University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The principalship: preparation, recruitment, and retention

(USC Thesis Other)

The principalship: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: THE PRINCIPALSHIP 1
THE PRINCIPALSHIP: PREPARATION, RECRUITMENT, AND RETENTION
by
Joseph G. Fraser
____________________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2020
Copyright 2020 Joseph G. Fraser
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 2
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Cali, for her undying support and
commitment to me during this growth opportunity. Her ability to hold our home together and
provide for our kids in addition to running her own business, has been more than inspiring. I
want to thank my children, Gracie and Gabe, for being understanding of this process and lending
their dad to the doctoral program. Finally, I would like to thank my mom for her unwavering
support during these past 3 years. I hope that I have proved to them that all of their tireless work
in getting me to understand the importance of education has paid off.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation chair, Dr. Michael Escalante, for his leadership and
wisdom throughout this process. Thank you to Dr. David Cash for his mentorship both in and out
of the program; I will be forever grateful for his leadership. Thank you to my cohort and fellow
colleagues, who have been a tremendous support and have kept me accountable along the way.
Thank you to Dr. Greg Plutko for his guidance, leadership, and for believing in me. The oppor-
tunities that he has afforded me have been pivotal in my career and my personal life. Thank you
to Dr. Jessie Marion for being a great friend and colleague and for forcing me to join the Trojan
network.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2
Acknowledgments 3
List of Tables 6
Abstract 8

Chapter 1: Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 10
Statement of the Problem 11
Purpose of the Study 12
Research Questions 12
Significance of the Study 12
Limitations of the Study 13
Delimitations of the Study 13
Assumptions of the Study 13
Definition of Terms 14
Organization of the Dissertation 16
Chapter 2: Review of the Literature 18
History of the Principalship 18
Preparation for the Principal Position 23
University Preparation Programs 24
Nonuniversity Preparation 27
Principal Recruitment 28
Principalship Demographics 28
Diversity in the Principalship 29
Deterrents to Applying for a Principalship 30
Strategies for Recruiting Principal Candidates 33
Principal Retention 35
Challenges to Retention 35
Strategies for Retaining Principals 37
Leadership Frameworks 41
Four Leadership Frames 41
School Leadership That Works 42
The Principal: Three Keys to Maximizing Impact 44
Chapter Summary 45
Chapter 3: Methodology 46
Research Questions Restated 46
Research Design 46
Research Team 46
Qualitative and Quantitative Research 47
Population and Sample 48
Access and Entry 49
Instrumentation 49
Data Collection 51
Data Analysis 52
Validity, Credibility, and Trustworthiness 52
Reliability 53
Ethical Considerations 53
Chapter Summary 54
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 5
Chapter 4: Results 55
Research Design 56
Study Participants 57
Qualitative Interview Participants 57
Quantitative Survey Participants 57
Findings for Research Question 1 58
Principal Candidates Need on-the-Job Training 58
The Importance of Mentorship 63
Informal Networking 65
Summary Discussion for Research Question 1 68
Findings for Research Question 2 68
Prior Experience 80
Mentoring 82
Summary Discussion for Research Question 2 84
Findings for Research Question 3 84
District Office Support 100
Professional Relationships and Networking 102
Summary of Results for Research Question 3 105
Chapter Summary 105
Chapter 5: Discussion, Implications, and Recommendations 115
Purpose of the Study Restated 116
Summary of Findings 117
Research Question 1 117
Research Question 2 118
Research Question 3 119
Implications 119
Recommendations for Future Study 120
Conclusion 120
References 122

Appendices
Appendix A Research Participants’ Invitation E-Mail 131
Appendix B Informed Consent 132
Appendix C Principal Survey 133
Appendix D Human Resources Administrator Survey 140
Appendix E Immediate Supervisor of Principal Survey 144
Appendix F Superintendent Survey 148
Appendix G Principal Interview Guide 152
Appendix H Human Resources Administrator Interview Guide 154
Appendix I Immediate Supervisor of Principal Interview Guide 156
Appendix J Superintendent Interview Guide 158
Appendix K Question Alignment Matrix 160

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 6
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Demographics of Quantitative Survey Participants 59
Table 2: Mentoring Survey Data 66
Table 3: Responses Indicating That Informal Networks of Support Prepared Principals 67
Table 4: Principals’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was More
Valuable Than University Training Programs (Percentages) 69
Table 5: Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was
More Valuable Than University Training Programs (Percentages) 72
Table 6: Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job
Experience Was More Valuable Than University Training Programs
(Percentages) 75
Table 7: Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job
Experience Was More Valuable Than University Training Programs
(Percentages) 78
Table 8: Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the
Principalship and Recruiting From Within Are More Beneficial Than
University Preparation Programs (Percentages) 85
Table 9: Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That Building
Pipelines to the Principalship and Recruiting From Within Are More
Beneficial Than University Preparation Programs (Percentages) 88
Table 10: Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That Building
Pipelines to the Principalship and Recruiting From Within Are More
Beneficial Than University Preparation Programs (Percentages) 92
Table 11: Principals’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the Principalship
and Recruiting From Within Are More Beneficial Than University Preparation
Programs (Percentages) 96
Table 12: Principals’ Responses Indicating the Impact of District Support on Retention
of the Principal (District B Principals and All Principals) 102
Table 13: Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and
Principals Working in Professional Learning Communities Help to Retain
Principals (Percentages) 106
Table 14: Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That Supporting
Principals and Principals Working in Professional Learning Communities
Help to Retain Principals (Percentages) 108
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 7
Table 15: Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That Supporting
Principals and Principals Working in Professional Learning Communities
Help to Retain Principals (Percentages) 110
Table 16: Principals’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and Principals
Working in Professional Learning Communities Help to Retain Principals
(Percentages) 112
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 8
ABSTRACT
The K–12 public school principalship is a complex position that continues to evolve and
to become increasingly challenging. Today’s principals are responsible not only for the academic
and socioemotional needs of the students but also for the development and training of staff,
creating and sustaining strong relationships with families, and collaborating with the community.
Administrative preparation programs often do not support aspiring principals adequately in the
areas that lead to their success in the position–instead focusing on the managerial aspects of the
job. This qualitative study examined the preparation, recruitment, and retention of public school
principals in southern California. Perspectives from principals, immediate supervisors of princi-
pals, human resources administrators, and superintendents were considered to identify common
themes in response to the research questions. Learning opportunities, on-the-job experiences, and
networking relationships were found to be valuable in the preparation of principals. Taking
advantage of networking opportunities, having current administrators tap potential candidates,
and demonstrating characteristics unique to the district were all viewed as valuable for principal
recruitment. Relationships with others in the district, having a mentor, and finding the work
meaningful were important in the retention of principals. The themes in this study have implica-
tions for traditional university preparation programs, district personnel, and aspiring principals.
Future research can examine how districts can implement these findings to develop a strong
pipeline of future administrators.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 9
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The role of the school principal has evolved greatly since its inception. While in the early
days, the principal acted as a manager, today’s principal holds one of the most challenging and
important positions in the American school system. Principals are tasked with providing direc-
tion for their schools, building efficacy, shaping the instructional focus, and ensuring the overall
function of their organizations (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005). They manage both classi-
fied and certificated staff members, build culture, and monitor their facilities while simultane-
ously being charged with consistently improving student achievement (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
In fact, next to classroom teachers, the principal is the most influential factor in student success
(Fullan, 2014).
Unfortunately, many principals take on this role without adequate preparation. While
research has shown that the quality of school and district leadership is highly dependent on the
quality of preparation experience, many preparation programs fall short of necessary training for
the reality of the job (Hernandez, Roberts, & Menchaca, 2012). The majority of school adminis-
trators have first served as classroom teachers; however, success as a teacher does not neces-
sarily guarantee success as a principal. Aspiring principals must have knowledge of classroom
instruction, fiscal management, human resources, and other support services. University prepa-
ration programs are often criticized for a lack of consistent standards and for being out of touch
with the needs of the position. In addition, teachers in preparation programs are often adjunct
professors who are underprepared themselves (Hess & Kelly, 2005; Lashway, 1999; Levine,
2005). Some programs are addressing these issues by developing cohort models, creating
opportunities for shadowing and mentorship, building closer relationships with school districts,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 10
and helping candidates to access practical experiences (Davis & Darling-Hammond, 2012;
Pannell, Peltier-Glaze, Haynes, Davis, & Skelton, 2015).
In order to ensure the success of future principals, candidates should be adequately
prepared for this challenging role. School districts must also understand the complexities of the
principal position in order to recruit and train highly qualified candidates. Principal recruitment
is typically done in one of two ways: teachers are encouraged by site leadership to begin a prin-
cipal preparation program or candidates apply from outside the district for the position. Effective
recruitment and selection is a necessary aspect of increasing the pool of successful principal can-
didates (Normore, 2006).
Once a district has recruited a well-prepared candidate, it is necessary to create effective
training and mentorship opportunities in order to retain principals in their challenging positions.
Stress, low salaries, and the complexities and time demands of the job are among the top reasons
principals do not remain in the position (Gajda & Militello, 2008). While districts can employ
strategies to retain good administrators, principal retention remains a challenge in districts across
the country.
Background of the Problem
The principalship is multifaceted, and many potential candidates do not recognize the
complexity of the position (Baker, Punswick, & Belt, 2010; Kavanaugh, 2005). Most principal
candidates hold the necessary prerequisites but do not have a thorough understanding of the
requirements of the job. The pressures of accountability systems, expectations placed on princi-
pals, low compensation for high demands, and the excessive amount of time required for the job
have led to challenges in retaining successful principals (Norton, 2002). The responsibilities of
the principalship have become more challenging and complex due to decades of mandated
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 11
reform, rapidly changing demographics, technological advances, and dwindling financial support
for schools (Fullan, 2014; Hoyle & Wallace, 2005; Marzano et al., 2005; Spillane & Lee, 2014).
Although many principals are successful in the position, the pipeline of aspiring principals with
potential for success may be insufficient (Meyer & Feistritzer, 2003; Normore, 2006). Research
has shown that 1 in 5 principals left their school within 2 years and many school districts report a
lack of qualified applicants (Pijanowski, Hewitt, & Brady, 2009). Given the potential for an
insufficient pipeline of principals, as well as principals leaving the position, further consideration
must be given to principal preparation, recruitment, and retention.
Statement of the Problem
The job of the principal has become more complex and challenging since its beginning,
with the roles, responsibilities, and expectations continually evolving since the inception of the
position in the mid-1600s (Brubaker & Simon, 1986). Aspiring principals must thoughtfully
consider proper preparation, recruitment strategies, and skill sets for ongoing retention and
success in the position. Preparation programs, such as universities and nonuniversity entities,
have made attempts to train prospective principals to be recruited and successful in the position
but may have fallen short in their efforts (Brown, 2005; Davis & Darling-Hammond, 2012; Hess
& Kelly, 2007; Jackson & Kelley, 2002). Support for current principals, including networking,
mentoring, and coaching, has contributed to most principals’ ongoing success in the position
(Brown, 2005; Matthews & Crow, 2003; Service, Dalgic, & Thornton, 2016); however, principal
turnover remains high. The fact that disparities in the recruitment and retention of female princi-
pals and principals of color also exist magnifies the problem for these subgroups (Hill, Ottem, &
DeRoche, 2016; Hoff, Menard, & Tuell, 2006). These inadequacies signify an overall problem in
principals’ preparation, recruitment, and retention.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 12
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and
retention of California K–12 school principals. While the most significant direct influence on
student achievement is the teacher, the second most critical influence is the principal (Fullan,
2014). It is important to identify the preparation and support that principals must have in order to
meet the challenges and complexities of the principalship, as well as the support and retention
efforts that districts must use to keep principals in this crucial role.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study:
1. How have training programs and professional experiences prepared principals to
manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?
2. What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human
resources administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful principal
candidates?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?
Significance of the Study
Principals hold one of the most impactful position with regard to student achievement in
the K–12 school system. The ability to prepare, recruit, and retain effective principals is vital to
student success. This study analyzed principal preparation programs, study district strategies for
recruitment, and offer methods for successful retention of school leaders. The findings may
influence potential principal candidates in seeking an effective preparation program and real-life
opportunities for learning. University and nonuniversity preparation programs will be informed
on best practices for principal training. The findings of this study will inform K–12 district
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 13
leaders on best practices for recruiting and retaining good leadership. Finally, current principals
will be informed about strategies that will affect their success and longevity in the position.
Limitations of the Study
Limitations are matters and circumstances that are beyond the control of the researcher
(Simon & Goes, 2013). One limitation of this study is that the study will be difficult to replicate
because the research occurred in a natural setting. In order to address the limitation of validity
and reliability in qualitative research, the data were triangulated to minimize bias and increase
validity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The second limitation is that the study did not sample the
entire census of K–12 principals in California. Time and distance posed limitations as partici-
pants were limited to principals in California who voluntarily participated in the study. Time was
a limitation, as the study was conducted over a short period of time, which may reduce generali-
zability (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Findings are generalizable only to districts that participated
in the study.
Delimitations of the Study
Delimitations are limitations that result from specific choices made by the researcher
(Simon & Goes, 2013). In this study, the researcher collected data from a purposeful sample:
California K–12 principals and district personnel.
Assumptions of the Study
The following assumptions were made throughout the study. Successful principals were
currently employed in principal positions in school districts. All participants were truthful in
their survey and interview responses. The interview and survey protocols provided the researcher
with accurate, reliable, and valid information about the impact of principal preparation, recruit-
ment, and retention practices. The collected data reflected the beliefs of principals, district office
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 14
personnel, and superintendents in California. A qualitative approach was appropriate for this
study.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are defined based on the literature
reviewed.
Association of California School Administrators (ACSA): The largest umbrella organiza-
tion for school leaders in the United States, serving more than 17,000 California educators.
Beginning or novice principal: A principal who has been in the principalship for less than
4 years.
Change agent: A leader who challenges the status quo (Marzano et al., 2005).
Coaching: A task-oriented, performance-driven relationship with a focus on increasing
specific skills.
Colleagues: Peers who work in the same profession and are at the same level in their job.
Direct supervisor: A district office administrator who oversees the evaluation and men-
toring of a site principal.
Human resource personnel: Those who work in the human resources department of a
school district and oversee hiring practices.
Job Description Index: A job satisfaction questionnaire developed by Bowling Green
State University (Balzer, 1997). The Index has five facets: work on present job, pay, opportuni-
ties for promotion, supervision, and people at work.
Job in General: A scale that provides a rating of overall satisfaction with a job. It is used
in conjunction with the Job Description Index (Balzer, 1997)
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 15
Job satisfaction: A general feeling or attitude toward a job (Brayfield, Wells, & Strate,
1957).
Mentee: The person who is the “learner” in the mentoring relationship (Kerka, 1998).
Mentor: The person who holds experience and knowledge and works with others to
develop their skills (Cohen, 1995).
Mentoring: A relationship focused on developing an individual professionally and per-
sonally.
Mentoring: A relationship in which an experienced person provides guidance and
support to a less experienced person (Haney, 1997).
Opportunities for promotion: A subcategory of the Job Description Index that refers to
advancement possibilities within the organization.
Pay: A subcategory of the Job Description Index that describes the monetary compensa-
tion for the job.
People at work: A subcategory of the Job Description Index that refers to the coworkers
of the employee. This may include subordinates as well as peers.
Preparation program: A university, professional organization, or embedded training
program that supports a principal candidate in obtaining the skills necessary for the principalship.
Principal recruitment: The process or strategies used by an aspiring principal to obtain
the first principalship.
Principal retention: The process or strategies used by a principal or district personnel to
support retention of the principal.
Principal: The head or leader of a school.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 16
Principal: The person whose main responsibility is to serve as the educational and
instructional leader of the school (Brayfield et al., 1957; Marzano et al., 2005).
Principalship: A position of presiding rank, especially the head of an elementary school,
middle school, or high school.
Protégé: A person who is being mentored.
Purposive sampling: Selecting participants based on specific characteristics.
School district: A local education agency that operates schools in a geographic location.
Superintendent: The administrator or manager in charge of multiple schools in a school
district.
Supervision: A subcategory of the Job Description Index that refers to the boss or
manager of the employees.
Tapping: The informal process of current administrators identifying and encouraging
teachers with leadership skills to pursue administrative positions.
Work on Present Job or Present Job: A subcategory of the Job Description Index refer-
ring to the requirements and conditions of the job.
Organization of the Dissertation
The dissertation is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces and presents an over-
view of the study, including a statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the research
questions, the significance of the study, limitations and delimitations, assumptions, and defini-
tions of key terms.
In Chapter 2, the literature related to the study is reviewed. This chapter contains five
sections. In the first section, the history of the principalship is discussed, beginning with the legal
establishment of schools in America in the 1600s and the emergence of the “principal teacher”
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 17
position in the 1700s. The section demonstrates the progression of the job as the principal moved
from being a manager to embodying various leadership roles over time. The second section ana-
lyzes principal preparation programs, including both university and nonuniversity programs, and
how those programs affect the success of a principal. In the third section, the demographics of
current principals is shared, as well as why candidates are often deterred from applying for the
position and strategies that school districts can employ to recruit qualified candidates. The fourth
section discusses the challenges that districts currently face in retaining principals in their posi-
tions and strategies for keeping effective leaders. The fifth section presents three frameworks that
were used to analyze the data in this study. Bolman and Deal’s (2013) four leadership frames,
work by Marzano et al. (2005) on leadership, and Fullan’s (2014) three keys to maximizing the
impact of leaders were used as conceptual frameworks for this study.
Chapter 3 describes the methodology used in this study, focusing on the qualitative
design of the research. The research team, the population and sample of the study, and the
instrumentation are presented. The methods for collecting and analyzing data are discussed, as
well as the ethical considerations for the study.
Chapter 4 presents the research findings from data collection. This chapter identifies
themes and analyzes data with regard to each research question and the conceptual frameworks
for the study. Chapter 5 summarizes the study’s findings, identify implications for practice, and
present recommendations for further research.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 18
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This chapter presents a review of the literature pertaining to the preparation, recruitment,
and retention of principals in the 21st-century American school system. It begins with a brief
history of the principalship, outlining how the position has evolved from its inception in the
1600s to today. It then summarizes current practices for the preparation and licensure of princi-
pals in the K–12 school system. The current practices for recruitment of principals are analyzed,
including methods for internal and outside recruitment into a school system. The chapter exam-
ines best practices for mentoring and retaining successful principals. Three theoretical frame-
works were used to demonstrate ways in which district leadership can understand the changing
role of the principal, the skills necessary to be successful in this position, and hiring strategies
that can be used to recruit and retain high quality candidates.
History of the Principalship
It is important to understand how the role of the principal has changed over time as the
demands and challenges of public education have evolved. This section provides an overview of
the history of the principal position.
The role of the principal dates back to 1647, when Massachusetts enacted the first general
school law requiring every town of 50 or more to organize a school for reading and writing
instruction. Leadership positions emerged in these one-room schoolhouses as head teachers were
established. These lead teachers were often called “headmaster,” “rector,” “preceptor,”
“provost,” or “principal” (Brubaker & Simon, 1986). As larger numbers of students began to
attend schools, the position began to grow in scope and responsibility. The head teacher took on
necessary administrative tasks, including maintaining the school building, communicating with
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 19
the community, acquiring instructional supplies, scheduling classes, and working with the board
of education (Brubaker & Simon, 1986).
As schools continued to grow during the time period 1747–1850, the role of the “princi-
pal teacher” continued to evolve (Brubaker & Simon, 1986; Kavanaugh, 2005). During this time,
urban schools were developing and the school system was becoming more complex. Adminis-
trative tasks evolved into more supervisory tasks as efficiency of instruction began to be
assessed. For the first time, the principal teacher was also required to be a liaison between a
school site and a central office. Thus began the often uncomfortable political dynamic between
teaching staff and central office leaders (Brubaker & Simon, 1986). At this time, no special
training was required for the principal teacher position and the person was often appointed by a
council or school board based on his efficiency with clerical tasks and ability to follow the
commands of the school board (Brubaker & Simon, 1986; Kavanaugh, 2005).
It was not until 1850–1920 that the position of principal as it is known today it began to
formulate. Societal changes and the “common schools movement” helped to drive this shift to
management and away from the classroom (Brown, 2005). Immigration, expansion, and urbani-
zation increased the call for schools to maintain social order, build nationalism, shape good citi-
zens, reform society, and stimulate economic growth (Brown, 2005). A Rhode Island study from
the mid-19th century revealed that the job of the principal was then made up of 58.8% clerical
tasks, 23.5% organizational tasks, 11.8% facilities maintenance, and 5.9% pupil personnel, pri-
marily focused on student discipline (Brubaker & Simon, 1986). Supervisory duties began to
emerge, including class observations, individual meetings with teachers, assessment, demonstra-
tion teaching, pupil study, and leading staff meetings (Pierce, 1935). In fact, by 1900, large city
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 20
school districts had full-time principals, with teaching completely removed from job duties. In
1921, the Department of Elementary School Principals was formed (Kavanaugh, 2005).
Now a distinctly managerial position, the role of the principal evolved and shifted even
more over the course of the 20th century. Influenced by the Progressive Movement and a call for
moral earnestness and mission, in the 1920s the principal was known as a values broker (Brown,
2005; Kavanaugh, 2005). While there was still no formal training required for this position, the
principal at that time was a spiritual and social leader, much like a priest leading a parish
(Cubberley, 1923). The principal’s responsibilities included monitoring teachers in a democratic
style, being an active member of the community, organizing curriculum, and helping teachers to
develop effective teaching strategies (Kavanaugh, 2005).
Due in part to industrialization and the emergence of corporations in America, the princi-
pal in the 1930s became more of a scientific manager (Brubaker & Simon, 1986; Kavanaugh,
2005). Pierce (1935) noted a professional interest in the position of the principal and greater
emphasis on the scientific study of the position. Schools were seen as a business, and the princi-
pal was the executive charged to run the organization. This operationalized schooling and
required principals to use business practices for budgeting, maintenance, and pupil accounting
(Kavanaugh, 2005). In this light, students were seen as raw materials, and the factory model of
schools emerged (Knott & Miller, 1987). Using research, principal preparation programs were
put in place; by 1932, nearly half of all states had adopted standards for certification (Brown,
2005).
By the 1940s, a coordinated focus on human relations once again shifted the principal
role to that of democratic leader. The country was experiencing a time of nationalism, and the
role of public schools became focused on preparing youth for their role in a democratic nation.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 21
Principals now focused on helping students to live productively. Supervising teachers, develop-
ing curriculum, and engaging in shared decision making were all part of the principal’s job. In
this time period, principals began to seek higher degrees, and their focus was much more on
human relations than on scientific management (Kavanaugh, 2005).
In the 1950s a synthesis of approaches produced the theory-guided administrator
(Kavanaugh, 2005). The principal was expected to apply research and scientific management
principles as in the 1930s, while also maintaining the human relations style of the 1940s. This
approach allowed principals to update facilities, recruit teachers, and support data-driven teach-
ing strategies (Brown, 2005; Kavanaugh, 2005). Rather than focusing on the larger picture of
leading the school, principals in this time period were detail oriented and focused on the job of
running a building.
The 1960s was a time of large social change in America, and this led to principals ful-
filling the role of bureaucratic executive. Reformers were challenging bureaucracy and calling
for the decentralization of schools to address segregation and financial inequity; therefore, the
principal had to be a powerful bureaucrat with technical skills (Brown, 2005). In this time, dis-
content with the principal position began to rise as principals recognized their tenuous position of
answering to a range of stakeholders, including teachers, parents, students, the superintendent,
local businesses, and the community as a whole (Kavanaugh, 2005). Principals in the 1960s also
had to demonstrate competency as assessment and accountability became a more important
factor in measuring the success of schools (Brown, 2005).
Yet another shift took place in the 1970s as the principal job swung back to its focus on
the human side of education. This principal was known as the humanistic facilitator and was
required to be a people-focused community leader (Kavanaugh, 2005). The growth of social
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 22
problems, such as racial tensions, substance abuse, and teen pregnancy, all pulled the principal’s
attention away from academics and toward addressing social issues. The principal now had to
manage newly federally funded programs that supported students with disabilities and bilingual
education (Brown, 2005). Contract negotiations and policy making became part of the human-
istic principal’s political activism (Brown, 2005). Now acting more like a team player and less
like a boss, the principal of the 1970s worked to develop mutual respect and support for teachers
(Kavanaugh, 2005).
A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Education Reform was published in 1983, reporting
that American schools were lagging and leading to universal agreement that school improvement
was necessary (Kavanaugh, 2005). The principal as instructional leader emerged to address the
issues of performance. The principal of the 1980s was expected to be a visionary, with a mission
for the school and a plan for moving it forward. Top-down reform brought a tightening of edu-
cational standards, stricter professional certification requirements, and increased accountability
(Brown, 2005). As a result, the principal was now required to be a “change agent” who solved
problems, became intimately involved in the teaching and learning process, provided profes-
sional development, and improved student achievement (Kavanaugh, 2005).
In the 1990s, principals began to reach out to the community in a new way (Kavanaugh,
2005). The principal also became a “leader of teachers” when bottom-up reforms began to
empower teachers to initiate change and bring about school improvement (Brown, 2005).
National and state testing created greater levels of accountability, and the principal relied on
partnerships with stakeholder groups to ensure the success of high-needs populations, such as
students living in poverty, students speaking English as a second language, and minority students
(Kavanaugh, 2005). In 1990 the first private school vouchers were issued in Wisconsin, and in
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 23
1991 the first charter school movement began in Minnesota, introducing the era of school choice.
Principals of public schools now had to compete to maintain enrollment and ensure student
achievement in a time of increased accountability (Kavanaugh, 2005).
The position of the principal in the 21st century is now more complex than ever. In this
age of increasing accountability, the principal must continue to wear many hats. Brown (2005)
explained,
In addition to being first-rate instructional leaders, principals are being exhorted to be
highly skilled building managers, outstanding human resource directors, and competent
negotiators. They are expected to be change agents and problem solvers who provide
visionary leadership, moral leadership, and cultural leadership while practicing transfor-
mational leadership, collaborative leadership, servant leadership, and distributive
leadership. (p. 29)
Now a leader of learners, the 21st century principal is called on to be a facilitator of
learning communities to support academic performance of all subgroups (DuFour, Du Four,
Eaker, & Many, 2016). In short, this focus on academic standards, promoting student-centered
curriculum, and providing real-world experiences in school, in addition to the multitude of other
job duties, requires a “superprincipal” in the 21st century (Copland, 2001). As society has
evolved and changed, so have the job duties and responsibilities of the principalship. The
demands on the 21st-century principal are greater than ever, and the need for appropriate prepa-
ration for the job has increased with the complexities of the job.
Preparation for the Principal Position
In light of the challenges facing the 21st-century principal, appropriate preparation is an
important factor in a principal’s success. According to Hernandez et al. (2012), educational
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 24
leadership researchers have noted that the quality of school and district leadership is highly
dependent on the quality of preparation experiences. Although there was no formal preparation
early in the evolution of the principal position, during the mid to early 20th century, formal edu-
cational leadership programs began to be established to train principals (Pannell et al., 2015).
However, research shows that these programs have failed to keep pace with the evolving role of
principal (Butler, 2008; Duncan, Range, & Scherz, 2011; Fleck, 2008; Hernandez et al., 2012;
Lashway, 1999, 2003; Levine, 2005; Lynch, 2012; Miller, 2013; Reed & Kensler, 2010;
Zubnzycki, 2013). The knowledge and skills of the 21st-century principal matter now more than
ever. Today’s principals are charged with leading their schools in a time of unprecedented chal-
lenges, responsibilities, and accountability (Brown, 2005; Service et al., 2016). In the following
sections, the preparation requirements and pathways to the principalship are discussed.
University Preparation Programs
The beginning of the 20th century brought about establishment of formal leadership
programs at colleges and universities for principal preparation (Lashway, 1999). While early
preparation programs focused on management training, the increasing accountability for schools
and complexities of the principalship led to a greater focus on improving leadership programs
(Reames, 2010). By the end of the 20th century, leadership programs became more aligned with
the scientific era and grounded training in research (Lashway, 1999; Pannell et al., 2015). The
21st-century age of accountability created a further shift away from programs that prepared
managers to programs that prepared individuals to lead schools to higher student achievement.
At the same time, state and national organizations have developed professional standards for
administrators in response to growing concerns about principal preparation (Davis & Darling-
Hammond, 2012). In alignment with the standards movement, there have been increased efforts
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 25
to study and revise principal preparation programs to include more hands-on experiences,
thematically integrated curriculum, and closer partnerships with school districts (Davis &
Darling-Hammond, 2012; Pannell et al., 2015).
While there has been some progress toward improving principal preparation programs,
there is still a great deal of criticism about their effectiveness. First and foremost, very little
research has been done regarding the content and effectiveness of principal preparation
programs. In a 2007 study by Hess and Kelly, the researchers lamented this fact. “Almost no
current research systematically documents the content studied in the nation’s principal prepara-
tion programs, the instructional focus, or the readings assigned to students” (p. 4). As a result, it
is difficult to assess accurately the type of education principals are receiving or how this educa-
tion can be improved.
This issue is demonstrated in the fact that university programs often lack consistency in
training techniques, leading to a wide range of experiences in preparation for principals. Absence
of a uniform standard of training can leave principals only partially equipped to deal with the
myriad challenges of the job. Traditional university programs simply require a set of predeter-
mined coursework that leads to administrative licensure or credentialing. These programs have
been criticized for being out of touch with the real issues with which principals must grapple. In
fact, in a 4-year study based on surveys and case studies, Levine (2005) found that “these
programs were far removed from the realities of what principals must know to be successful” (as
cited in Hess & Kelly, 2005, p. 36). Graduates of these programs have provided feedback that
preparation programs are irrelevant and uninspiring (Lashway, 1999).
Another drawback of current principal preparation programs is their faculty. Many
programs rely too heavily on adjunct staff members who lack the expertise to instruct future
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 26
leaders. Other programs tend to use full-time faculty members who lack field experience
(Pannell et al., 2015). On average, only 6% of all education faculty have been principals and 2%
have been superintendents (Levine, 2005). According to Lashway (1999), these programs pay
too little attention to instruction and are often understaffed and isolated from the rest of the aca-
demic community.
In recent years, university programs have evolved to address the issue of ineffective prin-
cipal preparation programs. Successful programs have elements in common, including their
teaching and learning strategies, the nature of their curriculum, the organization of their com-
munities of practice, and the kinds of clinical experiences that they offer (Darling-Hammond,
Meyerson, LaPointe, & Orr, 2010). Some programs have moved toward a cohort model of
administrative preparation, where persons seeking leadership positions complete a predetermined
set of courses and work collaboratively with peers (Olson, 2007). This cohort model allows
future principals to learn from colleagues and provides a support system for those in the
program. The addition of seminars and field experiences has helped leaders to attain success.
Overall, there has been a recent positive shift toward greater emphasis on intensive and inten-
tional preparation, along with a growing consensus about best practices for these programs
(Olson, 2007).
Today’s schools are challenged to attract highly motivated teacher leaders to be trained
for administrative leadership positions. A university leadership preparation program must, there-
fore, appeal to and attract highly qualified candidates with the skills and knowledge to lead at the
site level (Lauder, 2000). University programs should continue to evaluate their programs in
order to provide future leaders with authentic experiences. Opportunities for shadowing success-
ful principals, receiving mentoring, accessing practical experiences, and observing a variety of
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 27
settings are all methods for training principals in meaningful ways (Brown, 2005; Service et al.,
2016). These methods can serve as effective professional development, can build professional
socialization, and can prevent feelings of professional isolation common that are in the
principalship (Matthews & Crow, 2003; Service et al., 2016).
Innovative preparation programs must have a clear vision that drives programmatic deci-
sion making. An intentional process for identifying potential candidates, a well-defined and
aligned research-based curriculum, the opportunity for collaboration with local districts for
shadowing and mentoring, requirements for internships, and a cohort structure are all methods
for creating a more effective program (Davis & Darling-Hammond, 2012; Jackson & Kelley,
2002). If universities are to prepare principals successfully for their challenging roles, they must
evolve their programs to be more practical, meaningful, and aligned to the real requirements and
challenges of the principal position.
Nonuniversity Preparation
In addition to university preparation programs, most states have criteria for candidates to
receive certification. In most cases, a principal must hold a valid teaching credential, earn a
master’s degree from an accredited university, meet experience criteria, and pass required
examinations or complete additional coursework. In some states, candidates can attend state-
approved administrator preparation programs while earning a master’s degree. Upon completion
of any necessary coursework, first-time administrative candidates must then apply for state certi-
fication. Some states allow certification for out-of-state credential holders with at least 3 years of
experience, and other states allow candidates to take a qualifying examination for certification.
During administrator preparation programs, candidates for certification often must complete
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 28
supervised administrative work to ensure that they are prepared for an administrative position
(Teaching Certification.com, 2016).
Principal Recruitment
In addition to ensuring that principals are well trained in their preparation programs, it is
important to ensure that potential leaders are recruited to serve as school administrators. Princi-
pal recruitment is typically done in two ways: teachers are encouraged by site leadership to begin
a principal preparation program or candidates apply from outside of a district for the position.
Effective recruitment and selection are necessary aspects of developing a pool of successful
principal candidates (Normore, 2006). In this section, the current demographics of the
principalship, the potential deterrents for candidates, and strategies for successful recruitment are
discussed.
Principalship Demographics
The Department for Professional Employees published a fact sheet in 2016 that provided
information about education administrators in the United States. The data from this fact sheet
demonstrated a potential administrator shortage across the country. In 2015, 928,000 adminis-
trators served American schools, a 10% decrease from 2010. While the National Center for Edu-
cation Statistics predicted a 3% growth in public school enrollment by 2025-2026, the predicted
growth among school administrators was not expected to keep pace (Sandham, 2001). Sandham
(2001) posited that recruiting qualified principals has become increasingly difficult as the role
has become increasingly complex.
As the role of the principal has evolved, so have the demographics of those who hold the
position. According to a 2016 publication from the Department for Professional Employees, in
2015, 13.4% of education administrators were Black/African American, 9.3% were Hispanic,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 29
and 3.8% were Asian. At 65.7%, the majority of administrators in 2015 were female, which is an
increase of 27% from 1987-1988 data (Hill et al., 2016). While there are more female adminis-
trators, the distribution is not necessarily even across all levels, as males continue to hold most of
the highest positions (Hoff et al., 2006). More public school principals reported having a
master’s degree in 2011-2012 than in 1987-1988, and they reported earning higher salaries, even
when accounting for inflation (Hill et al., 2016).
Diversity in the Principalship
When recruiting principals, it is important to note that the ethnic and gender make-up of
America’s principals has not kept pace with the diversity of schools. Data from the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission identified 419 multiethnic districts in 2002 and 638 in
2008, demonstrating a growth in schools’ multiethnic populations (Kerr, Miller, Kerr, &
Deshommes, 2016). Based on analysis of 267 multiethnic school districts for 2002 and 2008,
Kerr et al. (2016) found that Latinos were underrepresented in all administrative job categories
and non-Latino Whites were most often overrepresented. Latinos have made little progress
toward increasing their representation over time. On average, Blacks were underrepresented
among teachers and administrators and overrepresented among principals and assistant princi-
pals. The study also found that most competition for positions was between minority and nonmi-
nority groups, rather than between Black and Hispanic candidates.
In addition to issues of ethnic diversity among principals, districts must also pay attention
to gender diversity when recruiting administrators. While there are more female administrators in
American schools, the highest positions are still predominantly held by men (Hill et al., 2016;
Hoff et al., 2006). Hoff et al. (2006) suggested that women who aspire to be principals can face
trials and frustrations that can prevent them from becoming successful valued members of a
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 30
leadership team. Lack of mentoring, lack of advocacy, and pressures to maintain work and home
responsibilities are hindering factors in recruiting females into higher levels of administration.
Deterrents to Applying for a Principalship
A wide range of factors deters potential candidates from applying for a principal position.
Lack of benefits, loss of security, increased paperwork, dealing with bureaucracy, and increased
accountability demands are key deterrents that have been identified across multiple studies
(Pijanowski et al., 2009). The nature of the work and working conditions, location and reputation
of the district and superintendent, community support, and district relationships have been rec-
ognized as additional deterrents (Shen & Cooley, 1999).
Despite legislation enacted in the 1970s and 1980s designed to extend equal opportunities
and job opportunities to minorities, systemic issues still exist that deter minority candidates from
the principalship. At the most basic level, racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the
teaching profession, which naturally leads to a smaller pool of candidates for leadership positions
in schools (Coleman & Achilles, 1987). Coleman and Achilles (1987) noted that, most often, it is
talented teachers who are asked to pursue administrative positions, therefore hindering oppor-
tunities for underrepresented teacher groups. Kanter (1977) asserted that management ranks are
often filled by those who fit the cultural norm. In 1992, the U.S. Department of Educational
Resource Manual cited lack of peer acceptance, subtle and overt acts of racism, challenges to
authority, limits placed on decision-making responsibilities, higher performance-level require-
ments, lack of mentorship, and lack of advocates and role models as barriers faced by minorities
when pursuing leadership roles in school systems (Long, 2005).
These findings are significant as research has demonstrated that there are benefits to
placing minority principals in multiethnic schools. Most significantly, achievement by minority
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 31
students rises with the presence of a minority principal (Sanchez, Thornton, & Usinger, 2008).
However, Sanchez et al. (2008) cautioned that overplacement of minority principals in minority
schools could potentially reestablish patterns of segregation.
Females face additional deterrents when seeking principal positions. The need for nur-
turing was a factor for potential female candidates and women have identified male gatekeepers
as the key to their transition into administration, as males hold most of the highest administrative
positions in schools. In addition, women have expressed a need for others to invest in their
success in a principal position. Notably, while females more often share doubts about their abili-
ties, they typically have had more preparation, including more years in the classroom, more
advanced degrees, and more low-level administrative experience than their male counterparts
(Kruse & Krumm, 2016). In a 2006 study, Hoff et al. found that 76% of females reported that
they were either lucky that a position had opened for which they could apply or they were
encouraged into their first administrative position. Only 16% of women reported planning a
career path that included administration, and 62% of the study’s respondents indicated that they
had delayed their decision to move into administration in order to complete a credentialing
program, gain more years of experience, or meet the needs of family. More often, women put
extensive effort into improving their knowledge, skills, and credibility to be worthy of consider-
ation for an administrative position; however, the unique needs of women in a male-dominated
hierarchy still serve as deterrents to advancement.
Hoff et al. (2006) reported a perception held by many women that they have more diffi-
culty in acculturating and gaining acceptance in an organization when holding a leadership posi-
tion. Lack of mentoring was reported as an impediment to success. Of the respondents, 78%
reported that they were not assigned a mentor when starting their leadership position, and those
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 32
who had a mentor said that the mentor focused on the “nuts and bolts” of the job and did not help
them to understand the politics and culture of the district. Networking emerged as another deter-
rent, with 97% of the women reporting that there was no formal network to support female
leaders and 40% reporting that there was no network at all.
Being able to recognize themselves as cultural insiders or outsiders affected women’s
perceptions of themselves in leadership. Women with more experience and competency were
more likely to label themselves as insiders. Consciously taking on more male-like traits, such as
decisiveness, toughness, and lack of emotion, helped females to feel that they had acclimated to
their roles more quickly (Brinia, 2012; Hoff et al., 2006).
Many women note that lack of advocacy for leadership roles can be a deterrent from the
principalship (Cubillo & Brown, 2003; Hoff et al., 2006). While women have expressed the need
for advocacy, they have also expressed difficulty of advocating for other women. In fact, 79% of
women have reported feeling that they needed to be in a secure position themselves before they
