Written by Dr. John Meyer
Recent reports claim that pressures on WELS principals are threatening the position’s viability and contributing to a personnel shortage. For example, a 2015 synod convention report stated that inadequate compensation may “influence strongly . . . the difficulty the synod is having in filling principal vacancies” (Ad Hoc Commission II, 2015, p. 187). Similarly, the 2013 synod convention reported that “nearly 40 percent of our principals would prefer not to be principals,” adding “that if WELS had an improved model of principal training as well as the necessary time resources to fulfill the role well, that a greater number of our men would be more receptive to the idea of entering into and remaining in the principalship” (Task Force on Lutheran Schools, 2013, p. 55). Are these claims actually true?
Last fall, a survey was sent to all K-12 WELS principals and teachers to find out how time, training, and compensation affect their attitudes toward the principal position. One thousand eighty-two (53.4%) responded, including 245 (74%) principals. This is what they said.
The WELS principals’ primary concern is having adequate administrative time, but they don’t get enough. Ninety-two percent of the 245 WELS principals who completed the survey consider release time from teaching an important need, but only 8% said they are given an adequate amount. Nearly two-thirds of the principals claimed that more administrative time is needed than the suggested WELSSA guidelines of 10 hours per week for every 75 students. Importantly, teachers do not feel as strongly about the need for administrative time as their principals do. While 82% of the principals said their administrative time was inadequate, only 67% of non-principals did. These statistically significant differences, t(501) = -4.67, p = 0.000004, imply a faculty tension: When principals claim insufficient time to accomplish their tasks, teachers may hear it as excuses or complaints (figure 1).
There is strong support for increasing the training for principals, but there is little consensus about what that training looks like. Despite selecting necessary skill as the most important factor determining their interest in being a principal, only 10% of the respondents believe that WELS principals get adequate training (figure 2). When asked what principal training might look like, answers ranged from simple teaching experience to getting an administrator’s license (table 3). Interestingly, young men were 2 ½ times more likely to emphasize a master’s degree than older men. Just 0.75% think a B.S. in Education alone is sufficient training even though assigning new teacher graduates to the position makes this the most common preparation method.
Both WELS principals and teachers rank issues of compensation lower than other factors, but it’s still important—especially when combined with adequate time and training. WELS teachers are modest when discussing compensation, perhaps because they take to heart the biblical admonition that church leaders not be a “lover of money” (1 Timothy 3:3, NIV 2011). Many (41%) chose to remain neutral on the topic. At the same time, only 17% said that principal compensation is adequate. Ninety-eight percent support the principal being paid more than a teacher, with the most popular compensation (35%) being $5,000 more and many others selecting higher amounts. The greatest influence on a person’s interest in serving as principal is when all three factors – time, training, and compensation – are provided at an adequate level (figure 3).
If adequate levels of time, training, and compensation are provided, there are more than enough existing principals and experienced teachers interested in serving as a WELS principal to meet the synod’s needs. Seventy-nine percent of existing principals, 39% of male teachers, and 11% of female teachers say they are interested in being a WELS principal (table 1). Those percentages translate to over 600 people for the 342 K-12 schools. These same groups become more interested if provided adequate time, training, and compensation. For example, of the 43 existing principals who said they have a low interest in being one, 29 (69%) said they would be more interested if time, training, and compensation were adequate (table 2). The same is true for 69% of men and 36% of women teachers.
This study found that the recent reports about the challenges and possible solutions for the WELS principal position are true. Existing WELS principals and teachers agree that principals are not provided enough time or training to properly carry out the position, and the current compensation levels are not commensurate to the responsibilities. Despite these unfair conditions, the WELS can be thankful that so many principals continue to serve conscientiously. Wise stewardship, however, of its called workers and schools suggest that the synod review and revise its current practices. A copy of the entire survey report is available online.
John Meyer, PhD (DMLC ’87) is the director of graduate studies and continuing education at Martin Luther College, New Ulm MN.
