Get Schooled

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

I think the principal can make a huge difference. Teacher moral and attitude are heavily impacted by the principal. I know that this trickles down to the students. A friend teaches in a nearby school, and the principal had the habit of yelling at teachers in front of students. The principal disagreed with and corrected teachers in front of parents. Discipline in the school was horrendous. Parents never supported the teachers, students talked back, walked out of classes, wore whatever they wanted, and finally began physically pushing teachers around. The principal was finally replaced. Student behavior improved greatly. Parental support still isn’t what it should be, but it’s going to take awhile to undo the damage done by the principal.

My own principal is retiring this year. We are all nervous about who will be hired as the new principal. The principal sets the tone for school discipline, and the right person can build a smoothly operating team. It is very difficult for even a good principal to turn a bad school around. However, I’ve seen bad principals quickly run even good schools into the ground very quickly.

By Jeff

April 2, 2007 12:24 PM | Link to this

Lisa:

Dang girl, how many principals is your system losing???? GF’s principal is leaving too!!

(BTW: GF is about to gain a ring and lose the G!)

By Nikole

April 2, 2007 12:26 PM | Link to this

I am a 2000 graduate of Lakeside and the two principals I had there had negligible impact on test scores. Lakeside has always done well and they will continue o do well. Parents have come to expect excellence and that is what really fuels their success. Mr. Chelf may be popular, but he has not made any progress in raising acheivemnt among Hispanics. Someone else may do a better job with that aspect.

By Jeff

April 2, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

On topic:

I don’t know about overly large systems (Cobb, Gwinnett, etc), but I know that in smaller systems (I’m thinking 2 school per level max), the Principal can be the BEST, but HIS bosses determine system failure or not. I know that in Randolph, it is NOT the principal of the Middle School that caused the problems I had. It was his boss…

By HS Teacher Too

April 2, 2007 12:35 PM | Link to this

Lisa B, I couldn’t agree more. There are so many subtleties that a principal affects that play a role in how the school is run, independent of their “presence” and demeanor. Not the least of them is teacher morale and you couldn’t be more right that that definitely trickles down to the students.

Another thing that plays a role is how the principal supports teachers and how s/he communicates with parents; the principal is the bridge between the two parties and groups — which sometimes are in disagreement, as we all know — ought to feel that the principal has their best interests at heart; and the principal really ought to! When that’s not the case, it’s apparent in an instant.

Finally, I once worked for a principal who had the “you’re not an administrator, you don’t count” attitude. Teacher input mattered for nothing. You can only imagine what the kids thought of their “leader,” who had a similar attitude towards them …

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I agree with your point that the superintendent can tie the hands of good principals. As you said, I think it is easier for superintendents to micromanage principals in small systems with few schools. I can’t imagine a super having the time or ability to micro-manage every principal is a system the size of Gwinnett.

My system is losing two principals this year and searching for a new superintendent as well. Things will have a different feel next year.

Congrats Jeff on the “ring” for GF :-) I expect she’ll be moving, as you are working too far away to commute.

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 1:08 PM | Link to this

The friend I mentioned in my first post teaches high school. You are right that kids that age are very aware of how their teachers are treated. I am sure the students didn’t appreciate being treated as if their input was meaningless. I imagine few were engaged in learning, and many were probably disruptive.

I think one big problem is that the skills it takes to be a great principal often are exhibited in the positions one has prior to that promotion. I have sometimes seen fantastic assistant principals promoted to principal positions, only to fail miserably. I have also seen completely average assistant principals turn out to be great principals.

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this

I meant to say that the skills needed to be a great principal often are NOT exhibited in previous positions. It’s Spring Break and my brain is resting.

By Teacher Teacher

April 2, 2007 2:04 PM | Link to this

Yes, principals make a big difference in a school, usually a negative one. DeKalb is filled with principals and assistant principals who obtained their spots not from expertise or merit but from nepotism, cronyism, and good old sex. So Crawford finally gets rid of Chelf because, apparently, black staff member(s) thought he didn’t pay them enough respect, but what about the other principals in DeKalb? How about the one that has twice interferred with police investigations by actively trying to affect witness testimony through witness tampering and the creation of false evidence? Crawford knows all about this principal, but has yet to do one thing to him/her.

