« Finding the Best Teachers: Part 2 | Main | Finding the Best Teachers: Part 3 »

Assistant Principals: On the Move

Current school turnaround models call for the replacement of the principal, and, in some cases, half of the teaching staff. However, the real problem may not be that there are too many bad principals and assistant principals, but that the principals and assistant principals don’t stay long enough.

Recent research conducted by Dr. Ed Fuller reveal some alarming data about the mobility of both principal and assistant principals:

  • 70% of principals leave their positions within five years.
  • 60% of newly hired assistant principals were no longer in the position after five years on the job.
  • 30% of the assistant principals were no longer in school administration.
  • The largest proportion of assistant principals either became principals or moved to central office positions.
  • Turnover in assistant principals was highest in low-performing schools and schools with higher concentrations of poor and minority students.
  • High turnover among school administrators correlates with high teacher turnover.
  • Ironically, under-resourced students, who are most in need of stability, are least likely to attend schools with stable adult populations.
  • The researchers conclude that school improvement is extremely difficult when the staff in constantly churning.
  • The study found that principals who had been assistant principals were less likely to leave their jobs.

The Bottom Line

  • Consistency and stability over time are key elements of both quality classroom instruction and systemic school improvement.
  • Change for the sake of change, also known as moving people around for the sake of moving them around, is not a formula for responsible change.
  • Instead of devising ways of getting rid of or moving school leaders, efforts should be directed at finding ways to keep them in the jobs longer and to build their capacity to lead change efforts in their schools.
  • While constantly changing the players gives the appearance that change is occurring, the reality is that all the activity only amounts to a simple rearranging of the furniture.
  • Don’t just move people around. Improve the capacity of those who are already on the job.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://nasspblogs.org/blog-mt/mt-tb.fcgi/213


Hosting by Yahoo!

Comments

Your arguments here are VERY sound, in my opinion. For many of the same reasons, I oppose term limits in Congress. Whether politicians or principals stay in their jobs should be a decision based on the successes and failures of the individual person. Period.

I must respond to this one. All your bullet points on the correlation between duration and the performance of the school made me wonder which is the cause and which the effect. Do low-performing "difficult" schools only attract less competent adults? We know the mentality of putting in your time there until you can move on to greener pastures. Do such schools get the "left-overs" in staffing? I hope you plan to address how such schools need to hire correctly and then provide incentives to stay. There are many educators who prefer to work where they truly make a difference, i.e. in "needy" schools. But the professional structure of evaluation and promotion are still skewed against these professionals in spite of the lip service to acknowledge their more difficult assignments. I hope you include in your future articles some thoughts on supporting personnel who truly choose to stay in these needy positions.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Subscribe to Principal Difference by e-mail
(enter your address):