could advocate for another woman, and 57% reported that a man had helped them to learn the
political and cultural nature of the position. Some women even reported that women in positions
of power tended to be exclusionary rather than supportive (Hoff et al., 2006).
Historically, advancement has been impeded due to the unique pressures that women face
in balancing work and home responsibilities. The newer the position for a woman, the more she
has reported struggling to maintain a balance. In fact, in the Hoff et al. (2006) study, 68% of
respondents reported struggling with balancing home and work duties effectively and 68%
reported difficulty in maintaining relationships outside of work due to long hours and increased
responsibilities (Hoff et al., 2006). These issues were exacerbated for women who had taken
time away from their jobs and then struggled to re-enter the field (Brinia, 2012; Hoff et al.,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 33
2006). Most likely due to the hours, the smallest pool of women have taken on the role of high
school principal. According to Hoff et al. (2006), 92% of survey participants agreed that one
must sit in the seat of the high school principal in order to advance to the district office or
become superintendent. The lack of women in the high school principal role may thus be a deter-
rent for advancement to the district office.
The principal position continues to grow in complexity with increasing challenges, which
can be a deterrent in recruiting high-quality candidates. The barriers are greater for females and
minorities. These barriers have been demonstrated both across the nation and internationally;
they can be corrected if acknowledged and addressed in the recruitment process (Brinia, 2012;
Cubillo & Brown, 2003, Hoff et al., 2006; Kruse & Krumm, 2016). Strategies for addressing
deterrents to the principalship and attracting highly qualified candidates are explored in the fol-
lowing section.
Strategies for Recruiting Principal Candidates
In order to fill principal positions with highly qualified and well-prepared candidates,
districts can employ a variety of strategies to attract and recruit administrators. These strategies
are reviewed in this section.
Identification of potential internal candidates is one strategy that district leadership can
employ to build administrative teams. Superintendents can recognize teachers with leadership
qualities or those who hold an administrative credential and provide opportunities to develop
skills and experience to move into administration when a position becomes available (Normore,
2006; Pijanowski et al., 2009). Pijanowski et al. (2009) recommended hiring less-experienced
candidates who are not near retirement. These candidates may require additional preparation but
could be trained and have the longevity in the position that is currently lacking with older, more
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 34
experienced candidates. As often as possible, candidates should be identified early in their career
and mentored into leadership (Normore, 2006). Districts should intentionally seek female and
minority candidates and encourage them to apply for positions. Normore (2006) recommended
that women utilize a more transformational leadership style than men, which is needed in
districts. Academic success for minority students is also positively influenced by the presence of
a minority administrator (Sanchez et al., 2008). In this way, districts can benefit from seeking
and recruiting underrepresented candidates.
Maintaining a positive relationship with colleges and universities can be a method used
by districts to recruit potential candidates. Educational institutions can find high-quality candi-
dates through these partnerships (Pijanowski et al., 2009). University undergraduates who show
commitment and interest in leadership can be provided shadowing opportunities. When possible,
districts should consider financially investing in candidates through housing subsidies, salary
incentives, and even targeting potential candidates outside of their geographical location
(Normore, 2006).
Districts can increase their chances of recruiting highly qualified candidates through
some very practical changes. Lowe, Kroeck, and Sivasubramaniam (1996) recommended an
effective interview process in which candidates are asked situational questions about transfor-
mational experiences. They also suggested providing lower level leaders with training in inter-
personal skills, team building, and intellectual stimulation, in addition to the technical expertise.
Training that utilizes situational and interactive exercises to develop transformational skills was
advised (Lowe et al., 1996). On the most practical level, Pijanowski et al. (2009) stated that
reducing paperwork for principals can help to make the position more attractive.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 35
When districts concentrate their efforts on recruiting and attracting high-quality candi-
dates, there is a greater chance of their schools being led by successful principals. Ensuring that
the principal job is manageable, recruiting younger candidates with leadership potential, inten-
tionally seeking more inexperienced candidates, and providing ample opportunities for training
and leadership practice are all methods that districts can use to attract qualified candidates.
Districts should be aware of the unique challenges faced by underrepresented groups and strive
to mitigate these challenges. This is especially important if districts intend to retain quality
leaders in administrative positions. Strategies for principal retention are discussed in the next
section.
Principal Retention
The principal position is now more challenging than ever. With ever-increasing account-
ability and job expectations, districts face the possibility of a shrinking applicant pool and attri-
tion of sitting principals. As a result, it is important to examine why principals are leaving the
position and what strategies districts can employ to retain highly qualified leaders.
Challenges to Retention
In order to understand how to retain effective principals, it is important to understand
why many people are leaving the position. Gajda and Militello (2008) called the principal job a
“revolving door” and stated that the position in its current form is “nearly untenable” (p. 14).
D. Fink and Brayman (2006) posited that current principals have been stripped of autonomy and
are frustrated. They contended that this has led to “an increasingly rapid turnover of school
leaders and an insufficient pool of capable, qualified, and prepared replacements” (pp. 62-63).
Thompson, Blackmore, Sachs, and Tregenza (2003) made it clear that this high turnover of prin-
cipals has less to do with retirement and more to do with job factors.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 36
Three primary reasons for principal attrition are evident across local and national studies
(Gajda & Militello, 2008; Thompson et al., 2003). In a 2008 study by Gajda and Militello, 30%
of principals surveyed were planning to leave their positions and listed reasons that aligned with
those reported in other studies. First and foremost, the position of the principal is stressful; 21%
of respondents listed this is the primary reason for leaving the position. Job stressors include long
hours at night and on weekends, dealing with conflicting demands, and being pulled from one
activity to another at a rapid pace (Thompson et al., 2003).
The second reason listed by Gajda and Militello (2008) was low salary. In that study,
13% of respondents stated that they were leaving the position because the salary was low relative
to the responsibilities of the position. This has a profound impact on the stability of the job, as
the higher the salary, the more likely a principal will remain in the position (Baker et al., 2010).
Fuller, Hollingworth, and Young (2015) found that salary ranked 14 out of 25 in priority for
principals in small and mid-sized urban districts. This presents a problem for rural districts and
lower-level building administrators. The study found that major urban districts had the highest
salaries across all school levels, mid-size urban districts paid the second highest salaries, fol-
lowed by suburban districts, with districts located in towns and rural areas offering the lowest
salaries. High school principals tend to be paid the highest salary and elementary principals make
the smallest amount (Fuller et al., 2015). Overall, the most powerful impact on principal reten-
tion has been demonstrated to be the principals’ relative salary (Baker et al., 2010). Thus, salary
incentives are an especially important tool in retaining principals, particularly in rural and small
urban districts (Fuller et al., 2015; Whitaker & Vogel, 2005). Finally, 12% of respondents in the
Gajda and Militello (2008) study stated that they were leaving because the job was too complex
and time demanding. Not only do today’s principals have to manage their facilities; they are also
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 37
expected to be first-rate instructional leaders and excellent human resource directors (Brown,
2005).
As demonstrated in a historical analysis of the job, principals have accumulated roles
over time that include being change agents and problem solvers, visionary leaders, moral leaders,
cultural leaders, transformational leaders, collaborative facilitators, servant leaders, and distribu-
tive leaders, all while adeptly managing the politics of a wide range of stakeholder groups,
including the superintendent, district management, the board of education, staff, students,
parents, local businesses, and community members (Brown, 2005; Copland, 2001; Kavanaugh,
2005). With all of these other duties, it is not surprising that 11% of the principals in the Gajda
and Militello (2008) study who left the position within 5 years blamed too little time to spend on
instruction as their primary reason for leaving. This dynamic creates tension for the principal,
who is also expected to be the “lead learner” at the school site (Fullan, 2014). Time was also
named as a problem for principals. Principals from elementary to secondary schools listed
required meetings and paperwork as interfering with other job duties (Fuller et al., 2015).
In this age of accountability, the pressures of testing and other accountability measures
have led to even greater demands on the principal, particularly in urban and underperforming
districts (Fuller et al., 2015). In the Gajda and Militello (2008) study, 6% cited the pressures of
high-stakes testing as the reason for leaving. Thompson et al. (2003) pointed out that principals
are held accountable for test scores without having the power to hire and fire teachers and
without support from the central office.
Strategies for Retaining Principals
With the myriad challenges, pressures, and time constraints that principals face, it is not
surprising that districts struggle to recruit and retain high-quality principals. In order to address
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 38
these issues, research offers several suggestions that can be employed to keep quality adminis-
trators. A study by Bickelhaupt, Guffey, Helmich-Raasch, and Marsden (2010) demonstrated
that one important method for retaining principals is to reform the job duties of the position.
While this could necessitate support from state policies and leaders, intentionally reducing the
number of hours and workload required of the position can help principals to stay in their posi-
tions. The study addressed the issues of salary that affect retention by recommending that states
offer incentives and better compensation to principals. Restructuring retirement incentives and
making the position comparable to similar corporate positions could help, as well. Simple incen-
tives such as the central office recognizing the good work of the principal could increase reten-
tion. Paying dues for professional organizations and providing release time and funding for
conferences and workshops can help administrators to expand their networks and grow profes-
sionally (Bickelhaupt et al., 2010).
Districts can work with local organizations to ensure that aspiring administrators are
trained before taking on the principal position. Improving university credentialing programs to
create more authentic and connected experiences can assist with later retention. Districts can
create their own leadership academies to assist with administrator growth and guidance (Whita-
ker, 2003). For instance, the state of Ohio has created an entry-year leadership academy to
provide principals mentoring and support for portfolio development (Lashway, 2003).
Most important, adding support for principals in the form of coaching, mentoring, and
professional development can support retention efforts. The more support principals receive from
the beginning, the more likely they are to stay and be successful. Learning Innovations at
WestEd (2001) recommended offering training in authentic situations and problem-based
learning for issues that principals face on the job. Whitaker (2003) explained that “formal and
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 39
informal mentoring programs” are critical for new principals (p. 49). According to Rebore
(2004), mentoring entails pairing a knowledgeable educator with one who is new to the profes-
sion in order to supply the mentee with assistance and confidence. Most principal mentoring
programs pair a new administrator with an experienced administrator to provide various levels of
support dependent on the needs of the new principal. For example, in Santa Cruz, mentoring
coaches are taught to encourage beginning principals. The pairs meet regularly to discuss his-
torical situations and helpful approaches to the unique trials and struggles of the position
(Bloom, 2004). Bloom (2004) suggested that one-on-one mentoring helps principals to build
emotional intelligence required to be successful, and Hertting and Phenis-Bourke (2007) stated
that mentoring can help new administrators to establish networks and understand the social
dynamics of the position. Some maintain that a good mentoring program in a district can help to
address deficiencies found in ineffective university preparation programs (Bickelhaupt et al.,
2010).
Mentees are not the only ones to benefit from an effective mentor program. Experienced
administrators can benefit from reflection and time spent in discussing education with a newer
administrator. Senge (1990) explained that discussions can be meaningful to uncover and share
individual beliefs and ideas. Fullan (2001) commented, “This means that the organization must
frame the giving and receiving of knowledge as a responsibility and must reinforce such sharing
through incentives and opportunities to engage in it” (p. 86). In this way, districts must take
responsibility for facilitating the growth of both their new and veteran administrators, and a
mentoring program is an effective tool to accomplish this.
Induction programs are another method for retaining principals, and many people agree
that pairing induction programs with mentoring programs is the most beneficial way to support
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 40
administrators. According to Rebore (2004), “Induction is the process designed to acquaint
newly employed individuals with the community, the school district, and with their colleagues”
(p. 149). Induction programs are created to assist administrators with the shift into a new posi-
tion, a new organization, and a new network of professionals. Like mentoring, induction
programs are also advantageous to the veteran administrators who serve as mentors.
Most induction programs have a set of basic objectives that they are designed to meet in
the training of new employees. Rebore (2004) suggested common objectives for these introduc-
tion courses:
1. To make the employee feel welcome and secure.
2. To help the employee become a member of the “team.”
3. To inspire the employee towards excellence in performance.
4. To help the employee adjust to the work environment.
5. To provide information about the community, school system, school building, faculty,
and students.
6. To acquaint the individual with other employees with whom he or she will be associ-
ated.
7. To facilitate the opening of the school year. (pp. 149-150)
Induction programs can help new administrators to navigate these areas with help and
support so they can avoid the pitfalls that are common to a new position without support. Pairing
an effective induction program with mentoring helps to guarantee that a new administrator
receives intentional guidance from the beginning, with ongoing support as he/she grows in the
position. Employing some of these methods to train, prepare, and support principals in their
positions can help districts to recruit and retain high-quality candidates.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 41
Leadership Frameworks
In order to understand the challenges facing today’s principals and the best methods that
districts can use to prepare, recruit, and retain high-quality candidates, three leadership frame-
works were used in this study.
Four Leadership Frames
A principal’s success is often dependent on his/her ability to lead. Bolman and Deal’s
(2013) four frames of leadership styles is a useful framework for analyzing the principal posi-
tion. Bolman and Deal proposed four frames, or lenses, through which leaders should look at
challenges in an organization: structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. Any or all of
these frames can be used at any time, based on the needs of the organization. Bolman and Deal
emphasized that leaders should avoid the temptation to get “stuck” by viewing and acting
through one lens alone. Because no one frame works for every situation, a leader who is com-
fortable working in only one frame is bound eventually to become ineffective. Therefore, leaders
must determine the best frame or frames in each situation by asking the right questions and diag-
nosing the vital issues.
The first frame provided by Bolman and Deal (2013) is the structural frame. This frame is
task oriented and focuses on the obvious “how” of change. The frame concentrates on strategy,
setting measurable goals, clarifying tasks/responsibilities/reporting lines, agreeing to metrics and
deadlines, and creating systems and procedures.
The second leadership frame offered by Bolman and Deal (2013) is the human resource
frame. While the structural frame focuses on tasks, the human resource frame emphasizes the
needs of people. In this frame, people are given the power and opportunity to perform their jobs
well. The need for human contact, personal growth, and job satisfaction is prioritized.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 42
In the political frame, the problem of conflicting or hidden agendas of individuals and
interest groups is addressed. These issues are typically exacerbated in times when budgets are
limited and the organization must make difficult choices. In this frame, the concepts of coalition
building, conflict resolution, and power base building are used to support a leader’s initiatives
(Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Bolman and Deal (2013) proposed the symbolic frame to address people’s need for a
sense of purpose and meaning in their work. The frame focuses on inspiring people by making
the organization’s vision and direction significant and distinctive. The symbolic frame includes
developing a motivating vision and recognizing good performance through company celebra-
tions.
Bolman and Deal’s (2013) frames are useful for understanding leadership and for helping
principals to understand how to lead by engaging in and moving between frames in support of
their organization. Knowledge of Bolman and Deal’s frames helped to shape the findings of this
study.
School Leadership That Works
In an attempt to address the question of how school leadership influences student
achievement, School Leadership That Works by Marzano et al. (2005) work was used as part of
the theoretical framework in this study. Marzano et al. conducted a meta-analysis of 70 studies
that examined the effects of leadership and that had quantitative student achievement data
measured by standardized, norm-referenced tests or another form of objective achievement
measurement. These 70 studies included 2,894 schools, 1.1 million students, and 14,000
teachers. The researchers found a .25 strength of correlation between instructional leadership and
student achievement. The study also demonstrated that increased leadership leads to increased
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 43
student achievement. As principals improved their abilities in 21 identified areas by exactly one
standard deviation, student achievement also increased. Overall, the authors noted 66 leadership
practices embedded in 21 leadership responsibilities, each with a statistically significant relation-
ship to student achievement. They found the responsibilities with the highest correlation to be
situational awareness (.33), intellectual stimulation (.32), change agent (.30), and input (.30).
Regarding situational awareness, effective school leaders can solve problems, foresee and
avoid issues, and work with dissatisfied staff members. Situational awareness means that the
leader can read situations and predict outcomes in order to intervene appropriately to prevent
potential issues. Intellectual stimulation describes a school leader who ensures that the staff is up
to date with current theories and pedagogy regarding effective schooling and keeps these ideas as
part of the regular conversations with faculty. Leaders with intellectual stimulation understand
the importance of developing their own depth of knowledge, building learning into the regular
practices of the school, and bringing systematic learning opportunities to the organization. A
change agent is defined as a leader who challenges the status quo. This leader is even willing to
upset the equilibrium and culture of a school temporarily in order to bring about growth and
change. A change agent will lead initiatives with uncertain outcomes, consider new ways of
doing things, and seek to improve the school’s competency. Input in leadership occurs when the
leader involves staff members in decision making. This leader works to include teachers in all
aspects of the school’s function and works toward building consensus and communicating prior-
ities. Building and using an effective leadership team is also part of this frame and helps to build
collective efficacy (Marzano et al., 2005).
The purpose of the study by Marzano et al. (2005) was to help leaders to understand the
magnitude of the changes that they are trying to lead, the predictable reactions to the changes,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 44
and how to tailor their leadership practices so that attempted changes will have the intended
impact on student achievement. These leadership practices are a useful framework in which to
understand the principal position and evaluate the findings of this study.
The Principal: Three Keys to Maximizing Impact
The third theoretical framework that was used in this study was Fullan’s (2014) The
Principal: Three Keys to Maximizing Impact. Fullan (2014) argued that “no one has sufficiently
clarified the new role of the principal and given principals the detailed attention required in order
to enable schools to thrive under new conditions” (p. 8). Fullan (2014) shared that 75% of prin-
cipals report that their job has become too complicated and is, therefore, dissatisfying. He out-
lined four policy strategies designed to “drive” a school system and ultimately bring about
necessary changes: capacity building, collaborative effort, pedagogy, and systemness. He
asserted that these four “right drivers” help systems to move away from the wrong drivers, which
often include accountability, individualistic solutions, technology, and fragmented strategies.
Instead, the correct drivers serve as the guiding force for the organization and will transform the
work of the principal into something that is energizing, productive, and instructionally effective.
This framework provides three key roles that an administrator must play in order to
employ the right drivers. These key roles should simplify the role of the principal, make the
administrative work less fragmented, and yield widespread results (Fullan, 2014).
The first key role that a principal must play is that of the lead learner. Instead of devel-
oping individual teachers, the principal leads teachers in the process of improving their own
learning. Lead learner principals protect their teachers from too many initiatives and ensure that
the basics of management are in place so that change can occur. This type of leader knows how
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 45
to invest in both human and social capital and uses decisional capital to help teachers interact in
a way that produces deeper and wider results (Fullan 2014).
The second key role that a principal must play is system player. Fullan (2014) defined
system players as leaders who look outside of their own system and understand the larger
system. The principal both contributes to and benefits from increased performance of other
schools in the system. By doing this, a system player can increase learning in a school, align
internal and external resources, and use networks with other schools to share ideas.
According to Fullan (2014), the third role for a principal is that of change agent. A
change agent is a leader who acts quickly and decisively, is open to feedback, and is willing to
disturb the status quo enough to get the desired outcome. This skill must be developed, and prin-
cipals must hone their individual competencies to find success in this area. Fullan discussed
Kirtman’s (2013) seven aspects of a competent leader and asserted that these skills can develop
both a principal’s personal and organizational capacity. By developing capacity, principals can
serve as change agents for their schools and for the system as a whole (Fullan, 2014). Fullan’s
(2014) key leadership roles serve as a useful framework for understanding and analyzing the
results of this study.
Chapter Summary
This chapter reviewed the literature relevant to the study, including the history of the
principal position and how schools and districts can take steps to recruit, train, and retain high-
quality leaders for the position of principal. In Chapter 3, the methodology used to address the
research questions is presented.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 46
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine perceptions about the preparation,
recruitment, and retention of K–12 school principals in California. Fullan (2014) stated that,
while the most significant direct influence on student achievement is the teacher, the second
most critical influence is the principal. With this in mind, it is important to identify the prepara-
tion and support that principals must have to meet the challenges and complexities of the 21st-
century principalship, as well as the support and retention efforts that districts must use to keep
principals in this critical role. Chapter 2 was a review of the current literature directly related to
preparation, recruitment, and retention. Chapter 3 describes the study’s research questions,
research design and methods, sample and population, access and entry, instrumentations, data
collection, data analysis, and ethical considerations.
Research Questions Restated
This study was designed to address the following research questions:
1. How have training programs and professional experiences prepared principals to
manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?
2. What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human
resources administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful principal
candidates?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?
Research Design
Research Team
The research team for this study was comprised of 12 doctoral students from the Univer-
sity of Southern California (USC), with Dr. Michael Escalante as the lead researcher and
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 47
supervisor of the study. A committee of USC staff and other mentors supported the team
throughout the study. The team met on a bi-monthly basis to establish research questions, present
relevant literature, determine conceptual frameworks, and receive guidance. Because the
research was conducted with a thematic group approach, there were commonalities and similari-
ties among dissertations.
Qualitative and Quantitative Research
This study took a qualitative approach to address the research questions. Quantitative
surveys were used to identify interview candidates and support and understand the qualitative
data. This study was primarily qualitative; however quantitative survey data, with a mixed
sampling design, were also collected (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). The research group
intended to develop a better understanding of the principals’ preparation, recruitment, and
retention through the lens of the study participants. Quantitative data were incorporated through
survey instruments that supported the study’s themes. The combination of quantitative data and
qualitative themes assisted the research team to address the research questions from a qualitative
perspective, with the support of quantitative data (Creswell & Creswell, 2017).
Qualitative data, in the form of interviews, were collected by the research team from
principals and district office personnel of California K–12 school districts (Creswell & Creswell,
2017). Interview data provided a look into thoughts, beliefs, knowledge, and motivations
regarding the preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K–12 principals. Interviews
provided additional evidence to contribute to the findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2017).
Quantitative data, in the form of responses to surveys containing Likert-type scale items,
were collected from California K–12 principals and district personnel (A. Fink, 2015). The
surveys were designed to provoke general thoughts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 48
of California K–12 principals and district office personnel regarding the preparation, recruitment,
and retention of principals. Surveys were administered through the Qualtrics™ service.
The qualitative and quantitative findings were triangulated by the research team to access
information regarding principal preparation, recruitment, and retention (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). Both qualitative interview and quantitative survey data were analyzed for themes to
address the research questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). This triangulation of interview and
survey data of K–12 principals and district office personnel was intended to increase the validity
of the study (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The research team decided that the
qualitative approach of this study would provide a comprehensive understanding of the research
questions (Creswell & Creswell, 2017).
Population and Sample
Purposive sampling, an appropriate method for qualitative research (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), was used in this study. The purpose of the study was to examine the
preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K–12 principals. Although a sampling of the
entire population of California K–12 principals and district office personnel would have provided
the most accurate findings, time and financial constraints limited the researchers to collecting
from a sample of that population (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). According to Merriam and
Tisdell (2016), “In purposeful sampling the researcher selects participants based on what the
researcher wants to discover, understand, and gain insight from, so the sample is based on the
sources that will furnish the most information” (p. 96). Purposeful sampling strategies were used
to select study participants (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Using a mixed sampling design, the study incorporated qualitative and quantitative ele-
ments from individuals in the same population (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). In order to
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 49
maintain the confidentiality of individual participants and participating school districts, the
research team assigned pseudonyms for both. The potential number of K–12 principals and
district office personnel constituted a limited population. The research group expected the
number of completed surveys to represent a sufficient group to generalize findings (Johnson &
Christensen, 2008).
Access and Entry
In order to conduct this study, the research group received approval from the USC
Internal Review Board (IRB). The IRB ensures that a study will be done ethically and that the
study participants are informed about their rights, have sufficient knowledge to decide whether
or not to participate, know that they are able to withdraw from the study, know that the study
presents no unnecessary risks, and know that the benefits of the study outweigh any risks
(Glesne, 2011).
To gain access to individuals for collection of quantitative data, the research team
requested permission from ACSA to gather data from their constituents (Bogdan & Biklen,
2007). Additional participants were identified based on relationships with the researchers in
order to maximize responses to surveys and interview requests.
Instrumentation
The research team developed four survey protocols and four interview protocols to
conduct this mixed-methods study. The protocols were developed by the research team based on
the study’s three research questions. The research team used these qualitative and quantitative
instruments to collect data to understand the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K–12
principals in California. The use of both types of instruments provided a thorough and meaning-
ful approach to addressing the research questions. Participants were contacted via an invitation
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 50
letter and provided informed consent prior to participating in the study (Appendices A and B).
All research instruments and recruitment correspondence were submitted to the USC IRB for
approval in spring 2019 (IRB #APP-19-00787).
Quantitative instrumentation. The research group used surveys as instruments to
collect quantitative data (A. Fink, 2015). Members of the research team worked collaboratively
to create the survey protocols for principals, human resource administrators, supervisors of prin-
cipals, and superintendents (Appendices C through F). The surveys were designed with 4-point
Likert-type scale items that were designed to gain the perceptions of K–12 principals and district
office personnel. A 4-point scale required survey participants to either agree or disagree, rather
than take a neutral stance. Survey responses will be given numerical values (4 = Strongly Agree,
3 - Agree, 2 = Disagree, 1 = Strongly Disagree). An option with a numerical value of 0 was also
included to represent Don’t Know. The surveys were tested and modified to ensure that they
would lead to the information necessary to address the research questions (A. Fink, 2015). Data
collected via these quantitative instruments were analyzed and connected to the qualitative
research data.
Qualitative instrumentation. The purpose of qualitative interviews is to gain in-depth
information from the sample to address the research questions. Members of the research team
worked collaboratively to create the interview protocols for principals, district office human
resource administrators, supervisors of principals, and superintendents (Appendices G through
J). The interview protocols were developed to gather insight, information, and perceptions
related to the research questions. The protocols were semistructured to give the research team
freedom to ask probing questions for richer narratives, deeper insights, and clarification of
responses.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 51
A qualitative interview matrix was used to collect data from qualitative interviews (John-
son & Christensen, 2008; Maxwell, 2013). The interview matrix helped to standardize the open-
ended interview with each participant (Patton, 2002). The qualitative interview matrix for each
sample group was developed by the research group to focus and guide the interviews (Patton,
2002). The research group asked probing questions to develop a participant’s answers. The use
of an open-ended interview guide reduced variations of interviews within the research group
(Patton, 2002). This semistructured approach allowed the research team the flexibility to alter
questions in order to establish a relaxed and trusting atmosphere. Qualitative interview data were
triangulated with quantitative data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data Collection
Data for this study were collected from California K–12 school districts during spring
and summer 2019. The research group used Qualtrics, a web-based survey tool available to all
doctoral candidates at USC, to capture quantitative survey data. After collecting all data, the
research group analyzed quantitative data and identified trends in responses to survey items
(Kurpius & Stafford, 2005). The team then conducted face-to-face interviews and administered
surveys at sites.
Qualitative interviews were conducted at times and locations most convenient for the
participants (Weiss, 1994). Participants completed a consent form that described the study’s
purpose and confidentiality (Appendix B). Following granting of permission by the interview
participants, an audio recording device was used to capture the data (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). In
addition, the research group collected descriptive and reflective field notes during interviews
(Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Interviews lasted 20 to 60 minutes, with only one interview per
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 52
participant. After the interviews were completed, the research group had the audio recordings
transcribed (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Weiss, 1994).
Survey and interview questions were organized to provide consistency and alignment to
research questions. Section I of both the survey and interview protocols aligned to Research
Question 1, Section II of both protocols aligned with Research Question 2, and Section III of
both protocols aligned with Research Question 2 (Appendix K).
Data Analysis
Once the quantitative and qualitative data were collected, the research team used the fol-
lowing protocol to interpret the findings. The team followed Creswell and Creswell’s (2017)
model for data analysis and interpretation of qualitative and quantitative research. Each research
team member used data gathered from his or her assigned school district, as well as pooled data
from the research team.
The research team first transcribed interview recordings and field notes, identifying
emerging categories while the information was fresh. The research team then labeled and coded
the information using ATLAS.ti software, identifying themes to create meaning. When coding,
the research team followed Creswell and Creswell’s (2017) steps for facilitating the coding
process, including listing topics and common themes, establishing codes to identify the data,
consolidating similar categories, analyzing data, and recoding data as necessary.
Validity, Credibility, and Trustworthiness
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) asserted that validity is the degree to which a study accu-
rately reflects the specific concept that the researcher is attempting to measure, whereas credibil-
ity indicates the researcher’s conclusions supported by the research findings. Patton (2002) stated
that trustworthiness is the evidence of both validity and credibility. The research team checked
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 53
with participants to confirm accuracy of the data to maintain the validity, credibility and trust-
worthiness of the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). The research team acknowledged the
potential for bias and committed to minimizing the impact of bias on study validity. To increase
the validity of findings, triangulation of data was used.
Reliability
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), reliability is the extent to which research
findings can be replicated and the results are consistent with the collected data. To increase study
reliability, Creswell and Creswell (2017) suggested that researchers (a) analyze transcripts to
ensure that they were accurately transcribed, (b) analyze identified codes to ensure uniformity
and consistent definitions, (c) communicate effectively with research team members to document
and share analysis of data, and (d) cross-check codes developed by other research team members
for accuracy. Following this protocol ensured the reliability of the study.
Ethical Considerations
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) noted that ethical dilemmas are likely during qualitative data
collection and analysis. They added that researchers are responsible for protecting the privacy
and rights of study participants. The research team, led by Dr. Michael Escalante, completed the
IRB process, including required completion of the Collaborative IRB Training Initiative (CITI).
Each team member completed online learning modules that addressed ethical considerations
associated with completing research. Furthermore, every study participant was presented an
informed consent statement that stated the purpose of the study and participants’ rights (Appen-
dix B). The research team was committed to protecting the anonymity of participants.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 54
Chapter Summary
This chapter presented the methodology that was used throughout the study and a
description of the research design, research team, population and sample, and the instrumentation
to be used to collect data. The chapter described data collection procedures, methods of analysis
of data, and the study’s ethical considerations.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 55
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
Principals hold one of the most challenging and important positions in the American
school system. Principals provide direction for their schools, build efficacy, shape instructional
focus, and ensure the overall function of their organizations (Marzano et al., 2005). In addition,
they manage both classified and certificated staff members, build culture, and monitor their
facilities while consistently working to improve student achievement (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Next to classroom teachers, the principal is the most influential role in student success in a
school (Fullan, 2014). With so much responsibility, it is important that principals be adequately
prepared for the position and supported while on the job. It is equally important for districts to
hire and retain the most qualified people to lead their schools. This study examined the prepara-
tion, recruitment, and retention of California K–12 school principals. The study was designed to
identify the preparation and supports that principals must have to meet the challenges and com-
plexities of the principalship, as well as the support and efforts that districts must make to retain
principals in this vital role.
This chapter reports the results of data collected and analyzed for the study. The study
was guided by three research questions:
1. How have training programs and professional experiences prepared principals to
manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?
2. What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human
resources administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful Principal
candidates?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 56
Each research question was addressed through a review of the literature and triangulation
of collected data. The researcher used surveys and interviews to gather quantitative and qualita-
tive data. To focus the analysis of the study data and establish themes from the survey and inter-
view data, three theoretical frameworks were utilized: (a) Bolman and Deal’s (2013) four frames
of organizational leadership, (b) Fullan’s (2014) The Principal, and (c) the 21 leadership respon-
sibilities from School Leadership That Works by Marzano et al. (2005). These theoretical
frameworks contributed to a deeper analysis of the data and the current findings in relationship to
prior research. Literature that was reviewed in Chapter 2 supports the findings in this study.
Themes emerged for each research question and were triangulated with the study’s literature
review and theoretical frameworks.
This chapter begins with an overview of the study’s design and participants. Next, a dis-
cussion of the findings related to each research question is presented, focusing on emerging
themes, the connection of the themes to the literature, and an analysis of the supporting data from
surveys and interviews. The chapter concludes with a summary of key findings related to the
research questions.
Research Design
This study was conducted by a research team led by Dr. Michael Escalante. The team
began to meet in September of 2018 to develop research questions and data collection protocols.
The team worked to establish connections in southern California schools and to organize the
process for data collection. The study utilized qualitative interviews in three school districts, as
well as quantitative survey data collected to support identified themes.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 57
Study Participants
Qualitative Interview Participants
The interview participants in this study were leaders in three southern California school
districts. The researcher conducted qualitative interviews and data were collected from 15 par-
ticipants in three school districts, including nine principals, three assistant superintendents of
human resources, and three superintendents. A brief summary of each school district follows.
District A is a high-performing suburban school district with a student enrollment of
about 10,000. District A is a K–12 district with six elementary schools, two middle schools, and
one high school.
District B is a small suburban elementary school district comprised of seven elementary
schools and three middle schools. District B serves approximately 6,300 students and is known
for academic excellence.
District C is a large suburban school district that serves 53,120 students and prides itself
on its diversity. District C has 50 schools, including 29 elementary schools, seven intermediate
schools, one middle school, eight high schools, three academy schools, one adult school, and one
school for students with exceptional needs. District C has 35 Distinguished Schools and 11 Gold
Ribbon Schools.
Quantitative Survey Participants
The researcher worked with a team of 12 researchers to gather quantitative survey data
from principals, supervisors of principals, human resources administrators, and superintendents
in southern California. The survey questions were developed by the team. The team distributed
the survey to members of 37 school districts. Of the 854 surveys distributed, the research group
received 186 responses, for a response rate of 21.78%. Within that total, 115 of 708 principals
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 58
(16.25%) responded, 28 of 68 supervisors of principals (41.18%) and 22 of 41 human resources
administrators (53.66%) responded, and 21 of 37 superintendents (56.76%) responded.
Table 1 provides a summary of the demographic data for survey respondents. Most of the
surveyed principals (68.07%) held a master’s degree. All but one reported having served as a
principal more than 10 years, with some serving for more than 30 years.
Findings for Research Question 1
In order to understand how people are prepared for the principal position, Research
Question 1 asked, “How have training programs and professional experiences prepared princi-
pals to manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?” The aim of this question
was to understand the process that educators must follow to attain a principal position and to
evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. The researcher used literature, surveys, and inter-
views to understand the participants’ preparation process and to determine whether the partici-
pants were well prepared for this school leadership position. The following themes emerged
related to principal training programs: (a) On-the-job experience was more effective than
university-based training programs, (b) mentors prepare educators for the role of the
principalship, and (c) informal networking is an important element in preparing for the
principalship.
Principal Candidates Need on-the-Job Training
The first theme related to preparation was that current training programs do not ade-
quately prepare candidates for the principalship and that on-the-job training is necessary.
Although educational leadership researchers have noted that the quality of school and district
leadership is highly dependent on the quality of their preparation experiences (Hernandez et al.,
2012), research has also shown that formal leadership programs have failed to keep pace with
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 59
Table 1