There should be some new qualifications for becoming a principal. For instance, five years minimum as an assistant principal (not some teacher-on-special-assignment either). 10 years as a teacher prior to beocming an assistant principal would be worthwhile, too. I also think that a principal should be required to take and pass literacy tests.

By Ernest

April 2, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this

Teacher Teacher:

Your qualifications point has merit. I’ve spoken to several ‘experienced’ principals that expressed concern regarding the current process for selecting Principals and APs. One expressed what you mentioned for an AP, that they should have actually taught in the classroom. The reason is so they could empathize with the classroom teacher along with mentoring them. It’s kinda hard to do that if one has never walked in a classroom teachers’ shoes.

IMO, the makeup of the school is a factor that helps determines how effective a principal can be. Could you imagine a ‘Joe Clark’ type of principal at some of the schools in the metro area? If some schools, he is probably the right kind of leader. In some, the parents would probably run him away before his coffee gets cold.

By Rob

April 2, 2007 3:48 PM | Link to this

It’s interesting that some people assume that a principal or assistant principal has to have taught for a certain period of time before he/she can do an effective job. That is really not the case. There are two different skill sets that one must have to be an effective teacher and principal. Sometimes you have good teachers that are awful administrators and sometimes you have great guidance counselors (not teachers) that make excellent principals. A person is born to lead, and no amount of teaching experience can produce a great leader. You learn on the job.

By Peachy

April 2, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this

I totally agree with Teacher Teacher’s suggestions…that assistant principals have 10 years in the classroom then they 5 as an assistant. And do away with this Leadership certification..what a crock. Make the standards higher for getting admin degrees…I am tired of being embarrassed everytime a principal stands up to speak and butchers the English language. And while I am on that subject, could we have the same test of English speaking/writing for teachers? Spelling would help, also. Illiteracy does’t need to rear its ugly head when the teacher opens his/her mouth.

By Peachy

April 2, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this

Yes, the principal sets the tone for the whole school..especially in a small school like ours. Our former principal was of the kiss-up mentality..got his job because he was a friend of the super. This guy didn’t even have a Leadership (what a joke) degree when he was offered the principal’s job (he hadn’t applied at the time). He sank like a rock, but it took 3 years to get rid of him…his buddy moved and took him with him. Our new principal is doing the work of 3 people and killing himself, but our school is soooo much better now!!

By Albright

April 2, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this

Dekalb is not the only district dealing with issues from their Superintendent. Everybody in Monroe County’s school district knew who the new coach and two principals were going to be before they were officially selected. All of the candidates selected were white and not one black principal was selected or asked to fill the vacant positions. Houston County selected a White male superintendent who was the brother of the out-going superintendent. Nepotism and discrimination is very much alive today.

By luvs2teach

April 2, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

Principals absolutely make a difference, and it can go both ways.

The school I teach now, has a new pricipal this year - our old principal retired last year. He was not bad, but it was his last year, and he was a little out of touch - the demographics of the school had shifted on him, and I don’t think he was prepared. We also had a mass exodus of teachers last year - either those unhappy with the demographic change or those fearful of new leadership.

Our new principal is wonderful, and morale is up - the students also know and respect him (not so much for our last pricipal). Not sure how the test scores will be though, due to other curriculum AND personnel changes.

On the flip side, my old school had a very strong principal, who supported her teachers in a tough school. Teachers stayed because, although it was tough, she made it work. She was reassigned and there is a new principal in place who has a real “blame the teachers” attitude. Morale has plummeted and misbehavior has increased. So many teachers are requesting transfers. I’m curious to see how test scores respond.

By Jeff

April 2, 2007 4:08 PM | Link to this

Albright:

Discrimination and neoptism goes both ways. ask Vernon Jones or Bobby Jenkins. (Randolph County Super)

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 4:10 PM | Link to this

Great suggestions in your 2:04 post Teacher Teacher!

