Most people who work in the field of education would probably agree that the principalship is a very complex, challenging job. Sergiovanni (2001) tells us that the principal’s roles and responsibilities have changed over time, and emphasizes that effective principals are needed for schools to function well. When I was an elementary principal in the 1980’s and 1990’s, it was tough enough; but today, with the assessment and accountability issues related to No Child Left Behind, school security concerns, shrinking district budgets, pressures from special interest groups, school consolidations, the continual need to keep up with technology, and local level politics, the job of the principal seems to have become even more overwhelming. That is why more than ever, there is a need for formal mentorship and induction programs for new principals, similar to those for classroom teachers, which offer support and guidance. Historically, it seems to have been assumed that a new principal should be able to ‘hit the ground running’, and be successful, effective, and comfortable right from the start. Riede (2003) states that, “We assume that if somebody is a pretty good teacher then they’ll be a competent administrator” (p. 27). Mawhinney (2005) writes about this and his experience as a new principal, sharing that “Prepping new principals goes well beyond a set of new keys and well wishes” (p. 14). I find it discouraging that according to researchers like Farkas (2001), many principals and superintendents believe that graduate administrator preparation programs are not meeting the needs of the prospective school leaders they enroll. In a similar vein, Malone (2001) reports that while advanced university training might teach about leadership behaviors, it does not necessarily transmit the knowledge and behaviors that are the hallmarks of successful principals. As I recall, the administrators of my era seemed to function well in their positions without necessarily having designated mentors or other types of support, particularly from the university. But the world is much different today than it was twenty or thirty years ago, and so are public schools.

Those of us who were educated and trained as school administrators two or three decades ago recall sitting through classes at the university every week, where professors delivered three-hour lectures. There were no on-line classes, no communication by e-mail, no chat rooms or discussion boards, and an advisor was difficult to even locate. In a large university with tens of thousands of students and instructors, I felt isolated. It was difficult for me to consider using anyone at the university as a mentor or sounding-board, which is really what I needed after I completed my program and began working as a new principal.

Now that I train prospective principals at the university level, and after a decade of experience in the principal’s office, I see things differently. I have become more attuned to what my prospective principals want and need. I listen to them, advise them, communicate with them regularly, and visit them. In the following sections, I offer three distinct areas where universities can and should contribute to the success of new principals: first, in the area of pre-professional training; second, by offering support for new principals after they have begun working in the field; and third, by coordinating with established mentoring programs or creating new ones.

Pre-Professional Training

Many people who aspire to be principals are unaware of the type of education and training they need or will receive at the university level. If you spend some time researching the principal training programs at many universities, you will find them to have similar courses and curricula. Most of these programs are based on earning a master’s degree in educational leadership or school administration, which includes courses such as: leadership theory; school law; administration of schools at the elementary, middle, or high school level; curriculum and assessment; community relations; human relations; school personnel management; instructional leadership; research; and sometimes, a course in school-related technology. Clinical field-based experiences are either embedded in each of the individual courses or offered as a capstone internship. Students progress through the sequence of courses, complete a thesis or capstone project such as a portfolio, sit for a state licensing examination, and apply to their state departments of education for certification. This provides the foundation of theory and hands-on experience that helps the new principal get started.

