education — are high.  Do we trust the hand McCarthy dealt? Or is it time to draw some new cards?

According to the Record, “consideration of [administrators’] contracts will follow within a month or so,” meaning, presumably, that for a few more weeks the district is not yet financially obligated to them.

Freed from an administrative status quo, a new superintendent and administrative team could bring integrity, freshness and hope to this learning community. Since the average salary for these positions is about $90,000 plus an excellent benefits package and long summer vacations, a new superintendent could find many top-notch administrators eager to apply.

Are the current ones the best available?

If so, then let them submit their resumes, but don’t allow the school board to hobble a new superintendent by rubber-stamping lame-duck McCarthy’s picks.

Eric Hood is a Langley resident.