XX number of Principals are appointed this year: Yearly, in the third quarter of the year, MoE would announce the whirlwind changes to the leadership in schools. Some are brand new Ps (fresh blood), while others are rotated in their tour of duty. On the ground, the teachers would have quickly checked out on the new P. How does such change affect the 'ground' in the schools?
No dynasty in our backyard
School educators are very perceptive people. They know what they perceived is coming very quickly especially the change at the top. It has been MoE's policy to rotate Principals around every 5 years or so, in the name of change, needs of the school etc. Unannounced reason could be that to prevent the building up of dynasty in a school when the Principal overstayed.
The high-flyers and the garden
There are also some 'high flying' leaders who would flit in suddenly and then leave suddenly in their tour of duty. Usually, they would ended up in greener pasture in HQ MoE. For me, I have seen quite a few of them whom I did not even have the chance to remember their names in my 38 years of service. Just before I retired 2 years ago, a new P came to my school. Among us old timers, we bet on his longevity in the school after he introduced himself. The fact that he mentioned about his short teaching stint in a JC followed by VPship before coming to our school already hinted that he was on a 'white knight' career path. Sure enough he left for better things after 2 years as predicted. It was like someone (MoE) planting a big seed (P) in the school garden which has a variety of plants and trees, some were the pillars of the school. Just after germination, this seed is weeded/transplanted into another plot. Most of them are 'marking time'. However some seed could have already affected the balance of the garden through his/her view of policy changes in the school's....change of vision, focus, management, etc. If his/her personality is very strong, the original intent of things would surely change. Same like the change of Minister...there will be changes or brand new initiatives and slogans (Teach less Learn More....) as though the former one did not have any!!
Post-principal
What happened once he/she leaves? Back to square one.....next please. Most teachers would wish for 'better days'. There would be also be a mad scramble for the inner circle of influence. Some teachers, especially ambitious middle managers who built their alliance around the last P would have to change tack, start anew in their politicking game.
Some say that Principal may change, but the school culture remains the same because the people are staying. However, the unseen upheaval on the ground happens. It is interesting and amusing to view how the different alliances renew their efforts to forge their sphere of influence on the new leadership.
Lime lighters
It was not uncommon for some to highlight their work done eg Emails were sent to all at 0300 this morning; we worked through Labour Day to complete the task, we brought pupils for learning journey during the weekend, etc. If these were quietly and conscientiously done, no issue. However, if mentioned in a forum of teachers/managers, to everyone present, then they became like little pellets flying around for impact. The effect on the P would be much different. He/She would have to praise them, inevitably, job WELL DONE.
When working issues arose, some middle managers would immediately march into the P's office instead of amiably discussing with the parties concerned. The next thing would be the summon to the office to explain one's side of the story. The one-upmanship is very common especially if the party involved wanted to create an impression, in the name of 'consultation'!
Of course, some leaders were able to see through it all and have their take of things. For an ordinary teacher in the system, there is always hope that 'better days' would descend together with the new school leader.
Stay how long?
The million dollar question is how long should a P stay in one school? In the past, there were some Ps who became legend in the school after a long stay especially those in the established school. Some started as a teacher and rose to the top eventually. There was always a consensus that he/she was an excellent leader. They left a legacy for the others to follow. However, in the present age of expendables, I don't think such longevity is possible in mainstream schools. Capable teachers and middle managers are usually posted out to other schools when promoted.
I felt that a 10-year period is good enough for a P to establish a stable school culture. He/She will be able to see the harvest the fruits of the 'masterplan'. The working order with the staff would be established, refined regularly for the betterment of the staff relationship and commitment. Speaking about 'loyalty' would be easier.
Assessing the Principal
Of course, there should be leeway for the exit of the P. Short of using the assessment of school leaders or voting to rate the performance of the P, a revamped school climate survey would give an indication of how the staff perceived the performance of the P. If only the P would find out personally and objectively on areas for improvement, nothing changes. So far, I always felt that the report on the SEM part on School Leadership was a sham. It was usually graded highly as the report writers are the VPs and HODs. You don't cut the main vine that feed you! In one school which I have taught in, even the request for transfer of 3 HODs in a year had no bearing on the P. Replacements came and left. If analysed properly, something must be wrong! The P happily remained in her post for many more years. The staff breathed a sign of relief when she retired.
