A recent study of principal turnover by University of Texas researchers Ed Fuller and Michelle Young came up with new findings on the maldistribution of high-quality principals in Texas public schools. The study is the first to address the scope of the retention and tenure problem in Texas and search for the reasons behind it.
Testifying before the Texas House Public Education Committee, Fuller said that principals assigned to low-performing schools generally are less experienced and have received their training from less selective programs. These inexperienced, underqualified principals tend not to stick around long; they are less adept at hiring and retaining well-qualified teachers; and they are likely to be replaced by yet another inexperienced, underqualified principal when they leave. “The least experienced and least qualified principals tend to take jobs at the lowest performing schools, which leads to the least experienced and least qualified teachers then being hired at these schools,” according to Young. It is a self-reinforcing cycle, Fuller said, that makes the task of turning around low-performing schools that much tougher.
Fuller’s research revealed low retention rates for principals from elementary school to high school, with high schools reporting that 70 percent leave before their fifth anniversary and only about one half stay for at least three years. The average tenure for newly hired elementary school principals is around five years. Factors contributing to the high rates, according to Fuller and Young, include inadequate funds and resources, poor working conditions, and the pressures of the state’s accountability system.
Principal retention has gained attention among researchers and experts on school reform. A “revolving door” pattern among principals makes it difficult for most reform efforts to gain traction. For high-needs schools, the average principal needs to remain in place for four to five years at the elementary level and five to seven years at the secondary level, Fuller says, adding that it takes a minimum of three years on average for principals to make a “substantial, lasting difference.” The larger the school, the longer it takes,” Fuller says. “The longer the school has been without a stable principal, the longer it takes. The greater the teacher turnover, the longer it takes. The lower the achievement, the longer it takes.”
Contrary to popular belief, principals do not leave because of low pay, but because they feel “micromanaged” by central office staff or they lack the necessary resources to be successful. They also report frustration with a rigorous and punitive accountability system. “Principals get really frustrated when that happens,” Fuller says. “They don’t have the tools and autonomy to do their jobs well.” Surprisingly, characteristics such as race, age, gender, rural versus urban districts, and certification test results had a negligible impact on retention.
To achieve higher principal retention, Fuller and Young recommend ensuring that principals receive “clinical” experience, improving working conditions, and restructuring school leadership. They also recommend adding a growth measure to the state accountability system to encourage principals to take assignments in high-needs schools—typically the campuses with the lowest retention rates.
Additional recommendations made by Fuller and Young to the Texas House Public Education Committee included:
In a more recent study that analyzed 16 years of state data on assistant principals, Fuller and Young concluded that they are almost as antsy as their principal colleagues. They found that more than 60 percent of the newly hired assistant principals they tracked were no longer assistant principals after five years on the job. Thirty percent of the original group had left school administration altogether.
The largest proportion went on to become full-fledged principals and others moved to central-office jobs. Some may have retired or moved out of state, thus removing them from the Texas database.
But what’s disturbing about the numbers, in Fuller’s view, is that turnover in the assistant principalship is highest in lower-performing schools and schools with higher concentrations of poor and minority students. “We’re starting to see that schools with high principal turnover tend to have high teacher turnover and also tend to have high assistant principal turnover,” he said. “The kids who need the stability the most are least likely to be in schools that have stable adult populations.” And it’s hard to bring in a new school improvement program when the staff is constantly churning.
On the plus side, the study also found that principals were less likely to leave the job if they had previous experience as an assistant principal. “That speaks to the need to give principals more clinical experience than we do now,” Fuller said, “and the importance of recommending to people that they become assistant principals before they become principals.”
—“Characteristics of Principals and Principal Turnover in Texas,” by Ed Fuller, presented to the House Public Education Committee, March 30, 2010.
—“Turnover High for Assistant Principals, Study Finds,” Education Week Inside School Research blog, May 1, 2010.