Demographics of Quantitative Survey Participants

Characteristic and category %

Gender
Male 41.2
Female 58.8

Ethnicity
Asian 4.0
Black 7.2
Latina/o 20.8
Native American 0.8
Pacific Islander 1.6
White 58.4
Multiple 3.2
Other 1.6
Declined to state 2.4

Age (years)
31–40 15.13
41–50 55.46
51–60 26.05
61+ 3.36

Highest university degree earned
Doctor of Education (EdD) 30.25
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 0.84
Master’s 68.07
Bachelor’s 0.84

Year in education profession
1–10 0.84
11–20 36.97
21–30 48.74
> 30 13.45

Years as principal
< 2 14.29
3–5 35.29
6–10 24.37
11–15 15.97
> 16 10.08

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 60
the evolving role of principal (Butler, 2008; Duncan et al., 2011; Fleck, 2008; Hernandez et al.,
2012; Lashway, 1999, 2003; Levine, 2005; Lynch, 2012; Miller, 2013; Reed & Kinsler, 2010;
Zubnzycki, 2013).
In order to attain a principal position, educators are required to complete university-based
coursework to earn a credential. In a 4-year study based on surveys and case studies, Levine
(2005) found that “these programs were far removed from the realities of what principals must
know to be successful” (as cited in Hess & Kelly, 2005, p. 36). Graduates of these programs
provided feedback that preparation programs were irrelevant and uninspiring (Lashway, 1999).
The results of the Levine study showed that not only were training programs inadequate, but the
missing piece for success was an on-the-job training component. In the current study, all 17
interview participants reported that on-the-job training was far more effective than university
programs. Fifteen participants at all levels of K–12 administration shared the clear theme that on-
the-job experience was the best preparation for the principalship. According to Principal 3 from
District B,
it’s very similar to teaching programs, where they tell you what it’s going to be like but
until you get in there you have no idea what it’s going to be like. It is so similar to my
experience as an administrator. There is a lot to be said about theory, but once you are
actually on the job, you run into a multitude of situations that just weren’t taught in my
credentialing program. They don’t teach you about master schedule and the contract. I
mean the theory was nice for discussions, but for real experience on the job, I would say
that the program was not helpful. (interview, August 29, 2019)
The same theme was revealed by Principal C1, who said, “Not much made sense until I
actually became an administrator. I mean there were a lot of leadership and managerial concepts,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 61
but none of it made sense until I actually became an admin” (interview, August 14, 2019). While
the principals acknowledged the benefit of learning theory, they consistently stated that there was
little connection between what they learned in class and what they experienced on the job.
For some administrators in this study, having the opportunity to serve as an interim prin-
cipal, intern, or designee provided the on-the-job experience that they had missed in their prepa-
ration programs. Principal B1 stated that experience as an administrative designee was far more
helpful than university coursework:
My role as the administrative designee taught so much. I was able to fulfill this role while
still teaching and it gave me a whole new perspective. From procedures, to a different
lens on instruction it really helped me develop a big picture approach. (interview Sep-
tember 9, 2019)
The superintendents and human resources administrators agreed that on-the-job experi-
ence is more effective than university-based programs. The superintendent from District A
reiterated what Principals A1, A3, and B2 had stated:
On-the-job training is so important when it comes to the principalship. University-based
programs are grounded in theory, but you don’t get the everyday experiences of being an
administrator. These on-the-job training experiences promote exponential growth and
learning about the school, the district, and the everyday work of a site administrator.
(interview, September 13, 2019)
Superintendent A shared his personal experience:
I can barely remember the courses I took in my credentialing program. I don’t think they
really prepared me at all for the work I would eventually do. I think having that hands-on
training is far more beneficial to potential principals. (interview, September 13, 2019)
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 62
The District C Human Resource Administrator echoed that on-the-job training was a
leading indicator of principal success: “From my observations the most effective training a prin-
cipal can have is on-the-job training” (interview, September 12, 2019). The administrator shared
that successful principals learned the job from leadership positions as teacher, teacher on special
assignment, or assistant principal. Human Resource Administrator C noted:
Coupled with that on-the-job training, it makes such a difference when administrator or
potential administrators have a mentor to help them through tough things like budget,
leadership, discipline issues. I have seen these coaching opportunities really pay off with
potential principals. (interview, September 12, 2019)
On-the-job experience was a common theme throughout the interviews with all who had
served as a principal at some point in their careers. The ideas presented in qualitative interviews
by Principal A2, Superintendent B, and Human Resource Administrator B were validated by the
quantitative survey data. Responses from the survey indicated that 77% of principals strongly
agreed or agreed with the statement, “My prior work experience was more important than my
university training experience in preparing me for my position as a principal.” Among human
resource administrators and supervisors of principals, 90.91% strongly agreed or agreed with the
statement, “Prior work experience was more important than university training experience in pre-
paring principals for their current positions.” Similarly, 99.19% of the superintendents surveyed
strongly agreed or agreed with the same statement. All survey data confirmed the finding that
on-the-job training was more effective than university training in preparing people for the
principalship.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 63
The Importance of Mentorship
While on-the-job training emerged as a necessary component for a successful principal,
the theme of mentorship emerged as another method to support principals. In fact, the review of
the literature, as well as survey responses and interviews, consistently showed that, particularly
for new principals, “formal and informal mentoring programs” are critical (Whitaker, 2003,
p. 49). According to Rebore (2004), mentoring entails matching a knowledgeable educator with
one who is new to the profession to supply the mentee with assistance and confidence in his or
her abilities. Most principal mentoring programs pair a new administrator with an experienced
administrator to provide various levels of support that are dependent on the needs of the new
principal. For example, in Santa Cruz, mentoring coaching pairs meet regularly to discuss his-
torical situations and helpful approaches to the unique trials and struggles of the position
(Bloom, 2004). Bloom (2004) suggested that one-on-one mentoring helps principals to build
emotional intelligence that is needed for success, and Hertting and Phenis-Bourke (2007) stated
that mentoring can help new administrators to establish networks and understand the social
dynamics of the position. This idea of mentorship fits nicely with Bolman and Deal’s (2013) use
of four frames when leading organizations. Specifically, under the human resource frame, the
individual’s need for human contact, personal growth, and job satisfaction is supported (Bolman
& Deal, 2013). Some even maintain that a good mentoring program within a district can help to
address the deficiencies of ineffective university preparation programs (Bickelhaupt et al., 2010).
Mentees are not the only ones who benefit from an effective mentor program. Experi-
enced principals can benefit from the reflection and the time spent in discussing education with a
new administrator. Senge (1999) explained that discussions can be meaningful to identify and
share individual beliefs and ideas. Fullan (2001) expounded on this: “This means that the
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 64
organization must frame the giving and receiving of knowledge as a responsibility and must rein-
force such sharing through incentives and opportunities to engage in it” (p. 86). Districts must
take responsibility for facilitating the growth of both their new and veteran administrators, and a
mentoring program is an effective tool to accomplish this.
In the interviews with principals, mentorship had played a crucial role in the decision to
become a principal and the preparation of the process to become a principal. Principal B1 shared
that his mentor had provided support in preparing him for the principalship.
She was so supportive in the development of my skills. She helped me with outlining the
workload, how to have difficult conversations, and being visible as an administrator. She
taught me how to stay out in front of issues that have really helped me be successful in
my job. (interview, September 9, 2019)
Principal B2 also benefited from a mentor relationship. Principal B2 shared that, before
becoming a principal, “I felt like I could really talk to my mentor . . . be open and honest about
things I wouldn’t normally share with others. . . . I absolutely loved the feedback and advice I
would get” (interview, September 1, 2019). Superintendent A offered an additional point of
view, sharing that mentoring by the district office staff was important in preparing educators for
the principalship. “For all of us that are in support roles in the district office, it is so important
that we use our experiences that we’ve had in our various roles so we can not only support each
other, but really those folks aspiring to be principals” (interview, September 13, 2019). The
theme of mentors supporting preparation of aspiring principals continued during interviews with
Principals A3, B3, C1, C2, and C3, as well as Human Resources Administration A and Superin-
tendent C.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 65
These administrators agreed concerning the critical role of mentoring in the preparation
and development of principals. In the survey responses, 99.13% of the principals strongly agreed
or agreed with the statement, “Having mentors was instrumental in preparing me for my position
as a principal.” Supporting this finding, 94.36% of supervisors of principals, human resource
administrators, and superintendents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “Having a
mentor was important in preparing my principals for their current positions.” These responses are
summarized in Table 2.
Informal Networking
Similarly to mentoring, aspiring principals’ ability to build and informal network is fun-
damental to preparing for the position of principal. In the interviews, principals and district office
administrators agreed that informal networks of support, such as professional colleagues, were
important in preparing principals for the position, which directly aligns to Bolman and Deal’s
(2013) human resource frame, addressing informal networks of support and how they address the
need for human contact, personal growth, and job satisfaction. In the survey responses, 99.13%
of principals and all superintendents and human resource administrators agreed or strongly
agreed with the statement, “Informal networks of support (such as professional colleagues) were
important in preparing me for my position as a principal.” Results are summarized in Table 3.
Qualitative interview data supported the survey data. During interviews, informal net-
works emerged as a theme that informal networks helped prepare people for the principalship.
Principals described information networks as a support structure during recruitment and during
tenure. Principal B1 shared:
I have been so lucky to have had the opportunity to build strong relationships with people
at the DO [district office]. They have always been supportive and really helped me get
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 66

Table 2

Mentoring Survey Data

Agree or
Respondent group and item Strongly Agree

Principals (n = 115)

Having mentors was instrumental in preparing me for my position as a principal. 99.13%
Having a mentor was an important factor in being recruited in my current position
as a principal. 77.40%
Having a mentor provided me with processes/strategies that currently support my
success in retaining my position as a principal. 92.17%
_____

Supervisors (n = 28)

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their current positions. 92.86%
Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions in my district. 77.58%
Having mentor provides principals with processes/strategies that support their
success in retaining their current positions. 96.43%

_____

Human resource administrators (n = 22)

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their current positions. 95.46%
Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions in my district. 90.91%
Having mentor provides principals with processes/strategies that support their success
in retaining their current positions. 95.45%

_____

Superintendents (n = 21)

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their current positions. 95.24%
Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions in my district. 80.95%
Having mentor provides principals with processes/strategies that support their success
in retaining their current positions. 100.00%

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 67
Table 3

Responses Indicating That Informal Networks of Support Prepared Principals

Response category Principal IS HRA Supt

Strongly Agree 86 19 16 12
Agree 28 8 6 9
Disagree 0 0 0 0
Strongly Disagree 0 0 0 0
Don’t Know 1 1 0 0

Note. Survey item = “Informal networks of support (such as professional colleagues) were
important in preparing me for my position as a principal.” IS = Immediate Supervisor of Princi-
pals, HRA = Human Resources Administrator, Supt = Superintendent.

prepared for what was to come as a principal. (interview, August 13, 2019)
Principal A1 highlighted the importance of informal networking with other principals
during the process of preparing for the position of principal, as well as continuing support:
Having been in some site teacher leader positions, I was able to build relationships with
principals and really pick their brains about the position. These relationships have really
helped me during very challenging situations and I rely on them heavily. I’m actually not
sure what I would do without this kind of support. (interview, August 11, 2019)
Principal B2, speaking of informal networks, said, “My principal friends are my biggest
fans. We get each other and how difficult this role can be. We are constantly supporting one
another so it makes all the challenges seem a little easier” (interview, September 1, 2019). The
principals who were interviewed agreed that informal networking and the support that they
provide had assisted them in preparing them for the principalship.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 68
Summary Discussion for Research Question 1
The participants clearly indicated that the principal position is complex, faces many
challenges, and requires aspiring principals to be prepared for the position. Findings pointed to
three major themes related to the preparation of principals. First, the importance of on-the-job
training was consistently considered the most effective preparation in becoming a principal.
Second, mentorship plays a vital role in preparing educators for the principal position, and
having a mentor at the district level enhances preparation for the principalship. Third, the
candidate’s ability to build an informal network, specifically with other principals, significantly
improves preparation and serves as a continuing support structure for principals. Table 4 reports
the survey responses from principals aligned to Research Question 1, Table 5 reports those
responses from superintendents, Table 6 reports those responses from human resource adminis-
trators, and Table 7 reports those responses from immediate supervisors of principals.
Findings for Research Question 2
In order to understand the recruitment process of principals, Research Question 2 asked,
“What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human resources
administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful Principal candi-
dates?” Effective recruitment and selection are necessary aspects of growing the pool of success-
ful principal candidates (Normore, 2006). Considering the impact of principals on student
achievement, it is essential for districts to hire principals with the skill sets of an effective leader
(Marzano et al., 2005). Therefore, the purpose of this question was to obtain feedback at every
level of a school district to identify recruitment techniques that work and those that do not.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 69
Table 4
Principals’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was More Valuable Than Univer-
sity Training Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University programs provided training and experience that were
important in preparing me for the position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 13.91 21.43
Agree 66.96 64.29
Disagree 13.04 7.14
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 6.09 7.14

My prior work experience was more important than my university
training experience in preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 47.83 42.86
Agree 29.57 28.57
Disagree 16.52 21.43
Strongly Disagree 0.87 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 5.22 7.14

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) was important in
preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 16.65 35.71
Agree 18.26 21.43
Disagree 29.57 21.43
Strongly Disagree 7.83 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 28.70 14.29

Nonuniversity training programs (such as The ACSA Principal Academy)
were important in preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 12.71 14.29
Agree 26.96 42.86
Disagree 18.26 14.29
Strongly Disagree 2.61 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 40.00 28.57

Holding certification and/or licensure from organizations (such as USC
or ACSA) was important in preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 8.07 21.43
Agree 28.70 21.43
Disagree 33.04 35.71
Strongly Disagree 5.22 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 24.35 14.29
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 70
Table 4 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having mentors was instrumental in preparing me for my position
as a principal.
Strongly Agree 77.39 71.43
Agree 21.74 28.57
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.87 0.00

A professional network of support (such as CALSA, NASSP, NAESP,
ACSA, or through a university) was important in preparing me for my
position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 13.91 21.43
Agree 41.74 35.71
Disagree 27.83 28.57
Strongly Disagree 3.84 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 13.04 14.29

