Unclear Roles, Unfulfilled Expectations: Hidden Reasons Behind the K-12 Leadership Shortage by Heather Lyon

Photo by Nick Fewings on Unsplash

The education system faces a critical shortage of leaders, and this extends beyond teachers; there are not enough K-12 school administrators. This crisis isn’t solely due to a lack of people entering the field, it is also caused by those who exit. Data from the National Center for Education Statistics’ 2023 National Teacher and Principal Survey paints a concerning picture: eleven percent of public school principals exited the profession between the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 school years (Taie & Lewis, 2023). Given the current and future needs for qualified leaders, it’s important to examine the reasons behind this exodus and propose solutions.

One reason for the leadership shortage can be attributed to a fundamental misunderstanding of what educational administrators actually do. This lack of clarity exists on two fronts. First, aspiring administrators might not grasp the various roles and responsibilities of educational leadership; they pursue certification without a clear understanding of the daily realities of the job. Second, leadership programs often focus on theoretical and philosophical aspects of leadership (Modeste et al., 2022). However, new administrators frequently spend their initial years in positions far removed from their program’s focus. This mismatch between aspirations, preparation, and reality fuels job dissatisfaction and potential exits from the field, necessitating a reevaluation of both administrator preparation programs and public perceptions of educational leadership.

Administrative Roles and Responsibilities Confusion

Having served as an assistant superintendent, consultant, and adjunct professor in a K-12 administrative program, I’ve witnessed firsthand the limited understanding of leadership roles. At Niagara University, I teach “Curriculum Planning, Design, Implementation, and Evaluation” in their K-12 administrative preparation program. The course aims to prepare future administrators for curriculum leadership, but a surprising reality emerged. Despite assuming everyone understood the distinctions between various administrative roles, I spent a significant portion of class time clarifying the differences between a superintendent, assistant superintendent, director, and building principal.

Victoria Polsonilli, a student in the course, reflected on this lack of clarity: 

“Last week in class, we were given a scenario…My role in this scenario was to act as the principal. When we first got into our groups and read our scenario, I had no idea where to begin. It felt as if everyone else in my group had a solid grasp on what their role should be in this situation…. Part of the reason why it felt uncomfortable was because on some level we were all trying to figure out how to talk about what each person was responsible for without saying that we truly didn’t know what each role’s purpose was in this scenario.”

Polsonilli’s reflection highlights the limited understanding of administrative work. Such misunderstandings can not only deter potential administrators but also lead to job dissatisfaction and ultimately, turnover. Closing the knowledge gap between theory and practice can equip new administrators with the necessary skills to navigate the complexities of the job from day one. This, in turn, fosters greater satisfaction and retention by ensuring their expectations align with the realities of the position.

Misaligned Leadership Preparation 

Another factor contributing to the crisis is the misalignment between leadership preparation and the realities of the job. A common theme in my consulting work is administrator frustration with their superiors’ decisions. While each level holds distinct responsibilities, administrators often see themselves as “middle managers” (Tanzi, 2024), caught between directing subordinates and reporting to superiors. These administrators yearn to offer valuable suggestions, only to have them dismissed. They question their purpose and feel like cogs in a machine, a sentiment never addressed in their preparation programs.

Professors Fusarelli and Fusarelli (2023) of North Carolina State University observe that educational administrators “often find themselves in a challenging position in that they want to implement strategies for school improvement, but they have little decision-making authority” (p. 11). This disconnect between training and reality leads to feelings of constraint and disillusionment. Interestingly, leadership positions in other professions often require no additional education beyond excelling in one’s current role (Ward, 2017). However, to become a K-12 administrator in the United States, formal training, including a master’s degree and certification exams, is mandated in most states (Wilkins, 2023).

Unfortunately, this required training fails to prepare aspiring administrators for entry-level positions (typically assistant principal or dean). Furthermore, it neglects to address the reality that most educational administrators are, in essence, middle managers caught between superiors and subordinates. The tension between being trained to be an instructional leader and the realities of being a middle manager are not new. In 1982, after three years of shadowing 24 building principals, Morris et al., lamented, “the scholarly community has come to embrace a kind of ‘conventional wisdom’ that the building administrator is, and should be, the ‘instructional leader’ of his or her school. What has not been clear over the years, however, is whether the on-the-job behaviors of the school principal is consistent with this role” (p. 689).

Instead of preparing leaders to support someone else’s vision, leadership preparation programs often focus on fostering “change agents” (Cooper 2009; Darling-Hammond, et al., 2009; Hesbol, 2012). My own experience reflects this. My coursework emphasized transformational leadership styles, painting a picture of setting the course and making a difference. However, my nearly two decades as an administrator have been more about navigating someone else’s course. This is not to say I have not made a difference or found ways to infuse my leadership into the work of the larger district, but I do find myself lacking the autonomy and authority I anticipated based on my preconceptions of administrative authority and my pre-service educational administration courses.

A Path Forward

If school leaders are indeed middle managers, those who prepare and those who hire school leaders must acknowledge and leverage middle management. After all, middle managers can be crucial to an organization’s success (Huy, 2001). Equipping aspiring administrators with a course like “How to Lead Your Leader” could be instrumental. This course would focus on honing skills to provide leadership to a superior (Schwantes, 2016), fostering a supervisory mindset that values subordinate leaders as trusted advisors.

Pre-service administrators need better preparation specifically for the demands of entry-level positions. This preparation should be multifaceted. An example of this would be equipping future administrators to be disciplinarians who build relationships with teachers, families, and students (Roberts & Singleton, 2023). Additionally, the training should cover methods for managing daily school operations, thereby alleviating some of the burden from principals. At the same time, aspiring administrators should learn how to advocate for on-the-job opportunities that extend beyond typical middle management tasks. During these extension opportunities, entry-level administrators would benefit from mentoring to prepare them to transition into future positions with greater influence and autonomy.

Schools also need to build stronger systems of trust to free K-12 school administrators from the shackles of middle management. The administrators are not just motivated to lead—they have had extensive training in leadership; these are people who want to be able to contribute to the organization beyond following orders. Empowering those who are currently treated like middle managers to utilize their expertise and make decisions closer to the ground will not only improve morale but also lead to more innovative and effective solutions for our schools (Dinham & Bhindi, 2005). This shift requires a culture change where administrators are seen as partners in achieving the school’s vision, not simply enforcers of top-down mandates. By fostering trust and collaboration, the full potential of school leaders will unleash and create a more dynamic and successful learning environments for all.

Conclusion

The leadership crisis in schools transcends a simple shortage. While insufficient recruitment and high turnover are undeniable issues, a deeper problem lurks: a lack of clarity and inadequate preparation for these demanding roles. Mitigating this crisis requires dispelling the fog surrounding leadership. School leaders must be equipped with a realistic picture of the work, not an idealized one. Overseeing and supporting staff while being accountable to superiors may not be the most glamorous aspect of education work, but this is the work of many. Doing management well, in terms of understanding an organization and working for others to meet organizational goals are skills that can be taught. Current training programs often fail to address the realities of entry-level positions, leading to disillusionment when new administrators encounter tasks for which they were not prepared. This is a recipe for burnout and high turnover. It is time to redefine leadership preparation. Reflecting the true nature of the role and empowering future leaders with the necessary skills can build the pool of qualified administrators entering the field and stem the tide of those leaving.

About the Scholar

References

Cooper, C. W. (2009). Performing cultural work in demographically changing schools: Implications for expanding transformative leadership frameworks. Educational Administration Quarterly, 45(5), 694– 724. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X0934163

Darling-Hammond, L., Meyerson, D., LaPointe, M. M., & Orr, M. T. (2009). Preparing principals for a changing world. Jossey-Bass. 

Dinham, S. and Bhindi, N. L. “Trends and Imperatives in Educational Leadership’, in NSW DET 2005, 157-164. https://ro.uow.edu.au/edupapers/236

Hesbol, K. A. (2012). Learning to lead: An examination of innovative principal leadership preparation practices. Planning and Changing, 43(1), 3-9. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1506941010?sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals

Fusarelli, B. C., & Fusarelli, L. D. (2023). What do excellent school leader preparation programs look like? Phi Delta Kappan, 105(4), 8-13. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217231219398 

Huy, Q. (2001). In praise of middle managers. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2001/09/in-praise-of-middle-managers?registration=success  

Levin, S. & Bradley, K. (2019). Understanding and addressing principal turnover: A review of the research. National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Modeste, M. E., Pavlakis, A. E., & Nguyen, C. (2022). Theory amid policy and practice: A typology of theory use in educational leadership scholarship. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 17(1), 55-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1942775120941904

Morris, V. C., Crowson, R. L., Hurwitz, E., & Porter-Gehrie, C. (1982). The urban principal: Middle manager in the educational bureaucracy. The Phi Delta Kappan, 63(10), 689–692. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20386513

Roberts, T. and Singleton, E. (2023) Leadership Preparation Programs and Teacher Shortages: Are Leaders Prepared to Address School Discipline, Trauma and Stress Related Issues?. Open Journal of Leadership, 12, 186-192. doi: 10.4236/ojl.2023.123012.

Schwantes, M. (2016, September 14). 8 smart ways to lead your boss. Inc. https://www.inc.com/marcel-schwantes/8-tricks-to-lead-your-boss-when-he-isnt-cutting-it.html  

Taie, S. & Lewis, L. (2023). Principal attrition and mobility. Results from the 2021–22 Principal Follow-up Survey to the National Teacher and Principal Survey (NCES 2023-046). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2023/2023046.pdf

Tanzi, A. (2024, March 4). Middle-managers are the least confident they’ve ever been. One said they had to take several months “to recover from the intensity of the role.” Fortune. https://fortune.com/2024/03/04/middle-managers-confidence-glassdoor-report/

Ward, M. (2017, January 13). The 20 highest-paying jobs that don’t require a master’s degree. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/13/the-20-highest-paying-jobs-that-dont-require-a-masters-degree.html   Wilkins, J. (2023, December 18). 50-state comparison: School leader certification and preparation programs (archive). Education Commission of the States. https://www.ecs.org/50-state-comparison-school-leader-certification-and-preparation-programs-archive-2/