Greg Lacey

The Principalship: A Distinct, Specialised Career

Published: Leadership in Focus magazine (Victorian Principals Association), 1998

Author: Greg Lacey

Is being a principal, simply the top rung of the teacher ladder or is it a whole new career? The
current career structure in Victoria at least, would suggest that it is the former. However,
many are beginning to question this assumption. The role has changed considerably and yet
salary and career structure have not changed in response. Current arrangements do nothing to
attract new applicants. They provide no advancement, no career structure and no recognition
for improved effectiveness. Salary and recognition are simply based on bums on seats.
Essentially, the more students you have, the more you are paid.

Principalship as a career
We are beginning to recognise the principalship as a new career, not just another step in a
teaching career. Most principals would still consider themselves educators but none could
deny that the job they are doing is significantly different to the one they were doing in the
classroom. In Victoria, there are principals with ten or more years experience who are
earning little more than they were at appointment. In the same time, a teacher will have
progressed through most of the incremental scale with a commensurate 50% increase in
salary. If time in the job makes teachers more effective, as measured by their increasing
salary, why not principals? If the Federal Government is calling nationwide for a scheme to
reward and retain our best and brightest teachers, why not a similar call for our best and
brightest principals? We know that both the number and quality of candidates for principal
positions are dropping and retention is an increasing issue as our most experienced principals
age.

The road to the top of the teacher class is clear, distinct and recognised in salary, levels of
responsibility and title. We use terms like graduate, accomplished and expert to describe the
standards through which teachers pass. Where are our accomplished and expert principals?
Where indeed, are our leading principals? How do you get to the top of the principal class?

A Victorian experience
It was 1979. I nervously parked in front of my first school. There I was, fresh out of teachers
college, about to start my career. Id been sent to the school by the Department. There was no
application, no interview and certainly no choice for me or the school. I began a career in
which advancement was essentially based on time on task. The longer you taught, the
higher up the ladder you progressed. It was a numbers game. There were some tricks of the
trade to enhance your chances of advancement but essentially it was a process of waiting in
line.

Some years later, the system in Victoria changed significantly with the introduction of local
selection of principals and teachers. Schools adopted a new system with the prospect of
choosing their own teachers to suit the school vision and the needs of the community. For
ambitious young teachers, it was an exciting development meaning that one could potentially
advance through the system through a merit based selection process rather than simply
waiting in line.

Greg Lacey
Over the next few years many moved up the ladder, working hard and grasping opportunities
and taking on progressively higher levels of responsibility, eventually becoming assistant
principals and then finally principals. But there the advancement stops. Where are the
opportunities for advancement in this new career called principalship?

The new principalship
It is universally recognised that the role of the principal is far more complex and demanding
than ever. We have made great advancements in the development of teaching and learning,
curriculum, school governance, facilities and funding models. Consequently, a principal these
days, in a self-managing environment like Victoria, faces a far different educational
landscape than was the case twenty years ago. And yet we reward our principals with a career
structure that has changed little in the last 30 years. The time has come to take a fresh look at
the principalship and its place in a modern school environment. We firstly need to recognise
that, in becoming a Principal, you are indeed embarking upon a new career. In light of that
recognition, we should develop a system of professional compensation that matches the level
of professionalism the principalship now requires.

One could make a good case for the notion that a merit based selection process for teachers,
applied effectively, goes some way to ensuring that progression through an incremental scale
and promotion to leading teacher positions, reflects the increasing effectiveness of the teacher
and the relative complexity of each new role. The same case would be difficult to make for
principals under current arrangements. Across Australia, principal salary levels are generally
determined by school size. Some would argue that the complexity of a principals role in a
large school is worthy of higher pay. However, it could be just as easily argued that the
principal of a small school with a teaching load, no assistant principal and little in the way of
support staff and leadership profile has a far more complex role and yet receives the lowest
pay, not much above that of a top level teacher. No account is taken of the effectiveness of
the principal or the school, nor does it adequately reflect other factors such as growth and
development in the role, the greater complexity of some schools or the many tasks taken on
by principals beyond their own school.

This would suggest then, that we need to develop consistent, transparent methods of
determining differentiated compensation. This is not a new concept of course. There have
certainly been attempts to provide differentiated salary in the past but they have generally
been nave in their concept and focused on simplistic notions of accountability to measured
targets. Most principals in Victoria will remember the performance pay debacle that existed
in the late 1990s. Truly professional compensation needs to encompass a much broader
vision than simply performance pay. We need to drastically expand the professional
compensation debate to include other areas of consideration. The literature around this issue
is rich and varied.

Recruitment and retention
Most commonly, much of the discussion deals with the issue of the principal shortage. That
is, a shortage of quality, well prepared aspirants to take principal positions in the future.
Studies have been completed, or are in the midst of being completed, in the US, UK,
Australia, Denmark and indeed in a combined study across all 22 OECD countries. The
principal shortage manifests itself through the recruitment phase, as a lack of quality
candidates for Principal positions. Aspiration to leadership positions is not necessarily
translating into actual candidates. The situation is exacerbated by factors such as our aging
Greg Lacey
workforce (an international issue) and our inability to provide principals with a clear and
distinct career path that encourages them to stay in the job.

In the US in 1998, both the NAESP (National Association of Elementary School Principals)
and the NASSP (National Association of Secondary School Principals) published a report
indicating serious concern for the Principalship in the US. The study entitled Is There a
Shortage of Qualified Candidates for Openings in the Principalship?, an exploratory study,
indicated that "approximately half of the school districts surveyed reported a shortage in the
labor pool for K-12 principal positions,". In California in 1999, 73 percent of 376
superintendents reported a shortage of qualified candidates for elementary school principal
positions and in Indiana in 1999, 72.9 percent of the superintendents who responded defined
a shortage given that the pool of candidates during the previous three years was much
smaller than was previously the case.

Further, the NAESP/NASSP report indicated that, out of the many factors that contributed to
a lack of interest in principal positions, 58% of the superintendents listed compensation
being insufficient compared to responsibilities as a significant barrier.
An executive summary of the recent OECD report, Improving School Leadership: Policy
and Practice, which was released in April of this year at a conference in Copenhagen,
reported that The study of 22 nations found that the roles and responsibilities of school
leaders have expanded dramatically in the past few decades. At the same time, the workforce
of principals in many nations is nearing retirement, and a majority of countries studied
reported difficulties in finding enough suitable job candidates.
In their summary, they recommended a number of strategies to make school leadership an
attractive profession. In particular they noted that, potential applicants are deterred by the
heavy workload of principals and the fact that the job does not seem to be adequately
remunerated or supported. Further they recommended a focus on the relative
attractiveness of school leaders salaries, noting that, the relative attractiveness of salaries
for school leaders can influence the supply of high quality candidates. Policy makers need to
monitor remuneration compared to similar grades in the public and private sectors and make
school leadership more competitive. Establishing separate salary scales for teachers and
principals can attract more candidates from among the teaching staff. At the same time,
salary scales should reflect leadership structures and school-level factors to attract high
performing leaders to all schools.
The ACER (Australian Council for Educational Research) in a report for DEST (Department
of Education, Science and Training), addressing the issues and concerns raised by the OECD,
noted that Australia is experiencing serious leadership supply problems and noted a
broad trend of low and, in some instances, diminishing number of applications. The study
concludes that, Provided incentives exist for teachers to seek to realise their career
aspirations and provided these incentives are not outweighed by the disincentives they
encounter, there is a greater likelihood that such aspirations will translate into applications.
Current evidence suggests that the number and strength of the disincentives have a
significant impact on aspirants.

The Victorian study The Privilege and the Price recorded many of the same concerns in
regard to the recruitment and retention of effective leaders and this is once more supported by
the recent study by Australian secondary school principal organisations Making a
Greg Lacey
Difference . Counting the Cost. If the balance is not struck between the level of stress,
responsibility and workload and the commensurate compensation and reward, we can expect
a continuation of the decline in quality candidates for principal positions and the continued
the exodus of effective leaders from the profession.

It would seem then that offering a suitable level of base compensation is a key point of
recognition and reward that will have an impact on teacher aspirations and retention rates
within the profession. However, this is only a starting point in building a system of truly
professional compensation for principals. It provides a base upon which we can scaffold a
range of other measures to ensure that principals can progress through their new career with
appropriate and on-going recognition.

In the international literature there are three main ways in which principals are being
provided with a professional salary structure. In general terms, they can be summarised as
recognition, responsibilities and results.

Results the complexities of performance
Let us deal first with perhaps the most difficult and certainly the most controversial method
payment by results. Whilst this sort of performance pay is often the preferred method of
differentiating principal salaries, it is also the one most fraught with danger and most dubious
in its impact.

The simplistic argument is that performance based contracts increase levels of accountability.
However, even the supporters of this strategy cannot come to a consensus as to the method by
which it should be evaluated. Concerns abound about teaching to the test, performance
targets unrelated to the real work of Principals and accountability that takes no account of the
school context. State-wide or national testing might, at face value, seem an appropriate
method for evaluation of performance based contracts. However, as a sole measure without
school context, it advantages high SES schools and discourages applicants to more difficult
schools.

