How long should headteacher stay at school?

[Southseabelle]

Whats your general experience of how long heads stay at schools?

Is it a sign of a dynamic school if the head changes often or a sign of something else?

Back when I was at school heads seemed to be there for ages - I think my headmaster had been there 5ish years when I joined and left a few years after me so in total he had 12+ years in post.

Whats caused me to think about this is that yesterday I found out that DCs' school head is leaving and I feel we've hardly got to know her.

This is Portsmouth Grammar School so hardly a failing school but the head after 3 years is going on to bigger and better things (in this case a Kings College School in London
www.kcs.org.uk/senior-school/news/kings-college-wimbledon-governors-announce-head-s-appointment) and I am feeling slightly annoyed at her lack of loyalty.

Or am I being unreasonable?; do we expect more from our teachers? Or is head at one school just another job for someone on the way up?

OP, the link for this lady is also on the SW London boys thread. I think when you get someone with her career path she is always going to be on the move for a big job and KCS is 1 of the biggest. I remember when Sarah Fletcher left KGS after only a few years parents who had chosen the school just because of her were upset but she then went to CLS for even less time and is now at St Paul's Girls school - 1 of the top private school jobs in the U.K. Her replacement at KGS has been very successful so often it all works out ok. But yes it's different to the old days when people stayed in post for years

Loyalty to who? What loyalty goes she owe you?she owes you nothing

Yabu. Being a teacher is a job and head of KCS is a high profile job.

Three years isn’t long enough for meaningful change, and especially with more than 1 of those years being covid. So seems a shame that a head would only stay that long, but people can move on professionally whenever they want. Hopefully the governors will put a bit more thought into appointing someone with a longer term commitment to the school now they have to recruit again so soon.

Turn it on it’s head. If this was YOUR job and your career, would you stay in your current role just to be loyal to your colleagues or customers? When the new role is with a “better” organisation, a promotion and pay rise?

Heads changing rapidly is a pain in the backside, particularly if you really liked them. I much prefer our new head though versus the old one!

My dcs school head has been there for at least 11 years.

I don’t know. Our brilliant headteacher stayed for almost 20 years just for the next headteacher to find out he left such a mess bot in finances and academic stuff that the only reason why our brilliant school was not put in Special Measures was because we had already got a new headteacher, who is doing a far better job than the previous one.

Change is good.

Why would anyone expect a teacher to be more loyal than any other job

3 years is loads of time to make an impact

I've been at my current school 15 years, but I'm not the head. In the 15 years I've been there, there have been 3 heads. The first was head at this school for 25 years, and only left as he was retiring. The next head actually had no interest in being head, she was happy being deputy but applied so there was at least one "safe" option amongst the candidates. She openly said she would not stay long, and true enough, she retired after 3 years as head. Then we got our current head. He's been in post since 2011, and as far as I know he has no interest in moving on. Maybe he will move on after his youngest child leaves the school, but I think he's here for the long term.

I wouldn't blame anyone for leaving a job though, not for any reason. Getting a more prestigious job with more money is allowed, nobody has to stay where they are forever, they just have to do a good job while they're there.

I can't think of a single reason why she shouldn't work wherever she chooses - her career, her life.

Turn it on it’s head. If this was YOUR job and your career, would you stay in your current role just to be loyal to your colleagues or customers?

Personally I’ve left jobs despite loyalty to colleagues/clients, but I’ve also considered the effect on my CV of moving too quickly. In my sector those who make speedy moves can attract a reputation of lacking commitment. It really isn’t as simple in many sectors as taking the best opportunity you can for your career at any single moment regardless of the circumstance or knock-on effect. Heads who don’t stay long tend to have been head-hunted by recruiters for the new school, though, so that lowers the risk of being thought lacking commitment from moving on too soon, I suppose.

Heads do seem to stay a lot less than when I was younger but I think a big part of that is because the job description has completely changed and heads now are expected to do so much more so it’s probably not worth the stress.
I’ve also seen a lot of schools bringing in new heads to turn the school around so I don’t know if it means the former heads are encouraged to leave.

When my older DB started secondary school the head had been there since my Mum was a pupil 22 years earlier.
He retired that same year and his replacement was there for 16 years.

Why shouldn't she move? High profile job so good career move, and she may have other reasons for wanting to move like any other woman (family etc).
As a teacher I tend to find the Heads that hang around a long time have either reached the peak/end of their career at a certain point in life and are ready to settle and/or are too old to move again, or are too mediocre for any other school to want them. Rarely happens with the women who make it to Head in these prestigious schools because a woman would never get that far if she were mediocre!

