This article reports the findings of a study on superintendent perceptions of the quantity and quality of candidates for the principalship. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 10 superintendents of variously sized school districts. Of the respondents, 90 percent indicated a moderate to extreme shortage of principal candidates, with the problem more severe at the high school level. Superintendents offered suggestions for ways to increase the candidate pool for principalships.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bowles, B., D. King, and G. Crow. 2000. Viable principal candidates: Superintendents’ perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 24-28 April, New Orleans, La.
2.
Carrigan, J., C. Brown, and K. Jenkins. 1999. Principals’ salaries: Incentives or deterrents to professional advancement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Finance Association, March, Seattle, Wash.
3.
Education Research Service (ERS). 1998. Is there a shortage of qualified candidates for openings in the principalship? An exploratory study. Prepared for the National Association of Elementary School Principals and the National Association of Secondary School Principals. Arlington, Va.: ERS.
4.
Education Research Service (ERS). 2000. The principal, keystone of a high-achieving school: Attracting and keeping the leaders we need. Arlington, Va.: ERS.
5.
Galvin, P., and D. Sperry. 1996. Educational leadership in Utah public schools: Results of the Utah school administrator survey. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah, Utah Consortium for Educational Leaders.
6.
Goodnough, A.2000. Mrs. Clinton proposes grants for principals. New York Times, 8 September.
7.
Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL). 2000. Leadership for student learning: Reinventing the principalship: A report of the Task Force on the Principalship. Washington, D.C.: IEL.
8.
Kennedy, C.2000. Summary of responses to NAESP/NASSP/NMSA survey questions. Washington, D.C.: Principals’ Leadership Summit.
9.
Kurtz, H.2000. Principal assignment. Rocky Mountain News, 1 October.
10.
Montana School Boards Association (MSBA). 1999. A study of the shortage of school administrators in Montana. Helena, Mont.: MSBA.
11.
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 2000. The best job in the world. Northwest Education Magazine5 (3).
12.
Oberman, G.1996. A report on principal turnover in the Chicago Public Schools. Unpublished manuscript, Chicago Public Schools.
13.
Olson, L.2001. Grant program aims to nurture school leaders. Education Week, 10 January, 1, 17.
14.
Sheldon, T.D., and L. W. Munnich. 1999. Administrative autumn: A study of Minnesota’s aging educational leadership and the difficulty in finding their replacements. Executive summary. Roseville, Minn.: Minnesota Department of Children, Families and Learning.
15.
Steinberg, J.2000. Nation’s schools struggling to find enough principals. New York Times, 3 September, A1, A4.
16.
Tirozzi, G., and V. Ferrandino. 2000. The shortage of principals continues. Education Week, 18 October, 1, 15.
17.
Whan, L., and A. Thomas. 1996. The principalship and stress in the work-place: An observational and physiological study. Journal of School Leadership6 (4): 444-465.
18.
Whitaker, K. S.2000. Executive summary of superintendent perceptions of quantity and quality of candidates for the principalship. Unpublished manuscript.
19.
Whitaker, K. S., and B. G. Barnett. 1999. A partnership model linking k-12 school districts and leadership preparation programs. Planning and Changing30 (3/4): 126-143.
