There are high levels of anxiety that the K-12 workforce at all levels is losing too much talent, but data to prove it have been sparse.
But now, a new brief looking at principal turnover may give the field some evidence to be concerned and to start acting.
About 16 percent of principals left their schools last academic year鈥攖he second full school year of the pandemic鈥攁ccording to a survey of school district leaders released Thursday.
The research brief by RAND Corporation, looking at principal and teacher turnover, as well as other staffing issues during the 2021-22 academic year and going into this school year, is one of the first to show an uptick in principals leaving their jobs during the pandemic years.
It comes after multiple polls captured higher-than-normal stress levels during the health crisis and sentiments from school leaders that they were thinking about quitting or planning to quit.
Consecutive surveys of principals by the National Association of Secondary School Principals, released in and 2022, showed that nearly 40 percent of school leaders planned to leave their jobs in the next few years.
In the latest NASSP survey released last summer, 14 percent said that amid staffing shortages, threats to their safety, and their general well-being, they planned to leave the next year.
Is the 鈥楤ig Quit鈥� happening?
But do these new data from RAND show that the long-feared and predicted exodus is on the horizon or is finally here?
Not necessarily, said Melissa Kay Diliberti, an assistant policy researcher at RAND and the lead author of the brief, 鈥�.鈥�
One data point, Diliberti said, does not make a trend.
It鈥檚 possible that the one-year spike is simply the result of delayed resignations and retirements from the previous two years as principals put off leaving to wait out the pandemic or for more stability in the economy and the job market.
Data are limited on principal turnover, but early data from two states, Massachusetts and Colorado, showed that rates of turnover fell in the first year of the pandemic and any increase later on was still lower than the last pre-pandemic year.
Diliberti said it鈥檚 also possible that the working conditions during the pandemic years became so stressful that principals were leaving as a result.
鈥淚 do think that our survey shows evidence of heightened attrition and cause for concern,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut it鈥檚 unclear yet whether this is an aberration, like a one-time problem, or a trend.鈥�
But understanding the reason for the one-year increase is critical, she said.
鈥淭hat鈥檚 important because we might make different decisions on what to do if it鈥檚 a trend, versus if it鈥檚 a one-time aberration,鈥� she said.
鈥淚f it鈥檚 a trend, then it hints more toward more systemic problems with working conditions in the profession, than if it鈥檚 a one-time aberration, which suggests that it was pent-up frustration from the pandemic that caused the aberration, but that generally we shouldn鈥檛 be concerned about the teaching or principal profession more broadly.鈥�
Interpret the data with some caution
For district leaders who are responsible for hiring and retaining principals, Diliberti urged a wait-and-see approach.
鈥淚 think it is an implication of our study, although perhaps an unsatisfactory one,鈥� she said. 鈥淚n the meantime, schooling is continuing and district leaders across the country are dealing with these challenges every day. But I feel like we need to wait and see if this is a systemic problem or just a one-time uptick.鈥�
RAND polled a random sample of 300 leaders from traditional school systems and charter management organizations about staffing issues between Oct. 13, 2022 and Dec. 12, 2022.
It also found principal resignations and retirements to be more acute in high-poverty districts and in rural areas, with district leaders in those school systems reporting turnover at 23 and 21 percent, respectively.
Historically, she said, high-poverty districts have had trouble recruiting and retaining teachers and school leaders compared to more affluent school systems.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 think it鈥檚 surprising to us that high-poverty districts show up as having among the highest attrition rates,鈥� she said, adding that 鈥渋t could be a combination of historical trends and potentially increased bad working conditions in these high-poverty settings during the pandemic-era that contributed to the unusually high rate of increase.鈥�
RAND urged caution with the rural numbers because those school systems have a smaller number of schools and just one departure can look like a big data swing.
There are a lot of caveats in these numbers. The latest federal data show that pre-pandemic principal turnover was around 16 percent. But those numbers capture school level-data鈥攖he movement of principals from a school; it counts a principal moving from one school to another, as well as a principal leaving the profession overall as turnover.
The RAND data reflect principals who retired or resigned鈥攅ssentially leaving the districts they were working in.
Diliberti said that she鈥檚 confident that RAND鈥檚 numbers come closer to capturing the exit from districts, but she left room for the possibility that district leaders may also be giving their best guesses in their responses about resignations and retirements.
District leaders, for example, said that principal retirements and resignations were about 3 percent pre-pandemic, which appeared exceedingly low.
鈥淲e are a bit skeptical of the pre-pandemic attrition rate,鈥� which she said 鈥渨as lower than you鈥檇 expect.鈥�
But, Diliberti added, the turnover number RAND captured was closer to鈥攖hough higher than鈥攖he 鈥渓eavers鈥� number reported in the National Center for Education Statistics in the 2016-17 school year, which found that 10 percent of principals left the profession and 6 percent changed schools.
Still, the combined effect of the disruption, both from principals and teachers quitting, can鈥檛 be good for schools, she said. Additional RAND surveys of district leaders showed that they planned to increase staffing for this school year鈥攊ndicating that they were responding to some of the working conditions that were negatively affecting teachers and principals.
David Griffith, the associate executive director for policy and advocacy at the National Association of Elementary School Principals, said the RAND survey results 鈥渃ompletely jibes with what we are hearing and seeing among our members as well.鈥�
鈥淚t鈥檚 something we have been trying to raise concern about,鈥� he said. 鈥淭eacher turnover and shortages were the immediate top-of-mind crisis, but we could see that the leadership piece was going to be happening.鈥�
A confluence of factors may be leading school leaders to the door, he said. Veteran principals stuck it out through the early days of the pandemic to support their students and their communities, and now that things have somewhat stabilized, they feel they can leave.
鈥淭hey think, 鈥極K, I鈥檝e contributed my part, I鈥檝e done my part, and now I can leave in good conscience,鈥� 鈥� he said. 鈥淚 think the other part of that is that leaders are also burned out 鈥� They have been on the go for three years. That鈥檚 also been an under-appreciated part of the pandemic.鈥�
The increased job demands, staff shortages, and politicization of education have also all contributed to a decline in job satisfaction and job retention, he said.
District officials and policymakers have to figure out how to make the job more attractive to would-be principals, including by offering incentives, providing additional in-school supports, and rethinking the role schools and school leaders play in communities, he said.
Annette D. Anderson, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University, was not surprised by the new data.
鈥淚t鈥檚 actually validating what we are hearing anecdotally in the field,鈥� said Anderson, who is also the deputy director of Johns Hopkins Center for Safe and Healthy Schools. 鈥淭he concern is, is this trend going to continue? Is it going to be exacerbated by our lack of understanding of how to stem this turnover and increase retention?鈥�
Many thought an influx of federal COVID relief funds and returning students to school buildings would help schools get back to normal. But many school leaders were just not prepared for what came afterwards, Anderson said.
鈥淭he systems themselves haven鈥檛 changed鈥攚e still have lunch, and we still have the same buildings, and we still have the same academic schedules鈥攖he needs in those schools are exponentially increased,鈥� Anderson said.
鈥淲e did not anticipate the mental health needs, the school climate needs, the school safety needs. These are ongoing challenges. As I talk to folks anecdotally in the field, they are feeling frustrated, they are feeling unheard, they are feeling exhausted, and they are trying to figure out, 鈥楧o I hang in there, do I try to ride this out, or do I start looking for other options in this economy?鈥欌�� she said. 鈥淭hat concerns me because the schools where this is happening, as always, are our most under-resourced schools. We鈥檝e got to figure this out.鈥�
Anderson said policymakers and district leaders must come to terms with the fact that the principalship is no longer a profession where people stay two to three decades.
Thinking about how to staff a position where leaders stick around for shorter periods鈥攕uch as having an entire school leadership team that stays in a school for about five years before transitioning to a new team鈥攃ould be an idea to consider.
鈥淲e really need to think about these positions as being more transitory, both the classroom positions and the leadership positions, and we need to plan around that,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e have to have this expectation that people are not going to stay.鈥�
Both leadership preparation programs and policymakers should also rethink their roles鈥攚ith a shift from how to train school leaders to how to support them once they get in the job.
鈥淥ur current higher education course offerings don鈥檛 necessarily speak to all of what our school leaders are seeing in terms of safety,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e still expect them to be instructional leaders when they are spending much of the day doing the work of the security guard鈥攍ike trying to keep the school itself safe for learning. We have to think about how our evaluation systems can pivot to being more responsive to that.鈥�
