School leadership

1. Terminology

2. School principals

2.1. Leadership standards and roles

2.2. Selection and working conditions

2.3. Leadership preparation and training

3. Teachers, parents and students

3.1. School management committees and boards

3.2. Middle leaders

3.3. Parents

3.4. Students

4. Governance

4.1. Autonomy of school leaders

4.2. Assessment and accountability of school leaders

4.3. Teacher assessment by school leaders

 

1. Terminology

In the United States education policy is primarily shaped at the state and local levels, with a limited federal role. Federal influence is established through key legislation including the Every Student Succeeds Act, as amended (ESEA).

ESEA does not explicitly define “principal” but does categorize the term under school leaders in section 8101(44). All states use the term principal to describe their school leaders, though various other terms are used more broadly in state standards such as “school executives,” “education leaders,” “school leader,” “administrator” and “administrative personnel.” These terms may also encompass other leadership roles at different levels, such as superintendents of the school district.

Some states do explicitly define the term “principal”. In South Dakota, the Administrative Rules South Dakota 24:58:01:01, describe a principal as a school building leader who has completed an accredited principal or administrator preparation program, holds a South Dakota teaching certificate with a principal endorsement, is not serving as a superintendent or assistant superintendent, and is designated as a principal in required reports. In New York State, the Consolidated Laws of New York, § 3012-D define the term principal as “a building principal or an administrator in charge of an instructional program of a board of cooperative educational services”. 

 

2. School principals
 

2.1. Leadership standards and roles

Competency standards and leadership frameworks and guidelines

The United States of America has a decentralized education system that is governed and regulated at the state and local levels. At the federal level, the government is able to administer laws and policies through financial assistance programmes. For example, Title II of ESEA states that the government may provide grant funds to states that have made plans to reform teacher, principal, or other school leader certification, recertification, licensing, or tenure systems. The requirements for this federal support ask that “principals or other school leaders have the instructional leadership skills to help teachers teach and to help students meet such challenging State academic standards.”  

Each state has its own principal competency standards, evaluation criteria, and support systems, many of which are based on leadership competency standards developed by independent organizations. The 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), its predecessor the 2008 Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) standards, are the most prevalent. These standards serve as the foundation for the administrative preparation, certification, evaluation, and professional development of school leaders. The PSEL is made up of ten standards: Mission, Vision, and Core Values; Ethics and Professional Norms; Equity and Cultural Responsiveness; Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment; Community of Care and Support for Students; Professional Capacity of School Personnel; Professional Community for Teachers and Staff; Meaningful Engagement of Families and Community; Operations and Management; and School Improvement. In comparison to its predecessor, the PSEL more strongly emphasizes human relationships and research-instructional leadership. It also introduces equity and cultural responsiveness. 

The following states have adopted the 2015 PSEL framework or are aligned to them: Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin. The 2008 ISLLC standards have been adopted by or aligned to by California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Maine and North Dakota.

Michigan follows the 2018 National Educational Leadership Preparation (NELP) standards while Kansas has adapted it. Wyoming has utilized its predecessor, the 2011 Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC) standards. Both the NELP and the ELCC standards are also aligned with the PSEL and ISLLC; however, they serve a distinct purpose in that they provide specificity around performance expectations for beginning-level building leaders (principals) and district leaders (superintendents). The NELP standards specify what novice leaders and programme graduates should know and be able to do as a result of completing a high-quality educational leadership preparation programme. There are eight standards: Mission, Vision, and Improvement; Ethics and Professional Norms; Equity, Inclusiveness, and Cultural Responsiveness; Learning and Instruction; Community and External Leadership; Operations and Management; Building Professional Capacity; and the Internship. 

Many states have also chosen to develop and use their own competency frameworks and leadership standards including, Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia. These take various forms. For example, Nevada has developed the 2022 School Administrator Instructional Leadership Standards in accordance with Nev. Admin. Code 391.572. This consists of four standards: Creating and Sustaining a Focus on Learning; Creating and Sustaining a Culture of Continuous Improvement; Creating and Sustaining Productive Relationships; and Creating and Sustaining Structures. Each standard then has up to four indicators that detail administrator responsibilities.

Here is a list of states organized by the national standard on which it was based.  

Clicking on the state will lead you to their respective standards or relevant policies. 

Highlighted in the following section are the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), the National Educational Leadership Preparation (NELP) Standards at the Building Level, and several state leadership standards, including: Florida’s Principal Leadership Standards (FPLS), Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies, and Virginia’s 2022 Guidelines for Uniform Performance Standards and Evaluation Criteria for Principals (hereinafter referred to as Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals). 

Roles

Setting expectations/objectives: Standard one of the 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) is “Mission, Vision, and Core Values.” According to this standard, “effective educational leaders develop, advocate, and enact a shared mission, vision, and core values of a high-quality education and academic success and well-being of each student.” School leaders are expected to do this in collaboration with members of the school and the community, using relevant data. They also review and adjust the school’s mission and vision according to the changing expectations and needs of the school and its students. To align with standard ten, effective leaders “use methods of continuous improvement to achieve the vision, fulfill the mission, and promote the core values of the school”. They “engage others in an ongoing process of evidence-based inquiry, learning, strategic goal setting, planning, implementation, and evaluation for continuous school and classroom improvement”.

The 2018 NELP Building Level Standards component 1.1 states that candidates who complete a building-level educational leadership preparation programme “understand and demonstrate the capacity to collaboratively evaluate, develop, and communicate a school mission and vision designed to reflect a core set of values and priorities that include data use, technology, equity, diversity, digital citizenship, and community.” Programme completers are also expected have in place a comprehensive plan for communicating the mission and vision.  

In Virginia, the 2022 Performance Standards for Principals states that the principal “leads the collaborative development and implementation of a compelling shared vision for educational improvement and works collaboratively with students, parents/caregivers, staff, and other stakeholders to develop a mission and programmes consistent with the division’s strategic plan.” As part of organizational management, the standards call for principals to develop short- and long-term goals to improve organizational and operational efficiency and impact. Florida’s Principal Leadership Standards (FPLS) asks principals to develop the school’s learning goals. They also organize time, tasks and projects effectively with clear objectives and coherent plans. Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies also have requirements for developing shared a mission, vision, and set of core values of the school.

Developing teaching and learning: Standard four of the 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), ”Curriculum, instruction, and assessment” asks educational leaders to “develop and support intellectually rigorous and coherent systems of curriculum, instruction, and assessment to promote each student’s academic success and well-being.” Education leaders are expected to promote and ensure instructional practices that are research-based, intellectually challenging, and recognize the strengths and needs of each student. In standard ten, they are asked to “develop technically appropriate systems of data collection, management, analysis, and use, connecting as needed to the district office and external partners for support in planning, implementation, monitoring, feedback, and evaluation.” Educational leaders also support teaching and learning with their ability to “seek, acquire, and manage fiscal, physical, and other resources to support curriculum, instruction, and assessment.”

In addition to the PSEL requirements, the 2018 NELP Building Level Standards add focus on the utilization of technology. Programme completers are asked to understand and demonstrate their capacity to “evaluate, develop, and implement high-quality and equitable academic and non-academic instructional practices, resources, technologies, and services that support equity, digital literacy, and the school’s academic and non-academic systems.” They must also be able to coordinate resources, technologies, opportunities and services; advocating for equitable access that supports the educational success and well-being of each student.

Individual states’ standards also maintain focus on developing teaching and learning. For example, Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals contains indicators which detail how principals should use research-based instructional best practices in the classroom. They use academic achievement data, monitoring and evaluation practices, and collaborate with staff to make appropriate educational decisions that improve classroom instruction. Specifically, principals must be able to identify student needs and use that information to design, revise, and monitor instruction. They generate, align, and leverage resources for the classroom. 

Promoting collaboration: Standard seven of the 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), emphasizes the role of leaders in fostering a professional community. It specifically tasks leaders with the responsibility to, “develop and support open, productive, caring, and trusting working relationships among leaders, faculty, and staff to promote professional capacity and the improvement of practice.” The standards ask educational leaders to cultivate an inclusive, caring, and supportive school community that promotes the academic success and well-being of each student. They build and maintain a safe, caring, and healthy school environment that meets the academic, social, emotional, and physical needs of each student. The school’s learning environment with the culture and languages of the school’s community. This ties in with standard three, which emphasizes equity and cultural responsiveness. Effective leaders are expected to act with cultural competence in their interactions, address matters of equity, and ensure each student is treated fairly. Standard eight, “Meaningful Engagement of Families and Community,” asks educational leaders to engage families and the community in meaningful, reciprocal, and mutually beneficial ways. They must engage in regular and open two-way communication with families and the community about the school, students, needs, problems, and accomplishments.

The 2018 NELP Building Level Standards three is titled “Equity, Inclusiveness, and Cultural Responsiveness.” In addition to the requirements from the PSEL, this standard asks programme completers to “use data to evaluate, design, cultivate, and advocate for a supportive and inclusive school culture.” The standards ask that leaders should “understand and demonstrate the capacity to collaboratively evaluate, develop, and implement the school’s curriculum, instruction, technology, data systems, and assessment practices in a coherent, equitable, and systematic manner”. Standard five, “Community and External Leadership,” states that programme completers must have the capacity to collaboratively engage and cultivate relationships with diverse families, community members, partners, and other constituencies for the benefit of school improvement and student development.  

Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals, require principals to collaborate and build positive relationships with all stakeholders. Students, parents/caregivers, staff, and other stakeholders should be asked for their input to promote sound judgement in the decision-making process such as the development of the long- and short-term goals. Principals also have the responsibility of using appropriate resources to communicate with stakeholders whose primary language is not English. Similarly, Florida asks principals to actively communicate with, listen to, and learn from students, staff, parents, and community stakeholders. They develop sustainable and supportive relationships between school leaders, parents, community, higher education, and business leaders.

Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies includes the need principals to demonstrate competence in community relations. Principals must articulate organizational purpose and advocate publicly for the needs and priorities of students, families, and the community; demonstrate the ability to engage the extended community; effectively generate and respond to various forms of communication through media; promote a positive image of schools and the school district; monitor and address perceptions about school-community issues; and demonstrate a community-centric perspective.

Supporting staff development: Standard six of the 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) states that educational leaders are expected to “develop teachers’ and staff members’ professional knowledge, skills, and practice through differentiated opportunities for learning and growth.” Standard seven builds upon these ideas by asking educational leaders to foster a professional community of teachers and other professional staff to promote each student’s academic success and well-being. This may be through job-embedded and other opportunities for professional learning. 

According to the 2018 NELP Building Level Standards, programme completers understand and can engage school staff in a collaborative professional culture as well as professional learning designed to promote reflection, cultural responsiveness, distributed leadership, digital literacy, school improvement, and student success. They also can implement systems of supervision, support, and evaluation.

Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals states that principals should promote continuous learning of all members of the school community. They support professional development practices and demonstrate its importance by participating in and providing adequate time and resources for teachers and staff for professional learning (i.e., peer observation, mentoring, coaching, study groups, learning teams, and action research). Additionally, principals evaluate the impact of professional development on the staff, instructional practices, school improvement, and student academic progress. 

Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies asks that principals “develop, assess, and support teachers' and staff members' professional knowledge, skills, and practice through differentiated opportunities and emerging trends for learning and growth, guided by understanding professional and adult learning and development.”

Acting in accordance with the ethical principles of the profession: Standard two of the 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) focuses on ethics and professional norms, stating that “effective educational leaders act ethically and according to professional norms to promote each student’s academic success and well-being.” This behavior applies, for example, in personal conduct, relationship with others, and decision-making. Qualities include integrity, fairness, transparency, trust, collaboration, perseverance, learning, and continuous improvement. 

Similarly, the 2018 NELP Building Level Standards asks programme completers to “reflect on, communicate about, cultivate, and model professional dispositions and norms (i.e., fairness, integrity, transparency, trust, digital citizenship, collaboration, perseverance, reflection, lifelong learning, democracy, digital citizenship, diversity, equity, inclusiveness, and the belief that each child can learn) that support the educational success and well-being of each student and adult.” Programme completers can evaluate, communicate, and advocate for ethical and legal decisions.  

“Professional and Ethical Behavior” is the fourth domain of Florida’s Principal Leadership Standards (FPLS). Principals are required to adhere to the Code of Ethics and the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida, under Rules 6A-10.080 and 6A-10.081, F.A.C. In Minnesota, principals must follow the Code of Ethics for School Administrators. 

Others: The 2015 Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), the 2018 National Educational Leadership Preparation (NELP) Standards, Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies and Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals all place great importance on equity and cultural sensitivity. They also emphasize the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) and its use in classrooms. Minnesota and Pennsylvania also ask principals to develop and implement policies and procedures for safe and secure educational environments; and demonstrate the means to address emergency and crises. Pennsylvania additionally asks that the school leader involve all staff in the development of the safe school plan.

2.2. Selection and working conditions

Degree requirements and prior teaching experience

All states have a system of certification and licensing of principals or other school leaders, as per ESEA. Studies show that the requirements for principal certification and licensure are similar across the 50 states. States commonly require school principals to hold a valid teaching certificate (all states); have experience in a school setting, usually as a teacher (37 states); have a master’s degree (37 states), completion of an approved university-based or alternative preparation programme (all states), pass a standardized school-leadership assessment (33 states); participate in a practicum or internship as part of pre-service preparation or during the first years as principal (38 states); be recommended by an approved institution of higher education; submit college transcripts; submit a criminal background check; and pay an application fee. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, data in 2020-2021 showed that almost all public-school principals (98%) have a master's degree or higher. This percentage was lower for private schools, indicating that requirements for principals are not as high for private schools. Principal certification requirements by state are available from the Education Commission of the States. 

In Pennsylvania, individuals may qualify for an administrative certificate via a traditional, certificate/experience, or alternative route. In the traditional route, principals are expected to hold a baccalaureate degree, have good moral character (as set in 24 P.S. § 12-1209), have at least three years of relevant experience, complete a graduate-level principal certification programme that includes an internship/practicum with a 3.0 Grade Point Average (GPA), and a satisfactory result on the Pennsylvania required test. The alternative route may occur when someone provides verification of an offer of employment as a principal but does not yet have the principal certificate. Within the first two years of service, the provisional principal must either pass the certification programme or complete a Pennsylvania Inspired Leadership Induction Programme. 

Oklahoma principals must also go through either a traditional or alternative route to certification. According to 70 OK Stat § 6-189 (2022), to receive a State Department of Education issued Standard Certificate for Administrators, principals must hold a master’s degree, have two years of teaching experience, complete a building-level leadership skills programme, and pass the Principal Oklahoma Subject Area Tests. Alternatively, the applicant may complete an alternative administrative preparation programme and submit a declaration of intent to earn the standard certification within three years.