Informal networks of support (such as professional colleagues) were
important in preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 74.78 78.57
Agree 24.35 21.43
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.87 0.00

Networks with university professors were important in preparing me
for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 8.70 14.29
Agree 45.22 57.14
Disagree 27.83 21.43
Strongly Disagree 6.96 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 11.30 0.00

Planning my career was important in preparing me for my position
as a principal.
Strongly Agree 10.43 21.43
Agree 54.78 57.14
Disagree 23.48 14.29
Strongly Disagree 3.48 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.83 7.14

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 71
Table 4 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

My university training program provided intentional supports or
resources to prepare me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 13.04 21.43
Agree 48.70 42.86
Disagree 24.35 21.43
Strongly Disagree 5.22 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 8.70 14.29

Having experience as a teacher leader was a crucial element in preparing
me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 73.91 64.29
Agree 24.35 35.71
Disagree 1.74 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Having experience as an assistant principal was a crucial element in
preparing me for my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 73.91 71.43
Agree 9.57 0.00
Disagree 1.74 7.14
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 14.78 21.43

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy, ASCA = Association of Cali-
fornia School Administrators, USC = University of Southern California, CALSA = California
Association of Latino School Administrators, NASSP = National Association of Secondary
School Principals, NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 72
Table 5

Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was More Valuable Than
University Training Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University programs provided training and experience that are important
in preparing principals for their positions.
Strongly Agree 9.52 0.00
Agree 76.19 100.00
Disagree 9.52 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Prior work experience was more important than university training
experience in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 61.09 100.00
Agree 38.10 0.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) was important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 33.33 0.00
Disagree 42.86 100.00
Strongly 19.05 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., The ACSA Principal Academy)
were important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 4.76 0.00
Agree 57.14 100.00
Disagree 28.57 0.00
Strongly Disagree 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Holding certification and/or licensure from organizations (such as USC or
ACSA) was important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 14.29 0.00
Agree 38.10 100.00
Disagree 33.33 0.00
Strongly Disagree 9.52 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 73
Table 5 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their
current positions.
Strongly Agree 52.38 0.00
Agree 42.86 100.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

A professional network of support (e.g., NASSP, ACSA, or a university)
was important in preparing my principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 23.81 0.00
Agree 42.86 100.00
Disagree 28.57 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Informal networks (e.g., professional colleagues) were important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 57.14 0.00
Agree 42.86 100.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Having experience as a teacher leader was crucial for preparing principals
for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 80.95 100.00
Agree 14.29 0.00
Disagree 4.76 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 74
Table 5 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having experience as an assistant principal was crucial for preparing
principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 61.09 100.00
Agree 28.57 0.00
Disagree 4.76 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy, ASCA = Association of Cali-
fornia School Administrators, USC = University of Southern California, CALSA = California
Association of Latino School Administrators, NASSP = National Association of Secondary
School Principals, NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 75
Table 6

Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was More
Valuable Than University Training Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University programs provided training and experience that are important
in preparing principals for their positions.
Strongly Agree 13.64 0.00
Agree 72.73 100.00
Disagree 9.09 0.00
Strongly Disagree 4.55 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Prior work experience was more important than university training
experience in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 50.00 50.00
Agree 40.91 50.00
Disagree 9.09 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) was important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 27.27 0.00
Agree 45.45 50.00
Disagree 9.09 50.00
Strongly 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 18.18 0.00

Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., The ACSA Principal Academy)
were important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 27.27 0.00
Agree 45.45 100.00
Disagree 9.09 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 18.18 0.00

Holding certification and/or licensure from organizations (such as USC or
ACSA) was important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 9.09 0.00
Agree 68.18 50.00
Disagree 9.09 0.00
Strongly Disagree 4.55 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 9.09 50.00
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 76
Table 6 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their
current positions.
Strongly Agree 81.82 50.00
Agree 13.64 50.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

A professional network of support (e.g., NASSP, ACSA, or a university)
was important in preparing my principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 23.73 50.00
Agree 63.64 50.00
Disagree 9.09 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Informal networks (e.g., professional colleagues) were important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 57.14 50.00
Agree 42.86 50.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Having experience as a teacher leader was crucial for preparing
principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 73.73 50.00
Agree 22.73 0.00
Disagree 4.55 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 77
Table 6 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having experience as an assistant principal was crucial for preparing
principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 73.73 100.00
Agree 27.27 0.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy, ASCA = Association of Cali-
fornia School Administrators, USC = University of Southern California, CALSA = California
Association of Latino School Administrators, NASSP = National Association of Secondary
School Principals, NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 78
Table 7

Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That on-the-Job Experience Was
More Valuable Than University Training Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University programs provided training and experience that are important
in preparing principals for their positions.
Strongly Agree 10.71 12.50
Agree 67.86 50.00
Disagree 10.71 12.50
Strongly Disagree 7.14 12.50
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

Prior work experience was more important than university training
experience in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 50.00 12.50
Agree 32.14 50.00
Disagree 10.71 12.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 12.50
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 12.50

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) was important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 27.27 0.00
Agree 45.45 12.50
Disagree 9.09 62.50
Strongly 0.00 12.50
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 18.18 12.50

Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., The ACSA Principal Academy)
were important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 27.27 0.00
Agree 45.45 12.50
Disagree 9.09 25.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 18.18 62.50

Holding certification and/or licensure from organizations (such as USC
or ACSA) was important in preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 46.43 25.00
Disagree 28.57 37.50
Strongly Disagree 3.57 12.50
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 21.43 25.00
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 79
Table 7 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having a mentor was important in preparing my principals for their
current positions.
Strongly Agree 67.86 50.00
Agree 25.00 37.50
Disagree 3.57 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

A professional network of support (e.g., NASSP, ACSA, or a university)
was important in preparing my principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 57.14 50.00
Disagree 32.14 12.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 10.71 37.50

Informal networks (e.g., professional colleagues) were important in
preparing principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 67.86 75.00
Agree 28.57 12.50
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

Having experience as a teacher leader was crucial for preparing principals
for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 75.00 62.50
Agree 21.43 25.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 80
Table 7 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having experience as an assistant principal was crucial for preparing
principals for their current positions.
Strongly Agree 71.43 87.50
Agree 14.29 0.00
Disagree 7.14 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 12.50

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy, ASCA = Association of Cali-
fornia School Administrators, USC = University of Southern California, CALSA = California
Association of Latino School Administrators, NASSP = National Association of Secondary
School Principals, NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals.

Results related to this research question indicated the following findings: (a) Prior experi-
ence and teacher leadership are successful strategies to assist aspiring principals in the recruit-
ment process, and (b) mentors are instrumental in the recruitment process.
Prior Experience
Based on a review of the literature, the interviews, and survey responses, prior experience
in education was the most important factor for developing and retaining successful principals.
Coleman and Achilles (1987) noted that talented teachers are most often asked to pursue admin-
istrative positions.
Teacher leadership opportunities give many aspiring principals the opportunity to gain
administrative experience. Among the human resource administrators who were interviewed,
prior experience was a highly desired quality. Human Resource Administrator B1 stated:
I think that the strongest candidates have had prior administrative experience coming into
the interview process. . . . You really can’t replicate on the job experience. Those that
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 81
have this experience are typically your stronger candidates. They know the work. They
have lived the work. They can use their past administrative experiences to present a much
more complex response to an interview question. (interview, August 13, 2019)
Administrative experiences as an assistant principal are rare, specifically in the elemen-
tary school setting. Because of this, aspiring principals tend to find on-the-job work experience
through teacher leadership opportunities. Principal A1 was committed to being involved with
anything and everything:
I was constantly looking for leadership opportunities, anything from being the department
chair, to serving on leadership committees, I wanted to learn and grow as much as I could
so I could speak from a leadership lens when I became a principal. So I sought out com-
mittees, lots of them. Those committees really helped me prepare. (interview, August 11,
2019)
Principal C2 also utilized teacher leader opportunities on campus. Principal C2 became
the administrative designee when the administrators were not on campus. Principal C2 recalled:
My opportunities to be an administrative designee really gave me the on-the-job experi-
ence that helped me understand the role of administration. The opportunity to build rela-
tionships across the school site and district really helped me as I stepped into the
principal’s role. (interview, August 30, 2019)
Principal A1 used her teacher leadership learning experiences while on the job. She
shared, “I was afforded the opportunity to sit in as the administrator on Imps, a member of the
School Site Council, Bell Schedule Committee Chair, Professional Development Coordinator,
and performed a myriad of administrative tasks to learn the job” (interview, August 11, 2019).
Principal C3 highlighted that her experience came through careful listening and observing:
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 82
I really kept my eyes and ears open. I knew that I would eventually be a principal, I really
watched my principal with that lens. I noticed the challenges and the ways she lead the
school. I learned so much by being present and engaged in the big picture. (interview,
September 13, 2019)
The theme of teachers using leadership experiences to support them in the recruitment
process was present in the interviews with the Human Resources Administrators and principal.
Quantitative survey data supported the theme of teacher leadership, as 97.39% of the principals
strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “My previous experience in education was an
important factor in being recruited in my current position as a principal.” To deepen support for
this finding, 92.85% of supervisors of principals, 100% of human resource administrators, and
100% of superintendents strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “Candidates’ previous
experience in education is an important factor in recruiting for principal positions in my district.”
Mentoring
As with the preparation for the principalship, mentoring emerged as a theme and strategy
for principal candidates during the recruitment process. In Bolman and Deal’s (2013) four frames
of leading organizations, mentoring directly correlates to the human resources frame by
addressing the need for human contact, personal growth, and job satisfaction. Moreover, building
and maintaining relationships with mentors provide opportunities for candidates to obtain
support in preparing for the position and in the recruitment process. Survey data from this study
supported the theme of mentoring playing a critical role during the recruitment process.
Principal B3 pointed out that his mentor had prepared him for the position during the
application process:
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 83
He was so supportive that he even sent me his resume, cover letter, letter of interest, and
really took the time to look at mine once I had a draft. I can remember really getting
hammered during his mach interviews he conducted. The most helpful part of that was
when he gave me the critical feedback on how to expand my answers. I truly believe he
was the reason I got my first job. I was so prepared. (interview, September 15, 2019)
Principal A1 described the support that he felt from his mentor in his preparation for a
principal position:
Just when I thought I was prepared for an interview, I was able to receive the most
critical feedback from my mentor. It really gave me an opportunity to be reflective and
really answer questions from the lens of the principal. We really covered all aspects of
the process and he kept me really succinct in my responses. (interview, August 11, 2019)
Principal A2 offered insight on the support that she received from her mentor:
When I didn’t get the first two positions I applied for, it was my mentor who really kept
me grounded and hungry for the principalship. We talked a lot about fit and how
important it is to be at the right school and the right district. He really helped me under-
stand the process and things to look for. (interview, August 9, 2019)
These opportunities for aspiring principals to develop as potential candidates with their
mentors made a significant difference in the recruitment process. The importance of mentorship
was supported as a theme in the survey data. According to the survey, 77.40% of the principals
strongly agreed or agreed with the statement, “Having a mentor was an important factor in being
recruited in my current position as a principal.” Also, 78.57% of the supervisors of principals,
90.9% of the human resource administrators and 80.95% of the superintendents strongly agreed
or agreed with the statement, “Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 84
positions in my district.” These results, coupled with the review of the literature, supported the
emerging theme of mentorship as having a significant impact on recruitment of principals.
Table 8 reports survey responses from superintendents aligned to Research Question 2,
Table 9 reports responses from human resource administrators, Table 10 reports responses from
immediate supervisors of principals, and Table 11 reports those responses from principals.
Summary Discussion for Research Question 2
The principal position continues to grow in complexity with increasing challenges, which
can be a deterrent to recruiting high-quality candidates. These barriers have been demonstrated
both across this nation and internationally and can be corrected if they are acknowledged and
addressed in the recruitment process (Brinier, 2012; Cabrillo & Brown, 2003, Hoff et al., 2006;
Kruse & Krum, 2016). Data from this study indicated that recruiting educators with prior experi-
ence and the ability to build positive relationships with mentors exerted a significant impact on
successful recruitment of principal candidates.
Findings for Research Question 3
In order to understand the retention of principals, Research Question 3 asked, “What are
the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?” With the myriad challenges,
pressures, and time constraints that principals face, it is not surprising that districts struggle to
recruit and retain high-quality principals.
Across local and national studies, three primary reasons for principal attrition are clear
(Blackmore et al., 2003; Gaudi & Militello, 2008; Thompson et al., 2003). In a 2008 study by
Gaudi and Militello, 30% of principals surveyed were planning to leave their positions and listed
reasons that aligned with those reported in other studies. First and foremost, the position of the
principal is quite stressful; 21% of respondents listed this as the primary reason for leaving the
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 85
Table 8

Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the Principalship and
Recruiting From Within Are More Beneficial Than University Preparation Programs (Percent-
ages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

District resources and recruitment strategies help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 9.52 0.00
Agree 76.19 100.00
Disagree 14.29 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

University principal preparation programs help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 19.05 0.00
Disagree 61.09 100.00
Strongly Disagree 9.52 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 9.52 0.00

The salary and benefits offered are important factors in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 19.05 0.00
Agree 66.67 100.00
Disagree 9.52 0.00
Strongly 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Candidates’ previous experience in education is an important factor
in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 66.67 0.00
Agree 28.57 100.00
Disagree 4.76 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 86
Table 8 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Candidates’ previous experience outside of education is an important
factor in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 33.33 100.00
Disagree 42.86 0.00
Strongly Disagree 19.05 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

The reputation of my school district is an important factor in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 47.62 0.00
Agree 52.38 100.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

A candidate’s level of level of understanding of district initiatives and
goals were important factors in being recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 38.10 0.00
Agree 47.62 0.00
Disagree 14.29 100.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Networking with district personnel helps candidates get recruited into
principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 9.52 0.00
Agree 61.09 100.00
Disagree 23.81 0.00
Strongly Disagree 4.67 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 28.57 0.00
Agree 52.38 100.00
Disagree 9.52 0.00
Strongly Disagree 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 87
Table 8 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Being an employee of my school district helps candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 14.29 0.00
Agree 71.43 0.00
Disagree 14.29 100.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Candidates’ participation in professional organizations helps candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 33.33 0.00
Disagree 57.14 100.00
Strongly Disagree 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.76 0.00

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) helps candidates get
recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 4.76 0.00
Agree 23.81 0.00
Disagree 66.67 100.00
Strongly Disagree 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Having instructional leadership experience is an important factor
in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 66.67 100.00
Agree 33.33 0.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 88
Table 9

Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the
Principalship and Recruiting From Within Are More Beneficial Than University Preparation
Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

District resources and recruitment strategies help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 31.82 25.00
Agree 63.64 25.00
Disagree 4.55 37.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

University principal preparation programs help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 50.00 37.50
Disagree 45.45 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 12.50

Nontraditional principal preparation programs help candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 59.09 12.50
Disagree 18.18 25.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 18.18 62.50

The nonmonetary incentives offered by my district are important
factors in candidates applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 22.73 0.00
Agree 45.45 62.50
Disagree 13.64 25.00
Strongly Disagree 9.09 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 9.09 12.50

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 89
Table 9 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

The salary and benefits offered are important factors in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 19.05 25.00
Agree 66.67 62.50
Disagree 9.52 0.00
Strongly 4.76 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

Candidates’ previous experience in education is an important factor
in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 77.27 62.50
Agree 22.73 12.50
Disagree 0.00 12.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

Candidates’ previous experience outside of education is an important
factor in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 9.09 12.50
Agree 31.82 12.50
Disagree 40.91 50.00
Strongly Disagree 9.09 12.50
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 9.09 12.50

The reputation of my school district is an important factor in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 50.00 50.00
Agree 50.00 12.50
Disagree 0.00 25.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

A candidate’s level of level of understanding of district initiatives and
goals were important factors in being recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 27.27 37.50
Agree 61.18 25.00
Disagree 4.55 25.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 90
Table 9 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Networking with district personnel helps candidates get recruited into
principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 31.82 62.50
Agree 63.64 12.50
Disagree 4.55 12.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 50.00 37.50
Agree 40.91 12.50
Disagree 4.55 25.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 25.00

Being an employee of my school district helps candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 31.82 37.50
Agree 68.18 37.50
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 25.00

Candidates’ participation in professional organizations helps candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 54.55 37.50
Disagree 31.82 37.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 9.09 25.00

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) helps candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 25.00
Agree 54.55 25.00
Disagree 45.45 37.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 12.50

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 91
Table 9 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having instructional leadership experience is an important factor in
recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 63.64 62.50
Agree 36.36 12.50
Disagree 0.00 12.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 92
Table 10

Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the
Principalship and Recruiting From Within Are More Beneficial Than University Preparation
Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

District resources and recruitment strategies help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 28.57 50.00
Agree 53.57 50.00
Disagree 14.29 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

University principal preparation programs help candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 3.57 0.00
Agree 46.43 0.00
Disagree 35.71 100.00
Strongly Disagree 3.57 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 10.71 0.00

Nontraditional principal preparation programs help candidates get
recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 3.57 0.00
Agree 35.71 0.00
Disagree 17.86 100.00
Strongly Disagree 7.14 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 35.71 0.00

The nonmonetary incentives offered by my district are important factors
in candidates applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 64.29 100.00
Disagree 21.43 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 14.29 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 93
Table 10 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

The salary and benefits offered are important factors in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 17.86 50.00
Agree 75.00 50.00
Disagree 3.57 0.00
Strongly 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

Candidates’ previous experience in education is an important factor in
recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 57.14 50.00
Agree 35.71 50.00
Disagree 3.57 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

Candidates’ previous experience outside of education is an important
factor in recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 7,14 0.00
Agree 7.14 50.00
Disagree 75.00 50.00
Strongly Disagree 7.14 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

The reputation of my school district is an important factor in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 46.43 0.00
Agree 46.86 100.00
Disagree 7.14 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

A candidate’s level of level of understanding of district initiatives and
goals were important factors in being recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 39.29 50.00
Agree 46.43 50.00
Disagree 10.71 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 94
Table 10 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Networking with district personnel helps candidates get recruited into
principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 38.29 50.00
Agree 42.86 50.00
Disagree 10.71 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 0.00

Having a mentor helps candidates get recruited into principal positions
in my district.
Strongly Agree 39.29 50.00
Agree 39.29 50.00
Disagree 10.71 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 10.71 0.00

Being an employee of my school district helps candidates get recruited
into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 50.00 50.00
Agree 35.71 50.00
Disagree 7.14 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 0.00

Candidates’ participation in professional organizations helps candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 0.00 0.00
Agree 50.00 100.00
Disagree 35.71 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 14.29 0.00

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) helps candidates
get recruited into principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 14.29 0.00
Agree 25.00 50.00
Disagree 46.43 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 14.29 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 95
Table 10 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having instructional leadership experience is an important factor in
recruiting for principal positions in my district.
Strongly Agree 75.00 50.00
Agree 17.36 50.00
Disagree 3.57 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 96
Table 11

Principals’ Responses Indicating That Building Pipelines to the Principalship and Recruiting
From Within Are More Beneficial Than University Preparation Programs (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

As an aspiring principal, district resources and programs were important
in being recruited into my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 24.35 28.57
Agree 49.57 42.86
Disagree 14.78 28.57
Strongly Disagree 4.35 00.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 6.96 0.00

My university principal preparation program was an important factor
in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 4.35 0.00
Agree 36.52 50.00
Disagree 34.78 42.86
Strongly Disagree 8.70 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 16.65 7.14

My nonuniversity principal preparation program was an important
factor in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 16.65 21.43
Agree 31.30 35.71
Disagree 13.04 28.57
Strongly Disagree 3.84 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 36.52 14.29

The nonmonetary incentives offered by my district were important factors
in applying for the principal position in my district.
Strongly Agree 8.70 21.43
Agree 31.30 28.57
Disagree 30.43 35.71
Strongly Disagree 10.43 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 19.13 7.14

The salary and benefits offered by my district were important factors
in applying for the principal position in my district.
Strongly Agree 10.43 7.14
Agree 44.35 50.00
Disagree 33.91 35.71
Strongly 6.96 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.35 7.14
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 97
Table 11 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

My previous experience in education was an important factor in being
recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 73.04 78.57
Agree 24.35 21.43
Disagree 0.87 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.87 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.87 0.00

My previous experience outside of education was an important factor
in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 10.43 28.57
Agree 20.00 7.14
Disagree 38.26 50.00
Strongly Disagree 8.70 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 22.61 14.29

The reputation of my school district was an important factor in applying
for the principal position in my district.
Strongly Agree 37.39 21.43
Agree 36.52 57.14
Disagree 18.26 14.29
Strongly Disagree 2.61 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 5.22 7.14

My level of understanding of district initiatives and goals was an important
factor in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 41.74 28.57
Agree 43.48 57.14
Disagree 11.30 7.14
Strongly Disagree 0.87 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 2.61 7.14

As an in-district candidate, networking with district personnel was an
important factor in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 40.87 50.00
Agree 29.57 14.29
Disagree 5.22 14.29
Strongly Disagree 0.87 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 23.48 41.43

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 98
Table 11 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

As an out-of-district candidate, networking with district personnel was
an important factor in being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 6.09 0.00
Agree 20.87 21.43
Disagree 15.65 21.43
Strongly Disagree 2.61 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 54.78 57.14

Having a mentor was an important factor in being recruited in my
current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 48.70 35.71
Agree 28.70 50.00
Disagree 12.17 7.14
Strongly Disagree 2.61 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.83 7.14

Being an employee of my school district was an important factor in
being recruited in my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 49.96 50.00
Agree 24.35 28.57
Disagree 6.09 7.14
Strongly Disagree 1.74 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 20.87 14.29

My participation in professional organizations was an important
factor in being recruited into my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 7.83 28.57
Agree 23.48 21.43
Disagree 35.65 35.71
Strongly Disagree 13.04 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 20.00 14.29

Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.) was an important
factor in being recruited into my current position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 15.65 28.57
Agree 15.65 7.14
Disagree 27.83 21.43
Strongly Disagree 12.17 14.29
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 28.70 28.57