References
Meyer, J., Treptow, E., Rademan, J., Sievert, J., & Brown, E. (2015) The WELS principal position: Time, training, and compensation. Retrieved from http://blogs.mlc-wels.edu/wels-educator/files/2016/02/Principal-Survey-Report-Final2.pdf
Voss, J., Buchholz, J., Dunn, H., Ehlke, W., Hein, M., Rodewald, D., & Unke, T. (2015). Ad Hoc Commission 2. Report presented at the 63rd Biennial Convention of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod in the Book of Reports and Memorials. Pp. 185 – 195. Retrieved from http://synodadmin.welsrc.net/download-synodadmin/official-synod-reports/?wpdmdl=3263&ind=CzvMGrbbXBHEUibu18tUr2MHDITwC-doN67S5v-qRocLuhWDtwjmrwGEZhbhOuY5P8XuTuWIHYeCC-3v9IMnJw
Granberg, S., Aswege, D., Huebner, P., Klindworth, R., Martens, L., Mueller, T., Schmudlach, S., Sievert, P. (2013). Task Force on Lutheran Schools. Report presented to the 62rd Biennial Convention of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod in the Book of Reports and Memorials. Pp. 45 – 68.
Students can enroll in any program.
Your last comment brings up an interesting point; are females allowed to enroll into the Masters Degree at MLC for principal or must they only do the early childhood director path?
Dr. Meyer’s survey and insights into this issue are critical for the future of Christian education. I hope we can turn this good information into action steps. Here are a few items of interest:
1. Teachers and Principals often have a different skill set and see a school through different lenses. There is strong documentation and research that shows instructors and administrators do not see education from the same perspective, naturally conflict occurs. While steps can be taken to ameliorate the conflict, this is a natural part of the exchange and of teachers acknowledging that they do have a boss.
2. We often shy away from the concept of different levels of compensation. But there is greater risk, including financial, for a Principal to lead effectively. Compensation must be adjusted to acknowledge and encourage the risk of leadership. I know of many potentially great Principals who remain teachers because the risk is not worth it and is not valued.
3. Principals do need to be taught to be great administrators with measurable administrative action steps. A Principal either has annual reviews or does not, follows all the action steps on a marketing plan or does not, etc. Principals must have specific action steps for marketing, cultivation or harvest plan, donor relations, alumni relations, technology planning, facility planning, financial management, human resources, etc. They need to be reviewed annually with documentation from year to year on what actions took place and what did not occur.
I hope we are all thrilled by this discussion and look forward to growing ministry through strong Principals. We can not get bogged down by man/woman leadership questions when there are so many men who are unwilling or unable to fill the need.
This may have been mentioned before, but providing educational leadership in a school is extremely stressful, and our principals deserve a lot more than they receive. When a WELS school is barely scraping by or floundering, or if there’s a school-wide issue, the principal is the one expected to save the situation. And that’s too large a task for anyone. I agree that we need to rethink our expectations for the position — one principal I know has nearly ruined his health as a consequence of his service.
I am not in WELS anymore, so in that sense I am not qualified to comment. However, I have now taught for years in a public school system. I just want to say that my principal at Trinity Lutheran in Crete was nothing short of amazing. I will forever cherish everything he taught us. I never realized until I was an adult, all the work he did as both principal and teacher. Whatever you do, do not turn to secular systems for administrative models, because there is an enormous disconnect between secular administrative policies and teaching.
I agree their seems in many congregations a different standard / benefits for teachers then pastor’s. What about paying teachers for different things they do besides just teaching. Computers, athletic director, etc. Many congregations do not foow all the guidelines for Synod code. They just go with the pay matrix and whatever they feel like for housing. The teachers are very dedicated.
For email surveys, a 30% return rate is considered high. A 53% return rate is very high for an email survey. As email surveys proliferate, fewer people take time to fill them out. Also, mass emails often get filtered as spam. So the return rate on this survey actually reveals a very high interest.
You will be pleased to learn that MLC and CLS have been working cooperatively to provide a variety of ways to train principals.
A set of ten Leadership modules have been offered in each district.
Candidate Leadership training provide leadership encouragement and initial training to experienced teachers.
Principal Apprentice mentoring provides newly assigned apprentice principals and EC directors with a trained mentor and leadership coach for two years.
Principal training program assigns a beginning teacher to serve alongside a veteran mentor principal for three years and then be reassigned as principal in another school.
Master of Science in Education – Leadership provides school leadership and instruction training to existing teachers and principals.
Master of Science in Educational Administration for WELS principals and early childhood directors provides full training to meet the unique requirements as set forth by the WELS principal and early childhood director standards.
Training is available and encouraged, but many find it hard to afford the time and cost.
I read with rapt interest the article by Dr. Meyer about principals and principal ship in the WELS and the comments that were posted concerning it. Some comments of mine:
1. Why only a little over 50% return rate? I should think a problem such as we have in WELS about the lack of principals would mean a much higher return rate. Or do the people the survey was sent out to not think it is that big a problem?
