Hold principals to high standards

The large pay raises an arbitration panel awarded public school principals come amid an era of rising expectations for Hawaii’s public schools — expectations that will be met only if the Department of Education succeeds in holding principals ultimately accountable for the success or failure of their schools.

It’s a lot of responsibility to put on a single campus leader, to be sure, but the research is clear: Great principals are visionary leaders who manage to succeed even in challenging environments and despite a relative lack of resources. They inspire excellence in faculty — teachers who consider their principals effective have been found to care more about their own work — and in the students themselves; one study out of Texas found that having an effective principal was the equivalent of two to seven months more learning per year. The profound impact on our young people is unmistakable. As goes the principal, so goes the school.

Knowing this, it is imperative that the Department of Education and the Hawaii Government Employees Association Unit 6 work together to more closely align a principal’s performance with his or her pay, and continued employment. For just as an excellent principal can spur and sustain educational progress, a poor or mediocre one can stifle it.

The DOE and the labor union that represents Hawaii’s principals, vice principals and other educational officers — to our continuing dismay, since these administrators belong in the management ranks — have made some progress on the accountability front; by the end of last school year, a new evaluation system was rolled out at all 255 regular public schools. The Comprehensive Evaluation System for School Administrators (CESSA) is an annual review that rates principals based on factors such as students’ test scores, instructional leadership and the engagement of the school community. The results, however, have no immediate impact on a principal’s pay or placement.

It is unfortunate that the salary and performance issues were separated, at least as far as Hawaii’s students are concerned.

Unlike Hawaii’s public-school teachers, who negotiated a contract that links future pay raises to performance, the roughly 850 members of Unit 6 got straight pay raises — annual, across-the-board increases of 4.5 percent each year for four years. The average pay for high school principals in Hawaii now is about $125,000 a year. The state’s consumer price index rose 1.7 percent last year, so the healthy increase for Unit 6 obviously reflects the arbitration panel’s view that the educational officers deserve more money for the scope and quality of their work, not simply to keep up with the cost of living.

Act 51, the 2004 state law that inspired the belated principal evaluation system, clearly stated that principals "will be held accountable for their performance through a system that includes rewards, assistance and sanctions." The evaluation system that evolved from that 2004 mandate, though, focuses on the two former, and this week’s arbitration decision goes further in that direction, establishing a program that would financially reward the highest-rated principals. The best principals surely merit this special recognition, it’s true, but sanctions for the worst performers must be part of the framework, too. The lowest-rated principals may need more than administrative support, mentoring and training; they may need to find another line of work. Schools cannot soar with weak principals. It is as simple as that.

Ultimately, the DOE and HGEA must continue to refine the principals’ compensation and evaluation lest an unequal system fester at the school level. Teachers and principals must aspire to the same lofty standards, and face the same high stakes.