Career
Current position: Superintendent of Schools, Yarmouth, Maine
Andrew began his career in education as a teacher of biology and chemistry at Dirigo High School in Dixfield, Maine. He taught chemistry at Lewiston High School in Lewiston, Maine before accepting his first position as a school administrator at Wiscasset High School in Wiscasset, Maine.
Andrew is currently the superintendent of schools for the Yarmouth School Department in Yarmouth, Maine. He has also served as the superintendent of schools for Regional School Unit 21 in Kennebunk, Maine and as the principal of Scarborough High School from 2000-2006.
In addition to his career in educational administration, Andrew has taught courses in the Educational Leadership program at the University of Southern Maine.
Degrees:
- PhD in Public Policy with a concentration in Educational Leadership and Policy, University of Southern Maine, 2015
- MS in Educational Administration, University of Southern Maine, 1995
- BS in Secondary Education – Biology, University of Maine at Farmington, 1987
Memberships and appointments:
- International Advisory Board of the Harvard Graduate School of Education’s Principals’ Center
- Executive Committee of the Maine School Superintendents’ Association
- District Administration Leadership Institute
- Phi Delta Kappa
- Educational Leadership Advisory Board, University of Southern Maine
Dissertation
Title: Resource Allocation in Maine’s More Efficient Public High Schools
Abstract: This mixed-methods study compared three-year average operating expenditures and resource allocation practices and policies of nine Maine high schools that had been identified in a previous study as being “more efficient” with those of nine “typical” Maine high schools. The study attempted to determine if more efficient schools allocate resources differently than typical schools. The quantitative portion of the study considered expenditures of 18 Maine high schools over a three-year period using three resource models: The Maine Department of Education (MDOE) warrant article model; the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) account code model; and ( the Roza and Swartz (RS) School Spending Profile. Expenditures were sorted by object type, and the average percent of total per-pupil expenditures was determined. Comparisons among the three resource models were made through the use of descriptive and inferential statistical procedures, and the calculation of effect sizes. The qualitative portion of the study consisted of interviews with six school administrators representing three more efficient high schools and three typical high schools. Additional qualitative analysis was conducted through a document review of fiscal policies for each of the schools. Through the qualitative study, the researcher sought to determine if more efficient high schools followed different practices in allocating expenditures than did typical high schools.
The quantitative analysis revealed that more efficient schools did allocate fiscal resources differently than typical schools, and that different resource allocation models showed differences in expenditures between the two types of schools to varying degrees. The findings revealed that greater efficiency is not a product of student demographics, faculty salaries, or operational expenditures. The study also showed that more efficient schools do not spend less than typical schools in every expenditure category: they spend more on regular instruction, and a greater percentage of expenditures on special education instruction, and co-curricular activities. The qualitative analysis revealed no differences between the ways in which more efficient schools and typical schools identify budget priorities, and develop resource allocation plans, known as annual operating budgets. The study findings indicate that more efficient schools focus more resources on instruction than do typical schools. The study findings also suggest that local policymakers may find using resource allocation models such as the NCES model and the RS model, and more aggressive budget development processes such as zero-based budgeting, to be beneficial in studying their own expenditure practices and priorities.