BELMONT, TEST SCORES SYMPTOMS OF `CANCER'.

Byline: Bryan Steele

THE latest from the Los Angeles Unified School District is that horrendous mismanagement caused the Belmont scandal.

That's the conclusion of the district's new auditor, Don Mullinax, whose first assignment was to investigate Belmont Learning Center.

Mismanagement goes a long way toward explaining how this $200 million high school was started on a site the Department of Oil and Gas told district officials early on was unfit for any construction.

But does mismanagement help explain other scandals plaguing the LAUSD? Arguably, a majority of students failing to read at grade level is far more tragic than any amount of wasted money. Does the kind of mismanagement cited in the audit also help explain poor student achievement?

Academic research says there is a direct connection between a principal's management style and teacher performance. In fact, study after study focuses on the link between effective principals and successful students with teachers playing one part in this complex relationship. To fully understand student achievement, these studies contend, the entire chain of command must be understood.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to understanding the role management plays in education. The relationship between principal and teacher, as in any managerial relationship, is founded on the simple notion of expectation. Teachers are in part driven by a need to satisfy their administrators' expectations. Administrative approval amid high expectation results in high performance.

But what happens if administrative approval is tied to something other than a teacher's job performance? The answer is simple: When managerial relationships are built on political self-interest rather than work performance, productivity suffers.

In the case of education, lower teacher performance translates into lower student achievement.

How does all this relate to the latest audit report concerning Belmont? The largest-dollar scandal in U.S. education history was, according to auditors, driven by top administrators failing to exercise their duties and responsibilities.

In other words, LAUSD administrators made decisions based on politics rather than their duty as defined by district and state rules.

Yet, in the large debate over failed public education, the importance of management is a distant concern, if considered at all. Are we to believe that through some miracle principals are sheltered from the influence of their downtown administrators?

The audit concludes that district management is experiencing a prolonged ethical crisis. Is there a physical barrier, like the one proposed to contain Belmont's contamination, that separates local school principals from the toxic effect of downtown mismanagement?

No. LAUSD principals have known for decades that when it comes to promotions and fancy administrative salaries, it's politics - not performance - that matters.

Where do students fit into such a scenario? They don't. Kids become the last area of concern when educational systems are driven by political expedience.

When politics rules the day, teachers and students become a liability rather than an asset - especially when test scores are low. Out of sight and out of mind is the mantra where administrators seek appearance over substance to facilitate smooth sailing through political waters.

One good example of appearance over substance is Superintendent Ruben Zacarias' recent list of successes. Last year, LAUSD again increased its total number of Advanced Placement classes offered to students.

While an increase in the number of Advanced Placement classes may look good, the classroom reality is quite different. For instance, the LAUSD's second-largest school, Bell, won the districtwide award for increased Advanced Placement enrollment for two years running by canceling all their honors classes.

Many honor students traded up by choosing Advanced Placement so as to avoid the mediocrity of regular classes. The result was an artificial jump in Advanced Placement enrollment.

Who cares that, except in Spanish, none of Bell's inner-city students pass the national Advanced Placement exams?

Lost is the fact that many of these teachers are unqualified. This is not substantive education reform but merely smoke and mirrors.

What actually goes on in the classroom is of little interest to politicized administrators because they pursue sound bites rather than meaningful student accomplishment.

Can a system as large as the LAUSD be changed? Yes, by cutting out the cancer that permeates every management decision.

The Belmont audit even provides the board of education with a clear opportunity to make this necessary incision. There's a list of top district administrators who contributed to the Belmont scandal, on Page 9 of the audit summary. The audit recommends these administrators be disciplined ``up to and including termination.''

By firing these incompetent, if not outright corrupt, bureaucrats, the district has the opportunity to make the first and most important step in cleaning house. With the top echelon of unethical administrators gone, the entire district culture can begin changing its way of doing business - by putting duty before personal interest.