Their missions are painfully clear--raise test scores, reduce the number of dropouts, and narrow the achievement gap separating white and minority students. The consequences of failure are equally clear--denial of school accreditation, state takeover, school closure, and diminished hopes and dreams for struggling communities. Such is the world of turnaround principals. While the term "turnaround principal" is new, some educational leaders have been successful in reversing the downward spiral of beleaguered schools for decades. But their numbers have been few. Not every principal is capable of turning a school around. The more I study principals, the more I realize that school leadership is not generic. The principal who is ideal for opening a new school or improving an already high-performing school may not necessarily possess the qualities needed to turn around a persistently lowperforming school. Private industry for years has acknowledged the value of turnaround specialists, and the advent of state and federal accountability initiatives, with their emphasis on high-stakes tests, school performance report cards, accreditation standards, and sanctions for inadequate yearly progress, has compelled education policymakers to focus on the need for specially trained principals who can lead low-performing schools into the Promised Land of high achievement and full accreditation.