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 99
Table 11 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having instructional leadership experience was an important factor
in being recruited into my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 65.22 78.57
Agree 32.17 21.43
Disagree 1.74 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.87 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Note. Ed.D. = Doctor of Education, Ph.D. = Doctor of Philosophy.

position. Job stressors can include long hours at night and on weekends, dealing with conflicting
demands, and being pulled from one activity to another at a rapid pace (Thompson et al., 2003).
The second reason reported by Gaudi and Militello (2008) was low salary. In that study,
13% of respondents stated that they were leaving the position because the salary was low relative
to the responsibilities of the position. This has a profound impact on stability of the position, as
the higher the salary, the more likely a principal will remain in the position (Baker et al., 2010).
Fuller et al. (2015) found that salary ranked 14th out of 25 factors for principals in small and
mid-sized urban districts.
Twelve percent of the respondents in the Gaudi and Militello (2008) study stated that
they were leaving because the job was too complex and time demanding. Not only do today’s
principals have to manage their facilities; they are also expected to be first-rate instructional
leaders and excellent human resource directors (Brown, 2005). As demonstrated in a historical
analysis of the job, principals have accumulated roles over time. Thus, it is not surprising that
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 100
11% of the principals who left the position within 5 years in the Gaudi and Militello (2008) study
cited too little time to spend on instruction as their primary reason for leaving. This dynamic
creates tension for the principal, who is also expected to be the “lead learner” at the school site
(Fullan, 2014). Principals from both elementary and secondary schools listed required meetings
and paperwork as interfering with their other job duties (Fuller et al., 2015).
Although a review of the literature presents many of the challenges that come with
retaining effective principals, this study was designed to identify strategies that would aid in
retention. Two themes related to Research Question 3 emerged based on data from the interviews
and surveys: (a) Support by district office administrators is imperative in the retention of princi-
pals, and (b) professional relationships and networking contribute to the retention of principals.
District Office Support
The first theme that emerged related to Research Question 3 was that principals are more
likely to stay in the position and feel successful when they receive support from their superiors.
Results from both survey and interview data supported this theme. Superintendent A noted that
in terms of retention, it is so important to make sure you’ve got great relationships with
your immediate supervisors and the district office. Our job is to come from a position of
support and make sure that we remain servant leaders. If you can ensure support and that
connection with your people you are going to retain great people. (interview, September
13, 2019)
Superintendent C agreed that a feeling of support was necessary for principals: “They
enjoy it here and they feel supported. That’s what makes a difference” (interview, August 8,
2019).
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 101
Although participants acknowledged that support could come in many forms, the ability
to have direct contact with those in the top positions in the district, such as assistant superinten-
dents and the superintendent, was key to their success. This access allowed principals to have
questions answered or to receive direction. Principal C3 stated:
We are a pretty small district and our Sup and assistant Sups are always available and
extremely helpful. They make it very easy to reach out and I am very comfortable doing
so. They are always so quick to respond and it definitely feels like an open door kind of
place which is so helpful in my position. (interview, September 13, 2019)
Principal B1 concurred: “I have the opportunity to have a direct contact with both my
assistant superintendent of human resources and my superintendent. That’s another piece that
makes me feel supported. It is so helpful when I have questions and need support” (interview,
September 9, 2019). The ability to have direct contact with superiors helped to create a feeling of
support for the principals in this study. Table 12 summarizes the principals’ survey responses
regarding support by district leaders.
Participants shared that not only was it necessary for them to have open communication
with district personnel, but that genuine relationships aided in their success. For instance, Princi-
pal B2 described a close relationship with a director:
One of my strongest relationships is with my director. I really value her perspective and
feedback. Additionally, she is an incredible listener. She is so easy to talk to in confi-
dence. She really makes me feel like I can ask for her perspective and feedback. . . . I
think it’s the support, the overall support. I feel very supported by the school district and
they are always a phone call away. In addition to me calling them, often times I get texts

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 102
Table 12

Principals’ Responses Indicating the Impact of District Support on Retention of the Principal
(District B Principals and All Principals)

Response category District B All

Strongly Agree 5 71
Agree 5 40
Disagree 0 1
Strongly Disagree 0 0
Don’t Know 0 3

Note. Survey item = “My relationship with directors, assistant superintendents, and my superin-
tendent supports my success in retaining my position as a principal.”

asking me if I need anything. These personal relationships are imperative to my success.
(interview, September 1, 2019)
Professional Relationships and Networking
The second theme that emerged related to Research Question 3 was the need for success-
ful principals to engage in professional relationships and networking with peers. According to
the literature, a successful induction program can facilitate professional relationships. Rebore
(2004) suggested common objectives in these induction courses:
1. To make the employee feel welcome and secure.
2. To help the employee become a member of the “team.”
3. To inspire the employee towards excellence in performance.
4. To help the employee adjust to the work environment.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 103
5. To provide information about the community, school system, school building, faculty,
and students.
6. To acquaint the individual with other employees with whom he or she will be associ-
ated.
7. To facilitate the opening of the school year. (pp. 149-150)
According to Rebore (2004), “Induction is the process designed to acquaint newly employed
individuals with the community, the school district, and with their colleagues” (p. 149). Induc-
tion programs are created to assist administrators with the shift into a new position, a new
organization, and a new network of professionals.
While induction programs can facilitate positive professional relationships, they are not
necessary so long as there is district support for peer relationship building. In the current study,
all of the principals pointed out that their relationships with peers were important in their reten-
tion, and superintendents and human resources administrators clearly recognized the importance
of peer relationships among principals. Superintendent C shared that
in my opinion, some of the most important professional relationships that support our
principals are the relationships they have with each other. It is so helpful to have people
to talk to and lean on that are in the same job. (interview, September 18, 2019)
The principals validated that their relationships with other principals were notably one of
the main reasons for their success. Principal B3 shared, “It is so important to have colleagues to
guide you and really have an understanding of where you are coming from” (interview, Septem-
ber 15, 2019). The principals pointed out that they felt supported and most successful when they
could call on fellow principals for support or guidance. Principal B3 shared that this collabora-
tive process of engaging with other principals allowed principals to learn from each other:
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 104
“Collaboration with other principals has been so helpful in my learning and growth. We are
constantly sharing ideas and learning together” (interview, September 18, 2019). Principal C1
agreed, “Some of my most productive moments are when I’m meeting with other principals. The
conversations around what is working and how we are handling issues continues to be so helpful
in my work” (interview, August 14, 2019).
While Gaudi and Militello (2008) identified stress and isolation as major contributors to
principal attrition, current study participants agreed that a professional network and positive peer
relationships can counteract the stressors of the job. Principal B2 stated that personal relationship
with colleagues creates a necessary support system for principals:
It’s a difference maker in my position to be able to get a hold of another principal and ask
questions, get feedback or advice. When you’re a principal there is only one of you on
campus, so the need to reach out to other principals is imperative. This is a lonely seat
and having that support system is so critical to my success. (interview, September 1,
2019)
Although there was no direct alignment between the theme of professional relationships
and the survey statements, 40.86% of the surveyed principals agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement, “Professional networks provided me with processes/strategies that currently support
my success in retaining my position as principal.” Survey statements focused on formal profes-
sional relationships, in contrast to the informal peer relationships discussed in the interviews.
Also, 85.71% of supervisors of principals, 81.81% of human resource administrators, and
71.42% of superintendents strongly agreed or agreed with the same survey statement.
The theme of peer relationships aligned with the theoretical framework offered by
Bolman and Deal (2013). The human resources frame encompasses peer relationships and
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 105
focuses on people and their relationships as key components of organizations. Looking through
this human resources lens of an organization allows a focus on the individual as an investment
and builds on the individual to perform at the highest potential (Bolman & Deal, 2013). For these
stated purposes, the principals are the investment as they continue to lead their organizations.
The survey responses aligned with Research Question 3 are presented in the following
tables. Table 13 summarizes survey responses from superintendents, Table 14 summarizes
survey responses from human resources administrators, Table 15 summarizes survey responses
from immediate supervisors of principals, and Table 16 summarizes survey responses from prin-
cipals.
Summary of Results for Research Question 3
With the ever-increasing demands placed on today’s principals, it is necessary for princi-
pals and school districts to continue to create an environment that supports retention of
principals. Results of this study indicated that perceived support by district office administration
and professional relationships and networking with peers contribute to retention of principals.
Chapter Summary
Data analysis included a review of the literature, survey responses, and interview
responses. The themes for this study were drawn from 15 qualitative interviews with nine
principals, three human resources administrators, and three superintendents. The themes found in
the interview data were triangulated with quantitative survey responses and the relevant literature
as reviewed in Chapter 2. The data were analyzed and aligned with the research questions and
the three frameworks: (a) Bolman and Deal’s (2013) four frames of leadership styles, (b) the
Marzano et al. (2005) a study of the impact of school leadership on student achievement, and (c)
Fullan’s (2014) three keys to maximizing the impact of leadership.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 106
Table 13

Superintendents’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and Principals Working in
Professional Learning Communities Help to Retain Principals (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University training programs provide principals with skills/strategies
that support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 63.64 100.00
Disagree 27.27 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Professional networks (such as NAESP, NASSP, ACSA, university
networks) provide principals with processes/strategies that support their
success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 77.27 100.00
Disagree 13.64 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Having mentor(s) provides principals with processes/strategies that
support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 77.27 0.00
Agree 18.18 100.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

The relationships principals have with directors, assistant
superintendents, and the superintendent support their success in
retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 81.82 100.00
Agree 18.18 0.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 107
Table 13 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Principals’ compensation determines their desire to continue
in their current positions.
Strongly Agree 18.18 0.00
Agree 54.55 0.00
Disagree 22.73 100.00
Strongly 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Having a formal, written strategic plan supports principals’ success
in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 22.73 0.00
Agree 45.45 100.00
Disagree 31.82 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Pressures from accountability measures affect principals’ desires
to retain their current position.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 63.64 100.00
Disagree 27.27 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Note. NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals NASSP = National Asso-
ciation of Secondary School Principals, ACSA = Association of California School Administra-
tors.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 108
Table 14

Human Resource Administrators’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and Princi-
pals Working in Professional Learning Communities Help to Retain Principals (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University training programs provide principals with skills/strategies
that support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 63.64 50.00
Disagree 27.27 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Professional networks (such as NAESP, NASSP, ACSA, university
networks) provide principals with processes/strategies that support
their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 77.27 50.00
Disagree 13.64 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Having mentor(s) provides principals with processes/strategies that
support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 77.27 100.00
Agree 18.18 0.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

The relationships principals have with directors, assistant
superintendents, and the superintendent support their success in
retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 81.82 50.00
Agree 18.18 50.00
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 109
Table 14 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Principals’ compensation determines their desire to continue
in their current positions.
Strongly Agree 18.18 50.00
Agree 54.55 0.00
Disagree 22.73 50.00
Strongly 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Having a formal, written strategic plan supports principals’ success
in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 22.73 0.00
Agree 45.45 50.00
Disagree 31.82 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 0.00 0.00

Pressures from accountability measures affect principals’ desires
to retain their current position.
Strongly Agree 4.55 0.00
Agree 63.64 100.00
Disagree 27.27 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.55 0.00

Note. NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals NASSP = National Asso-
ciation of Secondary School Principals, ACSA = Association of California School Administra-
tors.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 110
Table 15

Immediate Supervisors of Principals’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and
Principals Working in Professional Learning Communities Help to Retain Principals (Percent-
ages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

University training programs provide principals with skills/strategies
that support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 7.14 12.50
Agree 50.00 37.50
Disagree 35.71 37.50
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 12.50

Professional networks (such as NAESP, NASSP, ACSA, university
networks) provide principals with processes/strategies that support
their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 19.71 12.50
Agree 75.00 75.00
Disagree 7.14 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 12.50

Having mentor(s) provides principals with processes/strategies that
support their success in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 67.86 50.00
Agree 28.57 37.50
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

The relationships principals have with directors, assistant
superintendents, and the superintendent support their success in
retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 71.43 75.00
Agree 25.00 12.50
Disagree 0.00 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 111
Table 15 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Principals’ compensation determines their desire to continue in
their current positions.
Strongly Agree 14.29 12.50
Agree 39.29 25.00
Disagree 32.14 37.50
Strongly 7.14 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.14 25.00

Having a formal, written strategic plan supports principals’ success
in retaining their current positions.
Strongly Agree 25.00 12.50
Agree 28.57 37.50
Disagree 32.14 25.00
Strongly Disagree 3.57 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 10.71 25.00

Pressures from accountability measures affect principals’ desires
to retain their current position.
Strongly Agree 7.14 12.50
Agree 60.17 25.00
Disagree 28.57 50.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 3.57 12.50

Note. NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals NASSP = National Asso-
ciation of Secondary School Principals, ACSA = Association of California School Administra-
tors.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 112
Table 16

Principals’ Responses Indicating That Supporting Principals and Principals Working in Profes-
sional Learning Communities Help to Retain Principals (Percentages)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

My university training program provided me with processes/strategies
that currently support my success in retaining my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 11.30 35.71
Agree 47.83 35.71
Disagree 22.61 14.29
Strongly Disagree 6.96 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 11.30 14.29

Professional networks (e.g., NAESP, NASSP, ACSA, university
networks) provided me with processes/strategies that currently support
my success in retaining my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 4.35 21.43
Agree 36.52 35.51
Disagree 34.78 28.57
Strongly Disagree 7.83 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 16.52 14.29

Having a mentor(s) provided me with processes/strategies that
currently support my success in retaining my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 58.26 57.14
Agree 33.91 35.71
Disagree 3.48 7.14
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.35 0.00

My relationship with directors, assistant superintendents, and my
superintendent supports my success in retaining my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 61.74 71.43
Agree 34.78 28.57
Disagree 0.87 0.00
Strongly Disagree 0.00 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 2.61 0.00

My compensation determines my desire to retain my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 6.69 28.57
Agree 38.26 7.14
Disagree 38.26 57.14
Strongly 12.17 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 4.35 0.00
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 113
Table 16 (continued)

Districts
Survey item and response category All A, B, C

Having a formal, written strategic plan supports my success in retaining
my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 14.78 35.71
Agree 52.17 42.86
Disagree 24.35 14.29
Strongly Disagree 0.87 7.14
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 7.83 0.00

Pressures from accountability measures affect my desire to retain
my position as a principal.
Strongly Agree 15.65 21.43
Agree 33.04 14.29
Disagree 46.96 64.29
Strongly Disagree 1.74 0.00
Don’t Know or Not Applicable (N/A) 2.61 0.00

Note. NAESP = National Association of Elementary School Principals NASSP = National Asso-
ciation of Secondary School Principals, ACSA = Association of California School Administra-
tors.

