If there is anything everyone can agree about the interim superintendent of St. Louis Public Schools, it’s that she has far from an enviable job.
She obtained her position through a dubious, even suspect, process and entered a fiercely partisan political arena, where the education of our city’s future workers and leaders often seems to be marginalized, while the adults ostensibly in charge indulge in power plays and the settling of old scores. She took control of an unaccredited district that is deeply in debt and has been sinking lower by most performance criteria. Nearly the moment she accepted her (still interim) position, the mayor of the city whose taxes largely fund her district all but called for the state to take it over. In the six weeks since she took the job, the mayor reportedly has refused to meet with her.
She took control of a district in almost catastrophic disarray, after the abrupt resignation and departure of her predecessor, Creg Williams. Though it is far too early to say for certain – and the circumstances of her hiring still make it prudent to observe her with a critical eye – Diana Bourisaw has earned some early positive reviews. Objectively, she oversaw a difficult and thankless task in sorting out assignments for more than 1,000 teachers who did not know if or where they would be working less than two months before the start of classes. And a second-day attendance rate of 84 percent on Tuesday was impressive, given the number of changes in the district and resulting disorientation of many students and parents.
Bourisaw does come to St. Louis with experience with embattled urban school districts. With experience, she also brings a positive, people-first attitude that even earned early support from officials in the teacher’s union, who have had an adversarial relationship with recent administrations. Using a more colorful acronym, one union official said of Bourisaw that even if she is only spouting PR, at least it is the right PR.
She speaks of righting a dysfunctional human resources department, starting a new method of reviewing the work of teachers, bringing more “rigor” to the curriculum and classroom, and engaging the community in discussion of the many needed changes that are surely coming. These are precisely the right places to start in reforming the St. Louis Public Schools. She also has met individually with the members of the school board, apparently grasping what Creg Williams failed or refused to understand – that, friend or foe, sober or misguided, the school board members act collectively as her boss and she needs to deal with them constructively.
When the circus of the last six weeks started with the dismissal from coaching of Floyd Irons and Williams’ rush to back him, it was all but impossible to entertain hope for the St. Louis Public Schools in the school year 2005-2006. Needless to say, we have been disappointed and outraged before, and anything could happen from here, but the apparent competence, undeniable optimism and evident passion of Diana Bourisaw bring reason to hope for a brighter future for the city’s students and schools. It is imperative that all stakeholders continue to scrutinize – and, when they are worthy, support – her efforts in moving this district and the academic performance of its students forward. And if Bourisaw continues to make good on her early promise, it is the board members’ duty to let an experienced and competent administrator run the district without unwarranted interference or disruption.