Part of normal professional life. Not many people stay at the same company for decades these days, whatever the profession. It’s normal to move companies, and it’s no different for headteachers

Gosh I'm surprised you are annoyed by a lack of loyalty! Just like in every other professional teachers at all levels are free to seek promotion and better opportunities for themselves. If the school she is going to is bigger and more prestigious then she will likely be getting a higher salary - why shouldn't she want that for herself?
I've been teaching for quite a long time now - the head at the first school I worked at was there for 16 years until he retired. He was an excellent head and the school did thrive under him. My most recent school a head left after two years because he wanted to take an opportunity abroad before he retired - I never questioned his loyalty although we were of course disappointed to lose him.
I have a friend who is a headteacher - he moved around a lot in order to become the head of a large, very popular secondary - he did one 2 year headship and one 3 year headship on his way. He gets paid more and runs a highly successful school now, and he had to move around to get there.

Bloody hell. Who’d be a teacher?

There is a National shortage of head teachers. Unsurprisingly no one wants that level of responsibility for the low pay. I know lots of situations where 2 schools share and executive head because they are doing the LEA a favour.

Also worth bearing in mind that for the most high profile head posts the schools actively head hunt so she may not necessarily have been looking to move but been approached with an offer she couldn't refuse.

Looking at this woman I think she looks very impressive - I am in awe of her and the progress she made in her career but wonder what she is actually like as a teacher.

It seems she has been on the fast track from the start; over the course of 15 years or so after her PhD she has risen to the top. In that time she cant have had much of the general day to day slog of being a teacher - you know delivering lessons to reluctant participants, marking books, sorting out pupil problems.

(the cynical part of me also notes her discipline is classics which by its nature tends to teach the most academic, keenest to learn pupils in the top performing state and public schools and is assessed at GCSE and A Level so always looks good - no persuading bottom set students who dont want to learn to do Maths or Science on a Friday afternoon!)

I fear also the impact that she has had on the teaching staff - speaking as a slightly jaded cynical former teacher I have had experience of these hotshot heads coming in, making changes, appointing their yes people to middle management and then not sticking around to actually implement the change or bring the staff along with them. But maybe thats just me!

Reflecting more generally are we being unreasonable if we ask that heads have the teaching skills? - should we just accept that school leadership is an executive occupation on a par with other chief exec management positions. It has a different set of skills; balancing books, promoting the school rather than teaching. We dont for example require that the Chief Exec of Sainsburys to have shopfloor skills, hospital heads to have medical skills so why do we want this is school heads!?

I firmly believe every head teacher should still teach. Only has to be one lesson a week. Whenever I've worked for a head who teaches a class, they are so much more empathetic and reasonable - plus you accept their authority more easily I think!

Definitely far shorter time periods than they used to be. I don't remember either of my head teachers moving at primary nor secondary school. They seemed to have been there forever and both were probably in their 60s'

Nowadays, five years seems to be average. The head changed at my son's primary school when he'd just started and "retired" in DS's last year. Same happened with his secondary school, head started when he was in year 8 and retired when he was in year 12.

They seem to "retire" a lot younger too. Presumably pensions etc are a lot better nowadays than they were 40 years ago.

@Fitforforty

There is a National shortage of head teachers. Unsurprisingly no one wants that level of responsibility for the low pay. I know lots of situations where 2 schools share and executive head because they are doing the LEA a favour.

Erm low pay? Not for the top indie school heads. They each get over £325k/year. Recent article in Times listed pay of SPS, KCS etc. Reflects the responsibility, arguably, but not far off a prime minister’s pay!

3 years is just enough time to see if the changes that are implement are going to fuck the school over.
5 years will see the first co-hort through and have implement changes to what didn't work.
7 years to get everything fully settled and embedded.

Hmm... as a PGS parent I wish the head well but cant say I have noticed her impact on the school. I'm sure shes fab with figures, strategy and other management stuff but I think as well as all that you have to be the outgoing charismatic type to lead rather than merely manage. As head you have to 'be' the school to inspire and promote.

The previous head was very good - charming, outgoing, interested in you and you felt he genuniely cared about the school and the wider community and had the respect of the students. He also had wide recognition across the city which was good for the school bringing in lots of new applicants who wouldnt traditionally have thought of applying. The current head just seems to be keep herself to herself with no presence in the city or it seems in school. Speaking to my children it seems she rarely does 'head' things like lead assemblies etc relying on her middle management to actually do things.

I guess its the style of leadership that the school wants - the introvert or the extrovert. I'm sure there are advantages and disadvantages to both styles of leadership. We shall see what the school goes for next...