Limiting Principal's Tenure

icebergiceberg

Listening to a report on the Pat Hickey's length of service to the Olympic movement in Ireland (and proposals to limit that tenure to I think a limit of eight years) made me think of principal's service in schools.

Have you worked with a long serving principal?

Do you think that principals should hold that position for a limited period of time or do you think that it should be indefinitely?

TheDriver

Will be only possible under things like career average earning

judeboy101

icebergiceberg wrote: »

Listening to a report on the Pat Hickey's length of service to the Olympic movement in Ireland (and proposals to limit that tenure to I think a limit of eight years) made me think of principal's service in schools.

Have you worked with a long serving principal?

Do you think that principals should hold that position for a limited period of time or do you think that it should be indefinitely?

The dept are beginning to do this. They've started by telling etb's and the managerial bodies to start replacing principals with outsiders and by moving good deputies around to new schools. The idea is that eventually principals will be sent into schools to get them "performing" and then move them on like in England.

evolving_doors

I reckon it takes about 8 years to settle... So why would you upset the school again once a principal has gotten a handle of the school profile etc. I don't think all schools are the same.

judeboy101

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I reckon it takes about 8 years to settle... So why would you upset the school again once a principal has gotten a handle of the school profile etc. I don't think all schools are the same.

Unfortunately the new junior cert will lead to the introduction of standardised testing and targets. Low performing schools will get amalgamated and put under managers who have proven track records for bringing up "standards". In order to diminish the chances of any particular "culture" or "ethos" becoming engrained in the school through a principals leadership, they will be movred on once targets have been achieved. Hence the reason no new Voluntary secondary schools are built.

ethical

ETBs should first and formost look at themselves and sort out the multitude of crap that exists in choosing a Principal for a particular school.The use of "long retired b*stards" coming onto the gravy train that is interviewing panels should be number one on the list of things to go.Australia has a policy of having a limited term for a Principal and it seems to work well.Maybe Irish education gurus should take a look,after all we have considered what happens in other countries,taken the worst of them and ended up in deeper sh!t.

man_no_plan

I don't know how it would work in practice but its possibly a reasonable idea. If you have a 35 year old principal, for example, how well will he or she be doing in 30 years time given that most people that age are looking at retiring on full pension at 65.

While it might be an attractive idea, unless there is incentivised early retirement or some other avenue to pursue for these principals they will have to remain within the system. Rotating principals between schools is unlikely to make a major difference.

I'm not sure where the other poster is getting their info about ETBs being told to appoint external principals. Firstly, ETBs don't take well to being told anything. Secondly, in our ETB only one appointment in the last 5 years has been to someone outside the scheme with a very small number coming from other schools within the scheme. In most cases, particular ly at DP level the appointee came from within the school.

Its worth noting that in ETB schools only Principals and Deputys are appointed to a school with Class III teachers bring appointed to the scheme and subject to transfer.

feardeas

judeboy101 wrote: »

Unfortunately the new junior cert will lead to the introduction of standardised testing and targets. Low performing schools will get amalgamated and put under managers who have proven track records for bringing up "standards". In order to diminish the chances of any particular "culture" or "ethos" becoming engrained in the school through a principals leadership, they will be movred on once targets have been achieved. Hence the reason no new Voluntary secondary schools are built.

The new stand alone educate together schools are considered voluntary and one of the catholic patronage bodies opened one in the last few years. The reason for a very small number of new voluntary schools is more in line with the policy of diversity of patronage than anything I imagine.

Term limits for principals might be no bad thing but not sure how the practicalities would work. Can't imagine anyone would like to give up the allowance although it is not an easy job and no amount of money would entice me to it.

judeboy101

feardeas wrote: »

The new stand alone educate together schools are considered voluntary and one of the catholic patronage bodies opened one in the last few years. The reason for a very small number of new voluntary schools is more in line with the policy of diversity of patronage than anything I imagine.

Term limits for principals might be no bad thing but not sure how the practicalities would work. Can't imagine anyone would like to give up the allowance although it is not an easy job and no amount of money would entice me to it.

Actually, and correct me if I'm wrong, but all future ET secondary schools will be in conjunction with ETB, so dept are tightening their control on all management in schools bar voluntary schools.

Mardy Bum

judeboy101 wrote: »

feardeas wrote: »

The new stand alone educate together schools are considered voluntary and one of the catholic patronage bodies opened one in the last few years. The reason for a very small number of new voluntary schools is more in line with the policy of diversity of patronage than anything I imagine.

Term limits for principals might be no bad thing but not sure how the practicalities would work. Can't imagine anyone would like to give up the allowance although it is not an easy job and no amount of money would entice me to it.

Actually, and correct me if I'm wrong, but all future ET secondary schools will be in conjunction with ETB, so dept are tightening their control on all management in schools bar voluntary schools.

If you mess up as a principal in an etb you get promoted. It is a great number.

man_no_plan

judeboy101 wrote: »

Actually, and correct me if I'm wrong, but all future ET secondary schools will be in conjunction with ETB, so dept are tightening their control on all management in schools bar voluntary schools.