In Connecticut, candidates must have completed fifty school months of service. They must have a master’s degree from an approved institution and have completed an additional 18 semester hours of graduate credit. The candidate must have completed a preparation programme for administrative and supervisory personnel and receive the recommendation of that programme. Additionally, there are certain required courses, including “foundations of learning, curriculum development, school administration, personnel evaluation and supervision, education policymaking, and special education.” Finally, candidates must pass the state assessment.

Appointment decision

Due to the decentralization of education in the United States, the recruitment, selection, placement, and retention of principals, the recruitment, selection, placement, and retention of principals is the responsibility of local educational agencies. Three local examples will be noted in this section, New York City (New York), Seattle (Washington), and Baltimore City (Maryland).

New York City has a screening process called the Principal Candidate Pool (PCP) which was established by Chancellor’s Regulation C-30. Eligible candidates must complete and submit the School Leader Candidate Profile on an online portal. Once they complete the process, they receive a profile report and are assigned to the pool where they can view and apply for principal vacancy positions. Superintendents for the position serve as the appointing authority. The superintendent forms a committee made up of representatives from constituent groups on the School Leadership team. The committee interviews three to five candidates which the superintendent has preselected and then ranks them. The superintendent makes the final appointment.

In the Seattle Public School system, a pool of qualified candidates is also used. The HR department creates and posts job advertisements. A hiring committee is formed by the director of the school for interviews. Depending on the school level, the committee may consist of teachers, community members, specialists (SPED, ELL, PE, etc.), office leaders, parents, instructional assistants, and directors of the school. After interviews, the committee makes a recommendation. The superintendent has the final hiring authority.

Baltimore’s traditional principal selection process is comprised of three stages: Community notification, principal selection, and announcement. Before any principal candidate is considered, they must participate in the selection process of the Office of Human Capital. During the selection process, candidates are interviewed by school staff, a high school student, and up to five members of the School Family Council (the school management committee). The second round of interviews is conducted by the principal supervisor (ILED) and/or Chief of Schools. The CEO reviews all the community recommendations and selects and presents the final recommendation to the Board of School Commissioners, who make the appointment.

Employment equity measures

ESEA asks states to develop, improve, and implement “mechanisms to assist local educational agencies and schools in effectively recruiting and retaining teachers, principals, or other school leaders who are effective in improving student academic achievement, including effective teachers from underrepresented minority groups and teachers with disabilities.” 

In Oregon, the Governor and the Educator Advancement Council recognize the increasing cultural and linguistic diversity in the state and the lack of school administrators who reflect this diversity. The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission (TSPC) cites research that indicates that a diverse staff benefits all students and in particular, students of color. TPSC states that the licensed school and district administrator “have the responsibility to enact, train, and evaluate recruiting and hiring practices that encourage the application and selection of a diverse workforce”. Such practices include targeted advertisements and outreach, consideration of various non-traditional qualifications of diverse candidates, the assurance of diversity within the selection and interview panels, and “Grow Your Own” programmes. Grow Your Own programmes (GYO) have been gaining popularity in many states as a method for recruiting and retaining BIPOC educators through non-traditional pathway programmes. Every state, except Wyoming, has some type of GYO programme. The Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER) provided funding that allowed states to offer one-time funding opportunities for GYO. 

According to the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), 21 states have established or funded high school pipeline programmes to explicitly increase teacher workforce diversity. For example, Colorado’s Teacher Recruitment Education and Preparation (TREP) programme created by SB 21-185, allows qualified high school students to enroll in tuition-free postsecondary educator preparation courses for two years. 17 states fund scholarships and nine states use loan forgiveness as a recruitment and retention strategy for educators with the stated goal of increasing educator diversity. Section 6122, title VI, of ESEA gives funding to local education agencies or indigenous tribes who make plans to recruit qualified indigenous individuals to become principals and school leaders. The funds support the recruitment, preparation, and professional development of indigenous principals in local educational agencies that serve a high proportion of Indian students. 

Arkansas Code Ann. § 6-17-1901 states that each school district with more than 5% African-American or other minority students must prepare a minority teacher and administrator recruitment plan. Ark. Code Ann § 6-17-1902 and § 6-17-1903, require that districts set numeric goals around recruiting and retaining teachers and school leaders of color. Districts submit to the state data on their progress alongside detailed plans on how they will retain educators of color. Seven other states have a numeric, public goal to diversify their school teachers.

Working conditions

Principal salary is determined by local education agencies. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, the average salary for a public-school principal in 2020-2021 was $113,500. In Louisiana, LRS 17 § 418 requires districts to create salary schedules for teachers and administrators based on three areas: effectiveness, as determined by performance evaluations; demand (area of certification or assignment to high-need and/or hard-to-staff schools); and experience. 