Regarding Research Question 1, participants clearly indicated that the principal position
is complex and requires aspiring principals to be prepared for the challenges that they will face
on the job. Findings pointed to three major themes related to the preparation of principals identi-
fied in qualitative interviews and confirmed by quantitative survey data. First, the importance of
on-the-job training was consistently considered the most effective preparation in
becoming a principal. Second, mentorship plays a vital role in preparing educators for the princi-
pal position. Third, an educator’s ability to utilize informal networking is a crucial element in
preparing for the principalship. These results indicated that both principals and district office
administrators considered these three methods to be the most effective strategies and training for
helping candidates to deal with the complexities of the principal job.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 114
Regarding Research Question 2, the principal position continues to grow in complexity
with increasing challenges, which can be a deterrent in recruiting high quality candidates. These
barriers have been demonstrated across this nation and internationally and can be corrected if
acknowledged and addressed in the recruitment process (Brinier, 2012; Cabrillo & Brown, 2003,
Hoff et al., 2006; Kruse & Krum, 2016). Data related to this research question indicated that
recruiting educators with prior experience and ensuring opportunities as teacher leaders can aid
in successful recruitment of principal candidates. Also, mentorship is essential in the recruitment
process, as is networking, when navigating the recruitment process.
Regarding Research Question 3, with the ever-increasing demands placed on today’s
principals, it is necessary for principals and school districts to continue to create an environment
that supports retention of principals. Results related to this research question indicated that per-
ceived support by district office administration and professional relationships with peers cont-
ribute to the retention of principals.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 115
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The role of the school principal has evolved significantly since its inception. While the
early days of the principalship had school leaders acting more as managers, today’s principal
holds one of the most challenging and important positions in the American school system. Prin-
cipals are tasked with providing direction for their schools, building efficacy, shaping the
instructional focus, and ensuring the overall function of their organizations (Marzano et al.,
2005). They manage both classified and certificated staff members, build culture, and monitor
facilities while simultaneously being charged with consistently improving student achievement
(Bolman & Deal, 2013). In fact, next to classroom teachers, the principal is the most influential
role in the success of a school (Fullan, 2014).
Unfortunately, many principals take on this role without adequate preparation. While
research has shown that the quality of school and district leadership is highly dependent on the
quality of the preparation experience, many preparation programs fail to provide necessary
training for the reality of the job (Hernandez et al., 2012). The majority of school administrators
have first served as classroom teachers; however, success as a teacher does not necessarily guar-
antee success as a principal. Aspiring principals must have knowledge of classroom instruction,
fiscal management, human resources, and other support services. University preparation
programs are often criticized for lacking consistent standards and for being out of touch with the
needs of the position. In addition, teachers in preparation programs are often adjunct professors
who are underprepared themselves (Hess & Kelly, 2005; Lashway, 1999; Levine, 2005). Some
programs address these issues by developing cohort models, creating opportunities for shadow-
ing and mentorship, building closer relationships with school districts, and helping candidates to
gain access to practical experiences (Davis & Darling-Hammond, 2012; Pannell et al., 2015).
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 116
To ensure the success of future principals, candidates should be adequately prepared for
this challenging role. School districts must understand the complexities of the position in order to
recruit and train qualified candidates. Principal recruitment is typically done in one of two ways:
Teachers are encouraged by site leaders to begin a principal preparation program or candidates
apply from outside a district. Effective recruitment and selection are necessary aspects of
growing the pool of successful principal candidates (Normore, 2006).
Once districts have recruited a well-prepared candidate, it is necessary to offer effective
training and mentorship opportunities in order to retain the principal in the challenging position.
Stress, low salaries, and the complexities and time demands of the job are among the top reasons
principals do not remain in the position (Gaudi & Militello, 2008). While districts can employ
strategies to retain good administrators, principal retention remains a challenge.
Purpose of the Study Restated
The purpose of this qualitative study was to examine the preparation, recruitment, and
retention of California K–12 principals. Second only to the classroom teacher, the principal has
the most critical influence on student achievement (Fullan, 2014). Given the impact of the prin-
cipal on student achievement, it was beneficial to analyze the preparation, support structures, and
expertise needed for principals to meet the complexities and challenges of the principalship, as
well as support efforts that are directly related to the retention of principals (Marzano et al.,
2005). Three leadership models served as theoretical frameworks to guide this study: (a) Bolman
and Deal’s (2013) organizational frames, (b) Fullan’s (2014) three keys to maximizing impact,
and (c) School Leadership That Works by Marzano et al. (2005).
This study was conducted by a group of 12 researchers at the University of Southern
California Rossier School of Education, who designed the study, research questions,
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 117
methodology, and instrumentation. The research team collaboratively collected quantitative
survey samples from 37 school districts in southern California. Each researcher worked
independently to gather qualitative data from at least three school districts. Qualitative and quan-
titative instruments were designed to align with the three research questions of this study:
1. How have training programs and professional experiences prepared principals to
manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?
2. What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human
resources administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful principal
candidates?
3. What are the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?
The researcher identified themes for each research question. Mentoring was the common
theme for all three research questions.
Summary of Findings
Research Question 1
In order to understand how people are prepared for the position of principal, Research
Question 1 asked, “How have training programs and professional experiences prepared princi-
pals to manage the complexities and challenges of the principalship?” Three themes were
revealed in the data related to the preparation of principals. The qualitative interviews and
quantitative survey data confirmed these themes.
First, data indicated that the most effective training did not come from university
programs but from school site leadership and on-the-job experience. From the qualitative inter-
views with 15 participants, data indicated that the most effective preparation for the principalship
was on-the-job experience. According to Levine (2005), on-the-job experience, coupled with
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 118
theory, is the ideal framework in which to prepare aspiring principals. Second, mentors play a
crucial role in preparing potential candidates for the position of principal. Those who served as
teacher leaders and had a mentor at the district office level were more prepared than those who
did not have those experiences. Third, the support structures created by building informal net-
works help to prepare aspiring principals, aid in the recruitment process, and continue to offer
support for current principals. These findings correlate directly with Bolman and Deal’s (2013)
human resource frame, which highlights how principals lead others and learn how to be leaders.
Research Question 2
The results of this study identified two common themes related to Research Question 2,
“What are the perceptions of principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human resources
administrators, and superintendents regarding strategies to recruit successful principal candi-
dates?” Fullan (2014) pointed to the principal not only as the lead learner but as also responsible
for self-learning. Therefore, it is important for aspiring principals to act as lead learners and set
out to acquire leadership opportunities and experiences before becoming a principal. The study
showed that principals utilized these strategies during the recruitment process.
According to the data, prior experience and teacher leadership opportunities are success-
ful strategies to assist aspiring principals in the recruitment process and increase candidate
success in attaining a principal position. Principals and district office administrators agreed that
on-the-job experience was an important element for attaining a principal position, preparing can-
didates for interviews. The principals strongly agreed that mentors play a key role in the recruit-
ment process. Building strong relationships with mentors aligns with Bolman and Deal’s (2013)
human resource frame by addressing the need for human contact, personal growth, and job
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 119
satisfaction. Mentors provide critical feedback, thoughtful support, résumé building, and mock
interviews to prepare candidates during the recruitment phase.
Research Question 3
The results of this study identified two themes related to Research Question 3, “What are
the perceived strategies that support the retention of principals?” First, support by district office
administrators contributes to the retention of principals. In addition to district office support,
building and fostering professional relationships with peers significantly contributes to the reten-
tion of principals. Principals, district office administrators, and superintendents in this study
highlighted the need for relationships with peers in the retention of principals. The two findings
for Research Question 3 involved relationships and are in direct correlation with Bolman and
Deal’s (2013) human resource frame, which points out the need for human contact and job satis-
faction. Both support from and relationships with district administrators and professional rela-
tionships with peers contribute to the retention of principals.
Implications
This study contributed to the body of scholarly literature by identifying strategies that
principals took during their preparation, recruitment, and retention. Although the insights gained
were from participating principals, assistant superintendents of human resources, and superinten-
dents, aspiring principals, current assistant superintendents of human resources, and current
superintendents can use the insights and themes identified in this study to support principal
preparation, recruitment, and retention.
Aspiring principals can begin their preparation by seeking professional growth and
acquiring on-the-job experience. Aspiring principals should participate in leadership opportuni-
ties, in addition to their experience in a university program, to enhance their desirability as
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 120
potential candidates for the principal position. Building relationships with mentors will help
aspiring principals in recruitment, preparation for potential openings, and ultimate retention.
This study highlighted the crucial nature of relationships for principals to ensure their
retention. Feeling supported and connecting with district office personnel, building relationships
with colleagues, and fostering relationships with mentors all play key roles in principal retention.
Recommendations for Future Study
Based on this study’s findings, the researcher presents three recommendations for future
research. First, future research could focus on the continued role of mentorship and how it affects
the preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals. The inclusion of mentors in the qualita-
tive interview and survey process could be useful in this analysis. Second, future research could
focus on specific on-the-job experiences and potential intern programs that could benefit princi-
pal preparation. Aspiring principals could be the focus of qualitative interviews and quantitative
surveys to show how educators prepare for the role of the principalship outside of university
programs. Third, future research could replicate this study in a broader geographic region,
perhaps nationally, to validate the findings.
Conclusion
The job of principal has become more complex and challenging since its beginning in the
mid-1600s, with roles, responsibilities, and expectations continually evolving (Brubaker &
Simon, 1986). Aspiring principals must thoughtfully consider the proper preparation, recruitment
strategies, and skillsets for retention and success in the position. Preparation programs, including
those offered by universities and other entities, have attempted to train prospective principals to
be recruited and successful in the position; however, many have fallen short in their efforts
(Brown, 2005; Davis & Darling-Hammond, 2012; Hess & Kelly, 2007; Jackson & Kelly, 2002).
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 121
Support for current principals, including networking, mentoring, and coaching, have contributed
to most principals’ ongoing success in the position (Brown, 2005; Matthews & Crow, 2003;
Service et al., 2016). This study provided an in-depth look at principal preparation, recruitment,
and retention. Themes were drawn from qualitative and quantitative data to address the three
research questions regarding principal preparation, recruitment, and retention. All efforts were
made by the researcher to collect data ethically and to report the emergent themes scientifically,
with minimal bias. Based on prior research and the results of the data collected in this study, it is
imperative that aspiring and current principals seek and establish relationships with mentors,
build a broad network of peers and district office staff, and create opportunities for work experi-
ence and professional growth in order to meet the ever-changing demands and challenges of the
principalship.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 122
REFERENCES
Baker, B. D., Punswick, E., & Belt, C. (2010). School leadership stability, principal moves, and
departures: Evidence from Missouri. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 523-
557.
Balzer, W. K. (1997). User’s manual for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI, 1997 revision) and the
Job in General (JIG) scales. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University.
Bickelhaupt, M., Guffey, T., Helmich-Raasch, N., & Marsden, J. (2010). Recruiting and retain-
ing building-level principals (Doctoral dissertation). St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO.
Bloom, G. S. (2004). Emotionally intelligent principals: Addressing the affective demands of
newcomers through one-on-one coaching. School Administrator, 61(6), 14-18.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to
theory and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brayfield, A. H., Wells, R. V., & Strate, M. W. (1957). Interrelationships among measures of job
satisfaction and general satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41(4), 201-205.
Brinia, V. (2012). Men vs. women; educational leadership in primary schools in Greece: An
empirical study. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(2), 175-191.
Brown, K. (2005). Pivotal points: History, development, and promise of the principalship. In F.
W. English (Ed.), Sage handbook of educational leadership (pp. 109-141). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage
Brubaker, D. L., & Simon, L. H. (1986). Emerging conceptions of the principalship. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 4, 2-26.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 123
Butler, K. (2008). Principal preparation programs. District Administration, 44(10), 66-70.
Cohen, N. H. (1995), The principles of adult mentoring scale. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 66, 15-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.36719956604
Coleman, D. G, & Achilles, C. M. (1987). An agenda for program improvement in education
administration preparation. Planning and Changing, 18(2), 120-127.
Copland, M. A. (2001). The myth of the superprincipal. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 528-533.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cubberley, E. P. (1923). The principal and the principalship. Elementary School Journal, 23,
342-352.
Cubillo, L., & Brown, M. (2003). Women into educational leadership and management: Interna-
tional differences? Journal of Educational Administration, 41, 278-291.
Darling-Hammond, L., Meyerson, D., LaPointe, M., & Orr, M. T. (2010). Preparing principals
for a changing world: Lessons from effective school leadership programs. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Davis, S. H., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Innovative principal preparation programs: What
works and how we know. Planning and Changing, 43(1-2), 25-45.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2016). Learning by doing: A handbook for pro-
fessional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.
Duncan, H., Range, B., & Scherz, S. (2011). From professional preparation to on-the-job devel-
opment: What do beginning principals need? International Journal of Educational Lead-
ership Preparation, 8, 1-24.
Fink, A. (2015). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 124
Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School leadership succession and the challenges of change.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 62-89.
Fleck, F. (2008). The balanced principal: Joining theory and practical knowledge. Education
Digest, 73(5), 27-31.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Fuller, E. J., Hollingworth, L., & Young, M. D. (2015). Working conditions and retention of
principals in small and mid-sized urban districts. In I. E. Sutherland, K. L. Sanzo, & J. P.
Scribner (Eds.), Leading small and mid-sized urban school districts (p. 41-64). Bingley,
West Yorkshire, UK: Emerald Group.
Gajda, R., & Militello, M. (2008). Recruiting and retaining school principals: What we can learn
from practicing administrators. AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice, 5(2), 14-20.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston, MA:
Pearson.
Haney, A. (1997). The role of mentorship in the workplace. In M. C. Taylor (Ed.), Workplace
education (pp. 211-228). Toronto, ONT, Canada: Culture Concepts.
Hernandez, R., Roberts, M., & Menchaca, V. (2012). Redesigning a principal preparation
program: A continuous improvement model. International Journal of Educational Lead-
ership, 7(3), 1-12.
Hertting, M., & Phenis-Bourke, N. (2007). Experienced principals need mentors, too. Principal,
86(5), 36-39.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 125
Hess, F. M, & Kelly, A. P. (2005). The accidental principal: What doesn’t get taught at ed
schools? Education Next, 5(3), 35-40.
Hess, F. M., & Kelly, A. P. (2007). Learning to lead: What gets taught in principal-preparation
programs. Teachers College Record, 109(1), 1-28.
Hill, J., Ottem, R., & DeRoche, J. (2016). Trends in public and private school principal
demographics: 1987-88 to 2011-12 (NCES 2016-189). Washington, DC: National Center
for Education Statistics.
Hoff, D. L., Menard, C., & Tuell, J. (2006). Where are the women in school administration?
Issues of access, acculturation, advancement, advocacy. Journal of Women in Educa-
tional Leadership, 4(1), 42-63.
Hoyle, E., & Wallace, M. (2005). Educational leadership: Ambiguity, professionals and
Managerialism. London, UK: Sage.
Jackson, B. L., & Kelley, C. (2002). Exceptional and innovative programs in educational leader-
ship. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(2), 192-212.
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and
mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Kavanaugh, A. L. (2005). Introduction to principalship. In Jianping Shen (Ed.), School princi-
pals (pp. 1-13). New York, NY: P. Lang.
Kerka, S. (1998). New perspectives on mentoring. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult
Career and Vocational Education.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 126
Kerr, B., Miller, W., Kerr, G. R., & Deshommes, R. (2016). Interethnic competition for class-
room teacher, assistant principal, principal, and administrator jobs in multiethnic U.S.
school districts. American Review of Public Administration, 46, 459-477.
Kirtman, L. (2013). Leadership and teams: The missing piece of the education reform puzzle.
Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Knott, J. H., & Miller, G. J. (1987). Reforming bureaucracy: The politics of institutional choice.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kruse, R. A., & Krumm, B. L. (2016). Becoming a principal: Access factors for females. The
Rural Educator, 37(2), 28-38.
Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2005). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lashway, L. (1999). Preparing school leaders. Research Roundup, 15(5), 1-5.
Lashway, L. (2003). Transforming principal preparation. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on
Educational Management.
Lauder, A. (2000). The new look at principal preparation programs. NASSP Bulletin, 84(617),
23-28.
Learning Innovations at WestEd. (2001, December). Leadership challenges: Supply and demand
in Massachusetts schools. Stoneham, MA: Cyclex.
Levine, A. (2005). A race to the bottom: The nation’s school leadership programs are not pro-
ducing the educational administrators we need. Retrieved from http://www
.highereducation.org/crosstalk/ct0305/voices0305-levine.shtml
Long, J. E. (2005). Does race matter? The relationship between race and principal selection
and/or placement (Doctoral dissertation). University of South Carolina, Columbia.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 127
Lowe, K. B., Kroeck, K. G., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness correlates of trans-
formational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis review of the MLQ literature.
Leadership Quarterly, 7, 385-425.
Lynch, J. M. (2012). Responsibilities of today’s principal: Implications for principal preparation
programs and principal certification policies. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 31(2),
40-47.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research
to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Matthews, L. J., & Crow, G. M. (2003). Being and becoming a principal: Role conceptions for
contemporary principals and assistant principals. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementa-
tion (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Meyer, L., & Feistritzer, E. (2003). Better leaders for America’s schools: A manifesto, with
profiles of education leaders and a summary of state certification practices. Washington,
DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Miller, W. (2013). Better principal training is key to school reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 98(4), 80-
84.
Normore, A. H. (2006). Leadership recruitment and selection in school districts: Trends and
issues. Journal of Educational Thought, 40(1), 41-73.
Norton, M. S. (2002). Let’s keep our quality school principals on the job. The High School
Journal, 86(2), 50-56.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 128
Olson, L. (2007, September 11). Getting serious about preparation. Education Week, 27(3), S3-
S5.
Pannell, S., Peltier-Glaze, B., Haynes, I., Davis, D., & Skelton, C. (2015). Evaluating the effec-
tiveness of traditional and alternative principal preparation programs. Journal of Organi-
zational and Educational Leadership, 1(2), 1-28.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Pierce, P. R. (1935). The origin and development of the public school principalship. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Pijanowski, J. C., Hewitt, P. M., & Brady, K. P. (2009). Superintendents’ perceptions of the
principal shortage. NASSP Bulletin, 93(2), 85-95.
Reames, E. (2010). Shifting paradigms: Redesigning a principal preparation program’s curricu-
lum. Journal of Research on Educational Leadership, 5, 436-459.
Rebore, R. (2004). Human resources administration in education: A management approach (7th
ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Reed, C. J., & Kensler, L. A. W. (2010). Creating a new system for principal preparation:
Reflections on efforts to transcend tradition and create new cultures. Journal of Research
on Leadership Education, 5, 568-582.
Sanchez, J., Thornton, B., & Usinger, J. (2008). Promoting diversity in public education leader-
ship. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 3(3), 1-10.
Sandham, J. L. (2001, April 4). California faces shortage of administrators, report warns. Educa-
tion Week, 20(29), 25.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York, NY: Doubleday.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 129
Senge, P. M. (1999). The dance of change: The challenges of sustaining momentum in learning
organizations. New York, NY: Currency/Doubleday.
Service, B., Dalgic, G. E., & Thornton, K. (2016). Implications of a shadowing/mentoring pro-
gramme for aspiring principals. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in
Education, 5, 253-271.
Shen, J., & Cooley, V. (1999). Who will lead? The top 10 factors that influence teachers moving
into administration. NASSP Bulletin, 83(66), 75-80.
Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. G. (2013). Dissertation and scholarly research: Recipes for success.
Seattle, WA: Create Space.
Spillane, J. P., & Lee, L. C. (2014). Novice school principals’ sense of ultimate responsibility:
Problems of practice in transitioning to the principal’s office. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 50, 431-465.
Teaching Certification.com. (2016). The future of education: Where teachers and administrators
fit in. Retrieved from http://www.teaching-certification.com
Thompson, P., Blackmore, J., Sachs, J., & Tregenza, K. (2003). High-stakes principalship:
Sleepless nights, heart attacks and sudden death accountabilities—Reading media repre-
sentations of the United States principal shortage. Australian Journal of Education, 47(2),
118-132.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. New York, NY: Free Press.
Whitaker, K. S. (2003). Principal role changes and influence on principal recruitment and selec-
tion: An international perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(1), 37-54.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 130
Whitaker, K. S., & Vogel, L. (2005). Joining the ranks: Opportunities and obstacles in obtaining
principal positions. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 18(1), 3-19/
Zubnzycki, J. (2013). Principal development goes back to school. Education Week, 32(21), 4-6.
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 131
APPENDIX A
RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS’ INVITATION E-MAIL

Dear _______________ [stakeholder group role],

I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern Cali-
fornia and a _______________ [role] in the _______________ Unified School District. I invite
you to participate in a research study that will investigate the preparation, recruitment, and reten-
tion of public school principals.

You are asked to participate only if you are currently employed as a [role] in a public school
district. If you agree to participate, you will be asked to complete a survey; estimated time for
completion is approximately 20 minutes. The University of Southern California’s Institutional
Review Board has approved this research study (IRB #APP-19-00787).

Your participation is completely voluntary. If you decide to participate after reading this email,
you can access the survey via the following link: _______________

I value your input and hope that you will consider participating in this study. Please email me at
_______________ if you have any questions. Thank you in advance for your time.

Sincerely,
USC Doctoral Candidate Researcher
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 132
APPENDIX B
INFORMED CONSENT

Date: _______________

Dear _______________,

My name is _______________ and I am a doctoral student at the USC Rossier School of Education. I am
conducting a research study under the guidance and direction of Dr. Michael F. Escalante. The purpose
of my mixed-methods study is to examine the preparation, recruitment, and retention of public school
principals in southern California. I will interview and survey superintendents, human resources direc-
tors/assistant superintendents, immediate supervisors of principals, and principals.

You have been invited to participate in a graduate research study that will shed light on the preparation,
recruitment, and retention of public school principals in southern California. The results of this study will
inform multiple stakeholders, including aspiring principals, superintendents, and school boards. It is my
hope that this study will serve as a valuable resource.

Your participation is voluntary, and you have the right to withdraw at any time. The information col-
lected will be kept confidential and anonymous by the researcher and members of the dissertation com-
mittee. Data will be presented in a manner that will ensure that no individual or district can be identified.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding your participation in this study, you may contact me at
_______________ or Dr. Michael F. Escalante at the University of Southern California.

Thank you, in advance, for your time and assistance.

Sincerely,

_______________, Researcher [_______________@usc.edu]
(xxx) xxx-xxxx

Dr. Michael F. Escalante, Dissertation Chair mescalante@usc.edu
(818) 802-4769

( ) I have read this form and have been given the opportunity to ask questions. I consent to my participa-
tion in the research described above.

Participant’s Signature: __________________________________________________________

Participant’s Printed Name: _______________________________________________________

Date: _________________________________________________________________________
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 133
APPENDIX C
PRINCIPAL SURVEY
The purpose of this qualitative study is to examine the preparation, recruitment, and retention of
California K-12 public school principals. While the most significant direct influence on student
achievement is the teacher, the second most critical influence is the principal (Fullan, 2014). It is
important to identify the preparation and supports that principals must have in order to meet the
challenges and complexities of the principalship, as well as the recruitment strategies and reten-
tion efforts that public school districts must use to find and retain quality personnel in the
principalship. The goal of this brief, 15-minute survey is to quantify your perceptions on princi-
pal preparation, recruitment, and retention. Your participation in this survey is anonymous.
Thank you for your participation.

Personal Background

1. Gender
❏ Male
❏ Female

2. Ethnicity (check all that apply)
❏ Asian
❏ Black
❏ Latina/o
❏ Native American
❏ Pacific Islander
❏ White
❏ Multiple
❏ Other
❏ Decline to state

3. Age range:
❏ < 30
❏ 30-40
❏ 41-50
❏ 51-60
❏ 61+

4. Highest university degree earned:
❏ Ed.D.
❏ Ph.D.
❏ Master’s
❏ Bachelor’s
❏ Other (please specify) ___________________________________________

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 134

5. What university do you identify with professionally?

________________________________________________________________________

6. How many years in the education profession?
❏ 1-10
❏ 11-20
❏ 21-30
❏ 30 or more

7. How many years as a principal?
❏ 2 years or less
❏ 3-5
❏ 6-10
❏ 11-15
❏ 16 or more

8. Did you come from within your current district or outside your current district?
❏ Within
❏ Outside

9. What type of administrative preparation program did you participate in?
❏ University
❏ Nonuniversity, please specify: ____________________________________

10. Past experiences (check all that apply):
School site positions:
❏ Elementary school teacher
❏ Middle school teacher
❏ High school teacher
❏ Counselor (any level)
❏ College/university instructor
❏ Teacher on Special Assignment (TOSA)
❏ Other ______________________

School site administrator positions:
❏ Elementary School Assistant Principal
❏ Middle School Assistant Principal
❏ High School Assistant Principal
❏ Elementary Principal
❏ Middle School Principal
❏ High School Principal
❏ Dean of Students
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 135
District-level positions:
❏ Coordinator
❏ Specialist
❏ Director of Curriculum and Instruction
❏ Director of Research and Planning
❏ Director of Human Resources
❏ Director of Student Support Services
❏ Director: Other _____________________________________________________

Experiences other than education:
❏ Please specify: _____________________________________________________

11. Salary Range (approximate):
❏ Less than $100,000
❏ $100,001 - 110,000
❏ $110,001 - 120,000
❏ $120,001 - 130,000
❏ $130,001- 140,000
❏ $140,001- 150,000
❏ $150,001- 160,000
❏ $160,001- 170,000
❏ More than $170,001

School District Information

12. Type of school district:
❏ Urban
❏ Urban/suburban
❏ Suburban
❏ Rural

13. District student enrollment:
❏ Less than 5,000
❏ 5,001 - 10,000
❏ 10,001 - 20,000
❏ 20,001 - 30,000
❏ 30,001 - 40,000
❏ 40,001 - 50,000
❏ 50,001 - 60,000
❏ 60,001 - 70,000
❏ More than 70,000
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 136

Based on your perception of the preparation of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal preparation:
Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps you took prior to
taking on your first principal position.
PREPARATION
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(4)
Agree
(3)
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t
Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
1. University programs provided training and
experience that were important in preparing
me for my position as a principal.

2. My prior work experience was more import-
ant than my university training experience in
preparing me for my position as a principal.

3. Holding an advanced degree (e.g. Ed.D. or
Ph.D.) was important in preparing me for my
position as a principal.

4. Nonuniversity training programs (such as the
ACSA Principal Academy) were important in
preparing me for my position as a principal.

5. Holding certification and/or licensure from
organizations (such as USC or ACSA) was
important in preparing me for my position as
a principal.

6. Having mentors was instrumental in prepar-
ing me for my position as a principal.

7. A professional network of support (such as
CALSA, NASSP, NAESP, ACSA, or
through a university) was important in pre-
paring me for my position as a principal.

8. Informal networks of support (such as profes-
sional colleagues) were important in prepar-
ing me for my position as a principal.

9. Networks with university professors were
important in preparing me for my position as
a principal.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 137

10. Planning my career was important in prepar-
ing me for my position as a principal.

11. My university training program provided
intentional supports or resources to prepare
me for my position as a principal.

12. Having experience as a teacher leader was a
crucial element in preparing me for my posi-
tion as a principal.

13. Having experience as an assistant principal
was a crucial element in preparing me for my
position as a principal.

Based on your perception of the recruitment of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal recruitment:
Recruitment is defined as the strategies and steps you took
prior to taking on your first principal position.
RECRUITMENT
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(4)
Agree
(3)
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t
Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
14. As an aspiring principal, district resources
and programs were important in being
recruited into my current position as a princi-
pal.

15. My university principal preparation program
was an important factor in being recruited
into my current position as a principal.

16. My nonuniversity principal preparation
program was an important factor in being
recruited into my current position as a
principal.

17. The nonmonetary incentives offered by my
district were important factors in applying for
the principal position in my district.

18. The salary and benefits offered by my district
were important factors in applying for the
principal position in my district.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 138
19. My previous experience in education was an
important factor in being recruited into my
current position as a principal.

20. My previous experience outside of educa-
tion was an important factor in being
recruited into my current position as a
principal.

21. The reputation of my school district was an
important factor in applying for the princi-
pal position in my district.

22. My level of understanding of district initia-
tives and goals was an important factor in
being recruited into my current position as a
principal.

23. As an in-district candidate, networking with
district personnel was an important factor in
being recruited into my current position as a
principal.

24. As an out-of-district candidate, networking
with district personnel was an important
factor in being recruited in my current posi-
tion as a principal.

25. Having a mentor was an important factor in
being recruited in my current position as a
principal.

26. Being an employee of my school district
was an important factor in being recruited
into my current position as a principal.

27. My participation in professional organiza-
tions was an important factor in being
recruited into my current position as a prin-
cipal.

28. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or
Ph.D.) was an important factor in being
recruited into my current position as a prin-
cipal.

29. Having instructional leadership experience
was an important factor in being recruited
into my position as a principal.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 139
Based on your perception of the retention of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal retention:
Retention is the process/strategy you used to maintain your current principal position.
RETENTION
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(4)
Agree
(3)
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t
Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
30. My university training program provided me
with processes/strategies that currently
support my success in retaining my position
as a principal.

31. Professional networks (e.g., NAESP, NASSP,
ACSA, university networks) provided me
with processes/strategies that currently
support my success in retaining my position
as a principal.

32. Having a mentor(s) provided me with
processes/strategies that currently support my
success in retaining my position as a princi-
pal.

33. My relationship with directors, assistant
superintendents, and my superintendent
supports my success in retaining my position
as a principal.

