The Trust Paradox: Why Great Principals Are Present, Not Absent
Part 1 of a Two-Part Series
I am exploring short courses to offer to literacy leaders like you! I have narrowed down potential topics to five. I’d appreciate your feedback in the poll below. -Matt
In her book Biased, researcher Jennifer Eberhardt shares several studies and stories that point out how everyone has blind spots. In one anecdote, research found that baseball umpires made more favorable calls for pitchers when they were of a similar race. Once video technology was employed, monitoring each pitch and evaluating calls, umpires’ bias disappeared.
I’ll come back to this in a moment.
As a former building administrator and now an external coach, I have wondered why principals don’t get into classrooms regularly. The benefits of daily instructional walks are clear:
They build relational trust between teachers and leaders.
They increase a principal’s knowledge around collective instruction in a building.
They lead to opportunities for coaching conversations and professional growth.
I also understand what obstacles might stand in a principal’s way: an overwhelming number of student behaviors, for example. But the tide of whatever’s urgent in the moment eventually goes out. When the seas are calm, why aren’t principals venturing out?
As with the baseball umpires in Eberhardt's research, principals may not recognize how their own biases and assumptions shape their leadership practices. When principals prioritize the urgent over the important, they might actually be reinforcing an unconscious bias about their role—seeing themselves as evaluators rather than partners in learning.
Just as umpires improved their calls when given better information, principals who regularly visit classrooms gain a more accurate picture of instruction. It allows them to move beyond their preconceptions and make more informed leadership decisions.
One pattern I have noticed is school leaders saying that they don’t get into classrooms because they "trust their teachers.” They see themselves strictly as evaluators, as surveillance instead of support if they were to make instructional walks a habit.
For example, during the pandemic, an educator/parent I know reported a teacher not wearing a required mask. The principal dismissed the complaint: "I trust my teachers." Soon afterward, this teacher contracted COVID, many students were considered close contacts, and the principal reached out with an apology.
It is bias that can dissuade a principal from being a more positive and productive presence in classrooms. This type of bias springs from a simple story of what a principal’s role is: to keep the peace, to protect their teachers, to ensure students behave. It’s a role that needs a serious expansion if we expect schools to improve and their leaders to stick around for longer than a couple of years.
The anecdote of the umpires and video technology reducing bias can serve as an example of what’s possible. Why can’t administrators visiting classrooms be healthy, even something teachers look forward to? How can leaders develop the trust and relationships that allow feedback to flow freely among a learning community, and not a simple top-down exchange?
School leaders being present in classrooms is part of a healthy accountability system for everyone, including and especially principals. It's not about supervision—it's about building genuine trust through thoughtful, consistent engagement.
In next week's post, I'll share four specific conditions instructional leaders can cultivate to create open and trusting cultures where principal-teacher interactions become value-added experiences that everyone looks forward to. These practical approaches have transformed the schools I've worked with and can help build what I call "productive presence” in your own educational community.