Mix and Match: What Principals Really Look for When Hiring Teachers

Abstract

The vast majority of research and policy related to teacher quality focuses on the supply of teachers and ignores teacher demand. In particular, the important role of school principals in hiring teachers is rarely considered. Using interviews of school principals in a midsized Florida school district, we provide an exploratory mixed methods analysis of the teacher characteristics principals prefer. Our findings contradict the conventional wisdom that principals undervalue content knowledge and intelligence. Principals in our study ranked content knowledge third among a list of twelve characteristics. Intelligence does appear less important at first glance, but this is apparently because principals believe all applicants who meet certification requirements meet a minimum threshold on intelligence and because some intelligent teachers have difficulty connecting with students. More generally, we find that principals prefer an “individual mix” of personal and professional qualities. They also create an “organizational mix,” hiring teachers who differ from those already in the school in terms of race, gender, experience, and skills, and an “organizational match,” in which teachers have similar work habits and a high propensity to remain with the school over time. Because of tenure rules, many principals also prefer less experienced (untenured) teachers, even though research suggests that they are less effective.

Staffing the Classroom: How Urban Principals Find Teachers and Make Hiring Decisions

“…The extant literature on teacher hiring highlights the complexity of the process (Balter & Duncombe, 2005;Harris, Rutledge, Ingle, & Thompson, 2010;Jacob, 2007). Although research on teacher labor markets has focused more on teacher supply (teachers' decisions about entering and exiting teaching and where they choose to teach) than demand (how district and school administrators select teachers), recent work has begun to examine how teachers are identified and selected (Jacob, 2007).…”

“…Studies of principals' stated preferences for teacher characteristics have found that principals search for a variety of characteristics when selecting candidates, preferring those who are enthusiastic and have strong communication skills (Harris et al, 2010) as well as applicants who are caring and can manage a classroom (Cannata & Engel, 2012;Engel, 2013). Principals in lower achieving schools appear to focus more on classroom management skills and a teacher's ability to improve test scores, suggesting that principals' preferences may vary systematically by school type, even within a single district (Engel, 2013).…”

“…Principals in lower achieving schools appear to focus more on classroom management skills and a teacher's ability to improve test scores, suggesting that principals' preferences may vary systematically by school type, even within a single district (Engel, 2013). More generally, these studies find that principals seek a mix of personal and professional characteristics and look for teachers who they perceive will be a good fit in their schools (Engel, 2013;Harris et al, 2010). These results highlight the need to understand principals' strategies and decision-making processes for identifying and hiring teachers.…”

Problematic Preferences? A Mixed Method Examination of Principals’ Preferences for Teacher Characteristics in Chicago

“…Furthermore, there is a small but growing body of evidence suggesting that principals themselves have a somewhat limited ability to identify the teachers in their schools who are successful in raising student achievement (e.g., Jacob & Lefgren, 2008). We also know relatively little about what characteristics principals and administrators look for in teachers during the hiring process (Harris, Rutledge, Ingle, & Thompson, 2010).…”

“Staffing to the Test”

“…Administrators' preferences for teacher candidates often focus on organizational skills (Harris et al, 2010) and "rarely are more objective measures of teaching quality, such as student outcome data, included in these analyses" (Baker & Cooper, 2005, p. 451).…”