By Janine

April 2, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this

Did any of you see the letter to the editor about this today? The writer points out that the reason Lewis SAYS he is replacing Chelf is because of his negligible effect on test scores. She/he recommends going to the county website where you will find a huge number of principals for whom this is true…. yet he has chosen to remove very few. I am quite sure the reason Chelf is being moved is the same reason Lewis removed him last year. our inept superintendent has just chosen to use a more acceptable reason.

By Fulton County Mom

April 2, 2007 4:40 PM | Link to this

@ Jeff: WOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOO dang dude glad to hear that your making her a “F”! Hope the new career is doing well too.

Yes, Principals can make a difference…but it depends on what you want them working on. The one at our school has absolutely got the kids loving him! However he refused to setup a meeting with me when I asked, did not attend meetings that were set by the school for me (I asked specifically he be there), and otherwise seems to be loved by the community.

I am not thrilled with how he handles some things…even most things….but I am thrilled with how positive things at the school are.

By I_Teach

April 2, 2007 4:43 PM | Link to this

Principals can-and DO-make a huge impact, but not necessarily on test scores.

We have a new principal this year. MASS EXODUS is taking place. Morale has never been lower. She’s taken a high-performing happy school and turned it into her own personal project, with dismal results…not only are teachers alienated and leaving in droves, but the entire PTO has resigned-and it is due to her attitude/behavior/lack of communication skills.

If teachers are happy, and the principal hires QUALIFIED people, and doesn’t micromanage, and recognizes them for the professionals that they supposedly are, you will have the all important good test scores, and a happy building. However, when a barely qualified administrator steps in, decides on a few key issues to focus on, makes changes the second they step into the building, disaster usually ensues.

I understand that administrative changes are necessary and happen. However, if an admin inherits a building with a good rep, they are better off sitting back for the first year and changing only the major problems…and then the second year make changes, but with the staffs’ input. If a school does well, it is because of the teachers’ hard work- and we’re often motivated to do better, work harder for admins who recognize and appreciate that.

I for one am one who is part of our mass exodus. Supposedly I am a ‘highly qualified,’ ‘master teacher,’ but feel that my skills were being disregarded-arbitrarily-so I have opted to move to a building where my skills and abilities will be used in the proper way. I am very excited by this prospect, and very excited with working with my new administrator….

I do agree with a previous post that stated that admins should have more formal education-this leadership endorsment is silly. Admins should have a certain amount of experience in real classrooms, and certain number of years as an ap before advancing. I also have problems with coaches and band directors being named principals..especially if they’ve never had elementary experience!!! Each type of school has its own challenges; I truly think that to be successful as an administrator in a school, you should have taught at least SOME of the grades IN that school! I have had admins that haven’t had an inkling of what my kids can do, because they are not familiar with that age group!

I also find it appalling that my own education-and I am a ‘regular’ classroom teacher-exceeds my current administrators’. That’s scary! I know holding a masters is not required here in GA (it should be-higher performing states make it mandatory for all teachers to hold a Masters in education)-but I think someone who wants to be an administrator should demonstrate a love for learning and improvement by obtaining advanced degrees.

Just my penny and a half, adjusted for inflation.

By catlady

April 2, 2007 6:38 PM | Link to this

I disagree with Rob: In addition to significant, multi-grade teaching experience, an administrator should have degrees from more than the diploma mills used around here. I am not saying that a name brand college guarantees a superior product, but some of the programs I have seen are absolutely on a sophmore level. Also, a county-level administrator should not administrate a level or subject THEY HAVE NO EXPERIENCE OR DEGREE FOR. Our central office is staffed almost entirely by former special ed teachers who were wonderful special ed teachers but that is the extent of their practical experience. We have an opening coming up, and odds are very high it will be a former special ed teacher becoming supervisor of curriculum for all. In addition, our county has the habit of “kicking upstairs” incompetent principals to serve out their remaining years, leaving the rest of us to pick up the slack until they retire, when they are replaced with the next group that has risen to its level of incompetence (see the Peter Principle).

When I was in undergrad, you could not apply to a program for a master’s degree in administration or counseling unless you had been successful in the classroom for 7 years. And that was to be ACCEPTED into study for the certification.

I also think the school psych should have some classroom experience before making pie in the sky recommendations.

By Lisa B.