2. Our men are ill prepared to become principals. Our college of ministry and Commission on Lutheran Schools MUST offer more help to men in the area of the principal – more summer courses, workshops, seminars, etc. Could we make use of retired principals with their vast amounts of experience to help mentor younger men in the area of principalship?
3. What does the congregation want/expect from its principal? This was stated in a previous reply. Does a local congregation really, really know what is involved in the role of principal? For the most part, I think not. The principalship has evolved over the years into a highly complex role in the WELS. And it will keep on evolving as the years go by as educational methods and practices evolve.
It is my fervant prayer that our gracious God will continue to provide our LESs with competent men to serve as principals
Thanks for reading the report and for these questions: “Is the converse true? Would more males aspire to be a principal if there was more time, more training, and more money?” The survey pursued that information with item 8. The responses indicate that providing adequate time, training, and compensation will result in people being “more interested” or “much more interested” in the principal position (see table 8B on page 39 of the report). Very telling are the responses of principals who said they currently have a low interest in being one. Their discontent and their view of the time and training they receive seem connected. As reported, 69% of those currently with a low interest report being “more interested” or “much more interested” in being a principal if given the adequate time, training, and compensation (see table 11 on page 17 of the report).
There is wisdom In the report, not the article, on page 47, comment 2. To be noted is the scriptural insight of varying gifts as they relate to principals. A suggestion would be for MLC, early in the college experience-end of freshman year, to administer an aptitude test to the male students. After identifying those who have administrative traits and gifts and a spirit for service in a leadership role, modify the current early field experiences and awareness opportunities like urban ministry trips to vet and/or cultivate these attributes. MLC may consider developing a minor in administration to prepare these men for assignment as principals.
The study focused on time, training, and compensation relative to challenges to the principal’s position. Flip the concepts to see if these challenges would serve to induce more males to aspire to be a principal. Is the converse true? Would more males aspire to be a principal if there was more time, more training, and more money? The questions are intended to indicate the three together seem to be strange bedfellows. Related to this matter,in the report on page 15, footnote three is refreshing. This study chose not to include the motivation for preparing oneself for greater service. I rejoice to note when motivation was addressed in previous studies, the clear majority stated better service in ministry as the motive. I am thankful ministry preparation is the motive albeit known as professional growth to some.
As a former principal for many years, and now serving as a classroom teacher without the administrative duties, I can relate to the stress issue of school leadership.
But there are a few aspects of this report that are missing, although commentator Paul in the first comment was getting to it.
1) What does the congregation want from the Principal?
2) What does the Pastor want from the Principal?
3) What do the other Called Workers want from the Principal?
It seems all too often there is a congregational misconception as the role of the administrator that none of the survey questions touched upon in the report. I would harken to guess that there is a good percentage of schools and congregations that view the Principal as the school manager, much in the same way one might view an office manager. “Make sure books are ordered. Be sure to submit all receipts to the Treasurer. Is there enough toner in the copier? No? Order some.”
Those tasks are certainly important and necessary, but often they fall to the Principal to address. When the Principal receives his release time, how much time is spent being the office manager, and how much is spent being the Educational Leader?
There is the subsequent stressor when the Principal is leading a school and the congregation doesn’t want his leadership skills, ONLY his managerial skills. Educational leadership requires a commitment from the congregation that may not be welcomed. The much more stressing problem is NOT the ordering of textbooks (that’s just time consuming) but rather leading a school in a direction that the congregation is not at all interested in going. No amount of release time is going to solve that problem. In fact, it might aggravate it when the Principal sees all the needs and weaknesses that could be addressed, but the support needed for making “schools of excellence” is not sufficient.
The lack of commitment to the Principal’s vision are noticed in points 2) and 3) from above. What happens to a Principal when he has time for Education leadership and the teachers balk at it? The other teachers (and pastor perhaps) may resent his release time because it ultimately means that he’s creating new things for them to do to make the teachers’ lives even busier. In some teachers’ minds its great to have a manager rather than a Principal because it means they will have a stocked supply closet, with no other extra work of Professional Development.
The pastor/principal relationship is so important as well. It really is an entire topic unto itself, but having a survey question that asks how stressful is your relationship with your pastor would have awkward but necessary. Do your Principal and Pastor view each other as equals? Does your Pastor have ultimate authority as to what the vision of the school is going to be?