Performance incentives may be provided to principals who do well or to those who work in high-need schools. Under Title II, Part B of ESEA, funding has been reserved for human capital management systems including performance incentives for principals based on student achievement outcomes. The U.S. Department of Education has also implemented the Teacher and School Leader Incentive Program, which “serves educators in High-Need Schools who raise student academic achievement and close the achievement gap between high- and low-performing students, although the program may also fund services for educators serving in high-need subject areas (though not necessarily in High-Need Schools), as determined by the LEA or the State.” Several states also have programs which aim to direct educators to high-need schools. Arkansas provides an annual "High-need school salary bonus" to a Master Principal serving at a high-need public school. The principal receives at minimum $20,000 for each school year with bonuses depending on longevity. IIn Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, principals may qualify for a permanent salary increase based on principal performance and annual bonuses of up to $10,000 based on school and student achievement measures.

Many states have a two-tiered structure that includes an initial certificate with additional requirements for a principal to move to an advanced certificate. For example, in Arkansas, the Arkansas Leadership Academy operates a Master Principal Programme that provides “training programs and opportunities to expand the knowledge base and leadership skills of public school principals.” Principals who pass all three phases and designation requirements may receive the Master Principal designation along with an annual supplement of $9,000.

The National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) reports that 45 states have a clear set of policies for teachers to earn tenure or be considered non-probationary. As of 2016-2017, the national average of tenure was four years. In Massachusetts, a principal who has served in the same position at a public school for three consecutive years may not be dismissed or demoted except for good cause. Principals enter into individual employment contracts with their employing districts concerning the terms and conditions of employment. Newly appointed principals have 1-3 year contracts, subsequent contracts are for 3-5 years. Principals are not eligible to be represented in collective bargaining. However, they do have the right to meet and discuss with the superintendent the terms and conditions of their employment. 

2.3. Leadership preparation and training

Pre-service training

ESEA defines and describes two types of school leadership preparation programmes. The first, the ‘school leader residency programme’ is described as a school-based principal or other school leader preparation programme in which a prospective principal receives sustained and rigorous clinical learning with substantial leadership responsibilities and an opportunity to practice and be evaluated in an authentic school setting; evidence-based coursework; and ongoing support from a mentor principal or other school leader. The second, a ‘teacher, principal, or other school leader preparation academy’ which may be an institution of higher education that establishes an academy that will prepare teachers, principals, or other school leaders to serve in high-needs schools, and that trains prospective principals and certifies them. Research by the Education Commission of the States suggests that all 50 states and the District of Columbia require principal preparation programmes to be aligned with state performance standards or national standards. At least 39 states require practical experience, such as an internship, residency, or job experience. 

All states require candidates to complete an approved university-based or alternative preparation programme. The Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) serves as a national accrediting body for educator preparation programmes. Twenty-five states have partnered with CAEP to accredit their principals. For example, in Connecticut, all state Educator Preparation Providers (EPPs) must be accredited through CAEP. CAEP uses the NELP standards to accredit the preparation programmes. 

Many states choose to use their accreditation system for school leader preparation. In California, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) serves as an independent professional standards board responsible for the accreditation of school leader preparation programmes. The programme approval standards are tied to the state leadership standards, the California Professional Standards for Education Leaders (CPSEL). 

Thirty-five states use either a state-designed exam or an exam designed for broad use nationally by private companies such as Educational Testing Service (ETS) or Pearson, both of which have designed several tests for school leader candidates. For states that are aligned with the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL), school leader candidates may be assessed with the Performance Assessment for School Leaders (PASL) or the Educational Leadership: Administration and Supervision (ELAS) test. PASL is also aligned with the Georgia Educational Leadership Standards and Elements and the Texas Principal Certificate Standards (PDF). Both states require candidates to pass the PASL. These assessments provide a solution for measuring a school leader candidate's application of the knowledge and skills that are important for beginning instructional leaders. According to the PASL website, “test takers complete the PASL assessment tasks during their clinical experience/internship. The tasks focus on addressing a problem/challenge, developing continuous professional development and building a collaborative culture.” Alternatively, many states, such as Kentucky, choose to use the School Leaders Licensure Assessment (SLLA) which is designed to “measure the extent to which entry-level school leaders demonstrate the standards-relevant knowledge and skills necessary for competent professional practice.” In Florida, candidates must then pass the Florida Educational Leadership Examination (FELE), which is based on the Florida Principal Leadership Standards (FPLS). 

Title VI of ESEA on Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native Education, calls on the government to “provide pre-and in-service training and support to qualified [Indigenous] individuals to enable such individuals to become effective teachers, principals, other school leaders.”

Induction and in-service training

At the federal level, ESEA instructs all states to provide mandatory training for school principals on topics such as child sexual abuse prevention; school readiness; Science Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM); integrating Career Technical Education (CTE); students with specific learning needs; literacy instruction initiatives; and more. Most states offer a K-12 certificate that principals must renew by engaging in continuing education courses or professional development activities. 2017-2018 data from the National Center for Education Statistics showed that 85% of public school principals participated in professional development activities. 94% attended relevant workshops or conferences. Many principals also observed other schools, participated in mentorships, and participated in a principal network. 

