To the Editor:
Re “Want Reform? Principals Matter, Too,” by Will Miller (Op-Ed, April 17):
Regarding school principals, as a 30-year veteran of New Haven public high school teaching, I’ve “seen ’em come and seen ’em go.” I fully agree with Mr. Miller’s emphasis on reforming the building of leadership and putting more focus on recruiting, developing and retaining strong principals. But I would urge inclusion of three more steps toward this reform:
1. Define clear leadership traits, expectations and a performance rubric for principals.
2. Give parents and faculty a voice in the selection of principals. One of the first challenges a new principal faces is gaining trust with stakeholders. Knowing that their representatives were part of the candidate screening process helps historically distrustful faculty and parent groups share responsibility for school leadership success.
3. Grant principals the primary say in selection and retention of her or his leadership team.
Want reform? Expand career advancement opportunities for great teachers, along with identifying and mentoring great vice principals and principals.
ANTHONY WIGHT
Branford, Conn.
To the Editor:
“Want Reform? Principals Matter, Too” was on target. The job of a principal has changed dramatically in the last 15 years in terms of responsibilities, accountability and work hours.
And yet, despite this relatively new focus on the principal as the instructional leader rather than as a building manager, the education-government complex continues to focus on teachers with a dearth of funding for principal training.
The bipartisan Senate proposal to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act would improve the recruitment, preparation and retention of school leaders in high-need schools. The bill allows states to reserve up to 3 percent of Title II funds for principal training. Both my organization, the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators, and our national union, the American Federation of School Administrators, support this bill.
My organization has also been at the forefront of preparing the next cohort of school leaders through our Executive Leadership Institute. Years ago, we recognized that the “system” was failing to help school leaders as their duties expanded. The institute helps fill that void through workshops, yearlong programs and individual mentoring.
ERNEST LOGAN
President, Council of School
Supervisors and Administrators
New York
To the Editor:
I am very pleased to see the deficiencies of school principals finally receiving some attention. If more teacher performance reviews were conducted by competent administrators, there would be far less demand to evaluate teachers by student test scores, and far fewer inadequate teachers granted tenure.
In my experience as a teacher, too many principals are appointed to their positions based on nepotism and social connections. Many applicants seek administrative positions not for higher pay, but to escape the classroom, where their limited skills make teaching too challenging, too stressful and too unsatisfying.
Their idea of educational leadership consists of parroting back whatever “new” idea they heard about at the latest administrative conference. They play favorites, and reward their favorite teachers with the students most likely to succeed. They care far more about classroom discipline than genuine learning, so a quiet classroom full of children filling in the blanks on “dittos” of scant educational value is considered preferable to a more boisterous room where intellectual adventure is taking place.
Best of luck to Will Miller and his organization, the Wallace Foundation. Better principals will help new teachers achieve mastery, reduce teacher turnover and build the kinds of schools our children need and deserve.
VICTOR A. GALLIS
Shirley, N.Y.
You need to be a member of School Leadership 2.0 to add comments!
Join School Leadership 2.0