Petty tyrants and amiable drones

You often hear that the key to good schools is good teaching.  To a large extent, that's true. 

What you never hear, however, is that the greatest obstacle to creating and retaining good teachers is mediocre, sometimes incompetent, school management.  You don't hear it because the people most likely to expound on the subject are not teachers, but the administrators most responsible for driving good teachers from the system.

That's the conclusion of Portlander Jim Stinson, a videographer who for 35 tears has observed "this sad drama played out in three school districts, five schools, and grade levels, 2 through 12."

Stinson admits he's not an educator.  But I am, and what he says about the generally abysmal quality of school principals rings true:

"...how often do we learn about district officials and building administrators who are political opportunists, waffling bureaucrats, petty tyrants, educational faddists, or amiable drones?" ...

"The truth is that compared to teachers, there are proportionally fewer 'master' administrators or even effective professionals."

It may be especially true here in Portland.  The legacy of failed leadership at Jefferson High School has been well-documented.  But the story almost certainly doesn't end there. 

I've suggested before the possibility of running schools without principals.  At the very least we should make sure that the principals we do hire are true educational leaders, not simply  drill sergeants with reputations for badgering teachers into encouraging students to post higher test scores.

Effective Schools Research has been around for nearly thirty years.   Of late, it's been  ignored, supplanted by the current mania for test score accountability.  Nevertheless, the research still points the way to genuine school reform.  One of its main correlates is this:

"In the effective school, the principal acts as an instructional leader           and effectively and persistently communicates that mission to the staff,         parents, and students."

Larry Lezotte goes further.  He says that 'second generation' effective school reform requires that school leadership become the responsibility of teachers as well as the building principal, who should see his --or her-- role as a "leader of leaders", not followers.  A complex organization like a school, Lezotte says, necessitates teacher empowerment and the dispersal of leadership responsibilities. 

Portland has settled for a top-down hierarchical approach to school leadership, with teachers often viewed as responsible for poor student performance rather than as potential allies in revitalizing education.  That attitude is evident in the top-down mandates for a standardized curriculum and the increased use of scripted lessons, not to mention the reconfiguration of school instructional models without teacher input. 

If Portland Public Schools wants to keep its best, brightest, and most innovative teachers, it needs to treat them with respect.  And that means hiring building principals who are willing to do just that.

Comments

[Steve Buel]

I think there are a couple of points concerning principals which aren't often discussed. One is that it has become a horrible job. Test scores, apply some educational trend, make parents happy, cover up your school's flaws for PR purposes, do what the administration tells you to do and take the heat when it is wrong, etc. etc. It just isn't a great job. It used to be the best job in education -- educational leader, come up with innovative ways to improve your school, inspire teachers and students.... I mean who would want that job now? So, because of this I think it often attracts two types of educators -- teachers who want out of the classroom and teachers who want more money. Those aren't the best qualifications for the job.

The other point is that I don't think principals are allowed much freedom to really do what they think is necessary. They always have to watch their back.

So I think usually the people who become principals are not the problem, but the way the job is now designed to not attract the best people. Of course, there are exceptions, but basically that is, in my opinion, the real problem.

[Zarwen]

And MY opinion (also a former teacher!) is that it's both!

But Portland does seems to have a truly outstanding record, not only at promoting the worst teachers to principals, but the worst principals to Area Directors. I remember well how one particularly good and effective area director, Vinh Nguyen, was run off the job by her incompetent, political-toady "superiors." I am sure not one of them was superior to her in any way.

So, while we're on the subject, let's not forget how PPS has arranged for the root-rot to reach ever higher!

[marcia]

Interesting post, Terry. I loved this quote "political opportunists, waffling bureaucrats, petty tyrants, educational faddists, or amiable drones?" ...I have worked for the worst and the best...also saw a few of the in betweeners at my kids' schools.. Fortunately I work for a principal who watches our backs...the backs of the teachers...I feel lucky! And he respects what we do every day in our classrooms and allows us to follow our own professional judgement when it comes to innane mandates from the district. A "leader of leaders.."

[Terry]

I've been fortunate, too, Marcia, in the principals I've worked with, especially in Hillsboro. That was before NCLB, testing mania, and all the talk about merit pay.

But even there politics played a huge role in who was selected to join the administrative ranks. There were certainly some "drones" in the district who rose through the administrative bureaucracy.