Title VI of ESEA also instructs the government to improve the skills of qualified Indigenous principals and to develop and implement initiatives to promote the retention of principals and school leaders who have a record of success in helping low-achieving Indigenous students improve their academic achievement, outcomes, and preparation for postsecondary education or employment. Funds must be made available for the professional development of indigenous principals in local educational agencies that serve a high population of indigenous students.

According to the Wing Institute, states typically require school leaders to complete several hours of professional development to renew their certificates. For example, in Maine (L.D.1569) “an administrator's certificate is issued for 5 years and may be renewed by state board rules, which must require, at a minimum, that the administrator, whether employed or unemployed, complete at least 6 semester hours of professional or academic study or the equivalent or in-service training designed to improve the performance of the administrator in the field.” In Virginia, licensure renewal requires professionals to complete 180-270 approved professional development points, depending on whether the license is valid for five or ten years. 

Some national programmes include the National Institute for School Leadership (NISL), which provides professional development to aspiring and current school leaders, and the McREL Balanced Leadership Programme. 

 

3. Teachers, parents and students
 

3.1. School management committees and boards

School boards in the United States function at the district and state levels. According to the Education Commission of the States, 23 states include state boards in the constitution, while 26 state boards have statutory powers and duties. Minnesota and Wisconsin do not have a state board, and New Mexico’s public education commission is advisory only. Every state has statutory provisions related to outlining the authority of local school boards. Hawaii and the District of Columbia have only one school district, and thus only have one school board. The National School Boards Association (NSBA) works with all school boards in the United States to carry out their missions and ensure each student has access to an excellent and equitable public education. A 2020 survey by the NSBA showed that 31 states have student board members as a local option. In California, the Education Code “requires that a school district appoint a student school board member upon receiving a petition signed by 10% of high school students in the district or by 500 high school students at large requesting student representation on the governing board.” 

In Idaho (Idaho Code Ann. § 33-501 to 33-512), school districts are governed by a board of trustees, which has the power to make bylaws, rules and regulations for its government and that of the district. The board of trustees has the responsibility to employ help and labor to maintain and operate the schools; fix the days and hours of the school; to adopt, carry on, and provide for the financing of the district; to provide pupils with suitable textbooks and supplies; to prescribe rules for the disciplining of unruly or insubordinate pupils; and to provide support for teachers in their first two years in the profession. North Dakota (N.D. Cent. Code Ann. § 15.1-09-33) school boards powers include establishing free public school systems; acquiring property and constructing facilities; controlling school district property; purchasing equipment, textbooks and supplies; prescribe courses of study; adopt rules regarding instructional practices; and oversee employment of school district personnel.

Newly elected school board members in New York are mandated by law to complete training within their first year of service. The training covers topics on the essentials of school board governance and a minimum of six hours in fiscal oversight, accountability and fiduciary responsibilities.

3.2. Middle leaders

The National Council on Teacher Quality’s (NCTQ) 2019 study on Teacher Leadership Opportunities found that 35 states have adopted formal teacher leadership policies. 21 of those states have a policy that includes support and/or monetary incentives. Utah’s teacher leader designation allows for a variety of leadership positions. According to Utah Admin. Code 277-307-3, a local educational agency may designate a teacher as a teacher leader if they have a professional educator license, have high evaluation ratings, and demonstrate competence in their work, leadership, collaboration, teaching, and professional growth. Admin. Code 277-307-4 lists the different roles and responsibilities that teacher leaders can play. There are six different types of teacher leaders: 1) Professional learning lead, who generally supports school-based professional learning and/or serves as a facilitator for professional learning activities; 2) Formally trained and recognized mentor, who models effective instructional strategies and trains student teachers; 3) Lead or Master teacher, who guide other educators and lead efforts to improve the curriculum; 4) Education policy advocate, who positively contribute to policy making and share policy information with colleagues; 5) School outreach lead, who lead school improvement initiatives and act as a liaison for community projects; and 6) Education ambassador, who network within local, state, and national education organizations or serve on task forces, committees, and advisory boards. The local education agency may provide additional incentives to teacher leaders for fulfilling these responsibilities including a pay increase, bonus, or other financial incentive, or a reduction in their regular classroom workload. 

Georgia and Florida are two examples of states which have a two-tiered system for school leadership. Completion of Tier I in Georgia and Level I in Florida allow candidates to qualify for leadership positions which are lower than principalship. 

West Virginia has several teacher leadership roles including teacher instructional coaches, mentors, improvement specialists, and collaborative team leaders. Policy 5800 outlines the standards for teacher leaders. Teacher leaders must demonstrate interpersonal and collaborative skills; create clear and focused learning missions; facilitate rigorous curriculum, engaging instruction and balanced assessments; build and sustain a positive learning climate and cohesive culture; act as a student advocate and create a support system for student success; manage operations to promote learning; connect to families and the larger community; effect continuous improvement; and promote continual professional growth to help attract and retain quality staff. 

