Since 1989 in New Zealand, the work of the primary school principal has been transformed in official policy texts from that of leading professional to chief executive officer. Surveys document the changing nature of the role and the workload and other pressures that have resulted, particularly for principals with teaching responsibilities in smaller schools. There is a generally accepted crisis of preparation, recruitment, development and retention. Below the surface, however, are deeper-seated, structural difficulties: women comprise the majority of teachers, yet are a minority of principals and their career advancement is largely limited to small schools and those in poorer socioeconomic areas. This article reviews the situation and examines the reasons why dominant images of the primary school principalship may be both partial and counterproductive.
BrookingK. (2002). EEO in schools: Case studies of best practice. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
2.
BrookingK. (2003). [A study of board of trustee appointment practices in selected New Zealand primary schools]. In preparation for submission for PhD, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria.
3.
CollinsG. (2002). Principal development in New Zealand: Current issues and initiatives. NZ Principal, 11 (3), 23–25.
4.
CourtM. R. (1994). 1893–1993: How far have we come in women's employment in education?New Zealand Annual Review of Education, No. 4, 9–24.
5.
CourtM. R. (2001). Sharing school leadership: Narratives of discourse and power. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North.
6.
CourtM. R. (2002). Alternatives to the lone(ly) principal. SET: Research for Teachers, 3, 16–20.
7.
Education Review Office. (1996). Professional leadership in primary schools. Wellington: Author.
8.
Education Review Office. (1998). Good schools, poor schools. Wellington: Author.
Education Review Office. (2002). The appointment of school principals. Wellington: Author.
11.
Election comment: Party rundown. (2002). New Zealand Education Review, 7(26), 4–5.
12.
EvansS. (2002). Training the leaders. New Zealand Education Review, 7(31), 7.
13.
FiskeE.LaddH. (2000). When schools compete: A cautionary tale. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
14.
GlennyM.LewisD.WhiteC. (1996). Power sharing at Selwyn College—Auckland, New Zealand: The co-principalship model. Management in Education, 10(4), 25, 32–33.
15.
GraceG. (1995). School leadership: Beyond education management. London: Falmer.
16.
LangeD. (1999). Another day for tomorrow's schools. Delta, No. 51, 1, 11–22.
17.
LivingstoneI. (1999). The workload of primary teaching principals: A New Zealand survey. Wellington: Chartwell Consultants.
18.
Ministry of Education. (2001). Report of the School Staffing Review Group. Wellington: Author.
19.
MorganC. (1989). Inside the interview ‘black box’: The tenuous status of job-related evidence in LEA selection panel decisions. In RichesC.MorganC. (Eds.), Human resource management in education (pp. 162–170). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
20.
O'NeillJ. (1998). ERO's ‘capable teacher’: A science of control. Delta, No. 50, 201–224.
21.
Two at the top. (2002). Education Gazette, 81(9), 6.
22.
WhiteC. (1995). Joint principalship!Leading Lights: Newsletter of the New Zealand Educational Administration Society, 1 (3), 1.
23.
WhiteR. (1991). Evaluation of the pilot co-principalship at Henry Hudson school (Research report 90–02). Vancouver: Vancouver School Board, Student Assessment and Research.
24.
WhittallM. (2001). Rural school principalship: Alarming turnover patterns are emerging. NZ Principal, 16(1), 22–23.
25.
WylieC. (1997). At the centre of the web. Wellington: NZCER.
26.
WylieC. (1998). Principal appointments 1997: Report for the New Zealand Principals' Federation. Wellington: NZCER.
27.
WylieC. (1999). Ten years on: How schools view educational reform. Wellington: NZCER.
