'The Jeb Bush Nobody Knows' -- Part 17: Jeb's NEW requirements for FL public school principals: NONE

'The Jeb Bush Nobody Knows' -- Part 17: Jeb's NEW requirements for FL public school principals: NONE

I was actually planning to write a spiffy new editorial about another educational topic, but then I stumbled upon a fascinating article, below, during my research.

I think this article is worth reading. I also think it would be rather pointless for me to rewrite the article.

Consequently, I have simply written my current "editorial" in my reply #1. And, I hope you will share your reaction to this article as well.

Thanks,
summer - a former Dem, now an independent and a FL certified teacher

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Governor Jeb Bush -
shakin up FL's educational establishment yet again!

May 15, 2002

Education Week

Fla.'s New Code Drops Requirement For Principal Licenses

By Jeff Archer

Tucked inside the more than a thousand pages of revised education code approved by the Florida legislature this month is a one-sentence provision that would open principals' jobs to all comers.

Districts could set their own minimum requirements for filling such positions, hiring as principals candidates who lack the state's school-administration credential.

The measure would make Florida among the least restrictive states for administrator licensing, national observers say. One of the only states with fewer restrictions is Michigan, which several years ago stopped licensing administrators altogether.

The provision on principals drew little public attention amid the battles over other issues in the new school code, including unsuccessful amendments that dealt with religious expression and guns in schools.

Still, the Sunshine State's principals lobbied hard against what they argued was an ill-advised move that would lower the standards for school- level leaders.

Supporters of the change countered that the state's licensing rules have kept otherwise qualified candidates out of the field, while doing little to ensure the competence of principals.

"If it works like we think it might, we can get some really talented folks in young retirement age to step forward and take over these key positions," said James E. King Jr., the majority leader of the Republican-controlled state Senate.

Florida's current licensing rules require candidates for principalships to have taught for a minimum of three years, earned a master's degree or higher, and completed training in specified areas like management, education law, and curriculum and instruction.

'Taco Bell' Principals?

Under the new legislation, the state education department would continue to offer administrator credentials to individuals who applied, but districts would no longer be obligated to hire only those who held them. Critics derided the option by saying it could lead to the "Taco Bell principal," meaning that a manager of a fast-food restaurant could be hired to run a school.

Doug Crawford, the executive director of the Tallahassee-based Florida Association of School Administrators, called the new provision "a slap in the face of professionalism."

"Our state issues hundreds of different kinds of licenses, for architects and accountants and contractors," he said. "They all have to meet the state criteria to get a license, but then we take the most critical part of education and dilute that."

To what extent school systems would actually exercise the new option, however, remains to be seen. A nationwide wave of principal retirements-coupled with a Florida program aimed at encouraging public employees to retire early-could lead systems to look beyond the pool of traditional candidates.

But given the pressure to demonstrate school improvement, some experts believe that districts would still only hire principals with strong backgrounds in education.

That's what happened in Michigan, said Jim Ballard, the executive director of the Lansing- based Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals. Since the Great Lakes State did away with all licensing of school administrators in 1996, he said, districts have continued to advertise for principals who would qualify for state credentials if they were still offered.

Although he opposed the elimination of the credentialing rules, "I don't think Michigan education has been hurt by it," Mr. Ballard said.

Some local school leaders in Florida similarly expect little to change in practice.

"I doubt very seriously that this school board here will buy in to it, even though the state will now allow it," said John C. Fryer Jr., the superintendent of the 126,000-student Duval County district, which includes Jacksonville.

Mr. Fryer seeks new principals with public school experience, even though he himself came from the military and would not qualify under the state's previous licensing rules to serve as a principal.

Florida does not license superintendents. But the former U.S. Air Force general contends that district leaders and school leaders need different kinds of skills.

"We've got to get back to the focus on instruction," Mr. Fryer said. "And the instructional leaders have to be the principals. And the only way they can is if they're experts on instruction."