The Arkansas Leadership Academy’s (ALA) Teacher Leader Program (TLP) is for those who are “currently serving as classroom teachers in Arkansas public schools and are either currently in or aspire to take on leadership roles, where they can lead while remaining in the classroom”. The TLP is organized around seven themes aligned with the Arkansas Teacher Leader Model Standards for Lead Designation: collaborating, leading, understanding, learning, analyzing, reflecting, and advocating. Core learning focuses on three evidence-based areas of study: (1) Collaborative Leadership, (2) Collective Efficacy, and (3) Cultural Competence, each with emphasis on (a) data-driven decision-making, (b) effective instructional practices, and (c) social-emotional learning. After completion of the program, three years of teaching experience, good performance levels, and a portfolio assessment, the teacher may receive the Lead Professional Educator designation. 

The career ladder system for educators in Ohio has four tiers: the standard educator license, the professional educator license, the senior professional educator, and the lead professional educator license. The senior and lead educator tiers enable teachers to serve as school improvement leaders. Teachers at both levels are expected to have a master’s degree, nine years of experience, Master Teacher designation, and high levels of performance. The lead educator additionally asks for a teacher-leader endorsement. Oklahoma has a similar system with four types of licenses beyond the standard professional license for teachers: advance certificate, lead certificate, and master certificate. According to Oklahoma’s Code 210:20-18-1, for a teacher to be eligible for a lead or master teacher certificate, the board of education of the teacher's employing school district must submit a recommendation to the State Board of Education indicating that the local board has determined the applying teacher's eligibility under the statutory criteria and is in favor of the teacher's advanced certification. The contract of lead and master teachers allows for less student instruction (75% for lead teachers, 50% for master teachers), additional days for leadership training (10-15 days), and a salary supplement ($3,000 for lead teachers and $5,000 for master teachers). Additional tasks include mentoring other teachers, co-teaching, co-planning, peer reviews, and other duties agreed on by the district superintendent. 

3.3. Parents

Within the United States, there are two main terms for parent groups, the Parent Teacher Association (PTA) and the Parent Teacher Organization (PTO). There are no federal or state law or policy mandating the creation of either PTAs or PTOs. Each school may choose whether they join the national PTA organization or participate in a locally led PTO. Both groups aim to support schools in a way that meets the needs of students, the school, and community stakeholders. According to the National PTA, there are more than 20,000 PTAs across the US. PTO is a term used to refer to any school parent group that is not associated with the National PTA. According to PTO Today, there are approximately 60,000 PTOs across the US. 

3.4. Students

There is no federal or state law or policy mandating the creation of student councils. Each school may decide to start a student government organization. 25 states have a State Association of Student Councils which are under the National Student Council. None are connected with any government education authorities. The National Honor Society also functions similarly to student councils and 11 states have their associations. Even if a school does not have a state association, they are still able to start a chapter at their school. 

 

4. Governance
 

4.1. Autonomy of school leaders

ESEA asks states to encourage opportunities for increased autonomy and flexibility for principals and other school leaders. Funds received from the ESEA may be used to provide principals or other school leaders with ‘‘(i) balanced autonomy to make budgeting, scheduling, and other school-level decisions” and “(ii) authority to make staffing decisions that meet the needs of the school.” 

Though each state has different policies regarding the autonomy of school principals, the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) lists several competencies which indicate educational leaders’ autonomy. For example, standard six mentions that effective leaders, “recruit, hire, support, develop, and retain effective and caring teachers and other professional staff and form them into an educationally effective faculty.” The NELP Building Level Standards state that candidates should know about recruiting, selecting, and hiring school staff based on student, school, and staff needs. In Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals, performance standard three describes the principals' responsibility regarding human resources. They are expected to actively lead in the selection process and make appropriate recommendations relative to personnel transfer, retention, promotion, and dismissal.

Standard nine of the PSEL states that educational leaders are “responsible, ethical, and accountable stewards of the school’s monetary and non-monetary resources, engaging in effective budgeting and accounting practices.” The Virginian Performance Standards ask that principals plan and prepare a fiscally responsible budget. They must also review the fiscal records regularly to ensure accountability for all funds. Fiscal responsibility is also found in Minnesota’s Core Leadership Competencies and Florida’s Principal Leadership Standards (FPLS).

4.2. Assessment and accountability of school leaders

To receive federal funding under ESEA, states must have submitted plans to reform teacher, principal, or other school leader certification, recertification, licensing, or tenure systems. These plans must include indicators of principal effectiveness that are public and evidence-based. The 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act removed the requirement under the 2002 No Child Left Behind for principal evaluation systems and/or linking results to student test scores. 