I don't know where you're getting your info judeboy. I know you refer to future schools but the most recent batch of new schools has a mix of standalone ETB, voluntary secondary (religious) and ET and some with mixed patronage.

http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2013-Press-Releases/PR2013-11-28.html

The patronage for the next bunch of schools is still undecided.


http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2016-Press-Releases/PR2016-04-26.html

TheDriver

judeboy101 wrote: »

The dept are beginning to do this. They've started by telling etb's and the managerial bodies to start replacing principals with outsiders and by moving good deputies around to new schools. The idea is that eventually principals will be sent into schools to get them "performing" and then move them on like in England.

Never heard of any of this. Plus that would be a biased action I.e. Don't hire the best person because they're already in ETB. Also a new person isn't always better and older people can have lots of energy. A respected, good principal is good at any age

spurious

Mardy Bum wrote: »

If you mess up as a principal in an etb you get promoted. It is a great number.

Let's have less of this, thanks.

One of the best ETB Principals I worked with used to say he felt everyone should be moved on every 7 to 10 years (of course this was in the days when people had proper jobs, not scrabbling around for contracts). With the option to always return to a school after a stint somewhere else, I think this would have been a good idea.

If it could work across the systems, all the better.

implausible

judeboy101 wrote:

Unfortunately the new junior cert will lead to the introduction of standardised testing and targets. Low performing schools will get amalgamated and put under managers who have proven track records for bringing up "standards". In order to diminish the chances of any particular "culture" or "ethos" becoming engrained in the school through a principals leadership, they will be movred on once targets have been achieved. Hence the reason no new Voluntary secondary schools are built.

Woah! Evidence? Where are you getting this from?

implausible

TheDriver wrote:

Never heard of any of this. Plus that would be a biased action I.e. Don't hire the best person because they're already in ETB. Also a new person isn't always better and older people can have lots of energy. A respected, good principal is good at any age

Complete opposite experience in my ETB to the one speculated above - nearly all new principal and deputy principal posts filled from within the scheme.

political analyst

judeboy101 wrote: »

Unfortunately the new junior cert will lead to the introduction of standardised testing and targets. Low performing schools will get amalgamated and put under managers who have proven track records for bringing up "standards". In order to diminish the chances of any particular "culture" or "ethos" becoming engrained in the school through a principals leadership, they will be movred on once targets have been achieved. Hence the reason no new Voluntary secondary schools are built.

Are you sure that it's not because of lower numbers of people becoming priests or nuns (Voluntary schools were established by religious organisations)?

Nothing will happen to the two voluntary schools (one for boys, one for girls) in my locality. They and the local vocational school are highly subscribed because of the large population in my area. Therefore, there won't be any amalgamations in my area.

judeboy101

implausible wrote: »

Woah! Evidence? Where are you getting this from?

Have you worked in England? Every thing we have introduced in second level over last 20 years has followed what they did. Seems only natural we will keep that up.

icebergiceberg

My own feeling is that it is better to have a limited time period. I think people do go stale and this permeates around. Someone different, younger or older, may bring a new energy to the place. Then a situation arises: what to do with a former principal? Step back into the classroom again and report to the 'principal'? It would be interesting to see how many would be up for that.

implausible

judeboy101 wrote:

Have you worked in England? Every thing we have introduced in second level over last 20 years has followed what they did. Seems only natural we will keep that up.

Oh, I recognise the scenario. However, that is no proof of the same happening here, unless you have access to DES proposals that the rest of us haven't seen.

Every thing we've introduced, really? You don't think that's a bit of an exaggeration?

judeboy101

implausible wrote: »

Oh, I recognise the scenario. However, that is no proof of the same happening here, unless you have access to DES proposals that the rest of us haven't seen.

Every thing we've introduced, really? You don't think that's a bit of an exaggeration?

Hmmm. Coursework, continuos assessment, standardised testing, grade inflation, afl. Have I missed anything?and DES produced a paper on devolving budgets to schools like they did in the UK, which was linked to test results.

feardeas

I don't know about the future. However some of the new ones are educate together alone. They are voluntary and have aligned with the JMB. They are however small in number.

I'm not sure that being overly managed by an ethos is the panacea compared to central control. However sin sceal eile..

TheDriver

The whole thread is Whaley to be honest. Should we limit the leaving cert English teacher because 10 years is too long? Or the newbie in the door must be good hence give them lots of higher level? The fact is little or no one wants the Principals job. When I went for all my roles, there's was plenty applying but now, it seems very few are applying. The reality will become trying to hold onto good Principals and the opposite to limiting the tenure

Mardy Bum

TheDriver wrote: »

The whole thread is Whaley to be honest. Should we limit the leaving cert English teacher because 10 years is too long? Or the newbie in the door must be good hence give them lots of higher level? The fact is little or no one wants the Principals job. When I went for all my roles, there's was plenty applying but now, it seems very few are applying. The reality will become trying to hold onto good Principals and the opposite to limiting the tenure

Very true. The job takes a huge skill set which very few people possess. There was an interesting study recently in England and it found that those principals who focused on the short term ended up costing the school hugely in the long run and it was only principals who sacrificed short term improvements for long term goals that actually improved schools once they left.