Researchers examined assistant principal staffing, roles, hiring, support, and advancement in three large districts, using 11 years of administrative data as well as extensive interviews with central office leaders, principals, and assistant principals.

The research team purposely selected large districts because their sizable workforces made it possible to follow enough educators across roles and to examine pathways to the principalship over time. The research team also chose districts that predominantly serve students of color, represent different geographic regions, and vary in how centrally they organized leadership development.

Descriptive analyses documented changes in assistant principal staffing, school placement, and career progression, including differences by race and gender. The researchers also used regression analyses to assess whether educator and school characteristics were associated with advancement and the time needed to move into leadership positions. Other analyses identified themes across interviews to explain patterns and clarify how district policies and practices shaped assistant principals’ roles, support, and advancement.

The authors caution that the study has several limitations. First, the study provides in-depth descriptive evidence from just three large school districts, so is not nationally representative. The findings may not generalize to districts with different policy, funding, or labor market contexts. Also, the analyses identify patterns and associations, but cannot identify the causal effects of different central office structures, policies, or other conditions. In addition, because central office leaders nominated interview respondents, the study may overrepresent more visible and engaged leaders.