Week 5, Part 1: Code of Ethics for School Leaders

Reflection:

Though I am familiar with it, it has been beneficial for me to review the Texas Administrative Code Educators’ Code of Ethics, (TAC, Chapter 247, Rule 247.2 – Section 2). While focusing on Professional Ethical Conduct, Practices and Performance and Ethical Conduct Toward Professional Colleagues, I couldn’t help but see a direct correlation between ethical performance and leadership performance. In John C. Maxwell’s The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership he states, “Follow them [laws of leadership] and they [employees] will follow you.” Here are a few laws of leadership and how they relate to ethical actions as a school leader.

• The Law of Solid Ground- Trust is the Foundation of Leadership-

o      Unethical practices by a school leader, in which one would misappropriate, divert, or use monies, personnel, property, or equipment committed to his or her charge for personal gain or advantage would immediately shatter the foundation of trust.

•  The Law of the Picture- People Do what People See-
• If employees see mismanagement in regards to funds, why would leaders expect differently of them? Modeling ethical behavior for all employees is imperative.
• The Law of Buy-in- People Buy into the Leader, Then the Vision-
• Nothing can more quickly destroy buy-in to a leader and his/her vision than unethical decision-making. When a new superintendent joins a district he/she must work gain the respect of others. Making ethical decisions is important to earning the buy-in of your colleagues.

(B) Standard 1.2. The educator shall not knowingly misappropriate, divert, or use monies, personnel, property, or equipment committed to his or her charge for personal gain or advantage.

Professional educators, at times, are given the responsibility to purchase supplies for Science experiments using a district check. This could present a situation in which an educator could participate in an unethical practice. For instance, if an employee were to take a district check to the grocery store to purchase some supplies for a Science experiment, but included in the purchase some items from their home grocery list, this would be using district monies committed to his/her charge for personal gain. This could result in termination. 

(E) Standard 1.5. The educator shall neither accept nor offer gratuities, gifts, or favors that impair professional judgment or to obtain special advantage.

Superintendents wield much influence over their district’s budget, and how funds are allocated. The textbook adoption process is very competitive, and could present a situation for unethical conduct. For example, a large school district is seriously considering two different Reading textbooks for the next cycle of adoptions. If a company were to offer the Superintendent an all expenses paid vacation if his district were to select their textbook, this could be a situation in which a gift was offered that could impair professional judgment or to obtain special advantage. If this were to occur, the superintendent could be forced to resign.

(F) Standard 1.6. The educator shall not falsify records, or direct or coerce others to do so.

Each year Americans are required to file an income tax return with the IRS. Educators may deduct up to $250 that they spent over the last year on school supplies. One does not have to itemize the deductions in order to receive it. This might create a situation in which educators, who do not spend money on classroom supplies, could unethically choose to claim this deduction because of the unlikelihood of being audited on such a small amount of money. If this was to occur and the individual was audited, they may receive criminal charges and be forced to pay the money back.

(E) Standard 2.5. The educator shall not discriminate against or coerce a colleague on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, family status, or sexual orientation.

In one particular district, a new female administrator was not being paid commensurate with a new male administrator, despite having the same qualifications. The female administrator sought charges for gender discrimination and won. The superintendent was forced to resign.

(F) Standard 2.6. The educator shall not use coercive means or promise of special treatment in order to influence professional decisions or colleagues. 

Standard 2.6 would pose a compromise for a superintendent who has a son/daughter applying for a competitive teaching position in the district, if he/she were to promise or suggest the hiring principal would receive a salary increase if the son/daughter were to be offered a position with the district. This situation could result in termination of the superintendent for trying to influence a professional decision for monetary gain.

 There are many checks and balances when dealing with school funds today, and many of the above scenarios are unlikely to happen. It is important for a school district leader to model and promote the highest standard of conduct, ethical principles, and integrity in decision-making, actions, and behaviors. As a highly recognizable individual, the superintendent must promote these ethical behaviors, if he/she expects others to follow them.