34. My compensation determines my desire to
retain my position as a principal.

35. Having a formal, written strategic plan
supports my success in retaining my position
as a principal.

36. Pressures from accountability measures affect
my desire to retain my position as a principal.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 140
APPENDIX D
HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATOR SURVEY
Based on your perception of the preparation of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal preparation:
Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps that principals took
prior to taking on their first principal position.
PREPARATION
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(4)
Agree
(3)
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t
Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
1. University programs provided training and
experience that are important in preparing
principals for their positions.

2. Prior work experience was more important
than university training experience in pre-
paring principals for their current posi-
tions.

3. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D.
or Ph.D.) was important in preparing prin-
cipals for their current positions.

4. Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., the
ACSA Principal Academy) were important
in preparing principals for their current
positions.

5. Holding certification and/or licensure from
organizations (such as USC or ACSA) was
important in preparing principals for their
current positions.

6. Having a mentor was important in prepar-
ing my principals for their current posi-
tions.

7. A professional network of support (e.g.
NASSP, ACSA, or through a university)
was important in preparing my principals
for their current positions.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 141

8. Informal networks (e.g., professional col-
leagues) were important in preparing prin-
cipals for their current positions.

9. Having experience as a teacher leader was
crucial for preparing principals for their
current positions.

10. Having experience as an assistant principal
was crucial for preparing principals for
their current positions.

Based on your perception of the recruitment of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal recruitment:
Recruitment is defined as the strategies and steps that principals took
prior to taking on their first principal position.
RECRUITMENT
Statement
Strongly
Agree
(4)
Agree
(3)
Disagree
(2)
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
11. District resources and recruitment strategies help
candidates to get recruited into principal positions
in my district.

12. University principal preparation programs help
candidates to get recruited into principal positions
in my district.

13. Nontraditional principal preparation programs help
candidates to get recruited into principal positions
in my district.

14. The nonmonetary incentives offered by my district
are important factors in candidates applying for
principal positions in my district.

15. The salary and benefits offered are important
factors in candidates applying for principal posi-
tions in my district.

16. Candidates’ previous experience in education is an
important factor in recruiting for principal posi-
tions in my district.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 142
17. Candidates’ previous experience outside of educa-
tion is an important factor in recruiting for princi-
pal positions in my district.

18. The reputation of my school district is an
important factor in candidates applying for princi-
pal positions in my district.

19. Candidates’ level of level of understanding of
district initiatives and goals was an important
factor in being recruited into principal positions in
my district.

20. Networking with district personnel helps candi-
dates to get recruited into principal positions in my
district.

21. Having a mentor helps candidates to get recruited
into principal positions in my district.

22. Being an employee of my school district helps
candidates to get recruited into principal positions
in my district.

23. Candidates’ participation in professional organiza-
tions helps candidates to get recruited into princi-
pal positions in my district.

24. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or Ph.D.)
helps candidates to get recruited into principal
positions in my district.

25. Having instructional leadership experience is an
important factor in recruiting for principal posi-
tions in my district.

26. My district is experiencing a shortage of quality
candidates for the principal position.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 143

Based on your perception of the retention of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal retention:
Retention is the process/strategy used by principals to maintain
their current principal position.
RETENTION

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
27. University training programs provide principals
with skills/strategies that support their success in
retaining their current positions.

28. Professional networks (such as NAESP, NASSP,
ACSA, university networks) provide principals
with processes/strategies that support their
success in retaining their current positions.

29. Having mentor(s) provides principals with
processes/ strategies that support their success in
retaining their current positions.

30. The relationships that principals have with direc-
tors, assistant superintendents, and the superin-
tendent support their success in retaining their
current positions.

31. Principals’ compensation determines their desire
to continue in their current positions.

32. Having a formal, written strategic plan supports
principals’ success in retaining their current
positions.

33. Pressures from accountability measures affect
principals’ desires to retain their current position.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 144
APPENDIX E
IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR OF PRINCIPAL SURVEY
Based on your perception of the preparation of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal preparation:
Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps that principals took
prior to taking on their first principal position.
PREPARATION

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
1. University programs provided training and
experience that are important in preparing princi-
pals for their positions.

2. Prior work experience was more important than
university training experience in preparing prin-
cipals for their current positions.

3. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or
Ph.D.) was important in preparing principals for
their current positions.

4. Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., the ACSA
Principal Academy) were important in preparing
principals for their current positions.

5. Holding certification and/or licensure from
organizations (such as USC or ACSA) was
important in preparing principals for their current
positions.

6. Having a mentor was important in preparing my
principals for their current positions.

7. A professional network of support (e.g., NASSP,
ACSA, or through a university) was important in
preparing my principals for their current posi-
tions.

8. Informal networks (e.g., professional colleagues)
were important in preparing principals for their
current positions.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 145
9. Having experience as a teacher leader was crucial
for preparing principals for their current posi-
tions.

10. Having experience as an assistant principal was
crucial for preparing principals for their current
positions.

Based on your perception of the recruitment of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal recruitment:
Recruitment is defined as the strategies and steps that principals
took prior to taking on their first principal position.
RECRUITMENT

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
11. District resources and recruitment strategies help
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

12. University principal preparation programs help
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

13. Nontraditional principal preparation programs
help candidates to get recruited into principal
positions in my district.

14. The nonmonetary incentives offered by my
district are important factors in candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.

15. The salary and benefits offered are important
factors in candidates applying for principal posi-
tions in my district.

16. Candidates’ previous experience in education is
an important factor in recruiting for principal
positions in my district.

17. Candidates’ previous experience outside of
education is an important factor in recruiting for
principal positions in my district.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 146

18. The reputation of my school district is an
important factor for candidates applying for prin-
cipal positions in my district.

19. Candidates’ level of understanding of district
initiatives and goals was an important factor in
being recruited into principal positions in my
district.

20. Networking with district personnel helps candi-
dates to get recruited into principal positions in
my district.

21. Having a mentor helps candidates to get
recruited into principal positions in my district.

22. Being an employee of my school district helps
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

23. Candidates’ participation in professional
organizations helps candidates get to recruited
into principal positions in my district.

24. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D., or
Ph.D.) helps candidates to get recruited into
principal positions in my district.

25. Having instructional leadership experience is an
important factor in recruiting for principal posi-
tions in my district.

26. My district is experiencing a shortage of quality
candidates for the principal position.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 147

Based on your perception of the retention of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal retention:
Retention is the process/strategy used by principals
to maintain their current principal position.
RETENTION

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
27. University training programs provide princi-
pals with skills/strategies that support their
success in retaining their current positions.

28. Professional networks (such as NAESP,
NASSP, ACSA, university networks) provide
principals with processes/strategies that
support their success in retaining their current
positions.

29. Having mentor(s) provides principals with
processes/ strategies that support their success
in retaining their current positions.

30. The relationships that principals have with
directors, assistant superintendents, and the
superintendent support their success in retain-
ing their current positions.

31. Principals’ compensation determines their
desire to continue in their current positions.

32. Having a formal, written strategic plan
supports principals’ success in retaining their
current positions.

33. Pressures from accountability measures affect
principals’ desires to retain their current posi-
tion.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 148
APPENDIX F
SUPERINTENDENT SURVEY
Based on your perception of the preparation of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal preparation:
Preparation is defined as the strategies and steps that principals took
prior to taking on their first principal position.
PREPARATION

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
1. University programs provided training and
experience that are important in preparing
principals for their positions.

2. Prior work experience was more important
than university training experience in prepar-
ing principals for their current positions.

3. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or
Ph.D.) was important in preparing principals
for their current positions.

4. Nonuniversity training programs (e.g., the
ACSA Principal Academy) were important in
preparing principals for their current positions.

5. Holding certification and/or licensure from
organizations (such as USC or ACSA) was
important in preparing principals for their
current positions.

6. Having a mentor was important in preparing
my principals for their current positions.

7. A professional network of support (e.g.,
NASSP, ACSA, or through a university) was
important in preparing my principals for their
current positions.

8. Informal networks (e.g., professional col-
leagues) were important in preparing princi-
pals for their current positions.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 149
9. Having experience as a teacher leader was
crucial in preparing principals for their current
positions.

10. Having experience as an assistant principal
was crucial in preparing principals for their
current positions.

Based on your perception of the recruitment of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal recruitment:
Recruitment is defined as the strategies and steps that principals took
prior to taking on their first principal position.
RECRUITMENT

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
11. District resources and recruitment strategies
help candidates to get recruited into principal
positions in my district.

12. University principal preparation programs help
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

13. Nontraditional principal preparation programs
help candidates to get recruited into principal
positions in my district.

14. The nonmonetary incentives offered by my
district are important factors for candidates
applying for principal positions in my district.

15. The salary and benefits offered are important
factors for candidates applying for principal
positions in my district.

16. Candidates’ previous experience in education
is an important factor in recruiting for principal
positions in my district.

17. Candidates’ previous experience outside of
education is an important factor in recruiting
for principal positions in my district.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 150

18. The reputation of my school district is an
important factor in candidates applying for
principal positions in my district.

19. Candidates’ level of understanding of district
initiatives and goals was an important factor in
being recruited into principal positions in my
district.

20. Networking with district personnel helps
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

21. Having a mentor helps candidates to get
recruited into principal positions in my district.

22. Being an employee of my school district helps
candidates to get recruited into principal posi-
tions in my district.

23. Candidates’ participation in professional
organizations helps candidates to get recruited
into principal positions in my district.

24. Holding an advanced degree (e.g., Ed.D. or
Ph.D.) helps candidates to get recruited into
principal positions in my district.

25. Having instructional leadership experience is
an important factor in recruiting for principal
positions in my district.

26. My district is experiencing a shortage of qual-
ity candidates for the principal position.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 151

Based on your perception of the retention of principals,
rate the following statements from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

For the next statements, please use the following definition for principal retention:
Retention is the process/strategy used by principals
to maintain their current principal position.
RETENTION

Statement

Strongly
Agree
(4)

Agree
(3)

Disagree
(2)

Strongly
Disagree
(1)
Don’t Know
or
Not
Applicable
(NA)
27. University training programs provide princi-
pals with skills/strategies that support their
success in retaining their current positions.

28. Professional networks (such as NAESP,
NASSP, ACSA, university networks) provide
principals with processes/strategies that
support their success in retaining their current
positions.

29. Having mentor(s) provides principals with
processes/ strategies that support their success
in retaining their current positions.

30. The relationships that principals have with
directors, assistant superintendents, and the
superintendent support their success in
retaining their current positions.

31. Principals’ compensation determines their
desire to continue in their current positions.

32. Having a formal, written strategic plan
supports principals’ success in retaining their
current positions.

33. Pressures from accountability measures affect
principals’ desires to retain their current posi-
tion.

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 152
APPENDIX G
PRINCIPAL INTERVIEW GUIDE
Interviewer: Date:
Interviewee: Location:
Job Title: Contact Info:
Length of Time in Your Position:
Start Time: End Time:
Introduction

Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. The purpose of this study is to understand
the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K-12 principals in California public schools.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. The information that you provide today will be kept
confidential, but the data collected will be used for our study. Any identifiable information will
be removed from our study to maintain your confidentiality. You can stop at any time or choose
not to answer a question that you are not comfortable with. Our interview should take about 45
minutes of your time. I would like to record our conversation, in addition to taking notes, so that
I can ensure that I accurately represent your responses. This audio recording will not be shared
with anyone. Are you comfortable with me recording our conversation today?

Your reflection and experiences will be used to help understand how K-12 principals in Califor-
nia public schools are prepared, recruited and retained. Let’s get started.

Preparation

1. What type of training program (e.g. principal’s academy, university program, etc.) did you
attend that prepared you for the principalship?
1a. Which training was most effective? Why?

2. Describe your career path to the principalship.
2a. Which professional experiences leading up to becoming a principal were the most
beneficial? Why?

3. Which professional relationships helped you prepare for the principal position?
3a. Why were they important in your preparation?

4. When did you know that you wanted to be a principal?
4a. What proactive steps did you take to get a position?
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 153
Recruitment

5. How did your training program prepare you for the principal recruitment process?

6. What prior experiences did you have that made you the most desirable candidate for princi-
pal?
6a. Is there an experience that you lacked that might have helped you while being
recruited?

7. What qualities or characteristics made you a qualified principal candidate?

8. Did you strategically use professional relationships, such as mentoring or networking, to
attain your position? If so, how?

9. What attracted you to the principalship in your district?

Retention

10. What skills/strategies does a principal need to be successful?
10a. What does your district do to support the development of those skills/strategies?
10b. How does ongoing training support your retention?

11. What professional relationships support your retention?
11a. Is the relationship formal or informal?
11b. Is it assigned or self-selected?
11c. What strategies do you use with your supervisors to support your retention as a
principal?

12. What factors impact your decision to stay in the principalship?
12a. What factors, if any, would influence you leaving the position?

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 154
APPENDIX H
HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATOR INTERVIEW GUIDE
Interviewer: Date:
Interviewee: Location:
Job Title: Contact Info:
Length of Time in Your Position:
Start Time: End Time:
Introduction

Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. The purpose of this study is to understand
the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K-12 principals in California public schools.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. The information you provide today will be kept
confidential, but the data collected will be used for our study. Any identifiable information will
be removed from our study to maintain your confidentiality. You can stop at any time or chose
not to answer a question that you are not comfortable with. Our interview should take about 45
minutes of your time. I would like to record our conversation, in addition to taking notes, so that
I can ensure that I accurately represent your responses. This audio recording will not be shared
with anyone. Are you comfortable with me recording our conversation today?

Your reflection and experiences will be used to help understand how K-12 principals in Califor-
nia public schools are prepared, recruited and retained. Let’s get started.

Preparation

1. What type of training program did your principals attend to prepare them for the
principalship?
1a. Where did they receive the most effective training? Why?

2. Describe your principals’ career paths to the principalship.
2a. Which professional experiences leading up to the principalship were the most
beneficial to your principals? Why?

3. Which professional relationships helped your principals to prepare for their position?
3a. Why were they important?

4. What proactive steps did your principals take to get their positions?

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 155
Recruitment

5. How did principal training programs prepare your principals for the recruitment process?

6. What prior experiences did your principals have that made them the most desirable candidate
to be hired?
6a. Are there any experiences they lacked that would have helped them be recruited?

7. What qualities or characteristics do you seek in a principal candidate?

8. How have your principals used professional relationships, such as mentoring or networking,
to attain their positions?

9. What strategies do you use to attract principal candidates to your district?

Retention

10. What skills/strategies does a principal need to be successful?
10a. What does your district do to support the development of those skills/strategies?

11. What professional relationships support the retention of principals?
11a. Are these relationships formal or informal?
11b. Are they assigned or self-selected?

12. What factors have impacted the ongoing retention of your principals?
12a. What factors, if any, influence principals leaving the position?
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 156
APPENDIX I
IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR INTERVIEW GUIDE
Interviewer: Date:
Interviewee: Location:
Job Title: Contact Info:
Length of Time in Your Position:
Start Time: End Time:
Introduction

Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. The purpose of this study is to understand
the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K-12 principals in California public schools.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. The information you provide today will be kept
confidential, but the data collected will be used for our study. Any identifiable information will
be removed from our study to maintain your confidentiality. You can stop at any time or chose
not to answer a question that you are not comfortable with. Our interview should take about 45
minutes of your time. I would like to record our conversation, in addition to taking notes, so that
I can ensure that I accurately represent your responses. This audio recording will not be shared
with anyone. Are you comfortable with me recording our conversation today?

Your reflection and experiences will be used to help understand how K-12 principals in Califor-
nia public schools are prepared, recruited and retained. Let’s get started.

Preparation

1. What type of training program did your principals attend to prepare them for the
principalship?
1a. Where did they receive the most effective training? Why?

2. Describe your principals’ career paths to the principalship.
2a. Which professional experiences leading up to the principalship were the most
beneficial to your principals? Why?

3. Which professional relationships helped your principals to prepare for their position?
3a. Why were they important?

4. What proactive steps did your principals take to get their positions?

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 157
Recruitment

5. How did principal training programs prepare your principals for the recruitment process?

6. What prior experiences did your principals have that made them the most desirable candi-
dates to be hired?
6a. Are there any experiences they lacked that would have helped them be recruited?

7. What qualities or characteristics do you seek in a principal candidate?

8. How have your principals used professional relationships, such as mentoring or networking,
to attain their positions?

9. What strategies do you use to attract principal candidates to your district?

Retention

10. What skills/strategies does a principal need to be successful?
10a. What does your district do to support the development of those skills/strategies?

11. What professional relationships support the retention of principals?
11a. Are these relationships formal or informal?
11b. Are they assigned or self-selected?

12. What factors have impacted the ongoing retention of your principals?
12a. What factors, if any, influence principals leaving the position?
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 158
APPENDIX J
SUPERINTENDENT INTERVIEW GUIDE
Interviewer: Date:
Interviewee: Location:
Job Title: Contact Info:
Length of Time in Your Position:
Start Time: End Time:
Introduction

Thank you for taking the time to meet with me today. The purpose of this study is to understand
the preparation, recruitment, and retention of K-12 principals in California public schools.

Your participation in this study is voluntary. The information you provide today will be kept
confidential, but the data collected will be used for our study. Any identifiable information will
be removed from our study to maintain your confidentiality. You can stop at any time or chose
not to answer a question that you are not comfortable with. Our interview should take about 45
minutes of your time. I would like to record our conversation, in addition to taking notes, so that
I can ensure that I accurately represent your responses. This audio recording will not be shared
with anyone. Are you comfortable with me recording our conversation today?

Your reflection and experiences will be used to help understand how K-12 principals in Califor-
nia public schools are prepared, recruited and retained. Let’s get started.

Preparation

1. What type of training program did your principals attend to prepare them for the
principalship?
1a. Where did they receive the most effective training? Why?

2. Describe your principals’ career paths to the principalship.
2a. Which professional experiences leading up to the principalship were the most
beneficial to your principals? Why?

3. Which professional relationships help your principals prepare for their position?
3a. Why were they important?

4. What proactive steps did your principals take to get their positions?

THE PRINCIPALSHIP 159
Recruitment

5. How did principal training programs prepare your principals for the recruitment process?

6. What prior experiences did your principals have that made them the most desirable candi-
dates to be hired?
6a. Are there any experiences they lacked that would have helped them be recruited?

7. What qualities or characteristics do you seek in a principal candidate?

8. How have your principals used professional relationships, such as mentoring or networking,
to attain their positions?

9. What strategies do you use to attract principal candidates to your district?

Retention

10. What skills/strategies does a principal need to be successful?
10a. What does your district do to support the development of those skills/strategies?

11. What professional relationships support the retention of principals?
11a. Are these relationships formal or informal?
11b. Are they assigned or self-selected?

12. What factors have impacted the ongoing retention of your principals?
12a. What factors, if any, influence principals leaving the position?
THE PRINCIPALSHIP 160
APPENDIX K
QUESTION ALIGNMENT MATRIX

Instrument
RQ1
How have training
programs and profes-
sional experiences
prepared principals to
manage the complex-
ities and challenges of
the principalship?
RQ2
What are the percep-
tions of principals,
immediate supervi-
sors of principals,
human resources
administrators, and
superintendents
regarding strategies to
recruit successful
principal candidates?
RQ3
What are the per-
ceived strategies that
support the retention
of principals?
Principal Survey 1-13 14-29 30-36
Principal Interview
Guide
1-4 5-9 10-12
Human Resources
Administrator Survey
1-10 11-26 27-33
Human Resources
Administrator
Interview Guide
1-4 5-9 10-12
Immediate Supervisor
Survey
1-10 11-26 27-33
Immediate Supervisor
Interview Guide
1-4 5-9 10-12
Superintendent
Survey
1-10 11-26 27-33
Superintendent
Interview Guide
1-4 5-9 10-12

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The K–12 public school principalship is a complex position that continues to evolve and to become increasingly challenging. Today’s principals are responsible not only for the academic and socioemotional needs of the students but also for the development and training of staff, creating and sustaining strong relationships with families, and collaborating with the community. Administrative preparation programs often do not support aspiring principals adequately in the areas that lead to their success in the position–instead focusing on the managerial aspects of the job. This qualitative study examined the preparation, recruitment, and retention of public school principals in southern California. Perspectives from principals, immediate supervisors of principals, human resources administrators, and superintendents were considered to identify common themes in response to the research questions. Learning opportunities, on-the-job experiences, and networking relationships were found to be valuable in the preparation of principals. Taking advantage of networking opportunities, having current administrators tap potential candidates, and demonstrating characteristics unique to the district were all viewed as valuable for principal recruitment. Relationships with others in the district, having a mentor, and finding the work meaningful were important in the retention of principals. The themes in this study have implications for traditional university preparation programs, district personnel, and aspiring principals. Future research can examine how districts can implement these findings to develop a strong pipeline of future administrators.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals in southern California

PDF

Understanding the 21st-century principalship: contemporary preparation, recruitment and retention practices

PDF

Developing longevity in the K-12 principal position: strategies for preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K-12 principals

PDF

Public school district principals in California: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

School leadership: preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals

PDF

The 21st-century principal: the recruitment, mentoring, and retention of principals

PDF

An analysis of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of principals

PDF

K-12 public school district principals in California: strategies for preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California K–12 principals

PDF

High-performing school district superintendents: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

Selecting the 21st century school principals: preparation, recruitment, and retention strategies

PDF

Successful superintendents of schools: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

Perception of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of California school district superintendents

PDF

Understanding the pathway leading to the recruitment, support, and retention of superintendents from multiple lenses

PDF

The obscurity inside the margins: the preparation, recruitment, and retention of women of color superintendents

PDF

Influence of teacher recruitment, retention, training, working conditions, and improvement of district support of 21st-century teaching and learning

PDF

Educational leadership: a comprehensive analysis of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of school district superintendents

PDF

The preparation, recruitment, and retention of California schoool district superintendents

PDF

The impact of formalized school board training on California school districts

Asset Metadata

Creator Fraser, Joseph G. (author)

Core Title The principalship: preparation, recruitment, and retention

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 05/14/2020

Defense Date 01/16/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag K-12 education,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Escalante, Michael (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Crosby, Owen (committee member), Doll, Michelle (committee member)

Creator Email josephf@usc.edu,yellowboxmacaroons@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-306698

Unique identifier UC11663414

Identifier etd-FraserJose-8516.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-306698 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-FraserJose-8516.pdf

Dmrecord 306698

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Fraser, Joseph G.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA