ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AND PUBLIC SCHOOL ...

administrators very often feel that the reason for adverse employment action is beyond their
control. That was a sentiment that superintendents and school administrators did not share.
Davis’ (1998) research study is based on the beliefs of superintendents and their
interpretations of why principals suffer adverse employment actions--specifically, terminations.
In his research with 99 superintendents in California, Davis identified numerous reasons for
adverse actions. Among those reasons were the following:
1. Failure to increase academic achievement.
2. Failure to ensure an orderly school
3. Failure to promote and/or instill district and/or school visions.
4. Failure to involve all decision makers.
5. Failure to employ new ideas.
6. Failure to delegate administrative responsibilities effectively.
7. Failure to effectively handle cultural diversity.
Each of these reasons is clearly grounds for adverse employment action, but as Horowitz (1998)
notes, “education administration is a strange field. It’s highly unlikely you’ll ever get fired
because your students didn’t learn” ( 1). Davis’ study highlights that very point. In fact, the 99
superintendents polled by Davis believed that the primary reasons that school administrators
suffer adverse employment actions, according to superintendents, were poor interpersonal and
communication skills.
With the growth in student accountability and fiscal prudence, one would imagine that
the primary cause of adverse employment actions would fall within those two realms. Harris
(2011), however, asserted that administrative impact on student achievement is random and
inconsistent at best. Moreover, the findings of Davis’ study suggest that there is a reward system
14