Now that I have taught most of the required courses to aspiring school principals over the past decade, I can tell you firsthand that they need and want more than this, much of which can be provided by the university. First, I cannot emphasize strongly enough the need for meaningful, hands-on, supervised field experiences for the principal in training. Simply put, one cannot become an effective school administrator by merely reading books and listening to lectures, any more than one can learn to effectively drive a car by simply reading a manual. Carl Rogers reinforced this sentiment in his book On Becoming a Person (1961): “Experience is, for me, the highest authority. The touchstone of validity is my own experience. No other person’s ideas, and none of my own ideas, are as authoritative as my experience. It is to experience that I must return again and again, to discover a closer approximation to truth as it is in the process of becoming in me” (pp. 23-4). In a similar vein, Kolb (1984) reiterated the critical role of learning through experience when he defined learning as “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (p. 38). Field experiences and internships provide this to the principal-in-training; they are crucial, and need to be clearly defined, providing relevant, real-life opportunities for learning, growth, and practice. The university professor and the on-site supervisor have a perfect opportunity to develop a mentor relationship with the student, which hopefully will extend well beyond the field experience itself. Daloz (Galbraith, 1998) explains the mentor role as one that “promote(s) the development of the learner” (p. 354) and interprets the (new) environment, helping the students learn what they need to know to be successful. The value of experience is well documented in the research literature on adult learning through the writings of Kolb (1984); Rogers and Freiberg (1994); Brookfield (1986); and Knowles (1980). Recognizing this crucial role of experiential learning, the university can broaden its educational role to bridge the gap from students’ classroom experiences to those in the school.

Several years ago, while teaching at a very small university, I developed a program to prepare principals, which has since been adopted by other colleges and universities all over the state. I developed a handbook for administrative field experiences which every student in the principalship program received (both paper and electronic copies). All of the objectives, activities, and evaluations were reviewed carefully with each new class every term. The students created portfolios documenting all of their work in the required field experiences, which included hundreds of hours of on-site work and a minimum of 40 individual activities, each targeted to a specific area of administration outlined in the ISLLC Standards. The students selected their own mentors (site-supervisors) based on specific criteria, in a school district of their choice. Their work was evaluated by their professors, by their site-supervisors, and by means of self-evaluation. Their experiences formed the basis of our class discussions, where the students could share and learn from one another. I believed it was better if they made their big mistakes during this supervised learning experience, than on their own as new principals.

Over a period of three years (2001-2004), I collected the program evaluations from 255 students who completed the program. This group included 147 women and 108 men between the ages of 28 and 61. I was very interested in the students’ comments, and systematically searched through the paper evaluations for common themes. From the hundreds of comments they wrote, I discovered that what these graduate students wanted most (and what they appreciated) from the program were the following: high-quality coursework (no “fluff” or “busywork” as one student put it); conveniently-scheduled course offerings with part of the coursework offered in an on-line format; flexibility in assignments and deadlines; knowledgeable, caring, and patient instructors; timely feedback on assignments and assessments; and relevant hands-on field experiences that allowed them to put into practice what they were learning. Many students expressed concern that they might not continue to have this level of support in their jobs as new principals, and as a result, many continued to contact me by phone or e-mail after they completed the program. They shared challenges and successes with me in their new jobs as principals, solicited my advice, but most of all just seemed to need someone to listen to them. Perhaps we who teach in colleges and universities need to listen to these folks, and tailor our programs to meet their needs, which often change with fluctuating social, economic, and political currents. It became evident to me that when the coursework has been completed and the new principal is on the job, the need for support does not end.

Support for New Principals in the Field

So crucial is the new principal’s performance in the first year on the job that some researchers point to it as a pivotal determinant of overall success in school administration. In their book, If I Only Knew… Success Strategies for Navigating the Principalship (1998), authors Harvey B. Alvy and Pam Robbins warn that the first year as principal can be a predictor of future success. Likewise, Duke et al. (1984) note that “early experience in a position can be a potent shaper of an individual’s subsequent performance” (p. 12), and Parkey and Hall (1992) concur, stating that “a principal’s eventual level of career development is strongly indicated by the end of the first year” (p. 355).

My concern has been that although we seem to be getting much better at supporting our students while they are enrolled in our leadership preparation programs, we tend to cut our ties with them too soon after they have “flown the nest” and have moved on to positions as school principals, which is when they most need our support. So, what can the university do? Listed below are several ideas that I have found to be effective in supporting new principals from the university level:

2. Schedule open forums at convenient times for former students to come back together with their classmates and professors to discuss their jobs as principals, raise questions, and share their experiences.

3. Set up a ‘hotline’ that would allow new principals to speak with professors, school law experts, or experienced principals about specific problems.

