What school boards need to know before ousting a superintendent

Not all superintendent transitions are negative. But those driven by political pressure put student outcomes at risk.

“Some turnover is healthy,” says Rachel White, associate professor in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy at the University of Texas at Austin.

She urges school boards to try to avoid ideologically driven transitions because of the “trickle-down effects” on student outcomes. White’s latest research links ongoing instability to lower achievement, especially in high-poverty districts.

“It’s a modest relationship—anywhere from three weeks of learning up to two months in reading and math,” she explains. “When you have contentious superintendent churn, the effects are almost double.”

Nationwide, superintendent mobility is slowing and nearing pre-pandemic levels. Still, 17.4% of the nation’s 500 largest districts changed superintendents last school year, according to new data from ILO Group. Since 2020, these districts have changed leadership 745 times.

As District Administration reported, school boards are increasingly turning to internal candidates to maintain continuity, preserve institutional knowledge and reduce the disruption that often accompanies leadership transitions.

What drives instability?

Superintendents are the “knowledge brokers” of a school district, White says. The more disruption a district experiences, the less trust the community may place in its next superintendent.

“The folks that have been in that system for decades are going to say, ‘Well, this is our fourth [superintendent], I’m not going to change my practice again because we’ll probably have a new one in two or three years anyway,'” White says.

While retirements once drove most superintendent departures, resignations have become a leading factor. “What that tells us is people are moving around more,” she says. “They’re leaving for another job, or they’re leaving the superintendency.”

Political polarization at both the state and local levels is driving resignations. Roughly 38% of superintendents label state politics as a barrier to their leadership, according to a 2025 study from The School Superintendents Association. Another 29% cite political divisions in their communities.

Leaders who clearly connect their decisions to student outcomes can better navigate these tensions, according to White.

How to increase your longevity in a district

Today’s superintendents face mounting pressures that can shorten their time at the helm.

“In the past, superintendents were seen as superhuman and they were on 24 hours a day, 365,” she says. “Many of them were struggling, particularly through the pandemic, mentally, emotionally and physically.”

More superintendent contracts now include mental health supports, such as coaching, counseling and therapy, according to White. Meanwhile, leaders must rely on their relationship skills to persevere through political disagreement.

Drawing on Peter H. Kim’s How Trust Works, White says there are three mechanisms for building community trust:

1. Competence: Superintendents can build trust early by demonstrating expertise in areas such as curriculum and district finance.
2. Integrity: While important, it’s harder to win over your community with integrity alone. An honest act won’t build trust quickly, and one dishonest moment can instantly destroy your credibility.
3. Benevolence: Demonstrating genuine concern for students, families and staff is essential to building long-term trust.

Leaders must also separate single complaints from broader community sentiment. She believes parents and principals can better address an individual’s concerns.

“I think everyone’s voice matters in the community, but you can’t let that one person drive all your attention,” she says.