In my years as Principal, I can honestly say that the salary issue was of such a minimal importance, it hardly bears mentioning. I can honestly say that the greatest training necessary to be an effective administrator is experience. I can honestly say that having release time as a Principal who was only expected to be a manager was at times frustrating. The ultimate goal of the survey was to study the effects of Principal perceptions and burn-out. It was well done. It just was missing some of the biggest stressors.
My WELS school currently has a female acting principal who has a vote on council. We tried calling men to fill the position last summer but the calls were declined.
I come from a different perspective, that of one who has served on the board of Christian education, LES for many years, including eight years as Chair.
Those years included six traditional principles, one female who did most of the work but the title was bestowed upon the pastor so there could be representation on the school board and church council.
I have asked principals to resign for the good of the ministry, and have mentored. In order to continue support of a LES, I was part a joint school program from inception to the point when it dissolved because the other congregation pulled the plug on the program. Prior to which, two good principals were one too many, leaving the other displaced for nearly three years.
I have since moved to warmer surroundings yet still serving, in my former congregation, is a tremendous individual who’s many years of teaching at a high school level and even included starting a highschool outside the US came with initial challenges having never before served at a grade school level. I can assure you that while nearly every pastor, teacher, staff minister, and support staff all deserve more compensation, the reality is, so many of our churches and LES, are operated by very small groups of Christians who in many cases barely make it financially. I have heard many complaints over the years but rarely is compensation ever brought up.
What is often expressed and sensed is a lack of value given to those who serve as principals and teachers alike.
Even many who serve on LES boards have little clue how much is involved being a principle. And FYI, no, they do not get summers off!
Here is the reality check for what it is worth. Congregations love their pastors, as they should, yet as a result, principles and teachers are sometimes treated as less, i.e. the parsonage gets cable T.V. but the teacherage does not.
Unless a teacher is brought in a year or more sooner to work as a principal apprentice under someone who is nearing retirement, the majority of first time principals are blind sided by the task before them.
Pastors also need to be taught interpersonal skill sets when dealing with school staff. It is much different teaching an hour of Bible history and being able to go back to your office. Please do not compare how Billy never acts up for you. Try dealing with Billy every day, all day.
And I know this post is about Principals, but please stop referring to kindergarten teachers as “just kindergarten teachers.” No they are not responsible for the spiritual leadership of an entire congregation, but they too serve their Savior and are important is His eyes if not in yours.
Congregations need to prioritize expectations from principals and set limits on expectations. Number one ought to be teaching students under their care. Do you really need a report comparing the cost of school milk over the past seven years. And as well meaning as it may seem, there are limits to how much you can volunteer to lighten the load.
Here is the bottom line, yes apprenticeships, more courses on administration would be most useful in preparation to take on the argent task of potentially serving as a school Principal. In my opinion however, we miss the mark across all aspects of ministry work within our church body, and that is understanding the principles of leadership.
The reason being, it cannot be grasp from a textbook. Pastors are given a year of vicarship in the real world, that is a start, but leadership cannot be learned a day but daily.
I speak and train on the subject of leadership often. As my reply is getting rather long, I might suggest just a couple of items that might be considered. MLC require a course for all disciplines using the “21 irrefutable laws of leadership” by Maxwell, as the textbook and have it student taught with a facilitator at hand. Then start a Toastmasters chapter on campus where you are taught how to think on your feet, (impromptu speaking) prepared presentations, giving supportive feedback, time management, leadership, Roberts rules of order, an opportunity to compete outside of the school to better prepare for what is ahead.
Why? Because the congregations who will be served by these fine dedicated students are worth it.
This is an important topic of discussion. Thanks for sharing this information, Dr. Meyer. With the number of principal vacancies on the current call list (today), it is imperative that we do all we can to keep talented men in these leadership roles, including all 3 areas mentioned above. Thanks again for your work!
I would be interested in the factor of “experience”. What percentages of WELS principals have various years of teaching experience prior to taking on a principalship? Does experience plus continuing education have equal weight in people’s minds? I would also be interested to know reasons for the difference of opinion between older and younger male teachers on the view of degree status or principalships.
Thanks, Dr. Meyer for the quick look at this interesting topic.
The survey was designed to glean information on perceptions about time, training, and compensation for the WELS principal position, and whether addressing those would impact people’s interest in serving in that role. Both men and women were asked to complete the survey to get a broad understanding of the issues, but neither the survey nor the report are intended to convey a particular agenda regarding gender.
“11% of female teachers say they are interested in being a WELS principal”. Is this now acceptable in our synod? Are these discussion happening at our School of Ministry? Is this being proposed as a possibility to our female teachers?