4. Develop a university website with links to research sites and other resources for use by new (and experienced) principals.

5. Offer continuing education and/or refresher seminars for new principals at a reduced cost or free of charge.

6. Provide on-site mentors from the university for first-year principals.

7. Offer “think tank” services to principals. University faculty can conduct research that would otherwise be too time-consuming for principals to do themselves.

8. Invite former students, practicing principals, and current students to a “networking” lunch or dinner where they can just sit and talk. Do this on a regular basis, perhaps bimonthly.

9. Revise and offer courses in critical needs areas, keeping abreast of school reform issues like No Child Left Behind, school law, and special education.

10. Provide staff development for teachers that supports what new principals are trying to do in the schools.

11. Offer consulting services to new principals on special topics like: politics, legislation, the media, working with the state department of education, and students whose first language is not English.

12. Create a university principals’ academy and invite program graduates as well as practicing principals. Typically, these groups meet 4 to 6 times a year, offer programs with guest speakers, and provide lunch with time for sharing and networking.

In the final section of this paper, mentoring programs for new principals are discussed. While the list is not intended to be all-inclusive, my purpose is to raise the readers’ awareness of the existence of these programs, and to offer models to universities for the development of similar ones.

Mentoring Programs for Principals

Around the country, support programs have been created to help new principals cope with the challenges of their positions. One of these is the New Administrators Program (NAP) in Santa Cruz, California, which grew out of the Santa Cruz New Teacher Project. Moir and Bloom (2003) report that early research has shown that principals are emerging as instructional leaders with more confidence than their colleagues who have not had this type of support. Likewise, Lovely (2004) reports that since its inception in 1998, NAP has developed one of the most comprehensive coaching programs for new principals, creating what she calls a “coaching formula for champions” (p. 63).

In New York City’s District Two, new principals are assigned a veteran principal who serves as a mentor. This team effort was has been found to help principals deal with the significant stresses of working in the inner-city schools (Willen, 2001). Similarly, The New York City Leadership Academy’s Principal Mentor Program ( http://www.newvisions.org/leadership) works in conjunction with the News Visions for Public Schools program.

Another model, developed by the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) combines four strategies: teamwork, personal planning, building community and collaboration, and coaching/mentoring. The last involves the pairing of a veteran mentor from outside the new principal’s school district. The mentor works with new principals, helping them develop plans for personal improvement, and visiting them at their assigned schools (Crews and Weakley, 1996).

According to Daresh (2004), principal mentoring programs appeared in the 1990’s, and have been gaining in popularity as a way to support new principals. As the national professional associations and state departments of education began predicting grave shortages of principals into the new century, the rebirth of these programs were seen as a way to encourage prospective principals to engage in the necessary training, while assuring them that it was not an impossible or isolated job. Daresh lists several states (e.g., Mississippi, Ohio, Texas, and Arkansas) that have developed new principal mentoring programs since 1999 (p. 509).

Conyers (2005), a retired school superintendent, writes about the Protégé Mentoring Program developed in the Community Consolidated School District 15 in Palatine, Illinois, which provides potential leaders and new school leaders with “confidential access to an external mentor 24 hours a day on a completely confidential basis” (p. 18). Under this innovative program, the key is supporting the prospective principal as a whole person, not only in his or her job, for a period of two years. Conyers contributes the success of this program to the ongoing support, respectful relationships, and taking mentoring out of the realm of peer or supervisor.