Some observers expect more states will change credentialing rules for school administrators. Joseph Murphy, a national expert on school leadership who heads the Ohio Principals Leadership Academy, said: "Florida is a pretty good example of how the environmental forces are going to impact the issue of licensing."

As some of you may know from reading a few of my other editorials in this series, I've emailed Gov. Bush in the past on education issues. Believe it or not, one of my emails concerned my wish that FL would start hiring people from outside of education to run public schools. (BTW, I bet I'm not the only one who ever emailed him with this wish!) :)

In all honesty, I've encountered VERY few principals in public education who I wanted to work for as an employee. However, I never had such distaste for employers in my prior life as a private sector employee, and instead had good working relationships with all of the people above me. Yet, with principals, it was often another story for me, and a very unexpected one.

Rather than bore you with my own tales of woe with principals, I will tell you what I hope this new law achieves in addition to attracting more people who care about kids:

(1) More people from the military running urban pubic schools. These schools really need leaders who can impose and enforce tough discipline on kids.

(2) More people with a background in business. Some principals have learned how to utilize management principles to build a cohesive team, and, are willing to hire more men as teachers, but not many principals, IMO. I think one of the worse aspects of public school teaching is that it tends to be overwhelmingly female. This is especially terrible for male students who desperately want male role models beyond their physical education teacher (and, no offense to PE teachers).

(3) More people with a background in public relations. When public schools do something right, very few principals have enough common sense to tell such good news to the community.

(4) More people working as principals from a variety of fields outside of education. I believe students of all ages want leaders in education who come from other fields. I also think such a principal will hire more faculty from different and varying career backgrounds. Despite the teacher shortages, education continues to be a very tight clique -- and this stifles new ideas from entering education.

With respect to the superintendent from the military, who is quoted in the article as saying he prefers principals come from "a teaching background" because:

"We've got to get back to the focus on instruction," Mr. Fryer said. "And the instructional leaders have to be the principals. And the only way they can is if they're experts on instruction."

IMO, he is (1) right, and (2) wrong.

Right in thinking that instruction is key - but, wrong in thinking principals are the ones currently providing instructional leadership to teachers.

First of all, just because a current principal previously taught three years does not mean that person is a fabulous teacher. I can tell you for a fact I know some principals who were, by their own admission, lousy teachers.

And, second, while principals do have the obligation to evaluate teachers, they spend VERY little time in the classroom with teachers. Principals show up to do the yearly evaluation, and that is usually IT.

Rather than make principals the ones responsible for the evaluation, I believe others could do the evaluation - and provide instructional leadership. The ones I am thinking of are not the principals, but the seasoned, truly fabulous teachers in a school. These teachers should serve as peer evaluators and/or mentors. In a tiny handful of schools, this is already happening, but it does not happen often enough.

So, in short, I think this new law is great.

But, I also know school districts will be slow in opening the door to such people. Maybe the door will open in the worst performing schools, or in the more innovative charter schools. I really believe if the door swung open, it could be wonderful.

Let's face it: No one goes to "superintendent school" to become a superintendent, and no one goes to "governor school" to become a governor.

The only change I would add is this: All the new principals should be given the opportunity to attend some kind of on-going seminar in each school district to address their questions and concerns.

PS For anyone who wants to drop Gov. Bush a line about these changes, there is a "Contact Jeb" link on the left sidebar of his campaign web site, at www.jeb.org

According to Roger Clegg at The Corner at National Review Online, Jeb "today signed into law a bill that permits state-certified minority-owned companies, regardless of wealth, to request advance payments of up to 10 percent on contract awards. The idea is to increase working capital financing, but of course the better way to do that would be to make wealth the qualifying factor, not race or ethnicity. The bill is clearly unconstitutional, and it is very disappointing that the bill got to the Governor's desk, and that it got across it."

I agree with Clegg. Jeb's bow towards minorities in an election year, while understandable, is just the kind of thing that irks this conservative no end. Racial preferences are unconstitutional, unprincipled and unAmerican, and I'm tired of listening to the government überclass, in which the Bush family sometimes seems to be a bit too cosily ensconced, defend them!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.