If results are to be used as a means by which we reward our high performing principals, we
certainly need to put a great deal more work into concepts like value-added measures of
school performance. We also need a much clearer picture of the real work of principals in
order to develop measures that clearly reflect their performance.

Recognition raise the status
Appropriate recognition for Principals and their work is, of course, not simply an issue of
salary. However, regardless of any intrinsic satisfaction in the role, appropriate recognition
through salary is still a key factor and an appropriate acknowledgment. It is also more likely
to be more transparent and permanent in nature. This not only makes it a simple mechanism
to administer but an enduring means by which we can honour achievement.

Recognition can come in many forms. At a base level, Principals can be recognised for extra
qualifications and accreditations. The simple gesture of permanently raising the salary level
of a Principal who holds a Masters Degree or Doctorate would have a significant impact. It
would be a mark of respect for the increased qualification and an acknowledgement of the
value placed on such an achievement.
Greg Lacey
At a more complex level, recognition of advanced standards met would also reward
development and clearly delineate our high performers. In the United States, the NASSP
(National Association of Secondary School Principals) position statement on this issue
indicates that States and districts should provide additional compensation for exemplary
principals who obtain national advanced certification once such recognition is in place.
The NASSP advocates for a voluntary national advanced certification for exemplary
principals. In their opinion, this will elevate the status of the principalship and recognise the
best and brightest among the profession.
Much work has been done in Australia and overseas to establish advanced standards.
Teaching Australia has released a discussion paper in regard to national professional
standards for teachers. It indicates that advanced standards serve three important purposes.
They provide inspiration to aspiring teachers and principal, offer guidance to members of the
profession seeking to improve their professional practice and increase public recognition of
the quality of the profession. One could easily make a case for a fourth purpose; that of
providing a mechanism for the recognition of the attainment of advanced standards through
increased salary.

There are several leadership continua published, that create a simple framework for assessing
the attainment of advanced standards. In the US, the NAESPs Leading Learning
Communities provides standards for what Principals should know and be able to do.
Here in Victoria, the DEECD has produced the Developmental Learning Framework for
School Leaders which provides a similar construct that could be easily adapted to such a
purpose.

Many education authorities use award based programs as a basis for recognition. The USA
has the National Distinguished Principals Program. Representing all 50 states, these
principals are honored in Washington, D.C. at a traditional black-tie awards banquet. In
Canada, they take an extra step in that each year, the winners of Canadas Outstanding
Principals awards, also become members of the prestigious and highly esteemed National
Academy of Principals.

There are many further means by which Principals can be recognised and remunerated for the
complex work they do. The relative complexity of their particular school environment is an
obvious consideration. The level of disadvantage, the difficulty of staffing the school,
isolation and the level of ESL are all factors that can potentially increase complexity. With an
aging workforce and diminishing numbers of suitable applicants, it will be crucial to offer
monetary enticements for aspirants to ensure that these schools are properly staffed and
effectively lead. A lack of quality leadership in these schools will only further increase the
level of disadvantage experienced by the students.

Responsibilities beyond the school gate
Nobody will argue that much of the work of a Principal, these days is beyond the school gate.
Principals take on a range of system and professional responsibilities, with very little
recognition and no remuneration. This is particularly the case in Victoria where self-
management has increasingly placed a range of responsibilities firmly in the lap of school
principals. Whilst no-one would like to see self-management pared back, we need to
recognise that education authorities are obtaining quality services on the cheap.

Greg Lacey
It is commonplace in the private sector and an expectation amongst teachers, that when extra
responsibilities are accepted, appropriate pay should follow. This is certainly not the culture
when authorities deal with principals. There is a strong reliance, on the goodwill and
professional motivation of principals. Whilst principals would obviously prefer they were
paid more for taking on network or cluster leadership, mentoring and professional learning
provision, they would generally rather do it for nothing than see it not done.

Even within schools, Principals take on major capital works projects, community
responsibilities and innovation programs without any increase in salary but often with
increased stress, work time and responsibility. The natural tendency for principals though, is
to perform these roles without compensation for the good of their schools, their communities
and their students.

Where to now?
The recent EBA decision in Victoria, only highlights the lack of commitment that successive
governments have had to their school leaders. Whilst they will be relying on school principals
to deliver on their goals and programs and targets, there is no political will to properly
compensate them for the crucial role they play in leading our schools.

Principals dont just lead schools. They lead communities, they lead improvement and they
lead innovation. Government rhetoric about placing education first, needs to be reflected in a
level of professional compensation for educational leaders that heightens the status of the
profession, rewards performance, provides an enticement to quality applicants and recognises
achievements. We need to quantify the increasingly complex role of a principal in the 21
st

Century, and develop a professional remuneration system that delivers all of this.