April 2, 2007 7:26 PM | Link to this

Too often teachers are promoted too quickly, and are set up for failure. I have seen too many examples of people promoted to assistant principal after their 3rd year of teaching, and then promoted to principal after theri 3rd year as assistant. I sometimes see more experienced, qualified teachers and A.P.’s overlooked for promotion, but perhaps they were too experienced to be easily manipulated by those above. Fifteen years in business prior to my teaching career taught me to hire the best possible. I always looked for people who knew MORE than me, not less. When people are promoted beyond their experience or ability, they may tend to hire people who don’t question their leadership. That causes huge problems.

By RW

April 3, 2007 8:39 AM | Link to this

I agree with Rob. It is NOT necessary to be a good teacher to be a good principal. The skills needed to do each job well are very different. Some classroom experience is probably a plus, but there is nothing magical about an arbitrary “10 years in the classroom, 5 years as an AP.”

Same thing goes for graduate degree in education. For teachers, a master’s in their subject would be a much better qualification than a MEd. For principals, graduate degrees in public administration or management would be more in line with the skill set needed to run a school.

By Tim Parker

April 3, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

Principals make a HUGE difference in the quality of education at a school. As the school’s leader, they set the tone for discipline, academic expectations, hire/fire personnel, control spending, provide resources, training, and professional development, and establish relationships with parents, teachers, students, and the community.

I’m kind of confused I_Teach’s post. Are you saying that administrator’s don’t have advanced degrees? I know in Georgia, you are required to have at least a Master of Education degree in Educational Leadership to be an assistant principal and that most systems prefer that principals have at least a Specialist of Education (between a Master and Doctoriate) degree.

I’ve seen many types of leaders from empty shirts to control freaks in the 15 years I’ve been in education. I’m in my second year as an assistant principal, and I’d be willing to bet that if you asked every teacher you would get varying opinions on my performance. I consider myself a situational leader. I try to make the best decisions I can make based on the information given and always consider the welfare of the child first and foremost. Am I a good leader? I think so.

By Ernest

April 3, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this

Catlady, you made an interesting observation @ 6:38 that I’ve noticed in some cases also, that the path to administration goes through special ed. Is there something ‘unique’ about this experience that prepares one for administration? To be clear, I’m not making a blanket statement, I’ve just noticed quite a few administrators were former SPED teachers

RW and Rob, I don’t think the point was that one has to be a ‘good’ teacher (though that would be a plus). The emphasis was more on having classroom experience. In my industry, I’ve seen several good ‘workers’ that failed miserably in management. I agree, leadership, management, and accounting skills seem to be criteria that administrators to be should have, with opportunities to demonstrate them all.

By James

April 3, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this

Principal are like quarterbacks they take all the credit for the successes and too much of the blame for the failures. A principal is only as good as the staff he/she has hired.

With a simple BA I could be a great principal. Why? It’s all about LEADERSHIP. Great military generals of history were not educated to lead. They were educated so they would have the credentials. Leadership is an innate ability. Some folks have it and others don’t. A principal that has to be taught to lead is going to fail.

You can’t make someone a leader if they don’t have the personality of a leader. Look at your personal situation. There are people you wouldn’t dare follow, then there are folks you would go to battle with without question. Principals are like that as well.

A good principal surrounds him/herself with quality people not necessarily the most popular but the best people. What causes failures in school situations is everybody wants to be liked. It shouldn’t matter if you are doing the job you were hired to do.

I can look at a principal and decide within 10 minutes if that person is a quality leader. Good leaders don’t confront staff in front of students. Good leaders don’t go for embarassing students, teachers or parents.

Good leadership is tactful, bright, willing to try new things and determined to get the job done at all costs effectively.

Case in point in my son’s Fulton Co. elementary school the principal passed away. The assistant principal who happened to be white was the best qualified candidate. She didn’t get the job because teachers and parents complained. The person they did hire has been a BIG disappointment. Luckily my oldest graduated and I moved my youngest to another school. I hope she sues.

Finally, when teachers complain about a principal it is because he/she are not playing the popularity game.

By Jeff

April 3, 2007 9:40 AM | Link to this

So I’m from the Redneck Capital of GA (NW of ATL on I-75).