According to the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) 2022 study on Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies 14 states set all criteria for principal evaluations, 21 states set minimum criteria, and 16 states play no role in designing principal evaluations. According to 2017-2018 data from the National Center for Education Statistics, 79% of traditional public school principals reported having been evaluated within the last year. According to the NCTQ report, 30 states require annual evaluations for all principals. Some states determine evaluation frequency based on licensure or experience. For example, Washington requires new principals to be evaluated yearly for the first three years. Afterwards, they only need to be evaluated every six years. Four states (Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, and Washington) allow high-performing principals to be evaluated less frequently. 22 states require targeted interventions through articulated improvement plans for principals earning less-than-effective ratings. This number declined from 27 states in 2017. Maryland’s Principal Improvement Template is organized in a way so that principals and their supervisors work together to identify growth areas, list measurable goals, list resources and strategies, describe evidence needed to show growth and identify a timeline for completion of the plan. 

Trends in principal evaluation include using student achievement data, goal setting, and self-reflection. According to the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), in 2022, 27 states required some type of student achievement data to be used in principal evaluations, this number has fallen from 43 states in 2015. For example, Pennsylvania (Pa. Code,022 §19.2,2013) requires the use of district and national standardized tests in their evaluations, but also requires the use of student projects and portfolios. The first part of the New Jersey Principal Evaluation for Professional Learning Process details the annual planning and goal-setting of the principal where they reflect on the prior year, align and set new goals, determine the observation protocol, and determine their professional development needs. Massachusetts has a similar goal-setting period in their Five-Step Cycle of Continuous Improvement for Principals where administrators meet with their evaluators to discuss and develop the educator plan. The plan includes the administrator’s goals, key strategies, benchmarks of progress, timelines, and focus indicators as well as what type of evidence will be used to complete the evaluation process. This follows the principal’s self-assessment period. In South Dakota, the principal conducts a self-assessment using the performance standards and accompanying rubrics within the effectiveness Framework, data about student learning, past progress on school goals, the prior year’s evaluation and rating, and other relevant evidence. Other state examples of principal self-assessment include Minnesota, Tennessee, New York, Texas, Kentucky, and Wisconsin. 

One-third of all states required observations. In five states (Delaware, New Mexico, Ohio, West Virginia, and Wisconsin), novice teachers receive more opportunities for observation and feedback. Other possible methods of evaluation include a portfolio, which might include principal observations, school improvement plans, school board meeting agenda, minutes, and presentations, department, faculty, and staff meeting agendas and minutes, school newsletters, information about or evidence of community partnerships, crisis and emergency plans, school audits, school website, and/or communication logs. In New Jersey, portfolios are collected by the practitioner and supervisor over 2-3 months (depending on if the principal is tenured). These portfolios should accurately and fairly reflect the complexity of the principal’s work.

The National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) 2022 study on Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies showed that 28 states allow or require surveys to be included in principal evaluations in some form. For example, Michigan requires a mix of feedback from students, teachers, and parents all be included in a principal's evaluation score. Minnesota requires that annual evaluations “allow surveys to help identify a principal’s effectiveness, leadership skills and processes, and strengths and weaknesses in exercising leadership in pursuit of school success.”

In Pennsylvania, the principal’s evaluation is comprised of student achievement (10%), performance goals (20%), and observation and practice (the remaining %). The records for observation and practice may include: “notations of professional observations, employee/rater conferences or interviews, or informal observations or visits; communication logs (such as emails, letters, notes regarding phone conversations to parents, staff, students, community members); utilization of formative and summative assessments that impact instruction and critiques of lesson plans; agendas and minutes of meetings, programmes, courses, or planning sessions; family, parent, school and community feedback; development and implementation of school improvement plans, professional growth programmes, in-service programmes, student assemblies, safety programmes, and other events or programmes that promote educational efficacy, health and safety; budget and expenditure reports; professional development documentation toward continuance of certification or licensure or both.” 

4.3. Teacher assessment by school leaders

States must, in accordance with ESEA, develop and provide training to principals and other school leaders on how to accurately differentiate performance, provide useful and timely feedback, and use evaluation results to inform decision-making about professional development, improvement strategies, and personnel decisions. Both the Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) and the NELP Building Level Standards mention supervision and evaluation of school staff. The PSEL states that educational leaders utilize research-anchored systems of supervision and evaluation to deliver actionable feedback about instruction and other professional practice. The NELP states that candidates should demonstrate the skills required to observe teaching in a variety of classrooms, provide teaching staff with actionable feedback to support improvement and develop a system for monitoring whether supervision and evaluation strategies promote improvement. However, each state differs in the regulations of teacher evaluation and about half ask local education agencies to develop their own evaluation system based on state criteria. According to the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ)’s 2022 study on Teacher and Principal Evaluation Policies, 44 states require observations in teacher evaluations. Half of these states specify the percentage of the teacher’s evaluation that is made up by observations; 9 states set this percentage at more than 75%. 19 states require certification requirements for observers while 38 require some training for evaluators.

According to Virginia’s Performance Standards for Principals, principals properly implement teacher and staff evaluation systems, evaluating their performance using multiple sources. Principals are expected to document deficiencies and proficiencies, provide timely formal and informal feedback on strengths and weaknesses, and provide support, resources, and remediation for teachers and staff to improve job performance. 

 

This profile was reviewed by Victoria Hammer and Elizabeth Bucknor of the U.S. Department of Education.