This week, California Education Secretary Richard Riordan introduced a plan that would cede control over a school's administration and budget to its principal, taking it away from the central office administration. A hearty thumbs-up for this fine proposal, but now we learn that some principals would just as soon have the buck stop with someone else. Said one Jim Sieger, "I want to be working with teachers and students. . . . I'm here to be the educational leader, not the general manager. . . . I'm not an MBA or a CPA. I can barely balance my checkbook." Mr. Sieger is not really strengthening his case with such admissions. More to the point, if principals cannot handle the additional responsibility, perhaps it's time to think about hiring school CEOs who can take charge of all aspects of school leadership delegate instructional matters to folks like Sieger. The Los Angeles teachers union naturally denounced Riordan's plan, saying they're "not interested in the idea of having entrepreneurial principals" because "the collective wisdom of teachers is better than the collective wisdom of one principal." Very zen-like, that, but since the plan concerns devolving power from central office to principal, not to teachers, completely beside the point. They also grumbled that Riordan's plan could require "a wholesale change in teachers' contracts and also in state bargaining law." One can only hope.
"Financial empowerment a mixed bag for principals," by Duke Helfand and Erika Hayasaki, Los Angeles Times, February 9, 2004 (registration required)