High Principal Turnover a Problem for Texas Districts. HR Exchange April 2008. TASB On Line

Vol. 14 No. 6		April 2008

High Principal Turnover a Problem for Texas Districts The pressure on Texas school districts to improve student achievement appears to be taking a toll on their ability to keep principals in their jobs. The need to meet higher standards coupled with more demands from state and federal governments has made the job of principal tougher and is partially responsible for increasing attrition in the principal ranks. Districts feel the weight of higher expectations and the resulting pressure rolls downhill to those with a direct hand in school success: campus principals. Whether the school they lead is outstanding or low-performing, they know they’ll be expected to get results in the form of higher student test scores. Those who don’t succeed aren’t likely to remain in the job for long. The University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) confirms that Texas principal turnover is on the rise in its March 2008 publication Implications from the UCEA/The Revolving Door of the Principalship. From 1995–98, 47.3 percent of all principals left their schools or the field. Turnover was highest at the high school level, with 58.6 percent of principals leaving. From 2004–07, principal turnover at all levels had increased nearly 5 percent (to 52.2 percent). Again, high school principals were most likely to leave their jobs (60.7 percent). But turnover was an issue at all levels, with elementary principal turnover increasing the most (5.5 percent). Urban districts in particular are feeling the pinch. For example, Sixty-four percent of Austin ISD’s (AISD’s) high school principals leave their schools or the field after three years, slightly higher than the statewide average (61 percent). After five years, 82 percent of AISD’s principals left their jobs. The statewide average was 76 percent. Urban districts typically lose 18 to 25 percent of their high school principals each year. AISD is at the high end of that range, with a 25 percent high school principal attrition rate. Some AISD campuses have been hit particularly hard. Johnston High School had 11 principals in 12 years. In 2005, Reagan High School had four principals. Understanding the consequences UCEA offers a few research-based reasons for school districts and policymakers to care about high principal turnover rates: First, when a principal leaves, teachers are also more likely to leave. Research indicates that teacher turnover has a negative effect on student achievement. Second, many school reform strategies depend on developing small learning communities that require the principal to form personal relationships with parents and students—an effort that takes some time. When a principal leaves in a year or two, the departure impedes a school’s community-building effort. Third, organizational change research suggests that school leaders need at least five years to successfully implement large-scale changes. When a principal leaves after a year or two, any major school-improvement effort that’s in the works is less likely to succeed. Archie McAfee, executive director of the Texas Association of Secondary School Principals, says that the job of principal has always had high turnover in part because principals often aspire to other jobs in the central office, including curriculum director or superintendent. In those instances, turnover might not be a bad thing. It’s also not a bad thing when a principal who’s not able to do the job effectively leaves. No one would argue that districts should retain people who are clearly not suited for the job. It’s when good principals retire at a relatively young age or take jobs in other education-related organizations or just leave the profession entirely that districts have to wonder if the stress of meeting higher standards may factor into their decisions. Superintendents who aren’t supportive can add to the stress. “A principal who has a ‘recognized’ school may see a drop in the school’s rating to ‘acceptable.’ That principal might get word from the superintendent that, ‘Your school needs to be ‘recognized’ next year or you’re out.’ Principals leave positions because of that,” McAfee said. Certainly teachers share the responsibility for raising student achievement and feel pressure from principals to do their part. But teachers’ jobs are not on the line when expectations aren’t met. It’s generally the campus principal who has to deal with the consequences. With more than 52 percent of principals leaving the profession within a three-year period, it’s no wonder some have characterized the job as “a revolving door.” McAfee insists that principals aren’t afraid of accountability and don’t want to get rid of the accountability system. What they would prefer is for district leaders to have high but realistic expectations for each campus. They’d also like district leaders to show more patience with new principals and give them credit for the progress made towards a goal, even if the goal isn’t met. Retaining principals McAfee says that one thing districts can do to retain quality principals is to provide effective, relevant professional development for principals and teachers to help them learn the skills they need to work with the students in their schools. Any training that’s provided should be customized to fit the school’s needs and help educators improve their teaching skills in core subjects, since student test scores in those subjects are the basis of school accountability ratings. Ed Fuller, associate director of UCEA, says new principals need support and development including mentoring, training, and superintendents who will insulate them from outside pressures of the job and give them time to see reforms through. Principals in schools that serve high-needs student populations may need extra support and compensation from the district to stay in their jobs. Austin ISD is one example of a district that’s taking steps to stabilize its principal ranks. The district has increased principal salaries 10 to 20 percent in the past three years and partners with the University of Texas to provide campus leadership training. Districts that have principal training programs might also be well advised to help aspiring principals understand the nature of the job and the variety of hats they’ll have to wear. A principal who’s a strong instructional leader may not be crazy about having to also be the building manager, disciplinarian, parent liaison, business manager, and fundraiser, but those responsibilities are part of the job. So are long hours, community meetings, and emergency phone calls. Principals who can’t keep their focus on the big picture—improved outcomes for students—may struggle with the day-to-day challenges. Moving forward Districts need to do what they can to keep good principals at the same school—and particularly at high-needs schools—for extended periods to ensure the success of school reform efforts. Clearly, districts need to support new principals by providing skilled mentors and meaningful professional development. Veteran principals should have some decision-making autonomy and adequate compensation to keep them on the job. Slowing the exodus of good leaders from schools has the potential to help Texas districts reach their student achievement goals. —“Principal flight on the rise in the age of accountability,” by Raven L. Hill and Bob Banta, Austin American-Statesman, Feb. 11, 2008.

HRX Front | HRS Home | Archives | TASB Home