The National Association of Elementary School Principals (NAESP) has created the Peer Assisted Leadership Services (PALS) mentoring program to support new principals ( www.naesp.org), and the National Association of Secondary School Principals ( www.nassp.org) likewise provides support and mentoring for prospective and new administrators. Other widely-known mentoring/support programs include: the Educational Leadership Development Academy (ELDA), Induction and Support Program in San Diego, California ( www.sandiego.edu.soles), the Tennessee Academy for School Leaders (TASL) ( www.state.tn.us/education/tpd/tasl.shtml), the University of North Carolina Leadership Program for New Principals ( http://www.ncpep.org/content.php/index.htm), the Massachusetts Elementary School Principals Association (MESPA) The Consulting Mentor Program: Guiding the Journey of New School Leaders ( http://www.mespa.org), the New Jersey Leaders to Leaders (NJ-L2L) Program ( http://www.njl2l.org/), the Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association (TEPSA) First Time Campus Administrator Program ( www.tepsa.org), and The Principals’ Center at Harvard University ( www.gse.harvard.edu). The list of such programs for aspiring and new school administrators is impressive and extensive, which suggests that school districts, state education departments, professional organizations, and universities clearly recognize the importance and need for mentoring new principals. This is not only encouraging, but also vital to the succession of principals, and the success of educational reform in the public schools.

We need highly-qualified principals as much as we need highly-qualified teachers, and we need to help them be successful in their roles as instructional leaders. One way to facilitate this is to provide support to our program graduates during that critical first year as a building principal. I’ll never forget one young man who completed the principalship program at my university. He was a straight ‘A’ student, scored high on the state licensing exam, and was selected from a large, well-qualified pool of applicants for his job as middle school principal. Both of us were elated over his success. At the end of his first year, he e-mailed me that he had bid back into a teaching position in his district, because, as he put it, “I felt like I was out there all alone. I didn’t think it would be this hard.” I felt a twinge of guilt as his former teacher, but this helped me put things into better perspective. As a university professor, I am now consciously aware of helping my students to be successful even after they leave my classroom. We need to be proactive in providing this kind of support. After all, when principals feel supported and successful, perhaps their teachers and students will, too.

References

Alvy, H. B., & Robbins, P. (1998). If I Only Knew…Success Strategies for Navigating the Principalship. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.

Brookfield, Stephen D. (1986). Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Conyers, J. G. ( 2005, June). Thinking outside to support newcomers: Young administratorsbenefit from confidential mentoring by an external protégé. School Administrator, 61(18), 18-21.

Daresh, J. (2004). Mentoring school leaders: Professional promise or predictable problems? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 495-517.

Duke, D., Isaacson, N., Sagor, R., & Schmuck, R. (1984). Transition to leadership. Portland, OR: Lewis and Clark College, Educational Administration Pgm.

Farkas, S. (2001). Trying to stay ahead of the game: Superintendents and principals talk about school leadership. New York: Public Agenda.

Galbraith, Michael W. (Ed.). (1998). Adult Learning Methods. Malabar, Florida: Krieger.

Knowles, Malcolm S. (1980). The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy

Kolb, David A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning to Andragogy. Chicago, Illinois: Follett.

Lovely, S. (2004). Staffing the Principaship: Finding, Coaching, and Mentoring School and Development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Leaders. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Alexandria, VA.

Malone, R. (2001). Principal mentoring. National Association of Elementary School Principals. Alexandria, VA; ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, Eugene, OR.

Mawhinney, T. S. (2005, June). Lord, what do I do now? Prepping new principals goes well beyond a set of new keys and well wishes. School Administrator, 62(6), 14.

Moir, E., & Bloom, G. (2003). Fostering leadership through mentoring. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 58-60.

Parkay, R., & Hall, G. (Eds.). (1992). Becoming a principal. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Riede, P. (2003, November). Electronic mentoring. School Administrator, 60(10), 26-9.

Rogers, Carl R. (1961). On Becoming a Person. Boston, Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin.

Sergiovanni, Thomas J. (2001) The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.

Shelly, K. (1996, February). A letter to a newly appointed principal: Ten tips for making the grade. NASSP Bulletin, pp. 90-96. (National Association of Secondary School Principals)

Willen, Liz. (2001, Winter). Getting personal. Journal of Staff Development, 22(1), 47-49.

Footer

This work is licensed by Mary Harris-John under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 2.0), and is an Open Educational Resource.

Last edited by National Council of Professors of Educational Administration on Feb 28, 2007 1:32 pm US/Central.