That said, I attended 5 schools growing up (1 elem, 1 middle, 3 high) and between those 5 schools, I encountered 6 principals and countless assistants.

Of all those Principals, I had two truly great ones. The Elem and the Alternative school.

What distinguished them? A number of factors, I’ll try to list a few:

Both genuinely cared about all their students. They did not cater to a few select students/ parents. They were tough as nails, but they had hearts of pure gold. They wouldn’t hesitate to put you in your place, nor would they hesitate to praise you for a job well done. They could tell the difference between an apology said to try to get out of trouble and the real deal.

Oh, and guess what? While both were older men (indeed, the elem one retired the year I left that school, and the alternative school one retired before my 5 year reunion), race was not an issue. Indeed, the elem one was black - in a majority white system(and WELL respected, at least in my house - didn’t hurt that he had been one of my dad’s HS teachers….). The alternative one was white.

Now, back in the day when I was teaching/ trying to start teaching, I interviewed with probably HUNDREDS (defintely dozens!) of Principals of virtually every race/ gender. The only two that ever hired me were middle age men (mid 40’s - mid 50’s or so). Again, one black, one white. Though I had problems with them/ suspicions of them at times, I’ve come to think of both as being generally decent principals. My style is more in-your-face, batten-the-hatches, we’re-going-to-WAR!, and they played the political games MUCH better than I ever could - or would want to. But they were decent guys to work for, and sometimes that is all you can ask.

All that said, I find myself agreeing with James: Principals are very much the front men in the schools, and as such have the dilemma of ANY front man in ANY organization: Too much of the credit, and too much of the blame.

By Teacher Teacher

April 3, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

My choice of 10 and 5 years was not arbitrary. I firmly believe that the emphasis an educator should bring to the fore is in teaching, not administrating. The schools brim with administrators who have very few years in the classroom. How can anyone say that a principal need not have put in much time in the classroom? If an administrator hasn’t taught, how in the world could s/he possibly administer a school? My 15 year thought is based on the notion that an educator should spend at least a third of his/her time in the trenches before escaping (which is what most of them consider their advancement) from the classroom.

How anyone can say they are in education for the sake of kids and in the same breath say they are in administration bewilders me.

By Lee

April 3, 2007 8:08 PM | Link to this

For what it’s worth…

• Overall, I think a bad principal can bring down a school further and faster than a good principal can bring it up. A truly bad principal can poison a school.

• In my day, I recall that all my principals were in the position for a long time; 15-20 years or more. Today, you see so many A/Ps and principals at a school for 2-4 years, get their ticket punched, and then on to the next assignment. They are mimicing the corporate world in that respect.

• A principal is a first line manager. To manage on the tactical level, you need a sound foundation. To get that, you need to spend several years in the classroom. I don’t know any way around that…

• I know those of you in education place a great deal of emphasis on the sheepskins, but having a masters or specialist degree only means that you took some classes, wrote some papers, and passed a few tests. It does not mean that you are “qualified” for a damn thing.

• My biggest pet peeve with principals is that they do not deal with the poor performing teachers under their supervision.

-

By thomas

April 4, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

Lee,

It’s not about a principal “getting his ticket punched” as the reason most principals only stay 2-4 years at a school. It’s designed that way by administration. Today most school systems and boards LIKE to move principals around because it keeps them from getting truly established at a school. It’s a power thing for the school system. They don’t want the school principal to get too powerful (at least in their mind). In America it’s all about power and control. F* the kids. This is why we have kids who can’t read and write. It’s all about what some adults want to do and their little agenda.

By WFC

April 4, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this

The high school principal has an almost impossible job. I’ve reached the conclusion (after 26 years as a teacher/coach and four years as an AP) that it the structure of educational leadership that is the problem. The principal has to do EVERYTHING and very few people are excellent at EVERYTHING. I’ve worked under seven principals in my career. Each and every one had exceptional strengths and grievous weaknesses. In each case, the principal’s performance would have been greatly enhanced had he had the help of a “co-principal” whose skill set complemented his own.

Some modest proposals:

Principals have an impossible job. It’s time to re-design the entire model of “educational leadership” and bring it into the 21rst century.