Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Preparing English language learners to be college and career ready for the 21st century: the leadership role of secondary school principals in the support of English language learners
(USC Thesis Other)
Preparing English language learners to be college and career ready for the 21st century: the leadership role of secondary school principals in the support of English language learners
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Leadership Role of Secondary Principals in Support of ELL’s
Preparing English Language Learners to be College and Career Ready for the 21st Century:
The Leadership Role of Secondary School Principals in the Support of English Language
Learners
Helmer H. González
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2017
© 2017 Helmer H. González
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 2
Preparing English Language Learners to be College and Career Ready for the 21st Century:
The Leadership Role of Secondary School Principals in the Support of English Language
Learners
By
Helmer H. González
A Dissertation Presented
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
2017
APPROVED:
___________________________________
Pedro García, Ed.D.
Committee Chair
____________________________________
Rudy Castruita, Ed.D.
Committee Member
_____________________________________
Michael Escalante, Ed.D.
Committee Member
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 3
ABSTRACT
The educational system and current teaching practices in America are undergoing
transformations in the instructional practices of language understanding and literacy
development trajectories as it prepares its students to become global citizens in this rapidly
changing 21st Century. The shift of teaching and learning with a focus on critical thinking,
communication, collaboration, and creativity are essential skills needed to prepare students for
the future. An individual’s native language, culture, and background influence the individual’s
ability to learn a second language, and to master that language to the point of communicating in
that language in an academic context. English language learners are a high number of a
continuing and growing student population with language barriers and considered to be at risk of
failing or dropping out of school due to continuous, insufficient academic accomplishments.
Poverty, cultural or language barriers, disability status, and/or gender are indicators that make it
difficult for them to succeed academically. This study aims to represent a synthesis of findings
of the influences of how learners can extract language, the implications of language acquisition,
and the principals’ knowledge, skills, reflection, and professional development training influence
in the process. In addition, this study will offer recommendations for improving the
effectiveness of leadership dispositions.
Keywords: academic risk, English Language Learners, language acquisition
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 4
PREFACE
Some of the chapters of this dissertation were co-authored and have been identified as
such. While jointly authored dissertations are not the norm of most doctoral programs, a
collaborative effort is reflective of real-world practices. To meet their objective of developing
highly skilled practitioners equipped to take on real-world challenges, the University of Southern
California (USC) Graduate School and the USC Rossier School of Education have permitted our
inquiry team to carry out this shared venture.
This dissertation is part of a collaborative project with one other doctoral candidate,
Tatiana I. Duran. We two doctoral students will meet with school principals, with the aim to
resolve a genuine urban school problem. However, the process for dissecting and resolving the
problem is too large for a single dissertation. As a result, the two dissertations produced by our
inquiry team will collectively address the needs of secondary school leadership (Duran, 2017).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 5
DEDICATION
Under the honor and glory of God, I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my family
who has always been very supportive of my professional growth. Without their commitment,
understanding and dedication this project would not be possible. My most sincere thoughts are
dedicated to my lovely, talented and beautiful wife who has always been at the forefront of our
family, giving so much of her precious self, sacrificing her happiness to serve and unify our
family and the community she serves as excellent educator. We have been trusted and blessed
with raising Tatiana, Erica, and Michael as our children. Thank you, children, for enduring our
absences, sacrificing our time together, and giving us the support to overcome obstacles and
encouraging us to fight on and to never give up, so that we add value to our family through
education. Through our ethics of hard-work we hope to be the lighthouse that inspires our
granddaughters Jasmine and Isabella as well as the future generations to come.
In loving memory of our ancestors, I humbly take this opportunity to bless your resting
places and thank every one of you, for passing on the torch of love, wisdom and an exemplary
life of hard work through the generations that allowed our grandparents and parents to unite in
time and space to give us life. In memory of my maternal grandmother, Juana Magaña, who
took the immense responsibility to take care of my brother Paul Alexander, my sister Sandra
Linette and I when my mother faced the challenge to emigrate to provide for her three children
and a husband who suddenly lost his physical vision and could no longer provide for his family.
Gracias Mamita. Without my mother’s leap of faith, I would have never enjoyed these splendors
of growing up in a multicultural country full of opportunities and amenities that delight the
human spirit. I thank you, mother, Yolanda Chicas for your hard work and relentless sacrifice
and for always looking after our best interest. I revere and love you every day of my life for
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 6
your unconditional love. Three years after your departure, I now present this dissertation to you
father who lived forty years under the shadow of blindness and accepted your faith with an iron
will and an optimum mental attitude towards life and taught me to be kind, humble and be the
best at whatever endeavor I dedicated my life to. Thank you, father, Juan Isidro Gonzalez for the
great lessons and the long conversations that stimulated my intellect in diverse realms of
knowledge, dictating letters, treasures that over time served to build trust in my faculties and
strength in my inner self.
I am graceful to God for growing up in a loving family, surrounded by numerous cousins,
uncles and aunts who allowed us freedom to be children and play under the sun and the moon in
the spacious patio and corridor of our grandmother’s house. In a far-away land, adorned with
sugar-cane plantations, corn-fields and coffee-green mountains, my heart and mind remain
grounded in my origins that motivate my moral purpose to serve humanity to the best of my
ability through the art of education. Cheers to the honor and memory of our sacred family.
Thank you all for being instrumental in the development of this project and for your
unconditional love and support.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 7
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It has been an arduous and rewarding journey for both classmates and instructors who
have fortified our mental toughness and challenged our leadership abilities to the breaking point.
Thank you, cohort friends, classmates and instructors, for sharing your most precious
commodity, the irreplaceable time, your hard-earned experiences, your personal wisdom, your
academic knowledge and above all your caring heart. I hereby thank the high school principals
who volunteered to participate in filling out the surveys and those who agreed and participated in
one-on-one interviews. I thank the administrators at my place of work for writing letters of
recommendations and for contributing to my academic and professional growth. To Marie
Painter, my editor, thank you for the hours of reading and providing the necessary corrections.
A multitude of gratitude goes to the advising committee for providing guidance and
inspiration throughout completion of this project. In honor of your leadership and immense
heroic contributions, I dedicate this poem to recognize and exemplify the multiple facets of your
leadership character of what a true leader ought to be. Thank you, Dr. Pedro Garcia, Dr. Rudy
Castruita, and Dr. Michael Escalante, for every nugget of knowledge you have shared to inspire
my wife and me to follow your great example.
Caupolicán
Es algo formidable que vio la vieja raza:
robusto tronco de árbol al hombro de un campeón
salvaje y aguerrido, cuya fornida maza
blandiera el brazo de Hércules, o el brazo de Sansón.
Por casco sus cabellos, su pecho por coraza,
pudiera tal guerrero, de Arauco en la región,
lancero de los bosques, Nemrod que todo caza,
desjarretar un toro, o estrangular un león.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 8
Anduvo, anduvo, anduvo. Le vio la luz del día,
le vio la tarde pálida, le vio la noche fría,
y siempre el tronco de árbol a cuestas del titán.
«¡El Toqui, el Toqui!» clama la conmovida casta.
Anduvo, anduvo, anduvo. La Aurora dijo: «Basta»,
e irguiose la alta frente del gran Caupolicán.
(Rubén Darío, 1888, 2013)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables .........................................................................................................11
List of Figures ........................................................................................................13
List of Appendices .................................................................................................14
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .....................................................................15
Background of the Problem .......................................................................15
Statement of the Problem ...........................................................................27
Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................32
Research Questions ....................................................................................33
Significance of the Study ...........................................................................34
Limitations .................................................................................................35
Delimitations ..............................................................................................36
Organization of the Study ..........................................................................36
Definition of Terms....................................................................................37
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .................................................................45
Theories of Learning ..................................................................................47
Leadership Skills ........................................................................................55
Current Policies in Education ....................................................................65
Summary ....................................................................................................88
Chapter Three: Methodology .................................................................................90
Introduction ................................................................................................90
Purpose and Research Questions ...............................................................91
Research Design.........................................................................................92
Methodology ..............................................................................................95
Sample and Population ..............................................................................96
Instrumentation ..........................................................................................97
Data Collection ..........................................................................................98
Data Analysis ...........................................................................................100
Validity and Reliability ............................................................................101
Ethical Considerations .............................................................................103
Summary ..................................................................................................104
Chapter Four: Findings ........................................................................................105
Background ..............................................................................................105
The Leadership.........................................................................................105
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................106
Methodology ............................................................................................107
Research Questions ..................................................................................118
Theoretical Framework ............................................................................119
Interviews .................................................................................................122
Reporting Findings...................................................................................124
Training ....................................................................................................140
How Does the Principal Influence Instruction for Teachers? ..................165
How Does the Principal Know if What He or She is Doing
is Working to Help ELLs? ...........................................................185
Summary of Interviews ............................................................................188
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 10
Emergent Themes ....................................................................................188
Conceptual Model of Successful High School Principals .......................191
Summary ..................................................................................................194
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions. and Implications .....................................198
Overview ..................................................................................................198
Key Findings ............................................................................................199
Emergent Themes ....................................................................................200
Implications..............................................................................................215
Recommendations for Further Studies.....................................................219
Closing Remarks ......................................................................................221
References ............................................................................................................222
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 11
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Volunteer Principal Demographics .......................................................108
Table 2. Summary Demographic Data on Survey Participants Gender
(N = 21) .................................................................................................110
Table 3. Summary Demographic Data on Relevant Participant Age
(N = 21) .................................................................................................111
Table 4. Summary Demographic Data on Participant Race and Ethnicity
(N = 21) .................................................................................................112
Table 5. Summary of Demographic Data on Participant Home/Community
Upbringing (N = 21) .............................................................................113
Table 6. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Levels of
Schooling Completed (N = 21) .............................................................114
Table 7. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Years as
Subject/Class Teacher (N = 21) ............................................................115
Table 8. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Years in
Other Leadership Roles (N = 21) ..........................................................116
Table 9. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Years of
Experience as Principal (N = 21) ..........................................................117
Table 10. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Years of
Service at this School (N = 21) ...........................................................118
Table 11. Summary of Demographic Data on Activities and Behaviors
(N=21) .................................................................................................131
Table 12. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Professional
Development Training (N = 21) .........................................................137
Table 13. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Activities
and Behaviors (N=21) .........................................................................139
Table 14. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Activities and
Behaviors (N=21) ...............................................................................152
Table 15. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Teachers
Collaborate with Leadership Team and Colleagues (N= 21)..............159
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 12
Table 16. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Opinion
on Positive Attributes of a School Leader (N = 21)............................165
Table 17. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Instructional
and Curricular Shifts (N = 21) ............................................................168
Table 18. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Time Spend
on Instructional Versus Managerial Activities (N =21) ......................170
Table 20. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Teacher Work
Appraised by Principal or Colleague (N = 21) ...................................172
Table 20. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants First Language
Different from Language of Instruction (N = 21) ...............................177
Table 21. Summary of Demographic Data on Participants on All Students
Learning Needs Met (N = 21) .............................................................181
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Triangulation Diagram ..........................................................................93
Figure 2. Six-Step Data Analysis Framework ....................................................100
Figure 3. Conceptual Model of Successful High School Principals ..................192
Figure 4. Principal Skills, Educational Knowledge, and Training Practices ......219
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 14
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Leadership Survey...……...………………………………………247
Appendix B: Preparing English Language Learners to be College-and
Career-Ready for the 21st Century ..........................................................257
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 15
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Authors: Tatiana I. Duran and Helmer H. Gonzalez
1
Background of the Problem
In 1980, 23.1 million people in the United States spoke a language other than English at
home, compared with 59.5 million people in 2010, a 158% increase (U. S. Census, 2010).
English Language Learners (ELLs) are increasingly present in all US states. The California
Department of Education (CDE, 2014b) communicated that in the 2013-2014 school year, there
were approximately 1.413 million English Language Learners in California public schools.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP; U. S. Department of
Education, 2012), also named the Nation’s Report Card of student achievement, provided
information on the achievement gaps among different racial and socioeconomic groups in core
academic subjects. The 2012 NAEP reported fourth grade English Language Learners (ELLs)
scored 36 points below non-ELLS in reading and 25 points below non-ELLs in math. The gaps
among eighth graders were even larger, 42 points in reading and 37 points in math (Goldenberg,
2013). The gaps between ELL’s and non-ELLs are 3 to 18 points larger than the gaps between
eligible students who are and are not eligible for free or reduced-price lunch (U. S. Department
of Education, 2002). These figures present a need to understand and validate possible
knowledge, motivational, and organizational causes affecting the academic achievement of
secondary ELLs.
As US K-12 classrooms move to incorporate 21st Century Skills, Common Core State
Standards (CCSS, 2010), Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS, National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, Medicine, 2017), English Language Development (ELD) Standards
(CDE, 2012), and Response to Intervention (RtI, National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2017)
1
Chapters One, Two, and Three were jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting a team approach to this project.
The authors are listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by those listed.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 16
there is an intensified focus on instructional considerations of core concepts with academic
language proficiency resulting in deepened comprehension (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2004).
High levels of academic achievement are closely linked to challenging academic standards and
student success.
Teaching and learning in the 21st Century is filled with challenges and opportunities,
especially when teaching students for whom English is not their first language (Echevarria et al.,
2004). Urban school factors and issues facing English Language Learners in urban education
settings contribute to their academic outcomes (Thomas & Collier, 2002). Issues of risk,
diversity, and academic excellence are at the forefront of discussions concerning education
research, policy, and leadership practices to reshape education in the 21st Century (Thomas &
Collier, 2002). An historical context provides a deeper understanding of the practical challenges
faced by ELLs in the public school educational setting.
In 1965, the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, 1965) was
created and established to address the needs of children from low-income homes which required
more education services than children from affluent homes as part of President Johnson’s Great
Society Program to wage the war against poverty in the United States (Social Welfare History
Project, 2016). Subsequently, the U. S. Opportunity Act (United States Congress House
Committee on Education and Labor) mandated equal rights for Limited English Proficient (LEP)
students and stated that failure to provide adequate resources to overcome language differences
was considered a denial of equal education (Wiese & Garcia, 1998). Although the Bilingual
Education Act (1964) was limited to Spanish-speaking students, it led to the introduction of 37
other bills which were merged into a single measure known as Title VII of the Elementary and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 17
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA, 1965) or the Bilingual Education Act, which was
enacted in 1968.
The Bilingual Education Act of 1968, which was Title VII of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act, presented the challenges of non-English speaking students and
promoted bilingual education as an appropriate and effective way to serve the Limited English
Proficiency (LEP) student population (Crawford, 1989). Written at the height of the Civil Rights
Movement, its main purpose was to promote the development of innovative English as a Second
Language (ESL) education by offering competitive grants for State Education Agencies (SEA)
and reflected the nation’s changing attitudes toward diversity and equality (Crawford, 1989).
The Bilingual Education Act emphasized alternative language acquisition methodology and
bilingual education as the primary method to serve LEP students (Everling, 2009). The Bilingual
Education Act was the first piece of United States federal legislation that recognized the needs of
Limited English Speaking Ability (LESA) students. The English as a Second Language
education pedagogy comprised two main ideologies: Bilingual education or English only
education. The U. S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights set general guidelines
that states must follow, but did not specify a preference of methodology (Garcia & Baker, 1995).
Since Federal regulation did not specify the type of programming an SEA or LEA must adopt,
approaches to Bilingual Education changed with larger trends in educational policy (DiNitto &
Johnson, 2015). The Bilingual Education Act went through many revisions throughout its
lifespan; the first set of clarifications was added in 1974, as a response to Lau v. Nichols and the
Equal Educational Opportunity Act (Crawford, 1989). The changes to the Bilingual Education
Act throughout the latter half of the 20th Century mainly involved expanding and restructuring
the grant program, increasing teachers’ and school leaders’ Professional Development, and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 18
expanding the definitions of bilingual programming and Limited English Proficient (Crawford,
1989). The Bilingual Education Act was eliminated as part of larger school reform measures.
The 1983 report, A Nation at Risk (U. S. Department of Education, 1983), was instrumental
in creating a significant school reform movement. Hayes (2004) summarized the origins of this
report, recognized in hindsight as the beginning of the movement toward more accountability,
standards, and testing. The weaknesses of American education detailed in A Nation at Risk
catalyzed a reform movement that was supposed to radically restructure the nation’s schools
(Bennett, Fair, Finn, Flake, Hirsch, Marshall, & Ravitch, 1998). The distinguished citizens’
panel admonished the American people that the educational foundations of our society were
presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatened our very future as a Nation
and a people (Bennet et al., 1998). The report documented the gaps in school achievement
among racial and ethnic groups and between students from socially disadvantaged families as
large and persistent (Barton, 2003). The report focused on the many antecedents of differences
that helped perpetuate achievement gaps, school achievement, and college-going rates of
minorities.
A paradigm shift on how education was viewed occurred in 1994 with the reauthorization
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, 1965), in which the focus became on
lofty and rigorous educational outcomes rather than on vocational or alternative educative
methods that the bilingual education had been popular in previous decades (Owens &
Sunderman, 2006). Wiese and Garcia (1998) explained that as federal policies began to reflect
pedagogical expectations, states also began to reflect the same values. In 1998, California
passed Proposition 227; this initiative changed the way that LEP students were taught in
California. Specifically, it required California public schools to teach LEP students in special
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 19
classes that are taught all in English. This provision had the effect of eliminating bilingual
classes in most cases. As Owens and Sunderman (2006) explained, in 2001 ESEA was
reauthorized as No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2002) and the Bilingual Education Act
was replaced by Title III Part A. Through Title III Part-A of NCLB, the focus shifted towards
standards-based assessments; as a result, so did policy regarding Bilingual Education. There are
several differences between the Bilingual Education Act of 1969 and Title III-part A (Owens &
Sunderman, 2006). These include the emphasis on LEP students meeting content-based
academic standards and concrete assessments through Annual Measurable Achievement
Objectives (AMAO) and pedagogical changes. The Bilingual Education Act encouraged
bilingual and alternative language learning; on contrary, Title III emphasized the importance of
English proficiency (Owens & Sunderman, 2006). NCLB represented a quantum leap in both
Federal involvement and Federal mandates to schools. In the relatively short period of less than
a decade, NCLB changed teachers’ pedagogical practices, what subjects are taught in schools,
and how teachers and principals are evaluated. These pedagogical and curriculum changes
defined how the rising generation views schooling and curriculum.
The No Child Left Behind Act (2002) has hundreds of pages of complex provisions. It
embodies President Bush’s promise to end the soft racism of low expectations by closing racial
achievement gaps and bringing all students to proficiency in reading and math. NCLB created
unprecedented measurement of academic progress through mandated yearly assessments and
required that all children from all racial and ethnic groups attain 100% English proficiency.
Schools were required, under strict sanctions, to raise achievement each year in math and reading
and to eliminate the achievement gap by race, ethnicity, language, and special education status
(J. Lee & Orfield, 2006). The bipartisan bargain that led to the enactment of the law was
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 20
designed around hope of dramatic educational progress spurred by large increases in federal aid
and strict accountability. Many of the high-poverty schools the law aimed to change had limited
resources, poorly trained teachers, and instability of both student enrollment and staffing, making
it very difficult to accomplish large educational breakthroughs without large increases in funds
and major reforms (J. Lee & Orfield, 2006). The achievement gap has been a major issue
plaguing the education system in the United States for decades. One of the main reasons for the
achievement gap is poverty. J. Lee and Orfield (2006) described that, in fact, there is a direct
correlation between academic achievement and poverty; in other words, school and society are
inextricably connected.
In January 2011, A Blueprint for Great Schools, was available as a school improvement
plan recognizing the need for broad and deep stakeholder involvement in the issues facing
California public education (Torlakson, 2011). State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom
Torlakson convened a 59-member Transition Advisory Team formed with the charge of
concentrating on California Department of Education (CDE) as an institution and making
recommendations for its continued development in building a strong culture of service and
support, engaging internal and external talent, and collaborating across the department agencies
(Torlakson, 2011). This team was asked to provide advice on a planning process to strengthen
the CDE as a service-oriented public agency engaging in innovative and collaborative work
(Torlakson, 2011). The working team provided the Superintendent with a detailed planning
design entitled, Organizing for Innovation, Collaboration, and Service (Torlakson, 2011). This
has subsequently been adapted and is being used by CDE to strengthen the department’s culture
of service and support for California’s public education system. To narrow the achievement gap,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 21
several interconnected factors must work together as no silver bullet exists (T. Lee, 2002). Many
social forces are beyond the scope of K-12 educators to affect significant and immediate change.
The link between socio-economic status (SES) and student achievement has been
empirically well established for decades; the detrimental effects of poverty continues to impact
students’ performance. The academic gap in reading and math between language minority
students from low socio-economic backgrounds first appeared in elementary school and persists
into high school (Coleman & Department of Health USA, 1966; Rumberger & Palardy, 2005;
Sirin, 2005; White, 1982 as cited in Reynolds, 1992). Policy implications and issues facing
Language minorities in urban education settings include negative school outcomes including
academic failure (Lewis & Moore, 2008); high dropout rates (Ford, 2010; Ford & Moore, 2013;
Saracho & Gerstl, 1992); low graduation rates (Ford & Moore, 2013); and low test-scores
(Gallant & Moore, 2008). Combined with these outcomes are low academic motivation,
engagement, and interest of academic levels (Moore, 2007). Achievement gaps constitute
important barometers in educational and social progress.
The world is more economically inter-dependent than ever before with increased
globalization and the opening of world markets, jobs move from one side of the world to the
other with great speed and fluidity (Torlakson, 2011). The world is quickly changing because of
the global economic situation and developments in information and telecommunication
technology. The nature of work is changing. Some jobs are becoming obsolete; other jobs are
being created and many of these are in areas that did not exist before. Those who possess the
deep knowledge and broad skills necessary to apply their learning in new and innovative ways
are advantaged both in terms of higher earning potential and greater job opportunities
(Torlakson, 2011). California, the eighth largest economy in the world and a wellspring of
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 22
technological innovation, should be leading the world in developing such learners (Torlakson,
2011). A Blueprint of Great Schools (Torlakson, 2011) pointed out at present; however,
California is at a disadvantage in this globalized economy. Almost one-third of California’s
ninth grade students drop out before high school graduation and another one-third finish high
school but find they are not fully prepared to succeed in college and a career (Torlakson, 2011).
Those who are prepared for college are finding it more difficult to gain admission and secure the
coursework they need, as the higher education system is battered by budget cuts. Together, these
factors threaten California’s position in the world economy. California is a wholly unique state,
but one that, arguably, represents the future of America (Torlakson, 2011). It is a state that some
might say is on the edge of educational collapse, but it is also a resilient state with abundant
human leadership resources to regain its pre-eminence in education, if there is a purposeful plan
joined with public will (Torlakson, 2011). To ensure inclusive growth, education and training
must be life-long practices. This must be reflected in government planning and policy decisions
that apply fundamental understanding of issues surrounding the access and use of information
technologies for use in communication; networking tools as social networks appropriately used
to access, manage, integrate, evaluate, and create information to successfully function in a
knowledge economy and society.
The educational challenge in California requires different educational leadership. The
principal’s ability to embrace the challenge of change is critical (Marzano, Waters, & McNulty,
2005). Effective leadership means more than knowing what to do. Leadership is also knowing
when, how, and why to do it (Marzano et al., 2005). In the current age of improvement,
accountability, investment, and impact there are increasing pressures on building principals to
raise standardized test scores (National Association of Elementary School Principals, NAESP,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 23
2015). In addition to monitoring reading, writing, and basic arithmetic skills. Principals are
asked to embed data systems, student interventions, and plan professional development drives
that set high expectations for the schools and seek to create lasting foundation that impacts
student performance (NAESP, 2015). School administrators are charged with the task of
creating critical thinkers and must also identify and implement effective leadership practices that
will exert a positive influence on classroom instruction and ultimately enhance student
achievement as building blocks for success, both in school and in life.
A focus on school leadership, districts, and federal regulations are important to enhance
the quality of school and student performance (Marzano et al., 2005). Those who enter
educational leadership will find that much has changed since the days of the one-room school
house (Drake & Roe, 2003). Today’s instructional leaders do more than just balance budgets,
maintain discipline, and prevent lunchroom gripes (Drake & Roe, 2003). Today’s leaders must
recognize diversity and know how to serve diverse institutions (Marzano et al., 2005). Schools
serve cultures, families, and students with different attitudes, beliefs, approaches to education,
and various needs. Teachers of Limited English Proficient (LEP) students argue that many times
student scores do not improve because students face too many challenges attributable to
demographics (MacIver & MacIver, 2006). Such teachers may use language proficiency as a
justification for low expectations. Many are still convinced that students can master only basic
content due to the circumstances of their home environment (MacIver & MacIver, 2006).
Anderson (2003) discussed that the low expectations and lack of demanding curricula for lower
income and minority students on the part of school personnel, which was in part a reflection of
teacher perceptions of the lack of adequate district support to effectively address students needs.
A lack of instructional coherence within and across schools represented another common
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 24
challenge (Anderson, 2003). In other words, teachers may not possess the adequate knowledge
and skills to teach the domains of academic language acquisition and academic skills necessary
for ELLs to successfully master the core curriculum required to successfully compete in the 21st
Century.
Academic language is not the same as the everyday conversational language. Dutro and
Moran (2001) clarified academic language as the language of texts, academic discussions, and
formal writing. Academic English language is an understanding of the structures, lexicon,
meanings, functions, varieties, and its variations (Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975). This includes
linguistic language forms, whether in oral or written form, used to analyze, synthesize, and
extract information from text (Dutro & Moran, 2001).
Political mandates alone do not bring change in schools and/or teacher practice, even
when sanctions against schools, principals, or teachers exist (Anderson, 2003). This is because it
is necessary to change the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of teachers. Discussion on the district
role in change is complicated by a lack of consensus on the language for representing district
actions and policies associated with educational reforms. District actions are portrayed as
policies (Elmore, Richard, 1993), principles (Elmore, Richard, 1997; Resnick & Glennan, 2002),
characteristics (Cawelti & Protheroe, 2002; Murphy & Hallinger, 1989), strategies (Massell &
Goertz, 2002; Snipes, Doolittle, & Herlihy, 2002; Togneri & Anderson, 2003), or by naming
specific courses of action (e.g., establishing a common vision focused on improvement in student
learning) without labeling them in terms of some levels or forms of intervention. Little
distinction is made between general concepts, concrete actions, and formal policies.
Evidence suggested that successful school districts use a large repertoire of strategies to
mobilize and support system-wide success in student learning, and that the impact of the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 25
strategies depends on their comprehensive use in a coordinated way, not the selective enactment
of some over others or in isolation (Elmore, Richard, 1997; Snipes et al., 2002; Togneri &
Anderson, 2003). The literature is also ambiguous as to the linkages between the beliefs and
actions of district and school leaders and the formal policies (in whatever form) that are
associated with district-reform initiatives leading to improved teaching and learning.
Most analysts reported that successful districts tend to work simultaneously on multiple
dimensions of restructuring and change to support improvement in student learning, though
certain areas may be focuses of more intensive district development and intervention at different
times. Snipes et al. (2002) argued that district success depends on the existence of certain
preconditions (e.g., leadership stability, school boards that focus on policy governance rather
than micro-management of district operations, consensus on shared visions for improvement in
student learning and instruction, district capacity to diagnosis and respond to student learning
needs by school, alignment of district resources with district priorities, and support for change).
The development of these conditions, however, can also be a focus of strategic action by district
leaders.
One very important finding from research is that school and district factors have an
influence on what happens in classrooms and on ELL student achievement (Brown & Doolittle,
2008). Classroom instruction does not take place in a vacuum. It is strongly dependent upon
organizational features that influence what happens in classrooms and how teachers teach
(Brown, 2015). Coherent school-wide goals, ongoing assessment of student learning, strong
leadership, and ongoing professional development linked to goals and assessments contribute to
creating a school-wide culture of higher achievement and higher expectations for ELLs
(Masumoto & Brown-Welty, 2009). It is crucial for a leader to be weary of piecemeal efforts
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 26
that target narrow aspects of school functioning and ignore the larger school-wide context
(Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010). This is especially relevant to the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS, 2010). Some teachers might feel they do not have time to teach language
development skills because they have so much content to cover; they may not see the
connections of ELD strategies to what they already do (Brown, 2015). School leaders at all
levels must organize conversations and planning within each subject area (Green, 2010).
Enthusiasm and commitment are needed to find solutions and promote a positive culture so that
the new standards lead to success for ELLs and all students.
Principals, as educational leaders, play an important role in the learning of all students
including ELLs (Garcia, 2011). For principals to fully meet the needs of a diverse population,
they should sustain knowledge of students they serve, an understanding of how their own
perceptions about diversity impact leadership efforts, the skills they possess for leading change,
and the professional development training they bring to the position (Garcia, 2011). When
principals hold knowledge of the needs of ELLs, they are equipped to understand the aspects of
language acquisition and, therefore, can design appropriate learning systems for this student
population (Fullan, 2002a). Absent of this knowledge, principals may arrive at incomplete
conclusions and take actions which may not lead toward improved learning of ELLs.
Another key piece in supporting ELL learning is the perception principals carry of ELL
students and their language. Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon (2001) described how
principals who are aware of their own frames of reference including the perceptions and habits of
mind which factor into decision making for ELL learning; hold valuable insight which forms the
basis for sound decision making. Aware principals are better prepared to generate beliefs and
opinions which justify guiding action (Glickman et al., 2001). Thus, principal knowledge and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 27
perception directly relate to how school-site decisions of instruction and remediation are made.
These decisions may either support, or conversely undermine, language acquisition for ELLs.
Language acquisition and literacy are important learning outcomes the nation has
committed to develop to maintain a globally competitive economy (U. S. Department of
Education, 2016c). Students who bring to school diverse languages and cultures provide a rich
resource of experiences on which to develop a scientifically literate work force (O. Lee, Fradd, &
Sutman, 1995). As secondary school students begin their educational careers, the responsibility
falls on the school principal to take on the role of being an instructional leader to effectively
implement and promote language development throughout the school (Drake & Roe, 2003).
Secondary school principals must be informed on how to meet the needs of English Language
Learners.
Statement of the Problem
California has a vibrant, diverse student population that represents families who have had
roots in the Golden State for centuries and others who have more recently moved from virtually
every nation in the globe (Garcia, 2011). With a high rate of immigration, California also has the
highest proportions of English Language Learners in the country (California Department of
Education, 2010). Educators across the country are challenged by the dilemma of how to best
serve diverse language learners (Thomas & Collier, 2002). English Language Learners present a
challenge to educators’ due to a wide range of academic abilities, but also diverse home
languages (Chavez, 2013).
Teacher expertise can account for about 40% of the variance in students’ learning in
reading and mathematics achievement–more than any other single factor, including student
background (Rhoton & Stiles, 2002). Positive changes can occur in teachers’ practices when
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 28
they experience sustained, high-quality professional development (Rhoton & Stiles, 2002).
However, Rhoton and Stiles (2002) suggested that teacher development as carried out in most
schools today is not designed to develop the teacher expertise needed to bring about improved
student learning. It is important to take a closer look at educators of English Language Learners
and their professional development needs to reshape the practice of education in the 21st Century
(Gindis, 1999).
The importance of learning, focus, coherence, and rigor are the guiding principles for
language instruction and the commitment to providing a world-class education for all students
that supports college and career readiness, as well as the knowledge and skills necessary to fully
participate in the 21st-century global economy (Canagarajah, 2012). English Language Learners
have unique academic, language development, and social-emotional challenges facing them
(Faulkner, 2007). First, many students come to us with academic deficiencies that must be
addressed concurrently with attaining mastery of ongoing academics, language, and social
emotional development (Callahan, R. M., 2013). Since many of the students do not have the
knowledge that is prerequisite, the work of school leaders must be accelerated.
A U. S. Census (2010) report on language use in the US provided illustrative evidence of
the continuing and growing role of non-English languages as part of the national fabric. Fueled
by both long-term historic immigration patterns and more recent ones, the language diversity of
the country has increased over the past few decades (U. S. Census, 2010). As the nation
continues to be a destination for people from other lands, this pattern of language diversity will
also likely continue. Given the patterns of location and relocation over time, local areas may see
specific or diverse changes in the languages spoken in any given locality (U. S. Census, 2010).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 29
A discouraging aspect of the rapidly increasing presence of ELLs in American schools is
that these students are at high risk for academic failure (Ruiz-de-Velasco & Fix, 2000). In 2000,
the dropout rate for Latino/Latina youth, who comprised most ELLs, was 22.4%. California’s
rate is more than twice the national average, though this figure masks substantial variation in
terms of national origin and generation of residence in the United States (National Center for
Education Statistics, 2007). According to Elfers and Stritikus (2014), the National Assessment
of Educational Progress reported that a large majority of ELLs scored below the basic level in
almost all categories of achievement, including reading, writing, history, science, and
mathematics. Moreover, the ELL population did so at all grades tested: 4th, 8th, and 11th
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2007).
The causes of academic failure or stress are clearly multidimensional, ranging from
institutional practices such as academic tracking to students’ level of first-language literacy to
poverty (Callahan, R. M., 2005). Approximately 25% of the students in California’s K-12 public
schools are English language learners, and improving educational outcomes for ELLs remains
one of the greatest challenges in the state’s public-school system (California Department of
Education, 2014b). One critical issue, however, is teachers who are not prepared to work with
non-native English speakers (Pennington, 2014). It is of utmost importance that teachers of
English Language Learners are highly qualified to and prepared to teach diverse learners or the
achievement gap will continue to widen for the ELL population (Lin, 2013). Harper and de Jong
(2004) examined the problematic nature of four popular misconceptions about teaching English
Language Learners (ELLs) and discussed the implications for ELLs in mainstream classrooms.
The misconception stems from two basic assumptions that guide much current teacher
preparation for diversity. The first assumption is that the needs of ELLs do not differ
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 30
significantly from those of other diverse learners; the second is that the discipline of English as a
second language is primarily a menu of pedagogical adaptations appropriate for a variety of
diverse learners (Harper & de Jong, 2004).
The gap must be closed for reasons of both equity and economics (Arestis & Sawyer,
2010). California needs educated adults to work in tomorrow’s workforce (U. S. Department of
Labor, 2010). Even traditional jobs will require workers with a broader, deeper, and more
flexible portfolio of skills (U. S. Department of Commerce, 1999). Through work we build our
self-identity, our lifestyle, and our aspirations (Smith, V., 2013). There is a vital need of efforts
to directly, aggressively, and consistently address contributing social, educational, and cultural
factors (Gore, 2013). Racial and ethnic differences continue to be of high interest both socially
and in educational policy (Gore, 2013). Ferguson (1998) and Hedges and Nowell (1999) have
argued that achievement gaps have not been adequately studied in the past. Altogether, with
current changes in statistics of minority-majority achievement gap, is a need of policy reform as
the economic and racial achievement rarely commands the attention they deserve (Wang, 2013).
Academic achievement depends extensively upon the academic rigor of the curriculum
(California Department of Education, 2014b). Instructional rigor includes teachers’ expectations
of students, as indicated from teacher expectation-student achievement (Orosco, Swanson,
O’Connor, & Lussier, 2013). Youth development and learning are complementary processes
(Mekinda, 2012). Research has identified school connections, resilience, protective factors, and
developmental assets as major areas of youth development (Wissing & Brink, 2012). The factors
that contribute most strongly to academic achievement are caring relationships, high expectations
for students, and opportunities for meaningful participation (Austin, Bono, Cheng, & Hanson,
2007).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 31
Differences in education outcomes should be analyzed within the contexts of social,
cultural, school, and individual factors (Gore, 2013). No one variable is responsible for the
pervasive achievement gap of ELL students (Wang, 2013). When urban, highly capable students
do not achieve at their academic potential, there are no quick or easy fixes (Orosco et al., 2013).
The effects of dynamic strategic math on English Language Learners’ word-problem solving.
Poor achievement, if not temporary or situational (e.g., moving to a new school,
parental/caregiver divorce, personal or family illness, teacher disinterest, etc.), it is usually a
function of many intricate and interactive factors that collectively take their toll on the
educational experiences and subsequent performance of students (Barton & Coley 2008; Cohen
& Lotan, 2004). Teachers face the challenge of preparing children from disadvantaged
neighborhoods to be productive and ready with the necessary skills (Vogt, 2014).
Within the past 39 years, a principal’s role has shifted from being accountable for
managing funds and other resources to being accountable for student outcomes and achievement,
thus resulting in a dramatic shift in responsibilities (Lyons & Algozzine, 2006). Supporting this
notion, a 1970 U. S. Senate Select Committee Report on Equal Educational Opportunity (U. S.
Congress, 1970) identified the principal as the single most influential person in a school by
stating:
In many ways, the school principal is the most important and influential individual in any
school. He [or she] is the person responsible for all activities that occur in and around the
school building. It is his leadership that sets the tone of the school, the climate for
learning, the level of professionalism and morale of teachers and the degree of concern
for what students may or may not become. He is the main link between the school and
the community of students and parents about the school. If a school is a vibrant,
innovative, child-centered place, and if it has a reputation for excellence in teaching, if
students are performing to the best of their ability, one can almost always point to the
principal’s leadership as the key to success. (p. 56)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 32
Given the perceived importance of leadership and the central role administrator’s play in
the effectiveness of their schools, it is not surprising that researchers in the field have dedicated
themselves to investigating various leadership theories and the theoretical basis on which
principals base their leadership styles and practices. Many of these theories have been influential
in guiding school leaders; however, instructional leadership is the favored style (Marzano et al.,
2005), such that scholars support the continued significance of instructional leadership as a core
responsibility for school principals (Mangin, 2007).
Purpose of the Study
Focusing on school leadership relations between principals, districts, and federal
regulations, this study aimed to examine the potential of active collaboration around instructional
matters to enhance the quality of teaching and student performance through principals as
instructional leaders (Barton & Coley, 2008). The analysis is grounded in three conceptions of
leadership: systematic, collaborative, and instructional throughout the organizational structure
(Anderson, 2003).
This study will outline ways in which bilingual education has been reconstituted, the
reposition of bilingual education for the 21st Century, while building on the scholarship of the
past socio-historical positioning, geopolitical forces, and how language ideologies have
interacted to sustain different kinds of bilingual education policies and how all these elements
influence classroom practice.
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of middle and high school principals in
the support of English Language Development Programs and school-wide approaches to
instructional decisions as schools prepare English Language Learners (ELLs) to be college and
career ready for the 21st Century. This research examined the relationship between the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 33
instructional leaders’ professional development training, skills, knowledge, and reflection
practices to support the academic demands and school reform initiatives to improve the English
and language proficiency of ELLs as they progress through public secondary schools. Moreover,
this study examined ways in which principals guided teachers to plan concrete learning
objectives for student learning, how they purposefully determined the kinds of learning activities,
and checked for understanding as an assessment strategy to obtain feedback on student learning
to check whether the planned outcomes have been accomplished.
This study analyzed a mixed-methods, qualitative and quantitative research design;
including surveys, interviews, observations, and documents (Merriam, 2014) to explore the
knowledge, skills, and leadership abilities of middle and high school principals as effective
instructional leaders.
Research Questions
In determining important issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language
Learner students, both the focus issues occurring within the school leadership and an
examination of how ELL language training leads to English-language proficiency needed to be
researched. This study attempted to build a better understanding of the leadership necessary to
create socially just schools for English Language Learners (ELLs) by addressing the following
four questions:
1. What professional development training, skills, and knowledge should a high school
principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
2. In what ways do high school principals create asset-based, collaborative, and inclusive
learning opportunities and services for ELLs? What do varying approaches of these
services and the leadership necessary look like in practice?
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 34
3. How do school principals influence how high school teachers of English Language
Learners (ELLs) plan and align their instructional objectives and assessment plans with
the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and English Language Development (ELD)
Standards?
4. What are the key leadership elements of an effective high school program that can assist
in the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
Significance of the Study
Expectations for schools as we seek to create improvement plans as lasting foundations
for learning that impact English Language Learners and every child drives both school and
student proficiency performance. Nowhere are these expectations more important than in our
secondary schools, which provide the building blocks all children need for success, both in
school towards high school graduation and in life towards college- and career-readiness. This
study sought to answer two literature questions: What behaviors do principals need to be diverse
instructional leaders? How does the principal, as the instructional leader, become effective in
creating a quality learning environment that impacts effective teaching for ELL student
achievement?
The information gathered through this study could be used by a district office to develop
criteria for an evaluation tool that properly assesses expectations for principals; generic
managerial skills, communication and presentation skills, knowledge and experience with
diverse student populations. The findings of this study have the potential to lead to the
development of a systematic protocol that will assist principals in gaining the knowledge, skills,
and training that may support them with the ability to put in practice strategies that will ensure
quality in production of school output as a critical factor in determining school effectiveness. A
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 35
systematic approach will lead to improved instruction in the classroom, which will have direct
correlation to student achievement. This systematic approach will allow district-level leaders to
identify principals who may need further support.
Limitations
Prior to conducting this study, there must be an awareness of several limitations that may
affect the conclusions. First, this study is limited to a small number of public secondary schools
in the state of California and therefore may not be representative of other public secondary
school settings, affecting transferability of results. Secondly, the study is limited by the length of
time that is to be spent in the research setting due to funding, resources, and time. Professional
obligations prevent the researchers from prolonged engagement in the study. Engagement in the
research study over a period of one school year or more would increase validity of the acquired
data. Adequately measured data collection includes overt and subtle cues obtained through
multiple observations over time. This would, in turn, provide more information related to the
role of the principal in meeting the needs of English Language Learners in the core classes from
the beginning to the end of the school year. Thirdly, when considering conformability or the
notion of objectivity in qualitative study, the researcher must identify and reveal the decisions
based on his or her judgment (Bloomberg &Volpe, 2008). Both researchers have been serving
ELL populations for the past 19 years and may hold their own biases due to the experiences
accumulated over the years of working to meet the educational needs of English Language
Learners. To minimize bias, or compromise the study, each researcher will maintain a reflective
journal in which annotations about data collection, data analysis, and other pertinent information
will guide decisions regarding findings when conducting the study. Keeping memos and
journals, observation field notes, and transcriptions offer the educational field the opportunity to
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 36
know the origin of decisions and findings that are made. According Maxwell (2013) and
Merriam (2014) this demonstrates validity to the study.
Delimitations
The study may be constrained by the following delimitations: Principals who have:
(a) remedial English Language Development classes at the secondary school, (b) in the state of
California, (c) sample size, (d) time, money, and resources needed for a larger sampling size are
not available for this study.
Organization of the Study
This dissertation will be divided into five chapters as follows: Chapter One provided an
overview of the study. It provided an historical perspective regarding the issues surrounding
ELLs. In addition, it introduced the issues that led to the role of the principal’s knowledge and
perception in relation to quality of instruction and academic success of ELLs.
Chapter Two includes a review of the literature, which seeks to determine important
issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language Learner students, the focus issues
occurring within the school leadership and an examination of how ELL language training leads
to English-language proficiency. This literature attempts to build a better understanding of the
leadership necessary to create socially-just schools for English Language Learners (ELLs) by
addressing the implications for school leaders that build on the literature, social justice
leadership, and the work of the principals, staffs, and communities at the schools. In addition,
Chapter Two includes a presentation of various socio-cultural perspectives on the importance of
language development and cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978) as related to student
learning and achievement. Moreover, explorations of the roles social and political actions have
on quality and focus of educational opportunities provided to English Language Learners.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 37
Chapter Three is a description of the methodology applied to investigate internal beliefs
and values of principals. Interviews, observations, and/or survey questionnaires were used to
support actions and operations of the school; artifacts were utilized to analyze the relationship of
administrators and teachers in the problem-solving process for ELL students. This chapter
provided detailed information about various instruments used in collecting data from the
participants. Furthermore, a description of the data analysis process was provided.
Chapter Four is a presentation of the findings from the study by analyzing and organizing
the data collected. Chapter Five provides conclusions and established the generalizability of the
findings. Chapter Five also provides a summary of recommendations and related educational
implications. Finally, direction for further research was explained.
Definition of Terms
The following terms and their respective definition provide clear understanding of the
terms used throughout this dissertation:
Academic Subjects through the Primary Language (L1 Instruction): English learner (EL)
students (formerly referred to as Limited-English-proficient (LEP) students) receive a program
of English-language development (ELD) and, at a minimum, two academic subjects taught
through the primary language (L1). Primary language instruction is provided (1) for K through
grade 6, at a minimum, in language arts (including reading and writing) and in mathematics,
science, or social science; or (2) for grades 7 through 12, at a minimum, in two academic
subjects required for grade promotion or graduation. The curriculum is equivalent to that
provided to Fluent-English-proficient (FEP) and English-only students. Students being taught
academic subjects through the primary language may also be receiving specially designed
academic instruction in English (SDAIE). See the definition for SDAIE. Primary language
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 38
instruction is provided by teachers with a California Commission on Teaching Credentialing
(CCTC) bilingual authorization in the primary language known as the Language Census or R30-
LC. (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Administrators: Administrators are certificated employees who are not teachers or
student services personnel. Administrators include principals, assistant principals, program
directors or coordinators, and other certificated staff members who are not providing direct
services to students. (CBEDS - PAIF). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS): The California Basic Educational
Data System is an annual data collection, distributed in October, which is used by the California
Department of Education (CDE) to collect the following categories of data from California
public schools (K-12): enrollment, graduates, dropouts, vocational education, alternative
education, adult education, course enrollment, classified staff, certificated staff, technology,
teacher shortage, and demand. Three separate forms are used to collect these data: The
County/District Information Form (CDIF), the School Information Form (SIF), and the
Professional Assignment Information Form (PAIF). (California Department of Education,
2014b)
Dropout Rates: Dropout rates are calculated from data reported for grades 9 through 12.
Although dropout data are collected from grades 7 through 12, only dropout data from grades 9
through 12 are included in most reports. The California Department of Education uses the
annual (one-year) dropout rate, which is essentially the same as the event dropout rate that is
used by the National Center for Education Statistics when comparing states and districts, and a
four-year derived rate. (CBEDS - SIF). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 39
ELD and Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) with Primary
Language Support: This term describes a setting in which EL students receive ELD and, at a
minimum, two academic subjects required for grade promotion or graduation taught through
SDAIE with Primary Language Support (L1 support). Primary language support is instructional
support through the student’s primary language and does not replace academic instruction taught
through the primary language but may be used to clarify meaning and to facilitate student
comprehension of academic content area concepts taught mainly through English. The support
may also include oral language development in the student’s primary language. (R30-LC).
(California Department of Education, 2014b)
English-Language Development (ELD): English-Language Development is a specialized
program of English language instruction appropriate for the English learner (EL) student’s
(formerly LEP students) identified level of language proficiency. This program is implemented
and designed to promote second language acquisition of listening, speaking, reading, and
writing. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
English Language Mainstream Classroom - Parental Request: At the request of a parent
or guardian, English learners who have not met local district criteria for having achieved a “good
working knowledge” of English are enrolled in classes where they are provided with additional
and appropriate services. Transferring an English learner from a structured English immersion
classroom to an English language mainstream classroom is done with the permission of a parent
or guardian of the English learner. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
English Language Mainstream Classroom - Students Meeting Criteria: English learners
who have met local district criteria for having achieved a “good working knowledge” (also
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 40
defined as “reasonable fluency”) of English are enrolled in classes where they are provided with
additional and appropriate services. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
English Learner (EL) Students (Formerly Known as Limited-English-Proficient or LEP):
English learner students are those students for whom there is a report of a primary language other
than English on the state-approved Home Language Survey and who, on the basis of the state
approved oral language (grades K through grade 12) assessment procedures and literacy (grades
3 through 12 only), have been determined to lack the clearly defined English language skills of
listening comprehension, speaking, reading, and writing necessary to succeed in the school’s
regular instructional programs. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Fluent-English-Proficient (FEP): Students who are Fluent-English-proficient are the
students whose primary language is other than English and who have met the district criteria for
determining proficiency in English (i.e., those students who were identified as FEP on initial
identification and students designated from Limited-English-proficient [LEP] or English learner
[EL] to FEP). (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Hispanic or Latino: The ethnic group of a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban,
Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. In 1998-99,
the title of this ethnic group was modified from Hispanic to reflect the new federal standards and
more current use. (CBEDS). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Not Receiving Instructional Services: This category was used to report the Limited-
English-proficient (LEP) students who are not receiving any specialized instructional services
related to language learning. This term has not been used since 1999 on the Language Census.
(California Department of Education, 2014b)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 41
Other Instructional Services: An instructional service specifically designed for EL
students that do not fit the description of ELD, ELD and SDAIE, ELD and SDAIE with Primary
Language Support, or ELD and Academic Subjects through the Primary Language. (R30-LC).
(California Department of Education, 2014b)
Other Instructional Settings: These settings are classes or any other instructional setting
other than Structured English Immersion, Alternative Course of Study, and English Language
Mainstream Classroom - Students Meeting Criteria or Parental Request. These instructional
settings are explicitly authorized by Education Code sections 300 through 340. (R30-LC).
(California Department of Education, 2014b)
Other Non-English Languages: Other non-English languages include other non-English
languages reported on the Language Census where the appropriate primary language is not one
of the choices provided. In some reports, where specific languages are listed, this term will refer
to all languages other than those listed. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Primary Language: The primary language is the language that is identified for K–12
students at the local level from information gathered on the Home Language Survey to determine
whether a student should be assessed with the California English Language Development Test
(CELDT). The primary language, also known as “native language,” should be identified only
once during a student’s school career and should never change. For pre-kindergarten students,
this is identified at the local level from either the “Home Language Survey” if available, or the
“Confidential Application for Child Development Services and Certification of Eligibility” form
(CD-9600), using the “Native Language” section. If these two forms are not available, and no
other reliable resource for this information is available, then LEAs should use the language
spoken most frequently by adults in the home. The languages reported by Local Educational
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 42
Agencies (LEAs) to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS)
represent languages other than English that were reported and used as an indication that the
student needed to be assessed for English learner services on the CELDT. (California
Department of Education, 2014b)
Primary Language Support: Primary language support is instructional support provided
through the English learner (EL) student’s (formerly LEP students) primary language. This
support does not take the place of academic instruction through the primary language but may be
used to clarify meaning and facilitate student comprehension of academic content area concepts
taught mainly through English. It may also include oral language development in the EL
student’s primary language. Primary language support may be provided by credentialed teachers
fluent in the EL student’s primary language or by bilingual paraprofessionals (aides). The aides
are supervised by a credentialed teacher. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education,
2014b)
Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE): Specially Designed
Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) is an approach to teach academic courses to English
learner (EL) students (formerly LEP students) in English. It is designed for nonnative speakers
of English and focuses on increasing the comprehensibility of the academic courses typically
provided to FEP and English-only students in the district. Students reported in this category
receive a program of ELD and, at a minimum, two academic subjects required for grade
promotion or graduation taught through (SDAIE). (R30-LC). (California Department of
Education, 2014b)
Structured English Immersion: Classes where EL students who have not yet met local
district criteria for having achieved a “good working knowledge” (also defined as “reasonable
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 43
fluency”) of English are enrolled in an English language acquisition process for young children
in which nearly all classroom instruction is in English but consists of a curriculum and
presentation designed for children who are learning the language. (R30-LC). (California
Department of Education, 2014b)
Teachers Providing Primary Language Instruction to EL Students: These teachers
provide English-language development (ELD), and teach at least two academic subjects that are
required for grade promotion and graduation, and teach English learner (EL) students primarily
through the primary language (L1). English-language development (ELD) instruction is
designed to promote efficient acquisition of skills needed to communicate effectively in English.
(R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Teachers Providing SDAIE and ELD: These teachers provide English-language
development and teach at least two academic subjects required for grade promotion and
graduation. These courses are taught to English learners through Specially Designed Academic
Instruction in English (SDAIE). The SDAIE method is used to teach academic courses in
English to English learners and is designed to increase the level of understanding of the English
instruction. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Teachers with a CCTC Bilingual Authorization (Providing Primary Language, ELD,
and/or SDAIE Instruction to English Learner [EL] Students): These teachers have (1) a valid
California Commission for Teacher Credentialing (CCTC), Bilingual Cross-Cultural Language
and Academic Development (BCLAD) certificates, (2) a Bilingual Cross-Cultural Certificate of
Competence (BCC), or (3) other CCTC authorization for bilingual education, including
emergency or sojourn authorizations. Note: District Designated Primary Language Teachers
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 44
(option 3) are those teachers who have met CDE-approved district-adopted criteria for primary
language instruction. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
Teachers with a CCTC SDAIE or ELD Teaching Authorization (Providing ELD and/or
SDAIE Instruction to English Learner [EL] Students): Teachers who hold a valid regular
California teaching credential and (1) who have a valid Cross-Cultural Language Academic
Development (CLAD) or Language Development Specialist (LDS) certificate issued by the
California Commission for Teacher Credentialing (CCTC); or (2) who hold an ESL
supplementary authorization issued by the CCTC. (R30-LC)
Teachers with SB1969 Certificate of Completion or CDE Approved District Designated
(Providing ELD, and/or SDAIE Instruction to English Learner [EL] Students): These teachers
hold a Senate Bill SB1969 certificate of completion of Staff Development or are CDE-approved
district-designated ELD teachers (option 3). Teachers in training for SDAIE or ELD Teaching
Authorization are as follows: The SDAIE Teachers in Training who are providing SDAIE and
ELD or SDAIE only to EL students are enrolled in either CLAD training or SB1969 staff
development training with a SDAIE instructional focus. Teachers only providing ELD to EL
students must hold a CCTC ESL supplementary authorization or be enrolled in either CLAD
training or SB1969 staff development training with an ELD focus for EL students in a self-
contained classroom. A description of the training program for these teachers should be included
in the district’s Plan to Remedy the Shortage of Qualified Staff or 1997–98 English Learner
Staffing Plan Annual Report. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014b)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 45
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This literature review provides a background for complex issues surrounding learning
opportunities within public education offered to culturally and linguistically diverse students.
Additional emphasis will focus on the unique educational and linguistic needs of Long-Term
English Language Learners (LTELLs). This mixed-methods study sought to analyze, identify,
and isolate the skills, knowledge, and training secondary school principals’ need to effectively
serve diverse institutions. This study examined existing literature to gain further insight and to
ascertain how some secondary principals have become skilled leaders that impact and influence
second language acquisition, engagement, and learning. The principal of a school today works
in a more fluid and expanding context than at any time in history (Drake & Roe, 2003). This
chapter addresses the following themes: the principal as a decision maker, the changing role(s) of
the principal, effective principal leadership, the professional development required to be an
effective diverse leader, the complex issues surrounding learning opportunities within public
education provided for culturally and linguistically diverse students, and the pervasive
achievement gap between English Language Learners is examined.
National Statistics
According to the U. S. Department of Education (2016b), more than 24 million students
have access to higher standards than they did a few years ago. That includes approximately
4 million African American students, 3.5 million Hispanic students, 2.8 million students with
disabilities, and 1.5 million English Language Learners (U. S. Department of Education, 2016c).
The list of prominent careers for tomorrow’s economy requires students to be prepared for three-
quarters of the fastest-growing occupations which require education beyond a high school
diploma with science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (U. S. Department of
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 46
Education, 2016c). On the other hand, the 2015 report from National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES, 2015) highlighted that the United States still has a high percentage of 16-
through 24-year olds who are not enrolled in school and have not earned a high school credential
(either a diploma or an equivalency credential such as a General Educational Development
(GED) certificate). According to NCES (2015), in each year from 1990 to 2013, the dropout rate
was lower for Whites than for African Americans, and the rate for both White and African
Americans were lower than the rate for Hispanics. During this period, the rate for Whites
declined from 9% to 5%, the rate for African Americans declined from 13% to 7%, and the rate
for Hispanics declined from 32% to 12% (NCES, 2015).
Professional Training
Principals are required to fill an array of roles within their respective school system. The
principal’s primary responsibility, however is to facilitate effective teaching and learning with
the overall mission of enhancing student achievement (Zepeda, 2003). Over time, instructional
leadership provided by the principal has been identified as a contributing factor to higher student
achievement (Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Marzano et al., 2005). Consequently, educational leaders
must be able to assess, adjust, and demonstrate effective leadership practices to be successful in
meeting the needs of internal and external stakeholders (Bagin, Gallagher, & Moore, 2007).
Moreover, principals must have a grasp of the knowledge, skills, and understandings that
students need to gain from academic courses (Petzko, 2008). In addition, school leaders need to
know enough about state and national standards in academic courses and elective fields of study
such as fine arts and practical arts to guide teachers to identify the main concepts that students
should learn in greater depth (Fusarelli, 2008). School leaders need to know what students are
supposed to learn and the standards they are supposed to meet in determining whether teachers’
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 47
exams and assessment guides are appropriate forms of measurement (Austermuhl, 2007).
Principals can best discharge their leadership role if they develop a deep and broad knowledge
base with respect to curriculum and learning. School leaders should seek to work cooperatively
with the school community in developing and implementing effective curriculum based on
student needs. The development of curriculum should begin at the school level, including
developing a vision/mission statement and goals, rethinking the program of studies, committing
to a learning-centered schedule, integrating the curriculum, aligning the curriculum, and
monitoring the implementation process (Schmeltzer, 2000).
Theory and research on human learning have expanded dramatically in recent years
(Bates, 2015). Better integration with education of such disciplines as psychology, human
development, and instructional technology has contributed to the expansion of the field of
learning. Schunk (2012) explained that an understanding of learning theories intends to:
(a) inform students of learning theoretical principles, concepts, and research findings, especially
as they relate to education, and (b) to provide applications of principles and concepts in settings
where teaching and learning occur. Although different theories of learning are discussed, most
educators continue to focus on cognitive perspectives (Schunk, 2012). This focus is consistent
with the contemporary emphasis on learners as seekers and constructors of knowledge rather
than as reactors to events.
Theories of Learning
Shuell (2013) discussed learning as one of the most important activities in which humans
engage. It is at the very core of the educational process, although most of what people learn
occurs outside of school. For thousands of years, philosophers and psychologists have sought to
understand the nature of learning, how it occurs, and how one person can influence the learning
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 48
of another person through teaching and similar endeavors (Shuell, 2013). Various theories of
learning have been suggested, and these theories differ for a variety of reasons (Shuell, 2013). In
trying to understand the various theories of learning and their implications for education, it is
helpful to realize that the term ‘learning’ means different things to different people and is used
somewhat differently in different theories (Shuell, 2013).
Behavioral Theory
Shuell (2013) explicated that the modern psychological study of learning can be dated
from the work of Hermann Ebbinghaus (1850–1909), whose well-known study of memory was
published in 1885. Other early studies of learning were by Edward L. Thorndike (1874–1949),
whose dissertation on problem solving was published in 1898, and Ivan Pavlov (1849–1936),
whose research on classical conditioning began in 1899 but first was published in English in
1927 (Shuell, 2013). These theories focused on explaining the behavior of individuals and
became known as behavioral theories. These theories used a stimulus-response framework to
explain learning and dominated psychology and education for over half a century (Shuell, 2013).
Shuell asserted that because behavioral theories focus on environmental factors such as
reinforcement, feedback, and practice, they conceptualize learning as something that occurs from
the outside in.
Social Cognitive Theory
During the 1980s, the social-cognitive theory evolved from other earlier theories (Shuell,
2013). Social cognitive theory reflects the cognitive features of the theory and aids in
differentiating it from behavioral theories of learning. During the 1970s and 1980s, conceptions
and definitions of learning began to change dramatically. Behavioral theories gave way to
cognitive theories that focused on mental activities and the understanding of complex material.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 49
An information-processing metaphor replaced the stimulus-response framework of behavioral
theories. These theories emphasized that learning occurred from the inside out rather than from
the outside in. During the late 1970s, John Flavell and Ann Brown each began to study
metacognition, the learners’ awareness of their own learning, an ability to reflect on their own
thinking, and the capacity to monitor and manage their learning (Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001).
During the mid-1980s, the study of self-regulated learning began to emerge (Zimmerman &
Schunk, 2001).
Subsequently, in the latter 1980s and the 1990s, these cognitive theories were challenged
by theories that emphasized the importance of social interactions and the sociocultural context of
learning. The work of Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934) along with the work of anthropologists such
as Jean Lave began to have a major influence on theories of learning (Nuthall & Alton-Lee,
1990). The notion that people learn by observing others, first articulated in social-cognitive
theory, was expanded in a new context (Nuthall & Alton-Lee, 1990).
Theories of learning are efforts to explain how people learn (Shuell, 2013). Different
theories are based on different assumptions and are appropriate for explaining some learning
situations but not others. Theories of learning can inform teaching and the use of different
instructional resources including technology, but ultimately the learning activities in which the
student engages (mental, physical, and social) determine what a student learns in the classroom
(Shuell, 2013). Classroom learning involves social, emotional, and participatory factors in
addition to cognitive ones. Shuell (2013) stated that most current theories of learning presuppose
that the goal of education is to develop the ability of students to understand the content and to
think for themselves, presumptions that are consistent with most of modern-day schools.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 50
Adult Learning Theory
While we have known for centuries that adults learn as part of their daily lives, it was not
until the early decades of the 20th century that adult learning was studied systematically
(Merriam, 2001). The first book to report the results of research on this topic was “Thorndike,
Bregman, Tilton, and Woodyard’s (1928) Adult Learning from a behavioral psychological
perspective, was published just two years after the founding of adult education as a professional
field of practice” (Merriam, 2001, p. 3). Merriam (2001) described that there is not one theory or
model of adult learning that explains all that we know about adult learners, the various contexts
where learning takes place, and the process of learning itself. Meriam (2001) suggested “a
mosaic of theories, models, sets of principles and explanations that, combined, compose the
knowledge base of adult learning theory” (p. 3).
Transformative Learning Theory
Jack Mezirow’s theory (published 1953-1985) of transformative learning has evolved
into a description of how learners learn by integrating new knowledge with their existing
knowledge, beliefs, and experiences (Imel, 1998). Transformative Learning Theory focused in
the 1940s on youth work and community development and on the ways people understand their
world and the possibilities open to them to effect social change, and later a theory of adult
development (Collard & Law, 1989). The essence of this latter theory is that adulthood involves
movement along a maturity gradient and how adults learn by making meaning of their
experience (Collard & Law, 1989). Mezirow (1991) developed ideas through studies of adult
education. Centrality of experience, critical reflection, and rational discourse are three common
themes in Mezirow’s theory, which was based on psychoanalytic theory and critical social
theory. Mezirow’s theory emphasized the role of experience in learning and especially how it
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 51
impacts learning needs (Cox, 2015). According to Cox (2015), Mezirow (1991) argued that in
transformative learning it is the need that creates a starting point for dialogue involving critical
examination of assumptions, or meaning perspectives, underpinning deep-rooted value
judgements and expectations. Mezirow defined transformative learning as the process of
learning through critical self-reflection, which results in the reformulation of a meaning
perspective to allow a more inclusive, discriminating, and integrative understanding of
experience (Cox, 2015). The way one’s meaning, perspectives, or habits of expectation serve as
perceptual and cognitive codes to structure the way one perceives, thinks, feels, and acts on one’s
experience.
Transformational learning is fundamentally concerned with construing meaning from
experience as a guide to action. In his theory of perspective transformation, Mezirow (1991)
presented a significant conceptualization of that process, but it is flawed in one major aspect: It
fails to account for context (Clark & Wilson, 1991). Clark and Wilson (1991) examined the
absence of context in the theory itself, and then focused on the decontextualized form of
rationality that underlies the process of critical reflection central to perspective transformation.
Clark and Wilson proposed a contextualized view of rationality which maintains the essential
link between meaning and experience. Finally, Clark and Wilson concluded that Mezirow’s
claim to have a theory was premature.
Andragogy and Self-Directed Learning Theory
Most educators spend considerable time acquiring information and learning new skills
(Hiemstra, 1994). The rapidity of change, the continuous creation of new knowledge, and an
ever-widening access to information make such acquisitions necessary (Hiemstra, 1994). Much
of this learning takes place at the adult learner’s initiative. A common label given to such
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 52
learning is Self-Directed Learning (SDL; Hiemstra, 1994). Self-directed Learning is any study
in which adult learners have the primary responsibility for planning, implementing, and
evaluating their effort.
Andragogy and Self-Directed Learning (hereafter SDL) were the first two attempts by
adult educators to define adult education as a unique field of practice, one that could be
differentiated from learning in general and childhood education (Merriam, 2001). Garrison
(2003) explained that as with many concepts in education SDL may be well attributed to John
Dewey (1925), with his focus on the experience of the learner. “In the latter half of the century,
the concept more directly emerged from the humanist philosophy of Carl Rogers [1969] and was
developed and popularized within adult education by individuals such as Allan Tough (1971)
and Malcolm Knowles (1975)” (Garrison, 2003, p. 162). “Rogers was largely responsible for
outlining the concept of adult self-direction. He was a psychotherapist who strongly believed in
personal responsibility and the freedom to choose” [one’s own learning] (Garrison, 2003,
p. 162). “This translated into a ‘nondirective’ approach accompanied by extreme trust in the
individual to learn and how to learn” (Garrison, 2003, p. 162).
According to Garrison (2003), “in the early 1970s [Self Directed Learning] SLD emerged
full force in the field of adult education and remains today its most researched topic and
reflective of the practice of adult education and learning at its best” (p. 162). “Knowles (1970)
made Rogers’ concept of self-direction the core of his approach to facilitating learning in an
adult education context, (i.e., andragogy)” (Garrison, 2003, p. 162).
Cox (2015) described that andragogy has reached its zenith with the advent of coaching
as a learning approach. According to Cox (2015),
Knowles’ (1984) theory of andragogy confirms the link between coaching and adult
learning theory and invoked Rachal’s (2002) extended definition of the concept: “The
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 53
adult learner is perceived to be a mature, motivated, voluntary, and equal participant in a
learning relationship with a facilitator whose role is to aid the learner in the achievement
of his or her primarily self-determined learning objectives (p. 219).” (p. 27).
Knowles (1984) was convinced that adults learned differently than children and that this
provided the basis for a distinctive field of inquiry (Smith, M. K., 2002). Knowles’ earlier work
on informal adult education highlighted some elements of process and setting (Smith, M, K.,
2002). Similarly, Knowles charting of the development of the adult education movement in the
United States helped him to come to some conclusions about the shape and direction of adult
education. The mechanism Knowles used was the notion of andragogy (Pratt, 1988). While the
concept of andragogy had been in spasmodic usage since the 1830s, it was Malcolm Knowles
who popularized its usage (Pratt, 1988). M. K. Smith (2002) explained that for Knowles,
andragogy was premised on at least four crucial assumptions about the characteristics of adult
learners that are different from the assumptions about child learners on which traditional
pedagogy is premised. A fifth was added by Knowles in 1984. These are:
1. Self-concept: As a person matures his /her self-concept moves from one of being a
dependent personality toward one of being a self-directed human being.
2. Adult Learner Experience: As a person matures, he/she accumulates a growing
reservoir of experience that becomes an increasing resource for learning.
3. Readiness to Learn: As a person matures, his/her readiness to learn becomes oriented
increasingly to the developmental tasks of his/her social roles.
4. Orientation to Learning: As a person matures, his/her time perspective changes from
one of postponed application of knowledge to immediacy of application, and
accordingly his/her orientation toward learning shifts from one of subject-
centeredness to one of problem centeredness.
5. Motivation to Learn: As a person matures the motivation to learn is internal.
(Knowles, 1984, p. 2).
Each of these assertions and the claims of difference between andragogy and pedagogy
are the subject of considerable debate (Smith, M. K., 2002). Useful critiques of the notion can be
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 54
found in Davenport (1993), Jarvis and Thomas (1987), and Tennant (1986). As Merriam,
Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007) pointed out, Knowles’ conception of andragogy is an
attempt to build a comprehensive theory (or model) of adult learning that is anchored in the
characteristics of adult learners. Cross (1981) also used such perceived characteristics in a more
limited attempt to offer a framework for thinking about what and how adults learn. Such
approaches may be contrasted with those that focus on an adult’s life situation; changes in
consciousness (Merriam et al., 2007).
Both Self-Directed Learning and Andragogy have been criticized for a blinding focus on
the individual learner while ignoring the sociohistorical context in which it occurs (Merriam,
2001). However, both Andragogy and Self-Directed Learning have become so much a part of
adult education’s identity, and have had such an impact on practice, that relegating them to the
status of historical artifact is inconceivable (Merriam, 2001). A more likely scenario is that both
pillars of adult learning theory will continue to engender debate, discussion, and research, and in
so doing, further enrich our present day understanding of adult learning.
Reardon (2011) described that the leadership of school principals has been considered
critical to school improvement at least since America was declared ‘A Nation at Risk’ by
Goldberg and Harvey (1983; see also Barth, 1986, Hallinger & Heck, 1996a; Lezotte, 1994;
Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003). Hallinger and Heck (1996b as cited in Leithwood,
Chapman, Corson, Hallinger, & Hart) asserted that school effectiveness research was a driving
force behind efforts to determine to what extent the quality of leadership made a difference in
student achievement. Standards-based reform efforts that emphasized the instructional
leadership role of the principal, and stressed student achievement as the measure of leadership
success, created an impetus for change in the way schools were led (Elmore, Randy, 2000). This
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 55
impetus culminated in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2002). O’Donnell and
White (2005) conjectured that the accountability provisions under which school districts have
operated since NCLB constituted perhaps the most challenging requirements in the history of
education. The pervasive finding of the largely indirect effect of the principal’s leadership on
educational outcomes does nothing to ameliorate the direct responsibility the principal is
compelled to accept for those outcomes in terms of NCLB (Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, &
Wahlstrom, 2004). The challenges for the secondary school principal include changing
demographics, schools, and curricula that are inappropriately designed for the changing needs of
today’s adolescents, principals trained to be managers rather than instructional leaders, and a
dramatic shortage of qualified candidates willing to take the principalship (Tirozzi, 2001).
Leadership Skills
The Effective Principal as a Decision Maker
Decision making is a way of life for school leaders at every capacity since it affects the
performance of a school or school district and the welfare of its stakeholders: students, teachers,
parents, and the community (Lunenburg, 2010). Furthermore, Lunenburg (2010) stated that the
quality of the decisions made is a predominant factor in how the superintendent views the
principal’s performance, or how the principal views a department head or the team leader’s
performance. Fundamentally, decision making is a people process; Lunenburg (2010) cited
considering that decisions are made at all levels of the school organization from the
superintendent concerning school district’s goals and strategies to the principal’s tactical
decisions concerning goals and strategies to accomplish them in relation to their own buildings.
Department heads and team leaders make curricular and operational decisions to carry out day-
to-day activities of their respective departments or school communities and classroom teachers
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 56
make decisions within their classroom capacity (Lunenburg, 2010). The purpose for engaging in
this mental activity is to get desired or targeted results to reach a favorable final decision
(Lunenburg, 2010).
To further illustrate the importance of decision making, Lunenburg (2010) provided two
basic models of decision making: the rational and the bounded rationality model. Under the
rational decision-making process or model, administrative decision making is assumed to be
rational; leaders can make optimum choices using criteria which highlight alternatives and
outcomes with certainty (Lunenburg, 2010). The criteria can be broken down into six cyclical
steps: identifying the problem, generating alternatives, evaluating alternatives, choosing an
alternative, implementing the decision, and evaluating decision effectiveness (Lunenburg, 2010).
Lunenburg (2010) recommends that properly identifying and defining the problem is the
most important step which affects the quality of the decision based on the priority scale of the
problem and solution compared to other problems; the method of problem analysis includes:
(1) problem identification; (2) definition of what the problem is and is not; (3) prioritizing the
problem; and (4) testing for cause-effect relationship. Generating alternatives is the second step
considered by Lunenburg based on the complexity of the problem, cost, and value. For example,
school leaders must specify the goals they hope to achieve through their decisions, such as
improve the quality of instruction, increase test scores, in which case information must be
collected regarding each of the alternatives and their likely consequences. Lunenburg advised
that when dealing with complex school problems affecting numerous people, it is often necessary
to conduct lengthy and thorough search for alternatives and compromise on some points on the
benefits of personnel. As a third step, in the decision-making process, Lunenburg recommended
to evaluate each of the alternatives generated in step two, where the school leader must ask these
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 57
three essential questions: (1) is the alternative feasible? (2) Is it a satisfactory alternative? and
(3) what impact will it have on people? The fourth step delineated in choosing an alternative is
based on the combination of information available where judgment and intuition determine the
outcomes. By the time the school leader is ready to decide, he or she has two alternatives to
choose from based on feasibility, satisfaction, and acceptance of the decision-making team
(Lunenburg, 2010). In step five, the school leader must consider the following procedures to
implement a decision successfully:
a. The school leader must communicate effectively to ensure that the alternative is
clearly understood by all stakeholders.
b. It is recommended to form committees for stakeholders to participate in the decision-
making process to endorse enthusiastically the outcomes.
c. Decision making requires school leaders to provide enough resources such as
budgets, hiring staff, procuring funds, office space, and school schedules for the
alternative to succeed.
d. As part of the process of implementation, the school leader needs to establish
timelines, step-by-step actions of how much and how soon to accomplish the targeted
goals.
e. During the implementation phase, the school leader must clearly assign
responsibilities to each member of the combined leadership effort to understand his or
her role in the process. (pp. 6-7)
The final step of the rational decision-making process is evaluating the effectiveness of
the decision (Lunenburg, 2010). According to Lunenburg (2010), when an implemented
decision does not produce the desired results there are probably several causes: incorrect
definition of the problem, poor evaluation of alternatives, and/or improper implementation.
Among these possible causes, the most common and serious error is an inadequate definition of
the problem (Lunenburg, 2010). When the problem is incorrectly defined, the alternative that is
selected and implemented will not produce the desired result (Lunenburg, 2010).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 58
The Bounded Rationality Model
According to Lunenburg (2010) and Simon (1982) who coined the term bounded
rationality to describe the decision maker who would like to make the best decisions but
normally settles for less than the optimal. The bounded rational model in contrast to the rational
model is comprised of: (1) satisficing, (2) heuristics, (3) primacy and recency effect,
(4) bolstering the alternative, (5) intuition, (6) incrementalizing, and (7) the garbage-can model
(pp. 8-11).
Lunenburg (2010) described the seven principles of the Bounded Rationality model as
follows: The first principle is satisficing; this approach involves choosing the best alternative that
satisfies minimal standards of acceptability without exploring all possibilities whether individual
or organizational. Principle two is a heuristic decision based on a rule of thumb in a complex
and uncertain situation where the decision maker may use a set of heuristics to guide their
decisions. An example associated would be the golden rule, ‘do unto others as you would have
them do unto you.’ The heuristic approach tends to oversimplify complex problems or introduce
bias into decision making as with judgment and intuition. The third principle is the primacy-
recency effect in which every piece of information researched is treated as being equal in
importance which affects the decision-making process. The fourth principle is known as
bolstering the alternative, in which the decision maker searches and supports information he or
she considers legitimate and acceptable. The fifth principle involves intuition, a decision based
on past experiences and the reinforcement associated with experiences devoid of conscious
thought. An example would be the automaticity of driving a car without consciously thinking
about it. The sixth principle, incrementalizing, involves making small changes (increments) in
the existing situation exploring possible alternative solutions exploring all conceivable
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 59
consequences of the alternative solutions and finally choosing the optimal alternative that will
maximize the achievement of the agreed-on goals. Lastly, the garbage-can model, a school or
district generate problems and alternative solutions to problems by depositing them into a
garbage can and mixing solutions and problems to generate a decision.
The Four Frames of Leadership
Bolman and Deal (2013) cautioned that overemphasizing on the rational and technical
side of an organization contributes to its decline or demise. Bolman and Deal in their book
Framing Organizations, provide an array of work in organizational theory which has focused on
the private or public or nonprofit sector but not on all three. Bolman and Deal considered not
focusing on all three collectively as a mistake. All three sectors could rotate in a synchronized
fashion as a well-oiled bearing (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The challenges of today’s organizations
require the objective perspective of managers as well as the brilliant flashes of creativity that
wise leadership provides (Bolman and Deal, 2013). Not undermining the value in judgment of
manager or leader, managers do things right while leaders do the right thing (Bolman & Deal,
2013).
Furthermore, Bolman and Deal (2013) affirmed that people in managerial roles need to
find simplicity and order amid organizational confusion and chaos. Organizations need versatile
and flexible leaders who are artists as well as analysts, who can reframe experience to discover
new issues and possibilities, which combine hard-headed realism with passionate commitment to
larger values and purposes (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Moreover, Bolman and Deal clarified that
organizations need leaders who love their work, their organization, the people whose lives they
affect, and leaders who appreciate management as a moral and ethical undertaking. The central
theme throughout the argument is framing or reframing to show how the same situation can be
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 60
viewed in at least four ways (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Management and leadership is neither
exact nor precise if it is interpreted as an art, where the artist through its artistry interprets
experience, expresses it in forms that can be felt, understood, and appreciated (Bolman & Deal,
2013). Leaders are artists who foster their art (leadership) as emotion, subtlety, and ambiguity
who presents the world in a deeper understanding of what is and what might be (Bolman & Deal,
2013).
Parallel to the analogy framed by Bolman and Deal (2013), Merriam (2009) portrayed the
leader as a qualitative researcher as the primary instrument of data collection and an analyst who
has the advantage to expand his or her understanding trough nonverbal as well as verbal
communication, process information (data) immediately, clarify, and summarize, check with
respondents for accuracy of interpretation, and explore unusual situational circumstances.
Merriam (2009) rationalized the process as inductive, the instructional leader as the researcher
gathers data to build concepts, hypothesis, or theories rather than deductively testing hypotheses.
The instructional leader as a qualitative researcher builds theory from observation toward
intuitive understandings gleaned from being in the field (Merriam, 2009).
For building a more precise argument, Bolman and Deal (2013) cited Volvo’s French
talented executive Goran Carlstadt who got to the heart of a challenge managers face every day
by stating that: the world simply cannot be made sense of; facts cannot be organized, unless you
have a mental model to begin with. You cannot begin to learn without some concept that gives
you expectations or hypotheses: such mental models or frames have many labels, maps, mind-
sets, schema, paradigm, and cognitive lenses (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Furthermore, Bolman and
Deal emphasized that reframing requires an ability to think about situations in more than one
way, which lets you develop alternative diagnoses and strategies. According to Bolman and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 61
Deal, leadership is composed of the following four distinct lenses or leadership frames: the
structural frame, human resources frame, the political frame, and symbolic frame. Together the
frames decipher the full array of significant clues, capturing a more comprehensive picture of
what is going on and what to do as a leader (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The wise managers, like a
skilled carpenter, wants at hand a diverse collection of high-quality implements; understanding
the difference between possessing a tool and knowing when and how to use it (Bolman & Deal,
2013).
As stated by Bolman and Deal (2013), in the last hundred years or so social scientists
devoted much time or attention to developing ideas about how organizations work, how they
should work, or why they often fail. The overview of the four-frame model shows that each of
the frames has its own image of reality (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Some perspectives may seem
clear and straightforward, while others seem puzzling, but learning to apply all four deepens your
appreciation and understanding of organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Additionally, Bolman
and Deal illustrated that Galileo discovered this when he devised the first telescope. As he added
additional lenses, each contributed to a more accurate image of the heavens. Successful
managers take advantage of the same truth; for instance, a physician may reframe consciously or
intuitively, until he or she understand the situation at hand (Bolman & Deal, 2013). They use
more than one lens to develop a diagnosis of what they are up against and how to move forward.
Today’s leaders require multi-frame thinking to move beyond the narrow, mechanical
approaches withholding organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 62
The Structural Frame
Bolman and Deal (2013) cited German economist and sociologist Max Weber (1864-
1920) as an originator of structural ideas who wrote around the beginning of the 20th century
when patriarchy rather than rationality was still the primary organizing principle. The father
figure has unlimited authority and boundless power to reward, punish, promote, or fire on
personal whim (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Other theorists who contributed to the scientific
management approach cited by Bolman and Deal included–Fayol, 1919; 1949; Gulick & Urwick,
1937; Urwick, 1937–of which the most prominent was Frederick W. Taylor (1911) who
developed principles that focused on specialization, span of control, authority, and delegation of
responsibility.
Bolman and Deal (2013) concluded that structural frame looks beyond individuals to
examine the social architecture of numerous work forces challenging structural design in global
organizations today. It encompasses the freewheeling, loosely structured entrepreneurial task
force as well as the tightly controlled, top-down forms which may work in simple, stable
situations but fall short in more fluid and ambiguous ones (Bolman & Deal, 2013). If structure is
overlooked, Bolman and Deal cautioned an organization often misdirects energy and resources.
It may, for example, waste time and money on massive training programs in a vain effort to
solve problems that relate to social architecture rather than with people’s skills or attitudes; may
fire managers and bring new ones, who fall victim to the same structural flaws that doomed the
predecessors (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
At the heart of any organizational design are the decision-makers at the center who
understand the use of vertical and horizontal procedures that lash the many elements together of
the goals, strategies, technology, people, and environment where a variety of design possibilities
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 63
can create formal prototypes that work for both people and collective purposes (Bolman & Deal,
2013). For people with their specialized roles and functions, according to Bolman and Deal
(2013) they are the most important assets to any organization that transform raw materials; that
are inputs activities, into outputs or outcomes.
The Human Resource Frame
Bolman and Deal (2013) portrayed the human resource frame as the relationship of
interdependence between people and the organizations. People need organizations for the
intrinsic and extrinsic rewards they offer, but their respective needs are not always aligned.
Organizations need people for their energy, effort, and talent. When the fit between people and
the organization is poor, one or both suffer: individuals may feel neglected or oppressed, and
organizations sputter because individuals withdraw their efforts or even work against
organizational purposes (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
In leading in a culture of change, Fullan (2001) presented a dynamic world where
everything exists only in relationship to everything else, and the interactions among agents in the
system lead to complex, unpredictable outcomes. The soul at work is individual and collective:
most people want to be part of their organization, they want to make a difference, the individual
soul is connected to the organization; people become connected to something deeper, the desire
to contribute to a larger purpose, to feel they are part of a greater whole, a web of connections
(Fullan, 2001). Furthermore, Fullan outlined seven essentials to developing relationships:
(1) setting clear standards; (2) expecting the best; (3) paying attention; (4) personalizing
recognition; (5) telling the story; (6) celebrating together; and (7) setting the example (p. 55).
Progressive organizations implement a variety of high involvement strategies for improving and
strengthening the bond between the individual and organization by paying well, offering job
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 64
security, promoting from within, training the workforce, and sharing the fruits of organizational
success (Bolman & Deal, 2013). When human and social capital is combined, they produce
powerful outcomes. Just hire great teachers and great principals, and the problem will be solved
(Fullan, 2001).
The Political Frame
Bolman and Deal (2013) defined the political frame as politics is the realistic process of
making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and divergent interests. This
view puts politics at the heart of decision making and organizational excellence, which demands
a sophisticated social skill: a leadership skill that can mobilize people and accomplish important
objectives despite dozens of obstacles; a skill that can pull people together for meaningful
purposes despite thousands of forces that push objectives apart; a skill that can keep corporations
and public institutions from descending into mediocracy characterized by bureaucratic
infighting, parochial politics, and vicious power struggle (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
Moreover, Bolman and Deal (2013) elaborated how the effective leader creates agendas
for change with two major elements: a vision balancing the long-term interest of key parties, and
a strategy for achieving the vision while recognizing the competing internal and external forces.
Leaders often fail to get things done because they rely too much on reason and too little on
relationships (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Four basic steps for exercising political influence are
described by Bolman and Deal as follows: (1) identify key players you need to influence;
(2) determine where the leadership challenges will be; (3) whenever possible develop links with
potential opponents to facilitate communication, education, or negotiation; and (4) coerce if
necessary as a last resource.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 65
The Symbolic Frame
The symbolic frame combines various elements in an organization on which actors play
their roles and hope to communicate their right impression to their audience: a community of
faith, bounded by shared beliefs, traditions, myths, rituals, and ceremonies (Bolman & Deal,
2013). A symbolic leader leads by example, uses the symbols to capture attention, frames
experience, communicates a vision, tells stories, respects and uses history (Bolman & Deal,
2013). Hallett (2007) highlighted that schools are good places to study deference, symbolic
power, and institutional order. Order is a problem in schools because they are connected to
diverse groups with different interests, policy makers, administrators, teachers, parents, and
students (Hallett, 2007). Pierre Bourdieu (2011) viewed society as a social space where people
exist in relation to each other based on their economic capital (stratified lifestyles tastes,
preferences, and knowledge) and social capital (networks). A person’s habitus is structured by
the objective conditions in which the individual develops, namely the cultural, economic, and
social capital of their parents (Hallett, 2007). As a scheme of perception, Hallett (2007) defined
the habitus as a reality of life, the habitus is a product of history. At the macro level, the fields
are institutions; they are slices of social space, each slice structured according to the forms of
capital in that institutional arena (Hallett, 2007).
Current Policies in Education
The U. S. Department of Education (2016d) considered that teachers, principals or other
school staff members should have meaningful opportunities to both understand and contribute to
the policies that impact their students, faculty and staff, and school communities. In addition, to
implement needed reforms, all stakeholders, especially those at the school building level, must
understand the intent of policy and be engaged in the outcomes (U. S. Department of Education,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 66
2016d). Secretary of Education Arne Duncan (NAESP, 2010) stated: “The best ideas in
education will never come from me or anyone else in Washington, D.C. They’re always going
to come from a local level” (para. 8). Mr. Duncan continued, “Principal leadership is so
critically important, and we want to support principals as they grow and develop. We want do
everything we can to help those great leaders at the local level make a difference in their
communities” (para. 10)
To strengthen education reform, the U. S. Department of Education (2016c) created the
Principal Ambassador Fellowship (PAF) program as one means of recognizing the critical
impact that principals have on instruction and student achievement; school climate and
improvement; and community and family engagement. According to the report, in 2013, the
U. S. Department of Education was thrilled to launch the first Principal Ambassador Fellowship
(PAF) program, modeled on the Teaching Ambassador Fellowship (TAF) program, giving local
leaders an opportunity to contribute their knowledge and experience to the national dialogue
about public education and in turn learn more about education policy at the Federal level (U. S.
Department of Education, 2016d). The intention of the PAF program is to recognize the
important impact that a principal has on instructional leadership, the school environment, and
talent management (U. S. Department of Education, 2016d). The goal of the program is for
school principals to learn about federal educational policy, to reach out to principals and other
school leaders in the field, and to reflect among cohort members on the knowledge gained
(U. S. Department of Education, 2016d). All stakeholders, and most importantly teachers and
principals, must understand the intent of policy and be engaged in the outcomes (U. S.
Department of Education, 2016d).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 67
The PAF position provides outstanding principals who have a record of leadership,
student achievement, strong communication skills, and insights from their school experiences an
opportunity to highlight the voice of the principal within the education community and the
country at large (U. S. Department of Education, 2016d).
The National Education Association and the Center for Teaching Quality on the Teacher
Leadership Initiative (TLI) together are piloting a comprehensive program designed to develop a
new generation of leaders with the knowledge, skills, and core values that advance teaching as a
21st century profession (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, NBPTS, 2016a).
The partners published a beginning vision for Teacher Leadership Competencies, which
envisioned leadership along three pathways: instructional leadership, policy leadership, and
association leadership (NBPTS, 2016a).
The National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT, Vandevoort, Amrein-Beardsley, &
Berliner, 2004), the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (Young, M. D.,
2015), comprised of superintendents, principals, teachers, professors, and advocates from more
than 138 countries, provide expert and innovative solutions in professional development,
capacity building, and educational leadership essential to the way educators learn, teach, and lead
(Young, M. D., 2015) along with the U. S. Department of Education (2016d) have convened
Teach to Lead, an effort to identify, highlight, and support innovative ideas for teacher
leadership from concept through execution (NBPTS, 2016b). The initiative has engaged
thousands of teachers across the country through regional Summits to local Leadership Labs,
bringing together stakeholders committed to improving education for both in and outside the
classroom (NBPTS, 2016a). According to the NBCT 2014 Census, Board Certified teachers are
leading the profession in countless ways: more than half of the respondents, “54%, are working
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 68
as team leaders; [more than a third,] 36%, are department chairs; and, 15% are staff developers
and instructional coaches” (Reilly & Kasperski, 2016, p. 8). In summary, “NBCTs are also
serving as principals, superintendents, state government officials, state department of education
staff and college faculty” (Reilly & Kasperski, 2016, p. 8).
The Principal as an Instructional Leader
Educators are gradually redefining the role of the principal from instructional leader with
a focus on teaching to leader of a professional community with a focus on learning (DeBevoise,
1984). DuFour (2002) described that according to the National Association of Secondary School
Principals one of the six standards for what principals should be able to do calls for principals to
put student and adult learning at the center of their leadership and to serve as the lead learner.
The Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium, a program of the Council of Chief State
School Officers, has also identified six professional standards for principals, one of which calls
for the principal to be an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by
advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to
student learning and staff professional growth (DuFour, 2002). By concentrating on teaching,
the instructional leader of the past emphasized the inputs of the learning process. By
concentrating on learning, today’s school leaders shift both their own focus and that of the school
community from inputs to outcomes and from intentions to results (DuFour, 2002). Schools
need principal leadership as much as ever. But only those who understand that the essence of
their job is promoting student and teacher learning will be able to provide that leadership
(DuFour, 2002).
The principals of today’s schools must be instructional leaders who possess the requisite
skills, capacities, and commitment to lead the accountability parade (DuFour, 2002). Excellence
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 69
in school leadership should be recognized as the most important component of school reform.
DuFour (2002) suggested that without leadership, the chances for systemic improvement in
teaching and learning are nil.
The concept of instructional leadership is interpreted by the actions that a principal take,
or delegates to others, to promote growth in student learning (DeBevoise, 1984). Generally, such
actions focus on setting schoolwide goals, defining the purpose of schooling, providing the
resources needed for learning to occur, supervising and evaluating teachers, coordinating staff
development programs, and creating collegial relationships with and among teachers
(DeBevoise, 1984). According to DeBevoise (1984), instructional leadership is somewhat a new
term in the literature on effective principalship. DeBevoise described some attributes of
principals in the 1960s and 1970s; these include: race, age, physical appearance, size, gender,
formal education, aspirations, and teaching experience. These characteristics yielded minimal
information about how principals exercised leadership, or affected the instructional process
(DeBevoise, 1984). Ultimately, personal traits revealed to be unreliable predictors of leadership
effectiveness (Rutherford, Hord, & Huling, 1983 as cited in DeBevoise, 1984). Personal
character studies of principals in the 1980s gave new perspectives in the way principals were
examined (DeBevoise, 1984). During this era, little if any attention was given to the traits of the
principal from the past. In a study of principals identified as effective by their colleagues,
Blumberg and Greenfield (1986) concluded:
. . . Those groups can learn to accept influence from a variety of people and to assign
group functions accordingly. What seems to be true is that anyone can assume the role of
leading an organization, a school, in the direction of making it better than it is. Most
people can learn the necessary attitudes and skills that enable a group of people to
function adequately. And it seems to be true that groups can learn to accept influence
from a variety of people and to assign group functions accordingly with the character of
the person involved. (p. 185)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 70
Among the characteristics of instructional leaders that Blumberg and Greenfield (1986)
observed were: a propensity to set clear goals and to have these goals serve as a continuous
source of motivation; a high degree of self-confidence and openness to others; a tolerance for
ambiguity; a tendency to test the limits of interpersonal and organizational systems; a sensitivity
to the dynamics of power; an analytic perspective; and the ability to oversee their jobs.
According to DeBevoise (1984), the value in Blumberg and Greenfield’s (1986) work is not the
creation of yet another list of characteristics of effective principals. Rather the work is
significant for its descriptions of the principals and their own assessments on how they operate in
their own schools. The study revealed styles in leadership and ways in which individual leaders
adapt and manipulate environments that are equally distinctive. One salient point made by
Blumberg (1984) is that the instructional leaders in their study were not the peace makers that
ran their organizations smoothly, but rather were innovators who were constantly seeking ways
to impact school improvement with an emphasis on student learning.
Though the concept of instructional leadership emerged in the early 1950s, it was not
until the 1980s that the construct of instructional leadership evolved (Hallinger & Heck 1996a;
Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008). In their extensive review of literature, Bossert, Dwyer,
Rowan, and Lee (1982; see also Hallinger & Heck, 1996a) coined the term instructional
management as the researchers inferred that the role of the principal had to do with the
management of curriculum matters and classroom instruction. Over time, the term instructional
leadership was gradually accepted and used by scholars and practitioners (Hallinger, 2010).
Instructional leadership gained ground as an influential leadership model when research showed
that schools were turned around by strong and directive leaders who practiced instructional
leadership (Bossert et al., 1982; Dwyer 1986; Edmonds 1979; Murphy & Hallinger, 1984).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 71
School leadership is much more of an art, a belief, a condition of the heart, than a set of
things to do. The visible signs of artful school leadership are expressed ultimately in its practice
(Tirozzi, 2001). As Tirozzi (2001) explained, creating lasting treasures requires a vision of the
finished work and an understanding of the medium to be used. Long-range decisions made today
must anticipate what the future will bring. Green (2010) stated that to understand the skills
required of principals in the 21st Century, the projected changes in the educational landscape and
how those changes affect the principal’s role and vision need to be examined.
College and Career Readiness
Nearly half of students who complete high school and go on to college require remedial
courses and nearly half of those students never graduate college (U. S. Department of Education,
2016b). The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (NCPPHE) and the
Southern Regional Educational Board (SREB) stated that in the last decade the gap between
college eligibility and college readiness has persisted unabated (NCPPHE and SREB, 2010). In
a brief, SREB (NCPPHE and SREB, 2010) reported the findings and recommendations for
governors, legislators, and state educational leaders with steps they need to take to close the
readiness gaps in their states. According to SREB, every year in the United States, 60% of the
first-year college students discover that despite being fully eligible to attend college, they are not
academically ready for postsecondary studies. After enrolling, these students learn that they
must take remedial courses in English or mathematics, which do not earn them college credits
(NCPPHE and SREB, 2010).
21st Century Leadership
The forces of globalization are shifting our world away from hierarchy and command
control toward one of collaboration and networks (Morse, Buss, & Kinghorn, 2007). The way
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 72
public leadership is thought about and practiced must be and is being transformed (Morse et al.,
2007). Leaders in public service who are agents of change not only in their own organizations,
but also in their communities and policy domains, work in network settings making connections
and collaborating to create public value and advance common good (Morse et al., 2007). Jones
(2000) explained how education reform continues to be a dominating feature of education
throughout the world. As a result, Jones (2000) clarified the importance of head teacher and
school leaders to develop the skills, which will enable them to manage their new responsibilities
effectively. School leadership in the 21st Century incorporates the major aspects of leadership:
strategical and ethical dimensions of leadership, leading and managing change, leading and
managing staff in high/low performance schools, information for student learning and
organizational learning, and transformation of schools in the 21st Century (Jones, 2000).
According to Koh (2015), close links between the basis of motivational, leadership, and
curricular constructs with regards to 21stCentury and net-generation (born ‘between’ 1990-2010)
learning exist. Recent developments in motivation, educational leadership, and curriculum
design offer an understanding of what is already known and what is yet to be explored in these
fields to understand flexible learning opportunities of these students (Koh, 2015). Furthermore,
Koh indicated that knowing the intricate relationships between these three domains facilitates the
tasks of researchers and educators in their endeavor to create a better learning environment in
21st Century learners.
Curriculum Design
Oblinger and Oblinger (2005) proposed that Net-Gen learners have been exposed to
multiple technologies from a young age; their learning needs and preferences differ distinctly
from those of their teachers. For instance, they would prefer learning that is experiential rather
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 73
than didactic. In addition, in lieu of conventional, top-down, unidirectional communication, they
prefer networking and social interactivity with response and reaction effected at the click of a
mouse (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). They are likely to make use of multiple types of media in
their learning, being comfortable and adept at doing everything on a single smart gadget,
notebook or one of the plethoras of other competing models of mobile devices available in the
market (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). Undoubtedly, if learning has taken on a new orientation, it
is imperative for teaching to follow suit. Currently, the Gen X teachers in charge of educating
their Net-Gen students have had a challenging time playing catch up with the slew of new
technologies and ‘apps’ (applications) such as those in Web 2.0. Yet, literally speaking, one
would describe the 21st-Century learner as anyone who is actively learning in the context and
with the tools and technologies of the 21st Century (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005).
Learning in the 21st century classroom is about equipping students with the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes that allow for independent learning and problem solving in all aspects of
their lives (Tan, 2007). It is about developing intelligence for independent learning, creative
thinking, and real-life problem solving (Tan, 2007). Therefore, the focus of education must shift
from knowing to thinking, with a greater emphasis on actively involving students in the
processes of meaning making and knowledge construction (Tan, 2007).
In the designing of 21st Century curriculum and learning environments, educators must
be mindful of the role of technological pedagogical content knowledge (Tan, 2007).
Technological pedagogical content knowledge is the knowledge of the integration of technology
and the teaching of the subject and it highlights the interactions and connections between
technology, pedagogy, and content (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Educators need to understand
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 74
how the introduction of technology may influence the teaching of the subject content and how
the associated learning outcomes will vary based on the technology and pedagogy being used.
Koh (2015) discussed how technology is changing the way students learn. There are
developing efforts in education systems around the world to design learning and teaching with
the technology to develop 21st-Century competencies such as collaboration, critical thinking,
adaptability, and autonomy (Calkins & Vogt, 2013; Wright, 2010). In this new educational
environment, schools should rethink their pedagogies to develop the potential of this generation
of students (Calkins & Vogt 2013; Wright, 2010). It is thus imperative that when designing
curriculum and learning environments for educators to understand that technology can be a
useful tool to support their pedagogical approaches towards engaging and motivating their
learners (Koh, 2015). In addition, they must be mindful on how the introduction of technology
may influence the teaching of the subject content and how the associated learning outcomes may
vary based on the technology and pedagogy used (Koh, 2015). School and institution leaders, on
the other hand, must possess the willingness and enthusiasm to provide the time, physical, and
human resources to support and explore new educational technologies that enhance students’
learning (Koh, 2015).
Professional Development
Fullan (2002b) described academic achievement as a major component in the measure of
school success in which school leaders are held accountable for student outcomes. Sergiovanni
(2009) pointed out that school leaders have a tendency of adjusting their leadership styles to
ensure that positive student outcomes are improved, or, at the least, sustained. In such instances,
the school leaders adopt the stance of a coach with the purpose of building teacher capacity in
such a way that each encounter results in reciprocal learning for both the teacher and the school
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 75
leader (Sergiovanni, 2009). According to Louis and Wahlstrom (2012), leadership practices
targeted directly at improving instruction have significant effects on teachers’ working
relationships and indirectly on student achievement. Three areas of leadership practices
presented by Louis and Wahlstrom are setting direction, developing people, and redesigning the
organization.
Focusing on the practice of people development specifically, school leaders must
stimulate their teachers intellectually, provide teachers with individualized support, and provide
teachers with an appropriate Teacher Professional Development (TPD) model to guide them.
Around people development, Louis and Wahlstrom (2012) related their work to that of
Hallinger’s (2011) instructional leadership and the principal’s role in providing guidance that
improves the teachers’ classroom practices. Hallinger (2011) affirmed that both education and
school improvement are about the development of human capacity and that leadership for
learning is a component of this capacity building.
Successful schools home in their instructional leadership and pedagogical knowledge and
engage in joint learning with their teachers, to better engage with their teachers in having shared
experiences in common instructional language for the school (Darling-Hammond & Berry,
1988). This practice of whole-school approach to professional development was best explained
by Darling-Hammond and Berry (1988): shared knowledge and shared commitment to extend
that knowledge depends in large part on shared membership in a group that articulates and
supports their pursuit. Robinson et al. (2008) found that the largest effects of instructional
leadership were derived through the principals’ support of and involvement in the professional
learning of the teachers. It is thus important to examine the link between moral purpose and
leadership. For changes to be sustained and teachers to be engaging in TPD, the moral purpose
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 76
would have to be understood and shared by all members within a school community (Darling-
Hammond & Berry, 1988). Louis and Wahlstrom (2012) also found that both principal
instructional leadership team members have significant effects on teachers’ working
relationships, with reference to the professional community, and on focused instruction.
Professional Learning Community
Professional Learning Community refers to the learning teams within a school consisting
of teachers addressing a common concern and it is closely associated with organizational
learning (Louis & Wahlstrom, 2012). Many middle and high schools have embarked on their
professional learning community (PLC) journey, embracing the presence of a professional
community that appears to foster collective learning of new practices, especially so, when there
is principal leadership (Louis &Wahlstrom, 2012). Moreover, Louis and Wahlstrom (2012)
emphasized the importance of a professional community, largely because accumulating evidence
shows that it is related to improved instruction, student achievement, and shared leadership.
When viewed in the light of shared values, a common focus, and collective responsibility for
student learning, reflective dialogue about improvement, and the purposeful sharing of practices,
building the professional community may be thought of as distributed leadership (Louis &
Wahlstrom, 2012). Similarly, Leithwood, Begley, and Cousins (2005) in an earlier study
identified professional development experiences as one of the factors that stimulate successful
leadership.
Success in school leadership is attributed to the level of trust in a school environment
(Hallinger, 2003; Handford & Leithwood, 2013; Sergiovanni, 2009). In examining the
relationship between school leaders and their teachers, trust has been identified as a critical
concept for leaders to understand and develop because it serves as a lubricant for most
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 77
interactions in their organizations (Handford & Leithwood, 2013). Teachers highlight the
importance of building mutual trust between students, between students and teachers, and
between teachers and leaders. Mutual trust and respect are at the core of what they thought
should count as a successful school (Moller et al., 2007). However, as Koh (2015) explained
what constitutes trust, appears that the definition is context specific and differs from school to
school, depending on the relationship that the principal has with the school community and the
time frame that the principal has been with the school. While trust takes time to build, it also
takes time to unpack; ironically, depending on the level of trust between the principal and their
staff (Koh, 2015).
Gurr and Drysdale (2007) found that effective leaders used a combination of influence
and support strategies to achieve their school goals. The source of the support strategies may be
either top-down or bottom-up, but it was established that principals were characteristically
hands-on and acted as role models (Gurr & Drysdale, 2007). The leadership style was inclusive
in the way they could bring people along. Adopting the inclusive and participative leadership
style cleared a pathway for people to be involved and achieve by removing blockages and
providing a clear vision serviced by adequate resources. Staff felt empowered within a
structured yet supportive environment (Gurr & Drysdale, 2007). The principals established good
relationships with a range of stakeholders that allowed them to develop strong networks and
alliances (Gurr & Drysdale, 2007).
Collective Leadership
Collective leadership is different from shared and anticipatory leadership and it goes
beyond distributed leadership (Chirichello, 2004). In a collective leadership environment, which
is built on a culture that values learning, the organization begins to learn from the collective
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 78
experiences of member relationships and shapes cultures that value empowerment and risk
taking (Chirichello, 2004). Followers become leaders and leaders step out of the way to become
followers. Collective leadership goes beyond delegation; it creates a culture that believes in self-
empowerment than power. Self-empowerment can be likened to a stream trying to cross the
desert (Chirichello, 2004). Unless principals let go of power, they eventually will evaporate on
their own. When principals realize the synergy in the collective empowerment of the staff, they
begin to understand the power of collective leadership (Chirichello, 2004). The schools that
were more successful in improving performance were those that not only empowered people at
the school site to make decisions, but also trained them for their new roles, provided information
to guide their decision making, and established rewards for performance. In each of these areas,
the most successful principals were effective in moving four critical resources: power,
knowledge and skills training, information, and rewards to teachers and community members
(Wohlstetter & Briggs, 1994).
More districts across the United States implement school-based management (SBM), that
is, decentralized control, transferring it from district offices to individual schools to give
principals, teachers, parents, and community members more authority over what happens in
schools (Wohlstetter & Briggs, 1994). District offices no longer tell schools what to do, but
instead try to help schools accomplish what they independently decide to do. Principals’ and
teachers’ roles also change under SBM, as decision making authority in a council, usually
composed of teachers who are selected by their respective constituencies (Wohlstetter & Briggs,
1994). Most schools structure the work groups as subcommittees of their site councils,
effectively spreading the work load. The subcommittees focus on areas such as assessment,
curriculum, and staff development, offering forums for teachers and others to discuss school-
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 79
specific issues, develop council ideas, or make recommendations to the council. In addition, to
the SBM work groups; principals create ad hoc committees to meet specific needs, such as
interviewing, job applicants, handling crisis situations, or exploring grant opportunities
(Wohlstetter & Briggs, 1994).
Inclusive and participatory leadership styles are designed to promote reflection,
discussion, and action among the entire learning communities, educating all children
encapsulates what research has revealed about successfully addressing the needs of students from
economically, ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse groups and identifies a wide range
of effective principles and instructional strategies (Cole, 2008). Although good teaching
practices work well with all students, school leaders must develop an extensive repertoire of
instructional knowledge to meet the varying needs of students from diverse backgrounds (Cole,
2008). Principals who are knowledgeable and perceive the needs of English Language Learners
are likely to develop school structures that support language needs (Brown, 2015). Recent policy
developments have increased the role of the principal in transforming school performance and
student learning outcomes (Brown, 2015). Effective leaders constantly work on developing
relationships at all levels of the organization (Fullan, 2001).
Community Relations
According to Bryan and Henry (2012), in schools’ students’ and families’ voices are
typically silenced; programs and interventions are designed for rather than with students and
families. In a partnership process: schools embrace democratic collaboration, meaning that
school, students, family, and community partners have ownership of shared decision making, and
responsibility for the partnership vision, goals, and outcomes. School personnel share power
with students, families, and community members and view them as equal and valuable experts in
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 80
their children’s education. This empowerment of the community gives parents not only an equal
voice but they also participate in the decision making, planning, and implementation of solutions
to problems affecting their children (Bryan & Henry, 2012). Furthermore, Bryan and Henry
stated that successful partnerships are intentionally infused with the principles of social justice
and strength focus. Purposeful family partnerships create opportunities for students to learn and
opportunities for teachers to teach. Together, partners define pressing student concerns, reach
consensus on the need for partnership programs and events, expand the leadership of the
partnership, engage the local and wider community, and focus on and implement the programs.
Partnerships can amass the support, resources, skills, networks, and programs that are
useful in helping schools provide responsive services to meet the numerous complex needs of the
often-large caseloads schools serve (Bryan & Henry, 2012). Partnership programs also create
the environments, relationships, and experiences that reduce risks, build social capital, increase
attendance and academic achievement, decrease behavioral issues, enhance school climate, foster
resilience, and create development internal and external assets for children and adolescents.
Students gain opportunities to exercise leadership, learn problem-solving prosocial, and other
skills such as build bonds with adults in school and in the community (Bryan & Henry, 2012).
Ethics
Professionals in the pro-state, according to Menzel (1997), tirelessly pursue the holy trilogy
of efficiency, economy, and effectiveness. In 1978, President Jimmy Carter signed into law the
Ethics in Government Act, committing federal employees to standards of behavior believed to be
in the best interests of the American public (Menzel, 1997). In 1984, Menzel (1997) pinpointed
that the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) adopted an ethics code designed to
raise the ethical standards and practices of its members. In the late 1980s, the National
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 81
Association of Schools of Public Affairs Administration (NASPAA) incorporated language into
its curriculum standards that called for public administration programs to enhance the student’s
values, knowledge, and skills to act ethically and effectively (Menzel, 1997).
In addition to the topic of ethics, Garofalo and Geuras (1994) based their argument of
ethics on Nicholas Rescher’s (2000) method of pragmatism, defined as the belief, that if a theory
cannot be conclusively proven either logically or empirically, it should be validated based on its
success in implementation. Ethics education or training should stimulate ethical understanding,
ethical reasoning, ethical decision making, and, ultimately, ethical action (Garofalo & Geuras,
1994). The study of professional ethics tends to seek out the values and standards that have been
developed by practitioners and leaders of a given profession over a long period of time and to
identify those values that seem most salient and inherent in the profession itself (Callahan, D., &
Jennings, 2002).
Public administrators serve the public interest, sustain regime values, support fairness
within the organization, practice ethical decision making, and practice negotiation, interpretation,
and bargaining to resolve role and value conflicts (Garofalo & Geuras, 1994). Organization
Development (OD) is complete and replete with ethical dilemmas, interventions, purposes, and
possible or probable consequences must be specified in advance of any effort to affect the
freedom, autonomy, and values of organizational members. The leader must maintain a balance
between the management’s instrumental aims and respect individual’s dignity (Garofalo &
Geuras, 1994).
In the educational realm, Fullan (2001) stated that every leader has his or her own style of
leadership, some are passionate about improving life through these four components of
leadership: understanding of the change process; strong relationships; knowledge building; and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 82
coherence making among multiple priorities. Yet, others have a more cognitive approach,
displaying less emotion but still being intensely committed to betterment (Fullan, 2001). In
education, an important end is to make a difference in the lives of students; the means to getting
to that end are also crucial, if the leader does not treat his or her subordinates well and fairly, he
or she will be a leader without followers (Fullan, 2001). Correspondingly, Fullan described
authentic leader qualities as follows: integrity, reliability, moral-excellence, and a sense of
purpose, firmness of conviction, steadiness, and unique qualities of style and substance that
differentiate the leader.
Authentic leaders display character, they can be trusted to be morally diligent in
advancing the enterprise they lead because they anchor their practice in ideas, values, and
commitments (Fullan, 2001). Moreover, Fullan (2001) highlighted that authentic leaders do not
burn people out as they relentlessly chase a target; leadership is about alignment, and creating a
sense of purpose and direction to inspire people to achieve. According to Fullan, to be an
effective, authentic leader, to mobilize every one’s moral purpose, and to awaken people’s
intrinsic commitment, it is important to make people feel part of a success story by: (1) having an
explicit ‘making-a-difference’ sense of purpose; (2) use strategies that mobilize many people to
tackle tough problems; and (3) be held accountable by measured and debatable indicators of
success.
Strategic Planning
Palestini (2005) citing William Cook (1980) defined strategic planning as a voluntary
commitment to generate rational decisions about the deployment of resources toward fixed goals
and functions. Furthermore, strategic planning is formulated by the combined expertise within
the organization and represents the consensus plan derived through the application of basic
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 83
principles of participative management (Palestini, 2005). The organization recreates itself by
concentrating all efforts, resources, and energies toward a single goal (Palestini, 2005).
In general, strategic planning is a process by which an organization identifies objectives
and unfolds strategies for achieving them (Palestini, 2005). It can be built on existing structures;
it is common practice to create a task force composed of representatives from all levels of the
organization that is responsible for planning and making decisions (Palestini, 2005). The process
must look forward to the future. Palestini (2005) described ten strategies for strategic planning:
(1) start with a mission statement, which should be brief but adequate to clearly express the
organization’s commitment to selective academic, social, and career outlines for students,
faculty, and staff, and other stake holders. The mission statement should be the basis for
planning and decision making in an institution; (2) develop a set of institutional goals, actions
that give direction and express clear objectives, and address all dimensions of how to achieve
them; (3) the process is to develop learning outcome statements, starting with primary level,
intermediate level, up to the high school level where students will have the ability to research
and analyze a given topic such as cause and effects to determine its implications for the future.
The current emphasis on outcomes-based education relies on authentic assessment and portfolio
assessment relying heavily on the planning process; (4) describe commencement requirements,
logical, next-step statements to establish a set of criteria that will be used to determine
achievement of student learning outcomes for graduation; (5) develop planned courses, the
essence of conversion from class-time based system to student learning outcomes; (6) plan and
conduct a comprehensive needs analysis, a crucial part of the strategic planning process; it must
involve a comprehensive identification of both internal and external strengths and weaknesses of
instructional practices, (7) develop a list of priorities for action planning, that is prioritized on the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 84
basis of their relationship to the identified mission and on the severity of the need; (8) develop
specific action plans, (a) objectives, (b) major strategies to be completed, and (c) projected time
lines or completion dates; (9) develop an assessment plan; and (10) prepare a Professional
Development Plan.
Language Acquisition
According to August, Carlo, Dressler, and Snow (2005), English Language Learners
(ELLs) are students who have more difficulty in acquiring and building vocabulary in English
compared to their native speaking peers. ELL students have a native language other than
English, and they may face difficulties in the domains of language acquisition–listening,
speaking, reading, writing, and communicating with others (Meyer, Madden, & McGrath, 2004).
Many ELL students may also have difficulty in obtaining academic success and as a result, can
sometimes be classified as students with learning disabilities (McCardle, Mele-McCarthy,
Cutting, Leos, & D’Emilio, 2005).
Alhassan and Kuyini (2013) discussed that when considering the cultural aspect of a
second language acquisition it is important to consider the following categories: family
background, culture, and the target language variations. According to Munro and Derwing
(1995), comprehension of accent is one of the most important aspects of learning and receiving
instruction as a second language. Differences in dialect between regions in the United States,
and variations in pronunciation of words between states, can cause difficulty for English as
second language learners (Hopp & Schmid, 2013). Differences among styles and methods of
writing and communicating between different languages can make the process of learning a
second language harder, causing difficulty where the innate aspects of each language conflict
(Hopp & Schmid, 2013). For example, in Mandarin Chinese, the alphabet is completely
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 85
different from English, so the Chinese student learning English must not only master all the
various rules of English, but must begin studying with the absolute basics of the alphabet
(Levitan, Mathison, & Billings, 2010).
The causes of academic failure or stress are clearly multidimensional, ranging from
institutional practices such as academic tracking, to students’ level of first-language literacy to
poverty (Carbonaro, 2005). A national survey determined that a high proportion of teachers,
41%, have ELLs in their classes, but only 12.5% of those teachers have had eight or more hours
of training in the previous three years on how to assist them (Curtin, Ingels, Wu, & Heuer, 2002).
A smaller-scale project reached similar conclusions: Byrnes, Kiger, and Lee Manning (1997)
queried approximately 200 practicing teachers in several states; most of these teachers had taught
ELLs but had not received any training to do so. Moreover, a national study of teacher education
programs found that a minority of institutions of higher education require preparation to
mainstream new teachers on the topic of working with ELLs (Montero-Fleta & Pérez-Sabater,
2010). It should also be noted that, as of 2004, only 24 states had legal requirements that
teachers in English as a Second Language (ESL) classrooms must be specially certified to work
with ELLs (Wanzek, Swanson, Vaughn, Roberts, & Fall, 2016).
Since A Nation at Risk report was released in 1983, improving the quality of the
educational system in the United States has been an issue of high national importance (Domina,
2014). To address the perceived failure of the American educational system, the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2002) implemented a combination of high-stakes testing and
sanctions for low-performing schools (Thorson & Krafft, 2014). After the passage of NCLB,
serious disagreement still exists as to the efficacy and appropriateness of NCLB’s sanctions
(Krieg, 2008). While the motivation behind NCLB was to improve public school performance, it
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 86
also provided incentives for schools to focus educational resources on the marginal student rather
than those on the tails of the ability distribution (Krieg, 2008).
Cultural differences affect the learning process in the classroom; learning styles may
reflect cultural experiences of students, and may also reflect the role of parents in the educational
process (Alhassan & Kuyini, 2013). The cultural background of the students’ parents is very
important in supporting the learning process of students (Taylor, H. L., McGlynn, & Luter 2013).
The expectations of the students and their families of what should be taught can greatly affect
what is learned in the school setting (Swan & Smith, 2001). To maximize the effectiveness of
learning for students, regardless of their native language and cultural backgrounds, educators
need to be aware of language acquisition strategies and implement them in their daily lessons for
teaching English as a Second Language (Frantz, Bailey, Starr, & Perea, 2014). In addition, the
way of thinking, speaking, and writing differs from one culture to another. The ways messages
are conveyed in speech and writing varies greatly from culture to culture and language to
language (Hopp & Schmid, 2013). For example, in English, main ideas are usually expressed
directly in the beginning and at the end of speech or any writing samples (Swan & Smith, 2001).
Customs, traditions, and religious background may affect language learning (Lynch &
Hanson, 1992). Since language is a product of culture, language is considered one of the tools of
cultural expression. It cannot exist without culture, which means that language and culture are
complementary to each other (Swan & Smith, 2001). English Language Learners come to the
classroom with unique background knowledge and experiences built in their primary language
and culture (Rubinstein-Avila & Lee, 2014). Cultural references can often be subtle; however,
they do impact student learning (Rubinstein-Avila & Lee, 2014). For example, learners from
different cultures can have different views on classroom behavior, such as student-teacher
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 87
interaction, as well as different views on the value of education (Swan & Smith, 2001). Cultural
differences can also affect how students understand content (Haynes & Zacarian, 2010). If the
students’ native culture differs significantly from their host culture, some concepts might not be
presented in their culture, which impedes their understanding of concepts/ideas in a new culture
(Swan & Smith, 2001). The same holds true for language (Swan & Smith, 2001). Language is a
part of culture, and culture guides how people think and conceptualize in that language. Thus,
native language is a powerful component that affects the way ELL students learn English
(Alhassan & Kuyini, 2013). However, culture is not something that cannot be added to or
changed (Alhassan & Kuyini, 2013). Like any evolving phenomenon, cultures can be created
and passed on. Therefore, ELL students are quite capable of acquiring a new language and a
new culture with it (Swan & Smith, 2001). Education is influenced by the culture and social
structure of any society; however, it also affects the surrounding culture in the society (Haynes &
Zacarian, 2010). Universities and other educational institutions directly reflect the norms of the
society that created them (Black, 2009).
Lantolf and Beckett (2009) explained that second language acquisition (SLA) research
informed by sociocultural theory began in earnest with the publication of Frawley & Lantolf’s
(1985) article on L2 (second language) discourse. Although the term sociocultural is often
applied to a wide array of approaches to research that seeks to understand what it means to be a
human being, in the present timeline, we restrict its interpretation to refer to the specific theory
of psychological development proposed by Vygotsky (1986). Other approaches that have
appropriated the term, such as those emanating from the insights of Mikhail Mikhaĭlovich
Bakhtin, while compatible in many respects with Vygotskian theory, have a different focus and
are not strictly speaking psychological or psycholinguistic theories (De Costa & Jou, 2016). To
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 88
be sure, Vygotsky rarely used the term sociocultural, preferring instead cultural psychology or
cultural-historical psychology to refer to his theory. Wertsch (1984) is generally credited with
having coined the term sociocultural as a way of capturing the notion that human mental
functioning results from participation in, and appropriation of, the forms of cultural mediation
integrated into social activities (Lantolf & Beckett, 2009).
An important factor in second language acquisition is the social status of the students and
their family. There is a significant correlation between poverty levels and educational
achievement of ELL students (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015). In other words, if
an ELL student comes from a lower socio-economic background, he is more likely to experience
difficulties in adjusting to the new culture or language (Martínez & Velázquez, 2000). Some
cultures and social practices encourage children and young people to interact with adults, while
some cultures consider that interaction to have certain limits. For example, keep a distance
between the speaker and the listener, looking down when the adult speaks, and not looking in
adults’ eyes when they speak. These behaviors affect the new language learner, so there is a
collision between learners’ culture and the new reality (Yang, Byers, Salazar, & Salas, 2009).
Summary
In summary, exploring the intersections of class, social structure, opportunity, and
education on a truly global scale is the beginning stage of making a positive difference for all
students including English Language Learners. Weis and Dolby (2012) presented an un-
paralleled examination of how social class differences are made and experienced through
schooling. By underscoring the consequences of our new global reality, the authors took
seriously the transnational migration of commerce, capital, and peoples and the ramifications of
such for educational leadership and social structure. Moving beyond national confines,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 89
internationally recognized scholars, Lois Weis and Nadine Dolby (2012) offered new theoretical
and empirical ground on the ways class is produced and maintained through education around
the world. Educational change is a broad term that refers a paradigm shift and efforts to reform
education. Shifting leadership perspectives are a result of awareness of new ideas based on
needs. The efforts to adjust to new ways can be categorized as educational change.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 90
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
2
Introduction
Educational leaders across the country are challenged by the dilemma of how to best
serve the diversity of language learners. English Language Learners present a challenge due to a
wide range of academic abilities, but also diverse home languages (Chavez, 2013). Language
diversity has, therefore, become a standard reality in US schools (Lakin & Young, 2013). It is
reasonable to expect such diversity to grow in upcoming years. The U. S. Department of
Education (Aud et al., 2013) estimated that 25% of the children coming to public schools will
live in homes where English is not their primary language. According to the California
Department of Education (2014b), there is a persistent gap where educational systems fail to
bring children from historically marginalized populations to the same level as their peers.
Taking this reality into consideration, it is important for academic institutions and their leaders to
be prepared and trained with relevant strategies that help facilitate academic success on all
content areas for English Language Learners (Zehr, 2008).
As discussed in Chapter One, the purpose of this study was to explore the skills,
knowledge, professional development, and training required of an effective principal to fully
meet the needs of diverse institutions. In addition, this study explored the challenges facing
English Language Learners (ELLs) and the leadership characteristics needed to address their
needs. This third chapter describes (a) the research question, design of the study, and the
methodologies employed; (b) sampling techniques, criteria for selection and population;
(c) survey, interview, observation, and notes are discussed; and (d) data collection procedures
and methods for data analysis are identified.
2
To maintain the confidentiality of the participants, this dissertation used pseudonyms to refer to the school, district,
and community.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 91
Purpose and Research Questions
In determining important issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language
Learner students, both the focus issues occurring within the school leadership and an
examination of how ELL language training leads to English-language proficiency need to be
researched. This study attempts to build a better understanding of the leadership necessary to
create socially just schools for English Language Learners (ELLs) by addressing the following
four questions:
1. What professional development training, skills, and knowledge should a high school
principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
2. In what ways do high school principals create asset-based, collaborative, and inclusive
learning opportunities and services for ELLs? What do varying approaches of these
services and the leadership necessary look like in practice?
3. How do school principals influence how high school teachers of English Language
Learners (ELLs) plan and align their instructional objectives and assessment plans with
the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and English Language Development (ELD)
Standards?
4. What are the key leadership elements of an effective high school program that can assist
in the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
As US K-12 classrooms move to incorporate 21st Century Skills, Common Core State
Standards (CCSS, 2010), English Language Development Standards (ELD, CDE 2012), the Next
Generation Science Standards (NGSS, CDE, 2017d), and Response to Intervention (RtI, National
Center for Learning Disabilities, 2017), there is an intensified focus on instructional
considerations of core concepts with academic language proficiency resulting in deepened
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 92
comprehension (Gutierrez et al., 2002). School leaders require significant insight on the
demystification of the language learning process (Gutierrez et al., 2002).
Research Design
Creswell (2013) identified a framework with six components for conducting a research
study. These include: 1) identifying the research problem; 2) reviewing the literature;
3) specifying the purpose for research; 4) collecting data; 5) analyzing and interpreting the data;
and 6) reporting and evaluating the research. This study has been constructed around this
framework, with this chapter specifically addressing steps four, five, and six.
Interviews, surveys, and documentation of data collection methods in qualitative research
are used with increasing frequency in education research, particularly to access areas not
amenable to quantitative methods and/or where depth, insight, and understanding of phenomena
are required (Merriam, 2014). The continued employment of these methods can further
strengthen many areas of education-related work. This study will utilize multiple-method
theoretical perspectives in which triangulation of interviews, surveys, and documents (Merriam,
2014) focusing on how they work in practice, the purpose of each, when their use is appropriate,
and what each method offers to the educational field. Figure 1 provides a visual illustration of
the design process.
Interviews
Merriam (2014) described the three fundamental types of research interviews: structured,
semi-structured, and unstructured. Structured interviews are, essentially, verbally administered
questionnaires in which lists of pre-determined questions are asked. Consequently, they are
relatively quick and easy to administer and may be of use if clarification of certain
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 93
Figure 1: Triangulation Diagram
questions are required or if there are likely to be literacy or numeracy problems with the
respondents. Conversely, unstructured interviews do not reflect any preconceived theories or
ideas and are performed with little or no organization. Semi-structured interviews consist of
several key questions that help to define the areas to be explored, but also allows the interviewer
or interviewee to diverge to pursue an idea or response in more detail. The flexibility of this
approach, particularly compared to structured interviews, also allows for the discovery or
elaboration of information that is important to participants but may not have previously been
thought of as pertinent by the research team (Merriam, 2014).
The purpose of the research interview was to explore the views, experiences, beliefs,
and/or motivations of individuals on specific matter (Merriam, 2014). Qualitative methods, such
as interviews, are believed to offer a deeper understanding of social phenomena than would be
obtained from purely quantitative methods, such as questionnaires (Merriam, 2014). Interviews
are, therefore, most appropriate where little is already known about the study phenomenon or
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 94
where detailed insights are required from individual participants. They are also particularly
appropriate for exploring sensitive topics, where participants may not want to talk about such
issues in a group environment (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997).
Surveys
By studying a sample of a given population, the researcher generalizes or makes claims
of that unique group through a quantitative survey design to study attitudes, opinions in a
numeric description of trends (Creswell, 2008). Creswell (2008) and Babbie (1990) stated that
the purpose is to generalize from a sample to a population so that inferences can be made about
some characteristics, attitudes, or behaviors for this population. Furthermore, Creswell (2008)
encouraged that a larger population is advantageous over a small group of participants; however,
due to the time constraint, a convenient sample of 50 surveys is the preferred type of data
collection for this study. The survey was cross-sectional, that is collecting data through a self-
administered questionnaire at one point in time. The information provided by the population
sample was stratified. Stratification means that specific characteristics of individuals (e.g., both
females and males) are represented in the sample and the sample reflects the true proportion in
the population of individuals with certain characteristics (Fowler, 2002 as cited in Creswell,
2008).
Creswell (2008) and Salant and Dillman (1994) suggested a four-phase administration
process to ensure a high response rate. First mail or e-mail out a short advance-notice letter to all
members of the sample. Secondly mail or e-mail out the actual survey, distributed about one
week after the advanced notice letter. The third mail-out consisted of a postcard or e-mail
follow-up sent to all members of the sample four to eight days after the initial questionnaire. The
fourth mail-out, sent to all non-respondents, consisted of a personalized cover letter with a
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 95
handwritten signature or an e-mail, the questionnaire, and a pre-addressed return envelope with
postage if necessary. The researchers sent this fourth mailing three weeks after the second
mailing. The researchers concluded the administration period on the fourth week after its start,
providing the return met project objectives. SurveyMonkey was used as the data gathering
instrument which gave researchers a data collection instrument to create custom templates and
posted on the website for participants to complete. In addition, SurveyMonkey generated results
and reported them back to the researchers as descriptive statistics or as graph information which
could be downloaded into spreadsheets or databases for future analysis (Creswell, 2008).
Methodology
The methodology used in this research included quantitative data form surveys using
electronic questionnaires and qualitative data from open-ended questions from surveys and
interviews gathered from high school principals in southern California. According to McEwan
and McEwan (2003), there are two basic methodological approaches used to research a question
or problem: quantitative and qualitative. Quantitative research uses statistical methods to show
relationships between variables, whereas qualitative research relies on observation and written
description. The qualitative researcher deals primarily in words and pictures while the
quantitative research uses numbers and statistics (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). For this study,
both methodologies were employed for the sole purpose of making inferences based on data that
was gathered. The critical question is the degree to which precise rules or procedures and
inferences are applied to the design of the study and interpretation of the data (McEwan &
McEwan, 2003). There are two purposes for doing research: (a) to discover something new or
make contribution to a field of knowledge for its own sake, and (b) to illuminate a societal
concern to test a method, program, or policy (McEwan & McEwan, 2003). Pure research and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 96
applied research are two categories needed in education; however, applied research offers the
most potential for informing decision making. It is a scientific approach and utilizes both
quantitative and qualitative methods (McEwan & McEwan, 2003).
Sample and Population
The units for analysis for this study included public high school principals in southern
California. Creswell (2008) explained the process of design with characteristics of the
population and the sampling theory and procedures. Based on Creswell’s (2008) and Patton’s
(2002) design recommendations, this study included a maximum survey sample size of 50 and a
minimum sample size of three middle and three high school interviews.
Sampling the population of high school principals in southern California included
multiple steps as follows:
1. Review of School Accountability Report Card (SARC, California Department of
Education, 2016a) regarding English Language Learners subgroup growth over time.
2. The researchers reviewed the documents to generate a complete list of high school
principals in southern California.
3. Designed a survey instrument to collect data. Included follow-up questions for those
participants interested in participating in a follow-up interview.
4. A complete random sampling (Fowler, 2009 as cited in Creswell, 2013) single-stage
sampling was conducted.
5. Surveys emailed to participants. Obtained permission from participants.
6. Used software program to generate results as descriptive statistics.
7. Interviewed participants.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 97
8. Triangulated different data sources of information by examining evidence from sources
and using it to build a coherent justification for themes.
9. Reported findings.
10. Offered future recommendations.
Instrumentation
The idea behind qualitative research is to purposefully select participants or site,
documents or visual materials (Creswell, 2014). Based on Creswell (2014) and Merriam (2009),
identifying the purposefully selected sites or individuals for this study helped the researchers
understand the problem and the question. The researchers, as the data collector instrument, took
the following elements into consideration: (a) The physical setting: the space, the contexts,
objects, resources, technologies, and behavior of participants; (b) The participant: who is in the
scene, how many and their role, and how are people organized and interacting; (c) Activities and
interactions: the sequence of interactions, the time and activity, the norms and rules established;
(d) The conversation: observe the content of the conversation, who speaks and who listens,
record via quotes, paraphrases, or summarize; (e) Subtle factors: observe informal and unplanned
activities, symbolic and connotative words as well as nonverbal communication; (f) Your own
behavior: what do you do? Your role as the observer, do you become part of the scene or just
observe? (Merriam, 2009).
Interviews were recorded and then transcribed and utilized in coding raw-data to
visualize patterns and emerging themes as the researchers inductively made sense of the
responses generated by the principal participants. Interviews are necessary for the researchers to
enter the other person’s perspective through a purposeful conversation to find out things
impossible to replicate such catastrophic events, feelings, thoughts, and intentions not directly
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 98
observed through behavior (Merriam, 2009). The structure of the interview according to
Merriam (2009) depended on the amount of structure desired based on: (a) Highly
Structured/Standardized, questions and the order in which they are asked are determined ahead
of time; (b) Semi-structured, questions are more flexibly worded or the interview is a mix of
more and less structured questions; or (c) Unstructured/Informal, the goal is to learn enough
about a situation to formulate questions for subsequent interviews.
For this study, quantitative data was collected through a survey questionnaire generated
through SurveyMonkey.com. This data method was designed to collect trend data using
descriptive statistics. This study will involve educational settings using actual theories and
research references. All names of participants, organizational entities, and locations will be
identified with pseudonyms.
Data Collection
The choice of data collection method depends on the information that is needed to
achieve research objectives. This choice is also influenced by the resources available to
complete the research (Merriam, 2014). To capture and collect the interview and survey data for
this study, the researchers emailed the participants: a) background information; b) an invitation
to participate; c) a link to the survey; and d) option to participate in an interview. After each
participant completed the survey, he/she received a follow-up e-mail thanking them for their
participation. Prior to collecting data, several precautionary measures were taken to ensure that
the instruments and stated research questions were aligned to the purpose of the study. First, the
survey and interview questions were aligned with the stated research questions. Secondly, the
survey and interview questions were aligned with leadership competencies. Thirdly, survey and
interview codes were analyzed for triangulation.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 99
For those participants willing to partake in the interview, the researcher scheduled a one-
to-one interview to elicit richer and more detailed responses. The goal of this approach was for
the researcher to gather information about in-depth attitudes, beliefs, and anecdotal data from
individual patrons during the interview. The interview opportunity to probe and explore
questions granted participants a way to express themselves and the researcher captured these
responses. The researchers used audio-recording as an accurate means of capturing data and
transcribed the responses afterwards.
The process of coding qualitative data is an important part of interpreting and refining
interpretations of the interviews and observations. Coding of the data was used to analyze the
survey and interview data. To begin the process, the researcher transcribed the interviews. As
Merriam (2009) explained, the process begins with reading the first interview transcript, the first
set of field notes, and the first document collected in the study. As the transcripts are read, the
researcher followed the recommendation by Merriam (2009) to jot down notes, comments,
observations, and queries in the margins. These notations helped to start the process of sorting,
summarizing, and synthesizing what was happening in the data. In linking data collection and
interpreting the data, coding became the basis for developing the analysis. Assigning codes to
pieces of data was the manner the researchers began to construct categories (Merriam, 2009).
The purpose of the study then became the storyline and the analytic thread that united and
integrated the major themes of the study.
Before beginning the data collection process, the researchers created a list of priori codes.
These initial codes were derived from the conceptual framework and the research questions.
When coding the interviews, the researchers assigned a word or phrase to each coding category
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 100
systematically. The concepts and themes were color coded to fit the categories and later in the
process larger codes or themes emerged from the data.
Data Analysis
Creswell’s (2009) six step framework was used for organizing and analyzing the data
collected from the surveys, interviews and observations. Figure 2 summarizes Creswell’s Six
Step data analysis framework.
Note: Based on Creswell (2009), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Research
Figure 2: Six-Step Data Analysis Framework
The analysis or construction of data is highly inductive; you begin with detailed bits or
segments of data, then you cluster data that seems to go together and at that point you name that
cluster (Merriam, 2009). In effect, the analysis of the interviews was consistent with patterns
which have enough information to create categories or themes. As Merriam (2009) stated, if
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 101
these themes are not created, 25 or 30 categories would emerge and the analysis would then
become too large in description. As the researchers moved through the process of analyzing
interviews, observations, and documents, they aimed to discover the terms that fit under the
overarching themes and/or categories. As you move along the analysis of data, Merriam (2009)
highlighted, you are operating from a deductive stance. The purpose of the study is revealed
through a systematic process by the participants themselves (Merriam, 2009). These tips or clues
were important at the time of coding interviews.
Validity and Reliability
In qualitative research, trustworthiness and credibility go hand in hand as a naturalistic
piece of work addressed using terminology based on the work of Lincoln and Guba (1985 as
cited in Shenton, 2014), who proposed four criteria that he believed should be considered in
qualitative research in pursuit of a trustworthy study such as: Credibility, Transferability,
Dependability, and Confirmability. The integrity of a qualitative research depends on the
researcher’s position; in other words, reflexivity, the process of reflecting critically on the self as
researcher, the human instrument considering biases, dispositions, and assumptions regarding the
research under taken (Merriam, 2009). Furthermore, Merriam (2009) highlighted that reality can
never be captured, it must be assessed in relation to the purposes and circumstances of the
research; that is how the researcher addresses data collection, because data do not speak for
themselves, there is always an interpreter or translator that validates how research findings are
congruent or match reality. To guarantee internal validity, Merriam (2009) suggested using
triangulation, where two or three measurement points enable convergence on a site, using
multiple methods, multiple sources of data, multiple investigators (if possible), or multiple
theories to confirm emerging theories. The purpose of using triangulation is to give validity to
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 102
the conclusion by using the above multiple sources as opposed to limited resources (Maxwell,
2013).
In addition, Merriam (2014) suggested that external validity is concerned with the extent
to which the findings of the study can be applied to other situations. Since the findings of a
qualitative project are specific to a small number of environments and individuals, it is
impossible to demonstrate that the findings and or conclusions are applicable to other situations
and populations. Each case is unique, it is an example within a broader group; it is the
responsibility of the investigator to ensure sufficient contextual information about the field site to
enable the reader to make that transfer. The researcher cannot make inferences of transferability;
the researcher must provide sufficient thick description of the phenomenon under investigation to
allow the reader to have proper understanding of it (Shenton, 2014). Based on the sufficient
descriptions, the reader judges the evidence and draws conclusions of his or her own from the
general themes emerged (Creswell, 2014). As Maxwell (2013) argued, validity is a property of
inferences rather than methods, and is something that can be proven or taken for granted based
on methods used.
As a final word of advice, validity threats are made implausible by evidence, not by
methods; methods are only a way of getting evidence that can help you rule out these threats
(Maxwell, 2013). Merriam (2009) also advised that the burden of producing a study that has
been conducted and disseminated in an ethical manner gives a qualitative study validity and
trustworthiness based on the credibility of the researcher. To achieve confirmability, the
researcher must take steps to demonstrate that findings emerge from the data and not their own
predisposition (Shenton, 2014). Shenton (2014) recognized the difficulty of ensuring real
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 103
objectivity, since test and questionnaires are designed by humans, the intrusion of the
researcher’s biases is inevitable.
Ethical Considerations
Prior to engaging in the study, a code of ethics must be considered such as professional
conduct, commentaries, ethical dilemmas, and potential solutions (Creswell, 2014). Creswell
(2014) advised to consider the nine arguments advanced by Maxwell (2013) as key elements in
early planning of the study and consider major points that need to be addressed in the study. The
characteristics used in this qualitative research included the following: the study was conducted
in a natural setting; relied on the researcher as the key instrument in data collection; involved
multiple methods; involved complex reasoning going between inductive and deductive, meaning
it was dependent on participants’ perspective and the many subjective views; reality was situated
within the context of setting, and participants; it involved an emergent and evolving design rather
than a prefigured design; it was also interpretative, that is sensitive to the researcher’s
biographies or social identities; and finally, it presented a holistic or perplex picture where all of
these points or topics were interconnected to provide a cohesive picture of the entire project
(Maxwell, 2009).
Kurpius and Stafford (2006) warned the researcher of the perils and pitfalls of conducting
qualitative research; the two large ethical domains to consider: the researchers’ own competence
and the rights of the people assessed. Before participants answered any question, they needed to
know who would see their responses and what would happen to them because of their responses
(Kurpius & Stafford, 2006). For this reason, the researchers followed these ethical
responsibilities: the instrument chosen to gather information had strong psychometric qualities
such as reliability and validity, protection of the confidentiality of the human participant being
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 104
interviewed, protection of the instrument itself, response forms, the information was not shared
with someone who was not competent in the field of study, did not over-interpret the data, did
not use the data in forms that were harmful to privacy, self-incrimination, or unfair
discrimination (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006). When the researcher asked someone to answer any
survey question, or measurement questions, the researcher was asking about personal thoughts,
ideas, knowledge, or attitudes. By answering the questions, participants are revealing personal
information about themselves (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006).
Summary
This chapter identified essential components in designing a study using a mixed-methods
approach, which incorporated quantitative data from an online survey and qualitative data from
open-ended responses on the questionnaire and interviews. This chapter outlined the relationship
between the research design variables, the identification of the population and sample, the survey
instrument used, and the steps taken in the analysis and interpretation of the data. The literature
review and the findings were triangulated to provide an understanding of the leadership
dispositions needed by secondary principals. The research-questions’ findings are presented in
Chapter Four. The summary, conclusions, and implications are discussed in Chapter Five.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 105
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Background
In previous decades, educators were expected to prepare only a small minority for
ambitious intellectual work, whereas now they are expected to prepare virtually all
students for higher order thinking and performance skills reserved to only a few (Darling-
Hammond & Bransford, 2007). However, the number of school-aged children enrolled
in public and private Pre-kindergarten through grade 12 in the fall of 2013 was 55.4
million out of an estimated population of 316 million (NCES, n.d.). Based on statistical
projections, the total number of enrolled school-aged children in public elementary and
secondary schools is projected to continue increasing to 51.7 million in 2025-26 (NCES,
2017a, p. 1) and private Pre-kindergarten through grade 12 is projected to decrease by 6%
to 5.1 million students in 2025-26, when it will reach a combined total of 56.8 million
(NCES, 2017b, Fig. 1, p. 1). English Language Leaners (ELLs) are heterogeneous and
complex second-generation students estimated at 27% and a third generation calculated at
30% as a group of students born to at least one migrant parent, not a recently arrived or
new comer (Squire, 2008; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,
OECD, 2012). Most of these students have been in the educational system for quite some
time. According Squire (2008) and the OECD (2012), 57% of these students are still not
adequately proficient in English to be reclassified as fluent English speakers.
The Leadership
The reality is that no single person has all the knowledge, skills, and talent to lead,
improve, or meet all the needs of a student-centered leadership; it takes a collaborative effort and
widely dispersed leadership to meet the challenges confronting the shifting needs of system
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 106
realities and the 21st Century learner (Timperley, 2011). However, it is the high school principal
at the radial, who brings it all together, providing the management and instructional leadership
needed to trigger the improvements (National Association of Elementary School Principals,
NAESP, 2015). According to the Garmston and Wellman (2016), these improvements are
possible through the adaptive leadership model, authentic partnerships, collaborative systems of
enquiry, and 21st Century learning. Furthermore, NAESP (2015) exemplified that the high
school principal empowers the teachers, encourages the students, and involves the community in
ways that have lasting impact.
Purpose of the Study
This chapter presents the findings of the data collected and analyzed under the current
study, which examined the role of high school principals in the support of English Language
Development Programs and school-wide approaches to instructional decisions as schools prepare
English Language Learners (ELLs) to be college and career ready for the 21st Century. The aim
of this research was to examine the relationship between the instructional leaders’ professional
development training, leadership skills, knowledge, and reflection of practices to support the
academic demands and school reform initiatives to improve the English and language
proficiency of ELLs as they progress through public high schools. Moreover, this study
examined ways in which instructional leaders guide teachers to plan concrete learning objectives
for student learning, how they purposefully determine the kinds of learning activities, and check
for understanding as an assessment strategy to obtain feedback on student learning to check
whether the planned objectives have accomplished favorable outcomes.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 107
Methodology
The researcher performed a mixed-methods research study using quantitative and
qualitative data. The quantitative data used for this study was collected from an electronic
questionnaire survey and the qualitative data was collected from open-ended questions on the
survey and interviews performed. The data used for this study was collected and analyzed
during the time frame of October 2016 to February 2017.
How Were the Schools Selected?
A review of Southern California’s high schools with high ELL proficiency rate as a
predictor of academic achievement was used to select schools. The California Department of
Education (CDE) School Accountability Report Cards (SARC, CDE, 2016a) were used to
compare and analyze student performance on a variety of indicators; primarily the ELL growth
over time. The SARC reports provided a comparison of schools for student achievement,
environment, resources, and demographics. The schools were chosen based on English
Language Arts (ELA) proficiency rates of English Language Learner (ELL) as a subgroup. To
collect unbiased data, 50 surveys were distributed to public high school principals across
Southern California, of which 21 were successfully completed, providing sufficient data of 42%.
From this pool of participants, five Principals were selected and interviewed based on their
willingness to participate in a one-on-one or face-to-face recorded interview. All participants
agreed and volunteered their time to collaborate on this project.
To protect their identity and privacy, the five Principals have been assigned a letter from
the first five letters of the English alphabet, under this anonymity; they will be referred to as
Principal A, B, C, D, and E organized in Table 1, based on an arbitrary system and no
identifiable information will be discussed or reported about their person, schools, or districts
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 108
within this study. As a result, aggregated demographic data collected during the use of
electronic surveys will be presented objectively. Qualitative data collected during one-on-one
interviews from willing participants will be presented in the next section as accurate as possible
in the themes and sub-themes identified during codification and triangulation.
Table 1
Volunteer Principal Demographics
Principal
Years as
Principal
ELL
Population
Diverse
Population
Faculty
Title I
A 3.5 200+ 1800 81 Yes
B 7 200+ 2061 92 Yes
C 6 200+ 2200 105 Yes
D 1 200+ 2020 90 Yes
E 6 200+ 3444 140 Yes
Table 1 represents the demographics of the five Principals who volunteered for the
interviews. Based on the visual representation, Principals B, C, and E have the most years of
experience. Principal A has been a high school principal for the past three and a half years. The
chart reveals that this is Principal’s D first year as a principal. In terms of English Language
Learners, all Principals revealed having a population of 200 or more under their administration.
Student population among the five Principals fluctuates between 1800 to 3444 students. A range
of 81 to 140 teachers is representative of the student population according to the size of the
school and its needs. Coincidently, these schools qualify for federal funding, Title I geared
towards low, social economic status.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 109
Demographics
The electronic survey was structured based on the empirical information obtained during
the literature review supported by many well-respected and qualified researchers within the
realm of their educational field. The objective of the inquiry was to study the educational leader
in terms of knowledge, training, and skills necessary to carry out the day-to-day managerial and
instructional functions at the school site where past experiences and leadership styles bring out
the best outcomes in students, teaching staff, parents, and the community at large.
The information voluntarily provided by participants in the initial nine questions was
analyzed and organized creating visual representations or charts which facilitate a quick
reference of the research-based narrative along with qualitative anecdotal evidence gathered
through one-on-one recorded and transcribed interviews.
The introductory questions in the survey were based on personal demographic
information to sketch a model of the leadership population participating in the study. These
questions asked for Principal’s: (a) gender, (b) age, (c) ethnicity, (d) language(s) spoken as a
child, (e) highest level of education completed, (f) years spent as a classroom teacher, (g) years
in other leadership role(s), (h) years of experience as a principal, and (i) years of experience as a
principal at the school site. The Principals’ responses to these nine questions served as
independent variables for the study. In summary, the 21 schools who responded to the survey
reported a student population that ranged from 79 to 3,256 students. The schools selected for the
survey had at least a 10% English Language Learners population.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 110
Table 2 exemplifies the gender identity of participants; 61.9% of the respondents
identified themselves as female; and 38.10% of the participants marked male as an indicator of
gender.
According Hill, Ottem, and DeRoche (2016), the proportion of female principals in
public schools was 51.6% in 2011-2012; in 1987-88 it was 24.6%. In addition, the percentage of
female teachers in 2011-12 was 76.3%; in 1987-88 it was 70.5% (Hill et al., 2016). Since high
school principals usually go up the ranks based on leadership experience over time, the results
obtained during this brief survey are congruent with the national statistics where 61.9% of the
respondents were female.
Table 2
Summary Demographic Data on Survey Participants Gender (N = 21)
Demographic Independent Variable f %
Participants Gender Female 13 61.90
Male 8 38.10
Total 21 100
Table 3 shows data of participants based on age; 61.9% of the participants selected the
category that depicts their age as 40-49; 23.81% chose category 50-59; and 14.29% of the
participants marked 60-69 as an indication of age.
Compared to a 25-year study by Hill et al. (2016), the average age of public high school
principals in 1987-88 was 46.8 years and 48.0 years in 2011-12. The change in average age over
time has remained relatively the same within public school principals studied for this study
where the percentage of participants fall within the 40 and 49 years of age reflecting 61.9%. The
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 111
percentage of principals within 50 to 59 years of age declined. In the public sector, principals
tended not to remain in the principalship much beyond age 55, suggesting that those who enter
the position later in life have shorter administrative careers (Gates, Ringel, Santibanez, Chung, &
Ross, 2003). Furthermore, participants identified themselves in various categories according to
race and ethnicity.
Table 3
Summary Demographic Data on Relevant Participant Age (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variable f %
Participants Age 22-29
30-39
40-49 13 61.90
50-59 5 23.81
60-69 3 14.29
70 +
Total 21 100
Table 4 shows participant responses based on race and ethnicity; 28.09% of the
respondents identified themselves as White/Caucasian; 23.81% identified as Hispanic/Latino (a);
14.29% identified as Black or African American; 14.29% identified as American Indian/Alaskan
Native; and 9.52% of the participants registered “Other” as a race and ethnicity.
Although principals in US public schools were predominantly White, the proportion of
White principals decreased between 1987–88 and 2011–12 in public schools; the percentage of
White principals declined from 87% in 1987–88 to 80% in 2011–12 (Hill et al., 2016). During
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 112
the same time, the percentage of Black principals did not change significantly, and the
percentage of Hispanic principals increased by 4 percentage points from 3 to 7 percent (Hill, et
al., 2016). Table 5 reflects a concentration of facts which support the results of the survey
conducted for this study where 28.08% of the principals identified themselves as White or
Caucasian, followed by 23.81% Hispanic/Latino (a), and 14.29% indicated Black or African
American. Furthermore, to understand the leadership serving our ELL community, the
researcher chose to survey upbringing history of the participants.
Table 4
Summary of Demographic Data on Participant Race and Ethnicity (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variable f %
Participant Race/
Ethnicity
American Indian/Alaskan Native 3 14.29
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black or African American 3 14.29
Hispanic/Latino(a) 5 23.81
White/Caucasian 8 28.09
Other 2 9.52
Total 21 100
Table 5 shows statistical data on participants’ Home/Community Upbringing; 61.90% of
the participants selected Standard English mainly spoken at home/community upbringing; and
38.10% selected ‘A Language other than English’ at Home/Community Upbringing.
Most of the respondents indicated growing up in a community and a home where
Standard English was mainly spoken during their upbringing. This is a significant statistical
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 113
indication because the ‘lingua franca,’ the target language is modeled by 61.9% of the principals
who are monolinguals and 38% of the principals identified themselves as being bilingual. The
perception of both types of principals according to Basurto, Wise, and Unruh, (2006) is their
attitude towards serving ELL populations. Subsequently, participants revealed information about
their degree of education completed to hold a transformational leadership role.
Table 5
Summary of Demographic Data on Participant Home/Community Upbringing (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Upbringing Standard English mainly spoken 13 61.90
A Language other than English 8 38.10
More than one Language(s) spoken
A non-standard English variety was mainly spoken
Other non-standards language(s)
Total 21 100
Table 6 shows levels of schooling completed by participants; 61.9% of the participants
indicated having a Graduate Degree (MA/MS); 23.81% of the respondents elected Ed. D as
levels of schooling completed; and 14.29% of the participants selected Ph. D as levels of
schooling completed.
More public-school principals reported a master’s degree as their highest level of
education in 2011–12 compared with 1987–88. However, fewer public school principals held a
degree higher than a master’s in 2011–12 than in 1987–88 (Hill et al., 2016). The information
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 114
obtained through the survey responses tends to agree with 2011-12 data where the percentages
levels remained relatively the same where 61.9% of the respondents indicated having a master’s
degree, and 23.81% reported an Ed. D degree. The number of participants holding a Ph. D
degree reported 14.29%. Since most principals rise to leadership positions from through the
ranks, the researcher determined vital to ask for years of experience as a subject or classroom
teacher.
Table 6
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Levels of Schooling Completed (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Levels of Schooling Bachelor Degree (BA/BS)
Graduate Degree (MA/MS) 13 61.90
Ed. D 5 23.81
Ph. D 3 14.29
Total 21 100
The percentages on Table 7 reflect 61.9% of principals identified themselves as having
six to ten years of subject classroom experience and or some form of leadership role prior to
taking principal responsibilities; 38.10% of the principals indicated having 11 or more years of
subject classroom experience. In comparison, Hill et al. (2016) through their longitudinal study
indicated that in both public and private sectors, the average years of teaching experience for
new principals was not significantly different from that of experienced principals in 2011-12 or
1987-88. In like manner, participants reported having other leadership roles outside the
classroom prior to becoming principals.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 115
Table 7
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Years as Subject/Class Teacher (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Years as Subject
Teacher
None
Less than 3 years
6-10 years 13 61.90
11-15 years 8 38.10
16-20 years
More than 20 years
Total 21 100
Table 8 presents years of leadership roles; 61.9% of the participants indicated having one
to five years in other leadership roles; 38% indicated having six to ten years in other leadership
roles.
Some of the experiences principals shared having prior to accepting the principal role and
responsibilities included: instructional coaches, Title I coordinators, working at the district
office, being elementary principals, and assistant principals at various high schools. In many
ways, principals agreed that the years of leadership experience prepared them to take the role as
a principal at their current site.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 116
Table 8
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Years in Other Leadership Roles (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Other Leadership
Roles
None
1-5 years 13 61.90
6-10 years 8 38.10
11-15 years
16-20 years
20+ years
Total 21 100
Table 9 indicates years of experience as a principal. Of the participants, 85.71%
indicated having six to ten years of experience as a principal; 14.29% indicated having one year
of experience.
The context of past experiences according to Alvy and Robbins (1998) projects how
successfully one will respond to the challenges of the principalship and how problem-solving
capabilities affect both new and veteran principals. Both new and veteran principals are aware of
the demands and responsibilities associated with the profession. Daily principals solve minor
and major occurrences on campus; make budgetary decisions; must keep in compliance with
federal, state, district, and individual school required forms; go through daily routines; have
ample knowledge of policy; and keep current on school related laws and procedures (Alvy &
Robbins, 1998). Under the same circumstances, principals will make good or bad decisions
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 117
which will impact the lives of numerous students, teachers, parents, and community members
(Alvy & Robbins, 1998).
Table 9
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Years of Experience as Principal (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Experience as a Principal First year 3 14.29
1-5 years
6-10 years 18 85.71
11-15 years
16-20 years
20 + years
Total 21 100
Table 10 presents the results of how principals rated the chart based on their years at the
current school location; 38.1% indicated having one to two years at their current school; 23.81%
selected three to five years as a choice at their current school site; 23.81% indicated having six to
ten years at this school site; and 14.28% indicated being first year principals at current school
site.
Although some principals indicated being new to their current position, the number of
hours of experience accumulated in various other leadership roles prepared them to develop their
principal potential. Keeping in mind that it takes time to flourish as Dweck (2006) and Gladwell
(2008) referenced in their respective books, Mindset and Outliers, both authors referred that it
takes at least ten thousand hours of practice to reach mastery of any skill. As indicated on Table
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 118
10, some principals fall within this category of mastery. In retrospect, according to Trotter
(1986) there are five stages of mastery: (1) novice, (2) advance beginner, (3) competence,
(4) proficiency, and (5) expertise. Principals as in any other profession start as a novice, ranging
from zero to three years of experience progressing through the various stages in the career
continuum with 16 or more years of experience (Hvidston, Range, McKim, & Mette, 2015).
Table 10
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Years of Service at this School (N = 21)
Demographic Individual Variables f %
Years at this School First year 3 14.28
1-2 years 8 38.10
3-5 years 5 23.81
6-10 years 5 23.81
11 + years
Total 21 100
Research Questions
In determining important issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language
Learner students, both the focus issues occurring within the school leadership and an
examination of how English language training leads to English-language proficiency need to be
researched. This study attempted to build a better understanding of the leadership necessary to
create socially just schools for English Language Learners (ELLs) by addressing the following
four questions:
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 119
1. What professional development training, skills, and knowledge should a high school
principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
2. In what ways do high school principals create asset-based, collaborative, and inclusive
learning opportunities and services for ELLs? What do varying approaches of these
services and the leadership necessarily looks like in practice?
3. How do school principals influence how high school teachers of English Language
Learners (ELLs) plan and align their instructional objectives and assessment plans with
the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and English Language Development (ELD)
Standards?
4. What are the key leadership elements of an effective high school program that can assist
in the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
Theoretical Framework
The framework used in this research consists of six components as identified by Creswell
(2008) for conducting a research study. These include: 1) identifying the research problem,
2) reviewing the literature, 3) specifying the purpose for research, 4) collecting data, 5) analyzing
and interpreting the data, and 6) reporting and evaluating the research. This study has been
constructed around this framework, with this chapter specifically addressing steps four, five, and
six.
Mixed Methods
The procedure for collecting, analyzing, and ‘Mixing’ both quantitative and qualitative
research and methods is to understand a research study better rather than using either method by
itself (Creswell, 2008). A mixed-methods research consists of merging, integrating, linking or
embedding interviews, surveys, and documentation for in-depth, insight and understanding of
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 120
phenomena (Creswell, 2008; Merriam, 2014). This study utilized multiple-method theoretical
perspectives in which triangulation, the analysis of quantitative and qualitative datasets was
analyzed separately (e.g., interviews, surveys, and documents), were interpreted by the
researcher as to whether the results support or contradict each other (Creswell, 2008; Merriam,
2014)
Surveys
By studying a sample or a given population, the researcher generalizes or makes claims
of that unique group through a quantitative survey design to study attitudes, opinions in a
numeric description of trends (Creswell, 2008). The purpose is to generalize from a sample to a
population so that inferences can be made about some characteristics, attitude, or behavior for
this population (Babbie, 1990; Creswell, 2008). Furthermore, Creswell (2008) encouraged that a
larger population is advantageous over a small group of participants; however, due to the time
constraint, a convenient sample of 50 surveys was the preferred type of data collection for this
study.
The Survey
The survey design was a cross-sectional, which is collecting data through a self-
administered questionnaire at one point in time. The information provided by the population
sample was then stratified. Stratification means that specific characteristics of individuals (e.g.,
both females and males) were represented in the sample and the sample reflected the true
proportion in the population of individuals with certain characteristics (Creswell, 2008; Fowler,
2002).
Furthermore, to ensure a high response rate, Creswell (2008) and Salant and Dillman
(1994) recommend the utilization of a four-phase administration process. The process began by
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 121
first sending mail or e-mails out with a short advance-notice letter to all members of the sample;
secondly sending mail or e-mails out of the actual survey, distributed about one week after the
notice letter. The third mail-out consisted of a postcard or email follow-up sent to all members
of the sample four to eight days after the initial questionnaire. The fourth mail-out, sent to all
non-respondents, consisted of a personalized cover letter with a handwritten signature or an
email, the questionnaire, and a pre-addressed return envelope with postage if necessary. The
researcher sent this fourth mail-out three weeks after the second mail out.
The researcher concluded the administration period on the fourth week after it was
started, as the returned surveys met the project objectives. Survey Monkey was utilized as a data
gathering instrument which gave the researcher a data collection instrument to create custom
templates and post on the website for participants to complete. In addition, Survey Monkey
generated results and reported them back to the researcher as descriptive statistics or as graphs in
formation which could be downloaded into spreadsheet or database for analysis (Creswell,
2008).
Likert Scale
To obtain a more accurate and reliable analysis of the data collected, a Rensis Likert’s
scale composed of five or seven variables served to rate the degree to which participants agreed
or disagreed with a statement (Sullivan & Artino, 2013). In addition, in an ordinal scale,
Sullivan and Artino (2013) suggested that responses be rated or ranked, but the distance between
responses is not measurable. Furthermore, the differences between ‘never,’ ‘seldom,’ ‘quite
often,’ and ‘very often,’ on a frequency response Likert scale are not necessary equal (Sullivan &
Artino, 2013). However, social scientists assign numbers to those responses to calculate interval
data, and the numbers become something measurable or quantitative (Boone & Boone, 2012;
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 122
Sullivan & Artino, 2013). Rensis Likert’s original paper in1932 clearly identified there might be
an underlying continuous variable whose value characterizes the respondents’ opinions or
attitudes and this underlying variable is interval level (Allen & Seaman, 2007). Following these
recommendations, data was aggregated into percentile rank, to identify frequency, medium, and
standard of deviation to make sense of the participant responses.
Interviews
Merriam (2014) described the three fundamental types of research interviews: structured,
semi-structured, and unstructured. Structured interviews are, essentially, verbally administered
questionnaires, in which lists of pre-determined questions are asked. Consequently, they are
relatively quick and easy to administer and may be of use if clarification of certain questions is
required or if there are likely to be literacy or numeracy problems with the respondents.
Conversely, unstructured interviews do not reflect any preconceived theories or ideas and are
performed with little or no organization. Semi-structured interviews consist of several key
questions that help to define the areas to be explored, but also allows the interviewer or
interviewee to diverge to pursue an idea or response in more detail. The flexibility of this
approach, particularly compared to structured interviews, also allows for the discovery or
elaboration of information that is important to participants but may not have previously been
thought of as pertinent by the research team (Merriam, 2014).
The purpose of the research interview was to explore the views, experiences, beliefs and
or motivations of individuals on specific matters (Merriam, 2014). Qualitative methods, such as
interviews, are believed to offer a deeper understanding of social phenomena than would be
obtained from purely quantitative methods, such as questionnaires (Merriam, 2014). Interviews
are, therefore, most appropriate where little is already known about the study phenomenon or
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 123
where detailed insights are required from individual participants. They are also particularly
appropriate for exploring sensitive topics, where participants may not want to talk about such
issues in a group environment (Bogdan & Biklen, 1997).
Coding of Data (Themes)
The process of coding qualitative data is an important part of interpreting and refining
interpretations of the interviews and observations. Coding of the data was used to analyze the
survey and interview data. To make sense of the gathered data, the researcher transcribed the
interviews. As Merriam (2009) explained, the process begins with reading the first interview
transcript, the first set of field notes, the first document collected in the study. As the transcripts
are read, the researcher followed the recommendation by Merriam to jot down notes, comments,
observations, and queries in the margins. These notations helped to start the process of sorting,
summarization, and synthesizing what was happening in the data. In linking data collection and
interpreting the data, coding becomes the basis for developing the analysis. Assigning codes to
pieces of data is the way you begin to construct categories (Merriam, 2009). The purpose of the
study then becomes the storyline and the analytic thread that united and integrated the major
themes of the study.
Before beginning the data collection process, the researchers created a list of priority
codes. These initial codes were derived from the conceptual framework and the research
questions. When coding the interviews, transcribed interviews were completed in order based on
the date of the interview. The transcription occurred over a word document which served to
enumerate the lines on the margin for the researcher to read line by line to identify words and
phrases through the progression of the document. As words and phrases were color coded, the
researcher applied the same method to the second transcribed document to identify common
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 124
themes and subthemes as the five documents were scrutinized repeatedly. The researcher created
charts with common words and phrases and eliminated explanations which appeared once or
twice which were not relevant to the overall vision of the project.
Considering all elements related to the research questions, the researcher approached the
data from an open mindset, seeking to discover what concepts were revealed within the data
(Cooper, Chenail, & Fleming, 2012). As a second phase of data analysis, axial codes served
through constant comparison of the data to identify codes, conceptual categories, and sub-
categories capturing the relationship among related concepts which allowed the researcher to
develop an ethical narrative protecting the confidentiality of the participants (Cooper et al.,
2012). The final stage in the coding process as Cooper et al. (2012) exemplified was memo
writing which aids the researcher in the analysis process and selection of a code that conveys the
key conceptual category around which other codes can be organized.
Reporting Findings
Research Question 1: What professional development training, skills, and knowledge should a
high school principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
Introduction
The professional development skills, knowledge, and training that an effective secondary
principal should have are described in depth in the following points outlined. The skills the
principal must have include: instructional leadership skills, a strong philosophy, the correct
mindset, a personal mission and vision, communication skills, and sustainability abilities. Under
knowledge, the principal must have: knowledge of the instructional programs, must be a life-
long learner, and have a strong ethical foundation. Ultimately, the principal must have an intense
training on transformational qualities of leadership, and training on the social emotional aspect of
learning.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 125
Effective Instructional Leadership Skills
Effective principals today work hard at building school communities made of faculty
capable to step into leadership roles and responsibilities (Mendels, 2012). The demands of
accountability require principals to be instructional leaders capable of developing a team of
teachers who deliver effective instruction to every student (Krasnoff, 2015). Furthermore,
effective principals are second only to teachers as the most influential school-level factor in
student achievement (Krasnoff, 2015). At a time when federal and state accountability mandates
have made data analysis a fact of school life, Mendels (2012) emphasized that effective
principals must know how to make the best use of school related data, learn the art of asking
relevant questions when analyzing data, integrating the collaboration of teachers in inquiry-based
learning, and spreading helpful feedback to students. To develop the organization, the effective
leader must depend on his or her skills and abilities, the knowledge of past experiences he or she
brings to the organization, and the educational training that qualifies him or her to set high
working standards and rigorous learning goals for all interacting members who share
responsibility and accountability.
The effective leader must create a good instructional climate based on his or her personal
philosophy as stated by Principal C, “your school becomes your personality,” along with a strong
collaborative vision and mission, while implementing good habits of communication with all
stakeholders, applying research-based information to the priorities of the educational site.
Philosophy. The consensus among the five Principals regarding their personal
philosophy on leadership was unanimous. The terminology utilized varied among the
participants, however, the essence spelled the same idea. “For me, leadership is distributed,”
stated Principal A. Congruently, Principal C added, “for me leadership is collaborative, we lead
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 126
by getting feedback from most stakeholders.” Under the same philosophy, the other three
Principals collectively stated, “we are all learners, we want to build capacity of all our staff
members.” “It is not about me, I don’t have all the ideas, we depend on our department chairs,
lead teachers, and academic teachers to make decisions,” illustrated Principal D. As explained
by Principal C,
Teachers are heavily involved; any decision made is ciphered through our staff, our
department chairs, leadership team, they have an input, [and] any major decision is
collaborative, it is shared. We might not go in the direction that the majority wants us to
go, but we usually go by consensus.
Furthermore, Principal C continued, “we have over 105 faculty, more than that with our support
staff, tutors, instructional aids, classified; we are very well staffed.” In addition, Principal C
elaborated, “the district is very good in supporting the schools; rather than being district heavy,
we are site heavy, we have all the support services that we need, we are running our school, and
the things we are offering.”
The correct mindset. Everyone needs a role model – someone who points the way at a
critical moment, someone who understands human qualities, such as intellectual skills, and
teaches that through effort and dedication; not innate talent and intellect alone breeds success, it
is through our abilities and capacity to overcome obstacles that we cultivate our intelligence
through the right mindset (Dweck, 2006). The growth mindset framework gives educators a way
to set high standards and have students reach them through a process of feedback (Dweck, 2006).
“Establishing a climate or culture of respect, changing the mindset,” explained Principal A.
Throughout the five interviews, Principals talked about having the right mindset or changing the
mindset of students and educators to support student learning. It is all in the language you use,
when Principal A stated that, “teachers police each other,” no one can denigrate students based
on learning capacity or ethnic background. In summary, principals must understand the need to
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 127
collaborate in a positive manner by modeling behaviors and changing the mindset of every
member of the organization. Educators need to adopt a deeper, true growth mindset, one that
will show in their classroom practices (Dweck, 2006). As Dweck (2015) adverted,
Let’s legitimize the fixed mindset. Let’s acknowledge that (1) we’re all a mixture of
fixed and growth mindsets, (2) we will probably always be, and (3) if we want to move
closer to a growth mindset in our thoughts and practices, we need to stay in touch with
our fixed-mindset thoughts and deeds. (para. 13)
Mission and vision. The mission and vision expressed by all the Principals interviewed
was created by the school community using a collaborative model of inclusive decision makers.
For example, Principal A stated, “at our school we have different pockets of decision makers.”
In addition, Principal D shared the following, “the vision was created by working together; our
leadership team made up of different stakeholders, faculty, counselors, paraprofessionals, lead
teachers, and students under the guidance of administration.” Principal A exemplified,
An essential factor when you have systems in place, you work with your lead teachers,
they carry the water for you, I have my finger in everything, I lead from behind, I allow
them their own independence, we are a united division working together.
In like manner, researchers Alvy and Robbins (1998) pointed out that an important
activity for a leader is to develop an individual vision, a vision of courage to help one keep in
mind what is important. Seeing the school mission often emerges because of a process in which
organizational members through consensus work the challenges of diverse teacher visions and
philosophies to the extent that all stakeholders involved in the process feel that it is a worthwhile
cause to do (Alvy & Robbins, 1998). In summary, using an adaptive school model approach to
shared decision making creates a system of trust, bridging all groups and individuals to work
independently, yet interdependent on the vision and mission of the school community.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 128
Communication and collaboration. An essential skill or quality valued in an effective
21st Century principal is the ability to communicate with students, teachers, parents, and local
community leaders where instructional leaders serve. Educational leaders enhance the
performance of their schools by building collaborative processes, providing opportunities for
staff to participate in decision making about issues that affect them and for which their
knowledge is crucial (Leithwood & Riehl, 2003). This way, leaders help others shape the school
in ways that can accomplish shared goals and address individual concerns as well (Leithwood &
Riehl, 2003). As Alvy and Robbins (1998) exemplified, the principal is the flow-through person,
the source or the catalyst for the flow of information, where he or she creates the forum for
individual or group communication by supporting facilities and activities that encourage working
relationships with everybody. Aligned to the everyday school activities, Principal D stated, “I
always make myself available to all the teachers, I always make it a point to listen to their ideas.”
Furthermore, Principal D added, “I keep all our faculty members informed as to what we are
doing, and I always welcome new ideas.” Each professional colleague in a school should feel
that the principal treats him or her with respect and honors his or her role as classified or
certificated staff (Alvy and Robbins, 1998). In contrast, “you are always doing something to
recognize people, it is our job to bring out the best in our staff and help people feel appreciated
and secured,” confirmed Principal A. In similar manner, Principal C stated,
I am very verbal, like any good administrator, I always give a lot of positive feedback,
there’s an understanding of mutual respect, I respect all my educators and hence I expect
them all to respect my profession and what I do.
However, there are other ramifications of communication that must be in placed to reach the
community; technology for example allows the principal to communicate via email, school
website, and on-line calendar of events, twitter, video conferencing, flyers, and general
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 129
announcements via intercom (Alvy & Robbins, 1998). In a collaborative school climate,
principals need to create a positive interpersonal communication which is vital for sharing
information with lead teachers, department chairs, faculty, students as well as technology to
reach the local community.
Sustainability. According to Burns (2003), we live in an age of change; every human
change begins with someone having an intention, and taking an initiative. At the heart of the
matter lies the question of who initiates change, in what circumstances, for what reason,
proceeding by what means toward what outcomes? (Burns, 2003). In addition, Burns (2003)
exemplified that, happy is the nation with no history, citizens accept their existence as it is, they
do so out of passivity or a belief that an external force rules all things. In a 21st-century style of
leadership there is no room for passivity or leaving decisions to chance where balance and
stability would be the sustainability of leadership. Sustainability for any organization is the
ability to change plans and strategies as needs to improve arise. Due to the competitive nature of
charter schools, principals shared the need to network with community businesses, chamber of
commerce, and local political agencies to attract students. Principal A, stated “what we are
getting killed with in this area is charter schools.” Principal A shared,
At the end of this month, principals and our family of schools we are getting together, all
the principals from all the middle school and the elementary schools that feed into them,
plan articulation activities between our schools and talk about what we are going to do to
market our schools.
Every school is involved in strengthening their educational program to better serve their student
population. Principal D shared, “right now we are trying to create a demonstration site school, a
tight partnership with a local university to bring their personnel on campus to serve our kids.”
Creating and maintaining a competitive school is important when choice options and market
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 130
conditions eliminate monopolies over enrollments and require schools to compete for students
(Leithwood & Riehl, 2003).
Sustainability cannot be achieved without leadership. It is a strategic initiative that
requires the immediate attention and support of top management. Without top management
support, involvement, and engagement, sustainable practices cannot be achieved (Madu & Kuei,
2012). The transformational leader is measured on the leader’s personality, qualities, capability
to make change; the employees of that leader feel trust, loyalty, admiration and respect and are
keen to work harder than initially expected (Bass, 1985). The transforming leader provides
employees with an exciting mission and vision that gives them an identity of self-worth, self-
growth, where both leaders and followers work to reach a higher level of confidence and
aspiration (Bass, 1985). Across all schools, educational change is based on snapshot views of
change that do not exceed a span of more than four or five years; although many innovations can
be implemented successfully with effective leadership, sufficient investment, and strong internal
and external support, very few innovations reach the institutionalization stage when they become
routine and an effortless part of most leaders’ practice (Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006). On the
other hand, Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) pointed out, as leaders get promoted or retire,
successions are poorly planned and sustainable improvements stretch beyond individual leaders.
Due to leadership succession planned or unplanned interrupts the flow of continuity and that
discontinuity in school leadership prevents further achievements within the school culture and
climate (Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006). This is in part due to the challenges and problems that
affect all principals both new and veterans who are still adjusting to their new job, building
relationships, working with teachers on instructional and curricular issues, prioritizing budgets,
and meeting with specific groups of decision makers (Alvy & Robbins, 1998).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 131
Instructional Leader
Table 11 reflects how participants rated the current statements that apply to their school,
their job, and the teachers at the school site. Participants could choose only one word or phrase
that indicates how strongly they agree or disagree with the statement on a five-point Likert scale
designed as: {e.g. Strongly Disagree (1); Disagree (2); Undecided (3); Agree (4); Strongly
Disagree (5)} along with assigned numbers ranging from one to five to determine mean and
standard of deviation used for validity and reliability of the results.
Table 11
Summary of Demographic Data on Activities and Behaviors (N=21)
Principal Responses to
Decision Making
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
M
3
SD
4
An important part of my
job is to ensure research
based instructional
approaches are explained
to new teachers and that
more experienced
teachers are using these
approaches.
47.62%
10
52.38%
11
4.52 2.13
Using test scores of
students to evaluate a
teacher's performance
devalues the teacher's
professional judgement.
47.60%
10
23.80%
5
14.30%
3
14.30%
3
2.95 1.72
Giving teachers too much
freedom to choose their
own instructional
techniques can lead to
poor teaching.
14.30%
3
23.80%
5
23.80%
5
23.80%
5
14.30%
3
3 1.73
3
Mean
4
Standard Deviation
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 132
Table 11 (Cont’d.)
Principal Responses to
Decision Making
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
M
SD
An important part of my
job is to ensure that
teachers are held
accountable for the
attainment of the school's
Reclassification
Re-designation goals.
14.30%
3
23.80%
5
61.90%
13
3.33 1.82
An important part of my
job is to present
instructional updates to
parents.
14.30%
3
14.30%
3
47.60%
10
23.80%
5
3.81 1.95
I influence that decisions
about this school are
taken at a higher
administrative level.
14.30%
3
14.30%
3
47.60%
10
23.80%
5
3.81 1.95
It is important for the
school that I see to it that
all mandates are followed.
14.30%
3
38.10%
8
47.60%
10
4.33 2.08
An important part of my
job is to resolve
instructional problems
with teachers' lesson
planning.
14.30%
3
38.10%
8
47.60%
10
4.33 2.08
An important part of my
job is to create a school-
wide orderly atmosphere
conducive of learning.
14.30%
3
23.80%
5
61.90%
13
4.48 2.12
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 133
Table 11 (Cont’d.)
Principal Responses to
Decision Making
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
M
SD
I have a system for
monitoring whether
teachers of English
Language Learners plan
and align their
instructional objectives
and assignment plans with
the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS, 2010)
and the English Language
Development Standards
(CDE, 2012).
24.00%
5
14.30%
3
61.90%
13
3.38 1.84
Starting with statement one from top to bottom on the left-hand side of the chart reads, an
important part of my job is to ensure research-based instructional approaches are explained to
new teachers and that more experienced teachers are using these approaches received combined
responses of ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’: 47.62% and 52.38% demonstrate a 100% agreement.
The next statement, using test scores of students to evaluate a teacher's performance devalues the
teacher's professional judgement received a 47.60% disapproval. The combination of ‘agree’
and ‘strongly’ agree combined produced 28.60%; and 23.80% of the participants marked
‘undecided’ as a response. Moving down to the third statement, giving teachers too much
freedom to choose their own instructional techniques can lead to poor teaching produced
neutrality with the following results: by combining the results of ‘strongly disagree’ and
‘disagree’ summed up to 38.10%; a similar result was obtained by combining ‘agree’ and
‘strongly agree;’ 23.80% elected the ‘undecided’ option. The fourth statement, an important part
of my job is to ensure that teachers are held accountable for the attainment of the school's
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 134
Reclassification Re-designation goals. More than half of the participants agreed with the
statement. Sixty-one-point nine percent marked ‘agree;’ 23.80% marked ‘undecided;’ and
14.30% ‘strongly disagreed.’ In the middle of the chart, the combination of statements five and
six include: (e.g. an important part of my job is to present instructional updates to parents; I
influence that decisions about this school are taken at a higher administrative level shared similar
results: the combined results of ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ summed up to 71.40%; the
remaining responses, ‘disagree’ and ‘undecided’ received 14.30% equally.
The combination of statements seven and eight: (e.g. it is important for the school that I
see to it that all mandates are followed; and an important part of my job is to resolve instructional
problems with teachers' lesson planning) share similar results in the elections of ‘agree’ and
‘strongly agree with a sum of 85.70%; and 14.30% of the participants selected ‘undecided.’
Similarly, 85.70% of the participants also selected ‘agree’ and ‘strongly agree’ in statement nine
which stated, an important part of my job is to create a school-wide orderly atmosphere
conducive of learning. To conclude with statement ten which states, I have a system for
monitoring whether teachers of English Language Learners plan and align their instructional
objectives and assignment plans with the Common Core State Standards and the English
Language Development Standards (CDE, 2014b). Sixty-one-point nine percent of the
participants marked, ‘agree’ while 24.0% marked, ‘disagree’ and 14.30% registered ‘undecided.’
Further analysis of the chart reveals a fluctuating mean ranging from 2.52 to 4.52. In like
manner, the standard of deviation ranged from 1.82 to 2.13. To illustrate the importance of
calculating the standard of deviation (SD), Kurpius and Stafford (2005) explained that, if there is
no standard of deviation (SD = 0), there is no dispersion. Furthermore, Kurpius and Stafford
(2005) elaborated that data points falling within the plus or minus of 1SD, 2SD is typically
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 135
interpreted as average or 95.44 % which creates a normal bell-shaped curve. Someone who
scores at least 3SD in the positive or the negative away from the mean is very different from
many of the people who took the same test or survey (Kurpius & Stafford, 2006).
Instructional leader’s knowledge. “As a principal, we need to know when we observe
classes what it is that we are looking for in instruction,” commented Principal D. Furthermore,
“right now we are heavy on academic conversations with each other and in writing across the
curriculum,” elaborated Principal D. “So as a principal, we need to be well versed in what
instruction would look like for these classes and for the students,” concluded Principal D. The
logic and reasoning expressed by Principals regarding what an instructional leader needs to have
to lead an educational organization align perfectly with the purpose and intention detailed in the
California English Language Development Standards framework (CDE, 2014b) whose initial
audience for this Guide is teachers, principals, students, parents, school board members,
superintendents, and community leaders who need to know the essence of the CCSS (2010) and
the ELD standards (CDE, 2012), and why deep knowledge and thoughtful implementation is so
important. In California, English Language Learners (ELLs) have always been a top priority,
committed to provide ELLs a high-quality program that will enable them to attain proficiency
and confidence in listening, speaking, reading, and writing (CDE, 2012).
Principals as life-long learners. Besides participating in District Professional
Development, Principals indicated that they are actively involved in conference attendance and
subscribed to educational agencies that keep them updated on current trends and issues in
education. “I receive educational leadership right now, I receive all of their newsletters which
are very helpful, because their articles contain information about the latest in education,”
commented Principal D. In addition, Principal D stated, “I help organize conferences mostly
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 136
about English Language Learners. Addressing the needs of our English Learners, we have fund
raisers to provide scholarships for ours kids. I always make sure our students are represented at
these conferences,” recapitulated Principal D. Congruent to the philosophy expressed by
Principals interviewed, Alvy and Robbins (1998) expressed that it is imperative to attend
professional meetings to network with individuals, network with small and large groups,
exchange e-mails, find out who the helpful mentors are in the district and call them to gain
various perspectives on getting the job done. Reciprocally, lifelong learners can gain inspiration
and insight from colleagues (Alvy & Robbins, 1998). In an ethically aligned organization,
teachers and students need to see the principal as a learner, someone who in turn shares their
learning through presentations, offering their notes, informal book or article reviews, videotapes
or audio tapes; that way learning flows through the organization (Alvy & Robbins, 1998).
Bringing strength to one another by bringing strength to each program leverages the instructional
leader in recharging professionally, networking, and reflecting on one’s performance (Alvy &
Robbins, 1998).
Everything about great leadership radiates from character, successful leaders take
responsibility for their own development, they are perpetual learners, they model for everyone in
the workplace what lifelong learning means, however, it should be sincere, consistent,
purposeful, and empowering (Robbins & Alvy, 2014). Another point highlighted by Robbins
and Alvy (2014) suggested that the characteristic of the successful leader is the ability to instill in
others the desire to learn what is necessary to help the organization reach its mission. All
Principals verbalized participating in at least five organizations that keep them up to date with
the latest development in educational leadership and innovative teaching practices aside from the
district professional development. When prompted, Principal C commented, “They provide
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 137
excellent training, top notch, and the best as far as preparing the leader.” In summary, most
Principals invest time facilitating meetings, exchanging information with lead teachers,
department chairs, and faculty in general modeling a lifelong learning behavior.
Professional development principals receive. Table 12 indicates how often the
participants (Principals) receive professional development training; 47.62% picked monthly;
23.80% selected ‘Other’ as an option; 14.29% selected bi-monthly; similarly, 14.29% indicated
weekly. In general, all Principals are engaged in some form of professional development either
on site or off campus.
Table 12
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Professional Development Training (N = 21)
Demographic Independent Variables f %
Professional Development Weekly 3 14.29
Bi-monthly 3 14.29
Monthly 12 47.62
Other 5 23.80
Total 21 100
Ethical. To understand the leadership role of the principal, it is necessary to define the
word ethics, a recurring word among the Principals interviewed. The word ethics has its roots in
the Greek word ‘ethos,’ which according to Northouse (2013) translates to customs, conduct, or
character. In addition, Northouse (2013) stated that ethics is concerned with the kinds of values
and morals an individual or society finds desirable or appropriate in decision making in what is
right or wrong, good or bad in any situation. In any decision-making situation, Northouse (2013)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 138
stated that ethical issues are either implicitly or explicitly involved. Ethical leaders play a major
role in establishing the ethical climate of their organization through: respect, service, justice,
honesty, and building community (Northouse, 2013). Furthermore, the moral responsibility of
the principal in an ethically aligned organization is the responsibility to serve students, teachers,
and parents. Alvy and Robbins (1998) advised that one should practice ethical and respectful
behavior with everyone (Alvy & Robbins, 1998). Under the same reasoning, Principal A
emphasized,
I like to support them [the teachers] in their working if they don’t do anything illegal,
make sure it is good for kids, and want to do the best. If I see all those three things, I am
pretty good with it, I am flexible with it, and it must be student centered.
Based on the ethical principles explained above, high school principals make decisions in
conjunction with their leadership teams aligned to the best interest of the students and the
community they serve.
Principal knowledge. Table 13 reflects how participants rated the current statements
that apply to their school, that most appropriately will assist in identifying models of supervision
that are most effective in promoting school improvement. Participants could choose only one
word or phrase that indicates how strongly they agree or disagree with the statement on a five-
point Likert scale designed as: (e.g. (1) Strongly Disagree; (2) Disagree; (3) Undecided;
(4) Agree; (5) Strongly Disagree) along with assigned numbers ranging from one to five to
determine mean and standard of deviation used for validity and reliability of the results.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 139
Table 13
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Activities and Behaviors (N=21)
Principal and Teachers
Job
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
M
5
SD
6
Leaders display a broad
knowledge and
understanding of
curriculum.
38.10%
8
61.90%
13
4.62 2.15
Leaders are trustworthy. 23.81%
5
76.19%
16
4.76 2.18
Leaders facilitate the
implementation of the
school vision.
14.29%
3
85.71%
18
4.86 2.21
Leaders are innovative in
addressing school issues.
47.62%
10
52.38%
11
4.52 2.13
Leaders engage
community stakeholders
in a shared responsibility
for student success.
47.62%
10
52.38%
11
4.52 2.13
Leaders demonstrate a
positive role model
approach for faculty and
staff.
23.81%
5
76.19%
16
4.76 2.18
Leaders exhibit a broad
knowledge and
understanding of
assessments.
47.62%
10
52.38%
11
4.52 2.13
Leaders encourage
teacher collaboration.
23.81%
5
76.19%
16
4.76 2.18
5
Mean
6
Standard Deviation
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 140
Table 13 (Cont’d.)
Principal and Teachers
Job
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
M
SD
Leaders demonstrate
courage/perseverance in
resolving challenges.
14.29%
3
85.71%
18
4.86
2.21
Leaders promote
opportunities for
professional development.
23.81%
5
76.19%
16
4.76 2.18
Leaders promote team-
building opportunities.
38.10%
8
61.90%
13
4.62 2.15
There was a 100% consensus among respondents who inclined towards ‘agree’ and
‘strongly agree’ on the ten statements related to a broad knowledge and understanding of
curriculum, professional development and assessment, as well as community building in terms of
school climate, collaboration, among other responsibilities related to the inclusion of decision-
making qualities. Further analysis of the chart reveals a fluctuating mean ranging from 4.52 to
4.86. In like manner, the standard of deviation ranged from 2.13 to 2.21.
Training
Transformational Leader Training
Some researchers according to Northouse (2013) conceptualized leadership as a trait or as
a behavior; others viewed leadership from an information-processing perspective or relational
standpoint. However, taking into consideration the research and analysis of Northouse (2013)
who has conceptualized or identified central to the phenomenon of leadership the following
concepts: (a) leadership is a process, whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 141
achieve a common goal, (b) leadership involves influence; without influence, leadership doesn’t
exist, (c) leadership occurs in small task groups, community groups, or large organizations, and
(d) leadership involves a common or mutual goal between the leader and the followers. “I
always make it a point to listen to their ideas, to really know whatever we have to offer to make
the learning experience for students, we will do it,” expressed Principal D. The concept of
power is related to leadership because it is part of the influence process. People have power
when they can affect others’ beliefs, attitudes, and courses of action (Northouse, 2013). Leaders
need followers and followers need leaders, leaders are not above or better than the followers,
both leaders and followers are involved in the leadership process (Northouse, 2013). It is the
leader who initiates the relationship, creates the communication linkages, and carries the burden
for maintaining the relationship (Northouse, 2013).
Climate of Trust
“The common trust between adults and students are different, a climate of trust takes
work, that’s not only here, it is everywhere;” that is how Principal C responded when asked
about a climate of trust at the school site. Classrooms need a climate of courtesy and respect,
build from safety, clarity, and trust, not simply compliance and control (Wiley, 2014). Students
must trust that if they expose their challenges and vulnerabilities, teachers and peers will treat
them with respect, and their mistakes will be opportunities to learn (Wiley, 2014). Similarly, all
“Students are valued in this environment and they want to be here, students say that the climate
is fabulous, kids love being here, they take care of their school, they are very proud of it, you can
come in at any time day or night, there is something happening,” summarized Principal C.
Community building at the classroom and schoolwide levels is the foundation for every
aspect of improved teaching and learning set in motion by a series of actions initiated by the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 142
leadership and faculty members (Wiley, 2014). In addition, Wiley (2014) highlighted that
students need to see adults in the school community working together, giving feedback, and
being open about their questions and mistakes. As Principal C explained,
as the instructional leader of the school, I think I would be a role model first, I feel that if
I am working hard, and I am doing the best to bring programs that would support our
kids, faculty and staff would see that I put trust in them, it is not just me saying okay we
are going to bring this program, I must make sure everybody buys in and that there is a
trusting climate and transparency, we are a transparent school.
Principal D exemplified,
To have a climate of trust, I bring all the lead teachers, department chairs, and faculty in
general into the conversation to keep all our faculty members informed of what we are
doing, and if there are any questions, they can see me; I always welcome new ideas into
our instructional program.
If you are open to the sights of the challenges you are facing, and if you are supportive, then you
are building a culture of support and understanding,” stated Principal B. “Having high
expectations with the kids and the faculty and changing the mindset,” Principal A concluded.
The Social Emotional Learning
The social emotional aspect of learning plays a major role in adults as well as school-
aged children. All Principals agreed about the importance of having a social emotional
component on their campus to help struggling students find the support they need to make their
school experience much more meaningful. In the ideal learning environment, children are
focused, fully attentive, motivated, engaged, and enjoy their work (Zins, 2004). Regardless of
their age, building caring relationships with teachers and school-family partnership increase
students’ desire to learn and have more confident in their abilities (Zins, 2004). Principal A
synthesized,
Building working relations with the kids, being empathetic with the kids, we have two
things that have really made a difference with our kids. The teachers listen to the kids to
understand where they are coming from; that indicates what is going on with the kids,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 143
because the reaction sometimes doesn’t really match the request. So, changing the
mindset of the teachers, self-reflection on behalf of the teachers, doing a talking circle,
teachers developing a nice relationship with the kids, establish a culture of trust, a culture
of respect in every direction, having high expectations with the kids.
Scientific data demonstrated that
“The emotional centers of the brain are intricately interwoven with the neocortical areas
involved in cognitive learning. When a child trying to learn is caught up in a distressing
emotion, the centers for learning become hampered. The child’s attention becomes
preoccupied with whatever may be the source of the trouble. (Zins, 2004, p. vii-viii)
“That’s where the whole caring piece comes out and having adults who care for the students who
are struggling, and their challenges,” amplified Principal B. The effectiveness of social
emotional learning (SEL) facilitates academic learning skills like self-awareness, self-
management, empathy, perspective taking, and cooperation programs as interventions that help
lower the risk of various problems young people face, as life’s challenges (Zins, 2004). Some of
the schools have a district support group on campus that trains teachers on the social emotional
element; others have counselors or coordinators who provide support to students, faculty and
parents, if they need the services.
Research Question 2: In what ways do high school principals create asset-based, collaborative,
and inclusive learning opportunities and services for ELLs? What do varying approaches of
these services and the leadership necessary look like in practice?
Introduction
The common factor among the five high school Principals interviewed provided ample
examples of how asset-based, inclusive, and collaborative learning opportunities and services are
created to support the academic achievement for English Language Learners. Asset-based
community building (ABCD) is an alternative approach that recognizes capacities, strengths,
gifts, talents and assets of individuals and communities to inspire positive change from inside out
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 144
(Mathie & Cunningham, 2003). The key focus is to build a sustainable community with the
merits of all members who have an interest or need in that asset (Mathie & Cunningham, 2003).
Social Capital
In any given community, social organizations are built on a web of relationships that
allow people to succeed or advance through formal and informal associations. Members of these
associations work together in concerted collaborative actions, norms, and social trust which
increases a society’s productive potential. By treating social relationships as assets, the concept
of social capital mobilizes other assets of the community to accomplish agreed-upon goals and
objectives (Marzano et al., 2005; Mathie & Cunningham, 2003).
What are Community Schools?
According to Jane Quinn vice president of the National Center for Community Schools
(NCCS), the number of community schools has increased exponentially nationally and
internationally since 2000 to extend the number of hours of service, offering additional services
through partnerships of schools with organizations that bring additional resources around the
goal of student success (Lubell, 2011). Community schools have rooted their work in a solid
body of research on social justice about what it takes to promote student success, including
parental involvement in children’s education, rich and engaging out-of-school experiences,
student wellness and family stability (Lubell, 2011). In addition, Lubell (2011) outlined “five
essential ingredients of school improvement: principal leadership, coherent curriculum,
professional capacity-building, student-centered school climate, and authentic family and
community engagement” (p. vii).
Furthermore, community school systems help counterbalance several negative trends
among high school students living in low social economic sectors where high drop-out rates and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 145
“1.3 million students fail to graduate each year” (Lubell, 2011, p. ix) due to chronic absenteeism,
health issues, lack of summer enrichment programs, and family instability problems which affect
student growth and development (Lubell, 2011). Aligned with a positive end in mind,
community schools provide extended learning time opportunity – “before and after school,
weekends, holidays, and summers” to serve diverse learners (Lubell, 2011, p. ix).
Principal D stated,
We are a community school which means that our school is open very early in the
morning for kids to take a variety of classes, like credit recovery classes, and we have a
lot of different programs that our students can partake after school and we are very proud
of that.
“Understanding and knowing who your students are in terms of social economic needs,
knowledge gaps, and special needs that are how you tailor interventions and services, not just
bringing programs that you [the leader] think are going to work,” formulated Principal B. “I am
really lucky at this school; most of my teachers really take their craft seriously. You are sitting
here, you are watching my staff come on Saturday, unpaid just to work in their classrooms,”
reiterated Principal A. In terms of servicing the diverse needs of students, high school Principals
are employing a wide range of strategies to ensure student success. “The target is to graduate a
high number of students on time,” reiterated Principal E.
Asset-Based Leadership
School-based leadership is a complex activity that occurs through the interactions of
school administrators, teachers, parents, and students within a unique social context of specific
classrooms, schools, and communities (Sudsberry & Kandel-Cisco, 2013). Asset-based
leadership is a transformative approach to leadership, leaving aside unilateral decision making
and honoring the resources of diverse leadership teams formed by students, teachers, and
administrators who bring coherence to the school community in terms of multiculturalism
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 146
(Sudsberry & Kandel-Cisco, 2013). In addition, Sudsberry and Kandel-Cisco (2013) pointed out
that asset-based leadership is transformative and distributed that purposefully integrates these
resources into school and classroom-level decision making. It disperses leadership activity and
decision making across all stakeholders, making it an inclusive community that acknowledges
the power of diverse thinking and greatly impacts learners (Sudsberry & Kandel-Cisco, 2013).
Instructional Learning Teams (ILTs) promote school improvement and teacher collaboration
allowing them to exchange ideas and best practices of the profession with other professionals.
For example, all Principals shared meeting with diverse groups of decision makers throughout
the week and throughout the month to discuss and prioritize allocation of resources. Principal D
expressed the following, “I obtain input from diverse pockets of decision makers within the
school community.” The principal along with assistant principals oversee the implementation of
curriculum and instruction as well as the managerial aspect of running a successful learning
environment. The combined evidence gathered from all Principals is summarized in the
following quote, “I meet with my assistant principals, department chairs, Magnet coordinator,
Title I and Title III coordinators, Bilingual Coordinator, and testing coordinators, as well as
Instructional coaches, Special Education, Social Emotional Coordinator, Chapter chair, Cafeteria
manager, Plant manager, and PSA counselor,” enumerated Principal A. The frequency and time
allocated to meet and collaborate vary from school to school. Some Principals meet weekly with
their leadership teams comprised of department chairs, coordinators, head counselor, chapter
chair, and other stakeholders. Throughout the four weeks, Principals attend professional
development themselves to bring back to their schools and share valuable information shared
with lead teachers and department chairs so that the information could be distributed to faculty in
general.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 147
Adaptive Leadership
Grounded in the Adaptive School model of Garmston and Wellman (2016), it becomes
increasingly important not to fall in the trap of rushing out judgments or being seduced by the
comfort of action; effective leadership is widely distributed, informed, and deeply developed.
Under the school-based management model, all Principals agreed on a collaborative system to
make decisions. Both systems converge on all points of leadership, “at a high school, you cannot
survive unless you have distributed leadership,” asserted Principal A. Quality decisions require
the leadership team to slow down to think, to inquire, to talk together the hard-to-talk-about
details of learning, teaching, assessment, and the cumulative effects of their work with students
(Garmston & Wellman, 2016). Each school is unique; however, there are social patterns that are
easily recognizable, when people gather in groups to work together, human energy and synergy
matters as much as the tools for developing and facilitating collaborative groups (Garmston &
Wellman, 2016). Furthermore, change requires more than linear thought, old problem-solving
formulas, and recycled strategic plans. To meet these new challenges of human organizations
and individuals, new and increasingly flexible forms are needed to improve student learning, the
growing body of work on the impact of collaborative adult professional cultures in schools offers
positive and productive means for organizing the work of on-going school improvement
(Garmston & Wellman, 2016).
Authentic Partnerships
Organizations according to Bolman and Deal (2013) are coalitions made up of
individuals and sub-coalitions, where goals emerge out of a bargaining process among coalition
members. Getting things done in an organization involves working through a complex network
of individuals and groups, friends, and allies who make things a lot easier (Bolman & Deal,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 148
2013). All Principals indicated having partnered with different agencies to improve student
achievement. Some of those organizations include: (e.g. Los Angeles Education Partnership
[LAEP], Ace Mentor program, local clinics, and others). Timperley (2011) added that the
sustainability element requires developing interdependence with those with specific expertise in
each field of interest to influence change. From a political perspective, goals, structure, and
policies emerge from an ongoing process of bargaining and negotiation among major interest
groups (Bolman & Deal, 2013). A coalition can survive only if it offers sufficient inducements
to keep essential members on board, not an easy task because resources such as money, time,
information, and decision-making capacity are limited (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Moreover, a key
difference between successful leaders has been attentiveness to building and cultivating working
relationships with friends and allies (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Consequently, Bolman and Deal
(2013) elaborated that leaders who spend little time building networks had much more difficulty
getting things done.
Collaboration is a joint effort between two or more people, free from hidden agendas, to
produce an output in response to a common goal or shared priority. Often this output is greater
than what any of the individuals could have produced working alone (Kayser, 2011). In
addition, Million and Vare (1997) suggested that potential collaborators need to tackle a specific
school-based problem that allows them to grow into their roles as egalitarian participants.
Million and Vare (1997) identified two conditions that are central to successful workplace
culture collaboration: (a) the participants must be equal in status, and (b) they must have
“mutually agreed-upon goals, shared goals, equality of roles, and equal participation in the
decision-making process” (710-711). Among the Principals interviewed, they shared having
certain partnership with colleges and universities to work closely with students who are on track
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 149
and aligned with their course work. For example, “right now we are working on something
called demonstration school site where more university staff members are going to be on our
campus,” shared Principal D. Furthermore, to operate efficiently, Professional Development
(PD) needs to provide participants with sufficient autonomy to reconcile the conflicting values
and norms of schools (Million & Vare, 1997). If school and school personnel possess sufficient
autonomy to create organic partnerships, they will simultaneously create a common culture with
values unique to the hybrid organization (Million & Vare, 1997). “We have dual enrollment
classes where college professors come to teach classes at our campus,” indicated Principal A. In
a collaborative school, administrators would also collaborate with teachers and researchers in
building an appropriate environment for teaching, learning, and research (Million & Vare, 1997).
Transferring good habits of leadership into the educational setting fortifies the foundation
for developing school, family, and community partnerships where Epstein (1995) recommended
and outlined the benefits in school climate, improved school programs, through family services
and support, increased parents’ skills and leadership, and by connecting families with others in
the school and in the community resulting in better relationship with teachers. Of course, the
main reason for creating this symbiotic partnership is to help students succeed in a caring
community where those learned skills will serve students in life (Epstein, 1995).
School-Based Management Model (SBMM)
Under successful School-Based Management (SBM), shared leadership expands
engagement of local participants in the school’s work which helps sustain attention and provides
substantial support for improvements in the classroom instruction and student learning (Briggs &
Wohlstetter, 2003). In contrast, Briggs and Wohlstetter (2003) exemplified that principals are
more likely to focus on distributing power, generating agreement around the school goals,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 150
encouraging all teachers to participate in school improvement efforts, collecting information, and
utilizing the skills and abilities of many individuals in school site council such as faculty,
parents, and students in decision making. The inclusion of diverse members of the school
community in creating actionable goals for student achievement conduces to a trusting climate
among stakeholders at the local setting. In summary, all Principals demonstrated a clear
understanding of the structures needed to run an effective school environment for all
stakeholders involved in a school-based management model (SBMM) system.
Problem Solving and Decision Making
It is not enough to exemplify leadership traits and principles, the leader must know how
to plan strategically and make short- and long-term decisions foreseeing potential problems and
solutions which benefit or harm student achievement in the community (Hesselbein & Shinseki,
2004). Citing an old proverb, Marzano et al. (2005) exemplified that a vision without a plan is
just a dream, and a plan without a vision is drudgery, but a vision with a plan can change the
world. Identifying the right work is critical to the success of a school; a well-organized plan of
action will help any school leader articulate and realize a powerful vision for enhanced student
achievement (Marzano et al., 2005). Furthermore, Marzano et al. (2005) proposed a five-step
plan:
(1) Develop a strong leadership team; (2) Distribute some responsibilities throughout the
leadership team; (3) Select the right work; (4) Identify the order of magnitude implied by
the selected work; (5) Match the management style to the order of magnitude of the
change initiative. (Chapter 7)
Leading a school requires a complex array of skills; however, a purposeful community
accomplishes goals that matter to all community members through collective efficacy, the shared
belief that we can make a difference in agreed-upon processes (Marzano et al., 2005).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 151
Some of the operating principles outlined by Marzano et al. (2005) reflect values or truth
that transcend differences that can divide groups in times of stress or conflict:
(1) Significance, address questions that matter in terms of goals and utilization of
resources; (2) Quality, work exemplifies the highest quality of standards;
(3) Responsibility, operate to improve student learning; (4) Integrity, maintain an
environment of trust, respect, and common values; (5) Ethics, the work should reflect
understanding and insight regardless of race, location, or socioeconomic status; and
finally (6) Openness, decision making processes should be transparent to both internal
and external audiences. (p. 104-105)
That means that faculty, staff, and the community have an opportunity to learn and understand
how decisions have been made. (Marzano et al., 2005).
Managerial Aspect of Principals
When Principal C stated that, “I know the heartbeat of the school, it doesn’t beat without
me knowing,” it is with a solid conviction of a life-long learner characterized by Alvy and
Robbins (1998) who asserted that a principal must become efficient in the management areas
related to policies, procedures, rules and regulations, school records, finances, the master
contract and collective bargaining and grievance procedures, the school facility, and operating
the school within the limits of the law. “As principal, 90% of the time is spent in operational
stuff, especially at this school; the more diverse your school is, the more complicated,”
illustrated Principal A. “As administrators, we are in the classrooms constantly, we are engaged,
we know what is going on in the school,” pinpointed Principal C. Principals value knowing what
they should expect in terms of internalizing the principalship socialization process, exercising
skills in human relations and communication, honoring the experienced staff, balancing
leadership and management, encouraging proactive behavioral strategies, and developing a
vision for teaching and learning (Alvy & Robbins, 1998). “We get caught up in the work, we are
always focusing on the management rather than in the leading,” expressed Principal C.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 152
Management Behaviors
Table 14 shows how participants rated 10 statements as they relate to management and
the frequency with which these activities and behaviors occur at the participants’ school site.
Participants could choose only one word or phrase that indicates the frequency of occurrence on
a four-point Likert scale designed as: (e.g. (0) Never; (1) Seldom; (2) Quite Often; and (3) Very
Often) along with assigned numbers ranging from zero to three to calculate the mean and
standard of deviation used for validity and reliability purposes.
Table 14
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Activities and Behaviors (N=21)
Principal frequency of
activities and behaviors
Never
0
Seldom
1
Quite
Often
2
Very
Often
3
Mean
Standard
of
Deviation
I make sure that the
professional development
activities of teachers are in
accordance with the teaching
goals of the school.
47.62%
10
52.38%
11
2.52
1.59
I ensure that teachers work
according to the school's
educational goals.
38.10%
8
61.90%
13
2.62
1.62
I observe instruction in the
classrooms.
61.90%
13
38.10%
8
2.38
1.54
I use student performance
results to develop the school's
educational goals.
14.29%
3
52.38%
11
38.10%
8
2.33
1.53
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 153
Table 14 (Cont’d,)
Principal frequency of
activities and behaviors
Never
0
Seldom
1
Quite
Often
2
Very
Often
3
Mean
Standard
of
Deviation
I give teachers suggestions as
to how they can improve their
teaching.
23.81%
5
38.10%
8
38.10%
8
2.14
1.46
I inform teachers about
possibilities of updating their
knowledge and skills.
23.81%
5
38.10%
8
38.10%
8
2.14 1.46
I check to see whether
classroom activities are
keeping up with the school's
educational goals.
14.29%
3
57.14%
12
28.57%
6
2.14 1.46
I take exam results into
account in decisions
regarding curriculum
development.
23.81%
5
52.38%
11
23.81%
5
2 1.41
I ensure that there is clarity
concerning the responsibility
for coordinating the
curriculum.
14.29%
3
71.42%
15
14.29%
3
3.57 1.89
When a teacher brings up a
classroom problem, we solve
the problem together.
14.29%
3
52.38%
11
33.33%
7
2.19 1.48
The first three statements starting from top to bottom on the left-hand side of the chart,
1. I make sure that the professional development activities of teachers are in accordance
with the teaching goals of the school.
2. I ensure that teachers work according to the school's educational goals.
3. I observe instruction in the classrooms.
For these three statements, a combination of the choices ‘quite often’ and ‘very often,’ indicate
100% consensus among respondents. Statements four, five, six, seven, eight, nine and ten, on
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 154
the other hand were marked with a ‘seldom’ option which fluctuated between 14.29% to 23.81%.
Furthermore, the combination of percentages ‘quite often’ and ‘very often’ ranging from 76.19%
to 90.47% show a three fourths approval for each statement. Further analysis of the chart reveals
a fluctuating mean ranging from 2 to 3.57. In like manner, the standard of deviation ranged from
1.41 to 1.89.
High Student Expectations
High student expectation is a complex construct of unconscious anticipations of
performance or competence by teachers and administrators who must be fully informed about the
true definition of what high student expectations looks like, and sounds like in the school or
classroom environment, where all students experience similar opportunities to learn (Quintero,
2014). However, Quintero (2014) exemplified a broad conceptualization of ability and a
cooperative environment are some of the necessary conditions to allow students the opportunity
to speak up, defend, and agree or disagree with suggestions and criticism by others. “We need to
raise the bar academically, our students already come high preforming, we have very high
offerings and very high results, so the rigor is there,” exemplified Principal C. In comparison,
“we just need to add rigor to all our general classes just as our AP program,” commented
Principal C. A vivid example of high student expectations was expressed repeatedly by Principal
A stated the following, “they [teachers] are here because they love kids and they believe in all
children are miracles, that’s our school culture.” Congruent to this notion Murphy, Weil,
Hallinger, and Mitman (1982) expressed,
By having school level policies that communicate high expectations to students and
faculty, schools promote academic achievement instilling self-concept of academic
ability, the belief that one is capable of high academic achievement and academic
efficacy, the belief that one’s efforts can make a difference in school (pg. 23).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 155
Principal A sated, “We are student centered, having low expectations is not allowed, it is
in the language that you [teachers] use, teachers police each other here, that’s for the most part,
not always but 90% of the time.”
One of my own personal things is making sure that there is no such thing as CORE and
Non-CORE… If you teach Physical Education, Music, Drama, Spanish, you are just as
important as someone who teaches English, Science, Social Science, and Math… We
call it CORE support… We are not going to call it Non-CORE because I think it is
disrespectful. A Physical Education teacher teaches as much as any other teacher, no less
or vice versa.” Under that climate of high expectations, we expect [positive] results in
Mathematics; we expect results in Physical Education.” (Principal C).
In summary, all Principals shared the same philosophy of having high expectations from
the students they serve. Principal A talked about the logistics involved in making sure that
students with ability and students with the greatest needs are properly placed with, “our top
teachers, one of the greatest need with a strong teacher, because if they had it, they could be
successful, so even if a teacher, for example, has four sections of honors, that teacher would still
have a section of the ELL kids.”
Parent Involvement
Under the new measurements of accountability and continuous improvement system
developed in California to oversee if local educational agencies (LEA) are meeting priority areas
for the needs of diverse students in each annual local indicator under Local Control Funding
Formula (LCFF) which includes: “(1) seeking input from parents/guardians in school and district
decision making; and (2) promoting parental participation in programs” (CDE, 2017a, Table 1).
According to the information provided by the California Department of Education (2017a), the
summary of progress is based either on information collected through surveys of
parents/guardians or other local measures. Under either option, the LEA briefly describes why it
chose the selected measures related to the goals established for other priorities in its Local
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 156
Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP). Under these two accountability measures, the
“targeted pupils are those classified as English Learners (EL), [who] meet income requirements
to receive a free or reduced-price meal (FRPM), foster youth, or any combination of these
factors,” not duplicating the count (CDE, 2017c, School District and Charter School LCFF
Funding, para. 4). Based on these indicators, interviewed Principals mentioned several areas
under which parents participate in the school. Principal B stated, “Parents participate in a couple
of ways, first at our Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) by giving feedback through
surveys.” After conducting research on that response, the comment made more sense. “Parents
are involved in decision-making,” stated Principal A. On the other hand, Principal C shared,
“parent involvement is very minimal, they participate in ELAC,” [English Learner Advisory
Committee]. A committee comprised of parents, staff, and community members specifically
designated to advise school officials on English Learner program services (CDE, 2016c).
Principal C also mentioned DELAC in the response provided to illustrate parent participation.
To clarify the acronym, DELAC stands for District English Language Advisory Committee for
County Offices of Education that serve 50 or more English Language Leaners (CDE, 2016c).
Parents voice their opinions on the direction of the school. I meet with them every
month, like the first Friday of the month where I provide them with updates and for them
to get input as to the direction of the school is taking, and that is open to all parents. In
addition, we have the ELAC meeting, which is a recommending committee and then the
decision-making committee will be the school site council; that group is comprised of
teachers and support personnel, students, parents, myself.” (Principal D).
“You build a culture of support and understanding,” stated Principal B. “We have the
parent center to support students and parents, especially now when students don’t know what is
going to happen [referring to current immigration policy]; however, outside organizations are
helping,” expressed Principal D. “I think that the main thing is getting the parents on board, it
would take a lot of effort because these are the neediest kids and they have the neediest situations
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 157
at home as well,” added Principal D. “Parents really like the academic programs here; half of the
school is magnet, they [students] are picked up from all over the place, students come from far
away, they get up at 5 o’ clock in the morning to get here,” emphasized Principal A. “However,
we are still working on communicating with parents to participate during Back to School Night
and parent conference; we still have a low participation rate across the board,” concluded
Principal A. In summary, the synthesis of the narrative provided by all the Principals serves as
evidence of how much effort they are applying to involve the parent community in the day-to-
day activities of the schools.
Professional Development
School-based professional development is the strategy schools and school districts use to
expose educators and administrators to a variety of educational experiences designed to help
these professionals analyze student achievement data during the school year to immediately
identify learning problems, develop solutions, and promptly apply those solutions to address
students’ needs (Mizell, 2010). New and veteran teachers juggle an overwhelming number of
activities, such as classroom management, instruction, curriculum, school culture and operations,
test preparation and administration, state standards, parent relations, and interactions with other
teachers (Mizell, 2010). Under School Based Management (SBM) systems, schools have the
autonomy to use a variety of schedules to provide collaborative learning time for teachers and
administrators to strengthen their practice (Mizell, 2010). Evidence of ongoing professional
development was present in every language of every Principal interviewed. Every school has
different structures in place to facilitate professional development according to their needs. To
illustrate the concept, Principal A has synthesized the essence of what other Principals are doing
in their respective schools:
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 158
Last year we talked about needing more professional development (PD) time; teachers
got together with the schedule committee, they looked at different schools and modeled
ours after some of them. We alternate professional development (PD) between
departments and small learning communities (SLC), one department meeting and three
small community meetings every month. Furthermore, professional development is run
by department chairs and lead teachers. In addition, every Thursday we do optional
teacher led PD or Teachers Choice, where a staff member leads PD on something that
he/she is passionate about and wants to share with 12 to 15 teachers. The topics could be
on building vocabulary or explicit EL differentiation, social emotional learning. We have
one person leading social emotional in each of our small schools, about 70% of the teams
are doing the training and implementing it. In terms of differentiation, we have teachers
who get together and do thematic lesson planning, comprised of three general education
teachers, one special education teacher. Incorporating these services into our curriculum
help ELLs and our special education kids have access to the curriculum. (Principal A).
Collaborative Systems of Enquiry
Collaborative inquiry according to Palmisano (2012) changes the professional learning
experience by reframing how professional knowledge is constructed and applied. Collaborative
inquiry engages educators in self-directed and participatory learning, moving beyond collective
passive learning to learning with and from colleagues through action and reflection (Palmisano,
2012). Through collaborative inquiry, educators demonstrate increased agency in their practice
and ownership of their professional learning (Palmisano, 2012). Educators uncover tacit
knowledge, (e.g., intuitive judgments, complex decision making, and, in a broad sense, learning
about the complex covariations among events that characterize the environment) and come to
individual and shared understandings of how, why, and under what conditions instruction and
leadership yield positive student results (Palmisano, 2012; Reber, 1989). “Teachers don’t whine
about the extra work; they look for ways to being innovative, they take it upon themselves to
learn inquiry-based learning, how to do project-based learning, and how to facilitate it,”
exemplified Principal A. Educators engage in learning and conversation from inside their
practice and build on their professional knowledge by examining and reflecting on new learning
through the lens of prior knowledge and experience, new information and data, and the impact of
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 159
their actions (Palmisano, 2012). They emphasize research-based strategies to improve teaching
and learning and initiate discussions about instructional approaches, both in teams and with
individual teachers (Mendels, 2012). Professional learning centers on investigating shared
problems or questions of practice as they relate to student learning (Palmisano, 2012). As a
result, individual and collective action become more internal, coherent, and evidence based in the
recurring cycles of planning, action, and reflection that increase student achievement in various
settings serving diverse student populations (Palmisano, 2012).
Table 15 demonstrates the opinion or view of how well teachers collaborate with
leadership and colleagues at the school site; 61.9% of the participants indicated ‘somewhat well’
from the range of options; 23.81% picked ‘very well’ as a second option; and 14.29% elected
‘extremely well.’ The chart reveals that 38.10% of the participants collaborate well at the school
sites, creating a positive school experience among all stakeholders.
Table 15
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Teachers Collaborate with Leadership Team
and Colleagues (N= 21)
Demographic
Independent
Variables
f
%
Leadership Team Colleagues Extremely well 3 14.29
Very well 5 23.81
Somewhat well 13 61.90
Slightly well
Not at all well
Total 21 100
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 160
The Four Frames of Leadership
According to Bolman and Deal (2013), leadership is composed of the following four
distinct lenses or leadership frames: the structural frame, human resources frame, the political
frame, and symbolic frame. Together the frames decipher the full array of significant clues,
capturing a more comprehensive picture of what is going on and what to do as a leader (Bolman
& Deal, 2013).
Structural Frame
Regarding structural leadership, school principals need to be concerned with building
effective structures for schools by helping to clarify school goals and lines of authority, and
focusing on tasks, facts, and logic, more than on personality and emotions (Alsmadi &
Mahasneh, 2011). If structure is overlooked, Bolman and Deal (2013) caution an organization
often misdirects energy and resources. It may, for example, waste time and money on massive
training programs in vain effort to solve problems that relate to social architecture rather than
with people’s skills or attitudes; may bring new teachers, who fall victim to the same structural
flaws that doomed the predecessors (Bolman & Deal, 2013). For that reason, Principals
indicated that they survey teachers before sending them to any conference or professional
development. Principal D stated,
To build capacity, if I hear about something that would benefit our students, I always
bring it back to our key group [Instructional Learning Team] to pass the word along to
see if anybody is interested in attending; for example, a technology conference.
Under the distributed leadership model, all Principals coincided by describing a
collaborative environment among the diverse groups who make decisions at the school site.
“When I first came here, I was the fifth principal that year; they had three interim principals
before I was selected,” shared Principal A. Furthermore, Principal A detailed some of the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 161
strategies utilized to bring cohesiveness and stability within the small schools: “I mean, there
were no systems in place, it was a hot mess.” Principal A concluded,
There was a conflict between the haves and have nots, between the magnet and the
community school; so, I started meeting every week with lead teachers of my small
schools right of way, and started talking about the needs in each group and started getting
an idea of where we wanted to go, and really coming up with a game plan, working
together to put together kind of a vision.
The Human Resource Frame
Human resource leadership involves school principals empowering, supporting,
advocating, and inspiring all school personnel who could be involved in students’ achievements
and development (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011). This focuses on increasing teachers’
participation and their sharing of appropriate information, and involving them in decision-
making processes through attitudes of trust and professionalism and using skills of listening and
communication (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011). Bolman and Deal (2013) portrayed the human
resource frame as the relationship of interdependence between people and the organizations.
People need organizations for the intrinsic and extrinsic rewards they offer, but their respective
needs are not always aligned. Organizations need people for their energy, effort, and talent.
When the fit between people and organization is poor, one or both suffer; individuals may feel
neglected or oppressed, and organizations sputter because individuals withdraw their efforts or
even work against organizational purposes (Bolman & Deal, 2013). “As a principal, you don’t
want to send educators to conferences because you think they are good,” explained Principal C.
Furthermore, Principal C added, “you ask, what interests you? We send them to areas they are
interested in and want to attend,” said Principal C. “You are providing them the opportunity,
you have the resources to send them out to AP trainings, and now with all the big push, and the
standards changing, and the NGSS [Next Generation Science Standards] for our science,”
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 162
Principal C explained. “We have a huge budget for collaboration, for teachers to pull our
departments; we have them collaborate on lesson plans, on assessments, and common lessons.”
(Principal C). Most of the principals talked about the professional development, allocating
resources towards teacher collaboration, conferences attendance and unforeseen expenses. For
example,
One thing that I can share is that this year, we have a lot of newcomers. These kids are
coming with no English skills, they don’t speak the language. For me it was a concern,
so many new comers, I had to address the concern with the key people, teachers who
would be affected and what I did, I opened another section to help alleviate, mitigate the
problem, but at an expense.” (Principal C)
In both survey and interview data, the human resource frame surfaced as the leading priority in
Principals’ agendas.
We make sure resources are distributed equally. Like this year in terms of IMA
[Instructional Materials] everybody got the same amount, every small school; we have
five small schools including magnet; everybody got the same number of school buses,
because we do a lot of field trips, every grade level gets a field trip in each small school,
there is equal amount of conference attendance funding, equal amount of technology
purchases. (Principal A).
The Political Frame
Under the political leadership model, transformational leaders use both formal and
informal authority to build support structures that benefit student progress (Alsmadi &
Mahasneh, 2011). In this they typically utilize skills of persuasion, collaboration, and
negotiation to overcome barriers that limit progress of the academic organization (Alsmadi &
Mahasneh, 2011). Furthermore, Bolman and Deal (2013) defined the political frame as: politics
is the realistic process of making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and
divergent interests. This view puts politics at the heart of decision making and organizational
excellence, which demands a sophisticated social skill: a leadership skill that can mobilize
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 163
people and accomplish important objectives despite a dozen of obstacles; a skill that can pull
people together for meaningful purposes despite thousands of forces that push objectives apart; a
skill that can keep corporations and public institutions from descending into mediocracy
characterized by bureaucratic infighting, parochial politics, and vicious power struggles (Bolman
& Deal, 2013). For example, “the community is very supportive of the school and wants us to be
successful, it is the cornerstone of our community; you talk to businesses of the community and
politicians as well as the chamber of commerce,” explained Principal A. Another example
shared by Principals, the alumni association being involved in fund raising for scholarships.
“We have different fund raisers to provide scholarships to our kids every year,” stated Principal
D.
The Symbolic Frame
The symbolic leadership frame involves inspiring and supporting other personnel to help
achieve, discover and communicate the vision through modeling and using selective messages,
impressions, and symbols to focus attention onto what is important and valued in the school
(Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011). The symbolic frame combines various elements in an
organization on which actors play their roles and hope to communicate their right impression to
their audience: a community of faith, bounded by shared beliefs, traditions, myths, rituals, and
ceremonies (Bolman & Deal, 2013). A symbolic leader leads by example, uses the symbols to
capture attention, frames experience, communicates a vision, tells stories, and respects and uses
history (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The way Principals communicated this aspect of leadership
within their schools is not apparent to the untrained observer. Principals talked about various
aspects of recognition either by the district or other entities related to the field of education. For
example, “this year, speaking of academics, our academic decathlon was the most improved
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 164
from the entire district,” shared Principal D. In addition, “our team received that honor in skills
USA, different metals in all three levels, so we are very proud of that,” stated Principal D.
Principal B shared some of their accomplishments, “our AP program has been nationally
recognized by the College Board; our visual and performing arts is competitive nationwide; we
have participated in the Carnegie Hall, all over the country; well decorated drama, choir, and our
ACE [Mentor] program as well.” Principal A shared,
there’s a sense of pride among the teachers and students, this year over 80% of the
students took the SBAC [Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium], we were the most
improved school in the city and we had some of the highest SBAC scores not only just in
the city, but in the state of California, we beat all of the West side schools in the Smarter
Balanced Test; I know and I feel that it is not healthy to compete with each other, but to
keep our district from losing kids to charters, it was a lot of fun.
All Principals surveyed and interviewed demonstrated through a clear understanding of the four
frames of leadership.
Table 16 reflects the overall view of positive attributes of a school leader. Of the total
participants, 100% chose Human Resource on the survey; 76.19% elected the Structural Frame
as a positive attribute of school leader; both Political and Symbolism frame received a 52.38%
rating;14.29% of the participants selected the Other as a positive attribute of school leader.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 165
Table 16
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants’ Opinion on Positive Attributes of a School
Leader (N = 21)
Demographic
Independent
Variables
f
%
Positive Attributes of School
Leader
Political 11 52.38
Symbolism 11 53.38
Human Resources 21 100
Structural 16 76.19
Other 3 14.29
Research Question 3: How do school principals influence how secondary school teachers of
English Language Learners (ELLs) plan and align their instructional objectives and assessment
plans with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and English Language Development
(ELD) Standards?
How Does the Principal Influence Instruction for Teachers?
Strategic Planning
The Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the
academic performance of all students to the level of performance goals established under the
California Academic Performance Index (Campbell, 2005). However, on March 15, 2017, the
State Board of Education (SBE) and the California Department of Education (CDE, 2017a)
launched a new accountability system to replace the Academic Performance Index (API) to
better measure our State's educational goals. The Dashboard contains reports that display the
performance of local educational agencies (LEAs), schools, and student groups on a set of state
and local measures to assist in identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas in need of
improvement (CDE, 2017a). California's new accountability and continuous improvement
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 166
system is based on a five-by-five colored table that produces 25 results using five colors. The
reports display the schools' (by district) and student groups' placement on the five-by-five
colored tables (CDE, 2017a).
Based on the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which was passed in 2013,
California has a new accountability system that is based on multiple measures. These measures
are used to determine local educational agency (LEA) and school progress toward meeting the
needs of their students. The measures are based on factors that contribute to a quality education,
including high school graduation rates, college/career readiness, student test scores, English
learner (EL) progress, suspension rates, and parent engagement (CDE, 2017a).
Based on the objectives emphasized above, when prompted to describe their role in the
schools’ comprehensive plan for increased student achievement varied in language, however,
they were in alignment with the performance indicators. For example, Principal D described the
many functions of responsibility of overseeing, “as an instructional leader, my role is key, I have
worked on the single plan for student achievement for many years now.” In addition, “my role is
basically working with the school site council, selecting goals that are achievable,” highlighted
Principal D. “Planning instructional activities and programs that work at the school and then
figuring out who is going to oversee monitoring those plans to make sure that they happen and
then selecting achievable smart goals” specified Principal D. According to the Santa Clara
County of Education (SCCOE, 2017), one way to increase the chances that a plan will make a
difference is the way it is written and executed. As the acronyms explicitly outline, goals should
be: Specific; Measurable; Attainable; Realistic; and Timely (S.M.A.R.T.; SCCOE, 2017).
Principal A described her role in the implementation of the plan as follows, “I have my
finger in everything, that’s in every layer.” “Remember how we were talking about the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 167
organizational structures, so when I meet with my administrative team, and that’s operational,
right? Each of my administrators supervises a department, or a small school,” recapitulated
Principal A. Furthermore, “when there is professional development, we are there to support
whoever is leading,” shared Principal A. Principal A emphasized,
Each person has their area where they are supporting our kids with a common vision.
Each teacher in each classroom is doing ‘A’ level work, having a common pacing plan, a
common theme, common expectations, you teach in your own style, but you should be
teaching in the same sequence.
Every Principal has his or her unique style of approaching the necessary responsibility to comply
with local district and the state mandates. “My role in the comprehensive plan is minimal,”
stated Principal B. “I don’t get involved, but leadership committee is very involved in updating
and making changes;” “I am more involved in overseeing and being part of the gathering of the
data” (Principal B).
Instruction and Curriculum
Table 17 shows how participants distributed their approval based on a question that asked
them to check all that apply in terms of what participants considered the specific instructional
and curricular shifts teachers are asked to implement to improve English Language Leaners’
achievement. Literacy Skills is leading the chart with 100% approval; next ELD/ELA Standards
received 76.19% of the approval; thirdly Content Specific Frameworks received a 61.90%
approval; an equal distribution was attributed to Language Proficiency with 52.38% approval;
followed by 21st Century Skills approval of 52.38%; and similarly, Reclassification and
Redesignation received 52.38%.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 168
Table 17
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Instructional and Curricular Shifts (N = 21)
Demographic Independent Variables f %
Instructional and Curricular Shifts ELD/ELA Standards 16 76.19
Language Proficiency 11 52.38
Content Specific Frameworks 13 61.90
21st Century Skills 11 52.38
Reclassification/Re-designation 11 52.38
Literacy Skills 21 100
Other
Hiring High Quality Teachers/Teacher Effectiveness
All teachers want to succeed in the classroom, when the necessary resources are in place
and implemented properly, and when staff are trained to move forward with instruction to assist
students in achieving at their highest levels, recruiting and retaining qualified staff who know
their content and modify instruction to maximize student learning, that alone deeply enhance
student achievement (McElroy, LaCour, & Cortese, 2007). “As a principal, you must be
strategic in your master schedule and in assigning the best people there is” stated Principal B.
Furthermore, “If you do not have it in your school, you must look outside your school to find the
right fit, and remember it is not only about liking kids, you must want their success and
challenge them too,” emphasized Principal B. Moving forward and working together requires
the development of new partnerships as well as the collective commitment of all stakeholders to
meet the school agenda (McElroy et al., 2007). To exemplify that concept, Principal D, stated, in
various areas of the interview that “to ensure that our students reclassify, I brought a small group
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 169
of teachers during the summer to plan professional development for the beginning of the year.
[During that time,] we explored different topics to present to our faculty.” “Monthly, I present to
our faculty to give them updates about the data and about what we are doing to make sure ELLs
reclassify,” said Principal D. “It’s all of us [educators] at our school, not only the three teachers
who teach our ELL population,” reiterated Principal D. Ultimately, “the key of the success of
the program is high quality instruction in the classroom, and making sure that our ELLs have
access to the content,” concluded Principal D. To propel student academic success, schools must
become places where adults and students alike feel safe and inspired professionally (McElroy et
al., 2007). “You the educators who understand what it is to be an English Learner,” pointed out
Principal B. Under the same premise, Principal C reinforced high teacher quality, “you have to
have the love for teaching English Learners.” On the other hand, school administrators should
establish goals and objectives for recruiting effective teachers through marketing strategies that
illuminate the positive elements of the school, the community, and the surrounding area
(McElroy et al., 2007). Most of the Principals talked about having a hiring committee in place
comprised of: (e.g. Department chair, a parent, a student, secretary, chapter chair, among others).
As a final note for principals, Bland, Church, and Luo (2014) recommended three ways to
increase the number of teachers who continue working effectively in classrooms for more than a
few years:
[let them] obtain mastery, Teachers flourish when they feel good about their work. …
[2] the concept of purpose. Teachers are in the classroom because they want to improve
the learning of their students . . . [and] have a positive effect on students…. [3] teachers
to be allowed autonomy regarding instruction, . . . [not] a tightly controlled scripted
curriculum delivery that provides the teacher no freedom regarding instruction, pacing,
and assessment (Coggins & Diffenbaugh, 2013, Retention, para. 2).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 170
Time Spent on Instruction
Table 18 represents an assessment of how often the participants engage on their daily
schedule in terms of instructional versus managerial activities; 52.38% indicated daily; 14.29%
picked weekly; in similar manner, semi-monthly received 14.29%; and 19.04% indicated a
monthly reflection.
Table 18
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Time Spend on Instructional Versus Managerial
Activities (N =21)
Demographic Independent Variables f %
Instructional versus
Managerial
Daily 11 52.38
Weekly 3 14.29
Semi-monthly 3 14.29
Monthly 4 19.04
Other
Total 21 100
Teacher Evaluation
Effective teacher evaluation collects multiple data points about teacher effectiveness
through various methods, the most common being direct classroom observations, formal and
informal conducted by principals, which at the end informs their rating of teachers’ effectiveness
on a summative evaluation scale (Young, S, Range, Hvidston & Mette, 2015). During these
classroom observations, principals collect data pertaining to teachers’ explicit teaching behaviors
so they can provide formative day-to-day feedback to teachers (Young, S., et al., 2015). “I have
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 171
been at this school for many years now, I know our teachers…. I know them pretty well, I know
what they like teaching, and what they need in terms of professional development,” indicated
Principal C. In support of the argument, Principal B added that, “you look at how they have
been teaching, their credentials, and when you do classroom observations and walk-throughs you
see what their needs are and then you tailor training and support for them.” During formal and
informal classroom observations, principals collect a wide variety of classroom variables such as
teachers’ ability to provide clear learning objectives, established classroom rules and objectives,
differentiated instruction, student engagement, effective communication, and sustainability of a
safe classroom environment (Young, S., et al., 2015). Principal C explained, “Sometimes is not
even about teacher evaluation…. During walk-throughs, you notice the projector doesn’t work
you must help solve that problem, or you leave them a thank you note about a lesson or strategy
you see them implementing.” In addition, Principal C stated,
We have a teacher who travels, she was very frustrated, because she must move three
times during the day, to ease her frustration I bought her the best cart there is and gave
her key to the elevator and made her life much easier.
On the other hand, Principal A, painted a different scenario,
Some people stand out, we try to do more peer coaching. For example, a teacher who
had no class control. I talked to the union representative and we paid two teachers that
kind of have similar demeanor to help this [teacher], they would observe and give
[teacher] feedback on how to improve class control.
Finally, in alignment with another process gaining popularity in teaching evaluation is
consulting teachers who mentor and evaluate novice or struggling teachers regularly under the
expertise of the principal as the assessor (Young, S., et al., 2015). In summary, to make sure
English Learners reclassify, “the ELL coordinator went around and tapped the teachers she
thought would be good for her EL kids, they all have good working relationship, they get
together and plan, teachers who are teaching our kids are good,” concluded Principal A.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 172
Teacher Evaluation
Table 19 demonstrates how often the work of teachers is appraised either by the
participant, colleagues, or any external professional with expertise in education; 61.9% of the
respondents indicated once every two years; 23.81% indicated twice or more per year; and
14.29% selected once per year.
Table 19
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants Teacher Work Appraised by Principal or
Colleague (N = 21)
Demographic Independent Variables f %
Teacher Work Appraised Never
Less than once every two years
Once every two years 13 61.90
Once per year 3 14.29
Twice or more per year 5 23.81
Total 21 100
Teacher Self-Efficacy
A recurring topic throughout the five Principals interviewed was self-efficacy from the
teachers’ perspective and the need for students to understand their own strengths and weaknesses
in the academic field. Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief in his or her capacity to
execute behaviors necessary to produce specific performance attainment (Lightsey, 1999). As
psychologist Albert Bandura (2000) further elaborated, individual’s sense of self-efficacy plays a
major role in how one approaches goals, tasks, and diverse challenges. Employees of high
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 173
perceived efficacy take greater initiative in their occupational self-development and generate
ideas that help them improve work processes, restructure their roles innovatively by improving
the customary practices by adding new elements and functions to them. In contrast, teachers at
the high schools selected for interviews demonstrated a high level of self-efficacy as indicated by
the Principals interviewed. “They are dynamos, I said, hey guys you cannot whine about the
magnet getting better kids, they got a better program, so we have to step it up, and that’s what
they are doing,” expressed Principal A. As a principal, “you must ask yourself deeper questions,
why didn’t it work? What can we do differently?” (Principal B). Furthermore, Principal B
clarified that, “you must be reflective, you must question yourself [and create] a KWL chart.” A
logical three-step cognitive procedure for accessing what I know, determining what I want to
learn, and recalling what I learned because of the process (Ogle, 1986). Having decided on a
course of action, one cannot sit back and wait for the performance to appear, making decisions
does not ensure that individuals will mobilize the effort to execute the desired course of action
successfully and stick to it in the face of difficulties (Bandura, 2000). In a climate of high
expectations of students and teachers, Principals agreed that it takes effort to implement targets
and goals in a rational model of decision making.
Student Self-Efficacy
There are many spheres of functioning with the scope of self-efficacy; students for
instance might not be fully aware of their strengths and weaknesses in terms of goal setting and
accomplishment. By working collaboratively for common purpose through interdependent
effort, principals and teachers pool their knowledge, skills, and resources and act in concert to
shape the students’ future (Bandura, 2000). Principal D corroborated,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 174
At the beginning of the [school] year, I introduce myself, I tell them they can do it, but
they also need to believe in themselves and that is not something that is just given to
them, they need to work very hard to meet their academic goals.
If people are persuaded to believe in themselves they will exert more effort and increase
their chances of success (Bandura, 2000). Pep talks, without enabling guidance, achieve little
advices Bandura (2000); however, self-efficacy builders do more than convey faith in others,
they are credible persuaders, knowledgeable, and practice what they preach. “Our teachers also
tell the kids that it takes effort to increase their grades,” specified Principal A. “That’s where
that whole caring piece comes out and having adults who care for the students,” illustrated
Principal B. Furthermore, people need informative feedback to adjust their behavior of how
things should be done; a common problem is that they do not fully observe their own behavior
(Bandura, 2000). On this note, all Principals agreed on having multiple people guiding,
coaching, and mentoring students academically during their high school experience.
Reclassification
To close the achievement gap between English Language Leaners (ELLs) and English
Only students (EOs), the California English Language Development Standards (ELD, CDE,
2012) have been aligned to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010; Bogatin, 2010) for
English Language Arts (ELA) supported by the Local Control Funding Formula to create
opportunities for the success and progression of K-12 outcomes for both EL and reclassified
fluent-English-proficient (RFEP) students to participate in content related opportunities (CDE,
2017b; Hill, Weston & Hayes, 2014). Most of the Principals explained how they have been
creating teacher capacity to meet state and district accountability at their school sites. For
example, Principal D shared that, teacher data chats have been crucial in creating awareness
among teachers, students, and parents. “This year, classification of ELLs has been the focus,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 175
priority,” added Principal D. Even though magnet programs do not have a high number of ELL
students, Principals still make sure everybody is involved in the process of reclassification.
Principals approach the subject of reclassification using different strategies; some facilitate
professional development utilizing whole team approach, while others leverage themselves by
allowing coaches or bilingual coordinators to present to their peers in small learning
communities or in department meetings. “I do lean on our teachers to fill that void,” shared
Principal D. “I present to all of our staff members monthly, and give them updates about the
data and about what we are doing to make sure more ELLs reclassify;” shared Principal D.
Teachers and Students Data Chats
To monitor progress in English and Language Proficiency (LEP), high school principals
address the need during weekly professional development meetings by presenting specific data to
all faculty members engaged directly or indirectly in the academic development of English
Language Leaners. “I hand out specific data after my presentation,” shared Principal D. In
addition, most Principals indicated engaging athletic coaches in the monitoring of ELLs by
talking to them about the importance of reclassification. In addition, Principal D emphasized, “I
am always available to meet with them [teachers], by talking to our teachers I get firsthand
knowledge.” By talking to students one on one, and explaining what it is that they need to do
better on the CELDT examination, Principals aimed to increase the percentage of students who
reclassify. For example, Principal A commented,
I talk to the kids about the CELDT and why they are taking it, explaining to the kids the
different sections of the test and [showing] them their previous test scores and their grade
[in their English] class, saying frankly speaking you speak better English than I do, you
got to see these three pieces of data that are yours and this is what you need to reclassify
or to be considered fluent in English.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 176
“In support of ELLs, teachers have their targets, their goals, and outlets in line they must
reach,” expressed Principal C. The evidence extracted from the interviews showed that
Principals involve faculty at various levels of leadership in the quest to reclassify or to reach the
planned goals and objectives. “We have opened discussions with the entire school, department
chairs, and bilingual coordinators to facilitate professional development on improving
instruction,” added Principal D. Principal A stated, “More and more teachers meet with students
to sheer them, mentor them, and have constructive conversations.” In support of EL
reclassification, “you got your language appraisal team, coordinator meets with the counseling
team, they go through the data with the kids, target student population (TSP), they talk about
programming, meet periodically with the teachers, recommend intervention classes,” reiterated
Principal A. In addition, Principal C added, “I spend part of my time talking to students. I have
a difficult time when I meet a student who has been here for three years and has very little
command of the English Language. That’s when the reflective piece comes into focus.”
Principal C shared some of the reflective questions: “I ask myself, what happened? What
support systems are not happening in the school? What support systems are happening at
home?” Principal C commented further,
Part of your understanding is knowing who your students are. Many times, as a leader
you must make your teachers aware. I want you to know that these are the students you
have. The only way you could do that is by having one-on-one conversations with them.
In summary, the evidence gathered from the five participating Principals shows a commitment in
accomplishing the task of reclassification.
Language Diversity School Site
Table 20 presents the broad percentage of students at the school sites whose first
language is different from the language of instruction; 61.9% of the participants elected 40% or
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 177
more but less than 60% as a primary option; 14.29% elected the option that represents 20% or
more but less than 40%; in like manner, 14.29% picked the option that contains 10% or more but
less than 20%; and 9.52% registered 60% or more as an option. The table reveals that more than
half of the student population at these school sites speak a language other than English at home.
Table 20
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants First Language Different from Language of
Instruction (N = 21)
Demographics Individual Variables f %
Language Different than English Less than 10%
10% or more but less than 20% 3 14.29
20% or more but less than 40% 3 14.29
40% or more but less than 60% 13 61.90
60% or more 2 9.52
Total 21 100
Data and Assessments to Guide Instruction
According to the U. S. Department of Education (USDE), educators need tools to help
them continually monitor students’ progress and adjust instructional strategies to target and
support students’ needs (USDE, 2016a). By providing rigorous monitoring systems such as
interim/benchmarks, formative and summative assessments, educators target instruction and
provide additional support services to those students who are not making appropriate progress
and provide additional support to enable ELLs to reach English Proficiency and gain grade level
content knowledge (USDE, 2016a).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 178
According to Perie, Marion, and Gong (2009), there are many forms of interim
assessments currently available, often labeled “benchmark,” “formative,” “diagnostic,” or
“predictive.” They can be given early in the school year, mid-way through, or periodically
throughout the year (Perie et al., 2009). The one common thread is that they are designed to give
information about the students’ level of knowledge and skills before the end of the school year.
(Perie et al., 2009). Throughout the interviews, Principals talked about utilizing assessments to
help them guide their instructional programs offered at their school sites. By using valid and
reliable assessments aligned to the CCSS (2010) and ELD standards (CDE, 2012), administrators
and faculty make informed decisions about instruction throughout the year (USDE, 2016a). To
exemplify and support how assessments are utilized by all learning institutions under this study,
Principals shared several ways to monitor student progress. Principal D explained,
I think that a very good piece of data [utilized] as an indicator of how students are doing
are teachers’ tests and students’ grades; English department is telling me based on what
they are seeing that 11th grade students have lower skills this year than last year, that is
qualitative data.
In addition, Principal D expressed,
I think that this is a very good piece of data because unlike the SBAC’s [Smarter
Balanced Assessment Consortium] data chats with students utilizing that tool takes time
and then we rely just on that data for a whole year.
For clarification, SBAC is an online assessment system aligned to the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS, 2010), a tool for educators to improve teaching and learning (SBAC,
2012). By having access to formative assessments, principals have access to monitor and guide
instruction according to need. “Another form to keep track of student progress is interim
assessments,” added Principal D. “We have them collaborate on lesson planning and common
assessments,” concluded Principal C. “I take it very seriously because teachers are experts in
instruction, at least that’s the way I see them,” expressed Principal D. With the new English
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 179
Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) replacing the CELDT Test, the new
online assessments allow principals to monitor student progress or needs through school report
card in terms of grades, formative, and summative assessments. In most cases there is a need to
be specific, using actual instructional modules and assessment tasks, to bring the standards to
light (CDE, 2012).
Equity and Access
Among the many accomplishments shared by each Principal, the passing rate and the
number of Advance Placement (AP) courses were highlighted repeatedly throughout the
interviews. Their philosophy and beliefs are in line with the AP central College Board
philosophy which states:
The College Board strongly encourages educators to make equitable access a guiding
principle for their AP® programs by giving all willing and academically prepared
students the opportunity to participate in AP [courses]. We encourage the elimination of
barriers that restrict access to AP for students from ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic
groups that have been traditionally underrepresented. Schools should make every effort
to ensure their AP classes reflect the diversity of their student population. The College
Board also believes that all students should have access to academically challenging
course work before they enroll in AP classes, which can prepare them for AP success. It
is only through a commitment to equitable preparation and access that true equity and
excellence can be achieved. (College Board, 2017, Part 5: AP Equity and Access Policy)
It is evident that these schools have invested time, money and effort to develop an
effective AP program to honor equity and access. “We offer more than 20 AP classes,”
expressed Principal A. In addition, Principal A stated, “our AP classes are capped at 44, last
year we gave 1073 AP Exams and most of our kids passed with 3, 4, and 5s.” At a different
school site, Principal D commented, “We really believe in equity and access for everybody, so
we encourage every kid to take the AP classes, we have increased the number of AP classes by a
good amount.” “We are very competitive, they [students] want the programs that we have, we
have more AP offerings than [schools in the vicinity] and we get better results,” proudly stated
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 180
Principal C. “If you have a kid [who] is bright and would benefit from the experience, we
encourage every kid to take the AP classes,” expressed Principal A. The consensus among the
high school leaders correlated to the findings publicized by the 10th Annual AP
®
Report to the
Nation (College Board, 2014) and correspondingly aligned to the data compared over the past
decade, where the number of students who graduate from high school having taken rigorous AP
courses has nearly doubled, and the number of low-income students taking AP has more than
quadrupled (College Board, 2014). Additionally, among California graduates, 30.2% of seniors
earned a score of three or higher on an AP Exam, a substantial increase of 11.6% over the past
decade (CDE, 2016b). State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson stated in a
news release, “It shows we are making great progress in our efforts to encourage students to take
courses that will challenge them, give them a greater understanding of a wide variety of subject
matters, and help prepare them for college and 21st Century careers” (CDE, 2016b, para. 3).
The statewide effort to bring equity and access for students from underserved communities is
evident at the local educational agencies (LEA) chosen for this investigation, where state and
district mandates provide college-going opportunities for diverse student populations, needs, and
social disadvantages spread throughout their respective local communities.
Meeting Students’ Learning Needs
Table 21 represents how confident participants feel about their ability to meet all student
learning needs; 38.1% of the participants picked ‘very confident’ as one of the options; similarly,
38.10% chose ‘somewhat confident’ as an election; 14.28% indicated ‘extremely confident’ on
the survey; by combining ‘extremely confident,’ ‘very confident’ and ‘somewhat confident’ we
see a positive score of 90.48%; and 09.52% of the participants selected ‘slightly confident.’
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 181
Table 21
Summary of Demographic Data on Participants on All Students Learning Needs Met (N = 21)
Demographic Independent Variables f %
All Students Learning Needs Extremely confident 3 14.28
Very confident 8 38.10
Somewhat confident 8 38.10
Slightly confident 2 9.52
Not confident
None of the above
Total 21 100
21st Century Learning
Leadership in the 21st Century learning is a model interlaced with the following
innovative skills essential for a leader to possess: (a) critical thinking, (b) communication,
(c) collaboration, and (d) creativity. Furthermore, the 21st Century leader besides knowing
standards and assessments, curriculum and instruction, and professional development, he or she
must be well adapted in utilizing social media and technology to model life and career skills
needed in a digital age for global economy. The learning environments must reflect current labor
practices for the working world students will join to work and lead (Partnership for 21st Century
Learning, 2015).
A quiz proposed by Frontline (2011) asked participants the following, ‘Are you old
school or new school?’ This inquiry generated two world views based on the data analyzed. The
data provided by Frontline (2011) stated that, if you are new school you are enthusiastic about
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 182
digital technology as a tool for transforming education, and you support collaborative, student-
centered approaches to learning. You are hopeful, you know that technology can engage
students in learning, and help teachers transmit the knowledge and skills students need for a
well-rounded education (Frontline, 2011). On the other hand, Frontline (2011) discovered that if
you are old school you are not convinced that technology is the answer to the challenges
educators face today. You see the future of education as continuing in the tradition that has been
established by previous generations. Therefore, you are a skeptic; the quality of instruction is
what matters most. Student-centered approaches really make a difference in improving learning,
not technology (Frontline, 2011).
Computer Technology
According to Demski (2012), the most successful implementations of technology
programs take place in schools where the principals see themselves as some technology leaders.
The principal who models these behaviors is going to be able to inspire innovation in their school
much more effectively than a principal that simply requires teachers to use technology,
collaborate, or take risks (Demski, 2012). However, technology according to 17th century Greek
etymology, “tekhnologia” is a systematic treatment of an art, the use of science in industry, in
engineering is a machine, a piece of equipment created by technology to solve problems of
technology (Oxford, 1879; Merriam-Webster, 1828). To be concise about the use of technology
in this presentation, whenever the word technology appears, it refers to computer technology.
According to Demski (2012), the consensus among principals surveyed across the
country found the following habits an effective technology leader should possess: (1) create an
atmosphere that inspires innovation, (2) foster collaboration, (3) be open to new ideas (4) be a
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 183
connected learner him or herself, (5) locate and provide adequate resources, (6) take risk, and
(7) have a visionary focus.
School leaders who employ a strong social media communication plan earn the trust of
their school communities, enjoy more positive feedback from stakeholders, and benefit from a
lively exchange of ideas with their off-site and extended community due to the emergence of
newer forms of social media that offer school principals new opportunities to engage in rich
interactions with stakeholders (Powers & Green, 2016). The evidence gathered through the five
interviews revealed a constant repetition and reference to the word technology and other
derivatives associated with it, being implemented in the classrooms by many teachers at each
school site. For example, Principal C cited several examples of how technology could be
utilized more effective to reach those students who are not planning to attend college. “Give
kids immediate jobs without college degree, focusing more on the non-college path, create a
technology academy, a television station, focus on computer programming, data processing,
web-design not simplex, but complex.” Under the same line of thought, Principal A added,
“there’s a lot of data in research around the ability of kids to get jobs if they have experience
with coding, and computer literacy.” Principal B added,
Let’s give these students outside opportunities to see the world and learn in a different
modality. Many of them lack educational experiences; they need to be able to explore
learning opportunities outside the box. Take them on field-trips, camping, and then have
them present their experiences using PowerPoint with some of the pictures they bring
back from the experiences.
Among the five Principals, the narrative focused mostly designing and developing opportunities
for students to utilize computer technology and social media more effectively in the classroom.
Throughout the interviews, Principals agreed that not everyone is on board in terms of
using technology. However, they have enough computers for students to use on site. For
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 184
example, at least five computer labs per school for student use as well as computer carts with at
least 40 laptops, available upon request. At least 85% of their faculty feel comfortable using
technology in their daily lesson planning and delivery. Teachers utilize the district and school
website for attendance and record keeping. Principal E emphasized that, “our school uses an
innovative tool designed to keep parents, students, teachers, and staff connected.” In summary,
all Principals agreed that all teachers, students, parents, and the community can view school
news, calendar of events, students can view assignments and submit work electronically, and
communicate via Email with any school member and vice-versa.
In conclusion, to build teacher capacity in the field of computer technology and the
effective use of social media in a safe educational environment, Principal A described the
process or method utilized to maximize resources at the school site:
For us technology is a huge thing right now. Google came and did a five-hour training
for my teachers on Google classroom on all instructional applications. I cannot pay
everybody for the camp; however, I told them that whoever came, he or she was going to
get a Chrome book; 85% of my staff showed up; They learned how to use Google Drive,
collaborate, create lesson plans together. They all collaborate from their couch at home.
(Principal A).
University courses, 9th graders take computer science and they follow that with an AP
course. If you are in the cyber patriot program and incorporate computer science in their
program, Beyond the bell will give that teacher a state of the art laptops for as long as
they are in the program; four of my teachers who are doing it, got it; it is more teacher
initiated rather than mandated. (Principal A)
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 185
Research Question 4: What are the key leadership elements of an effective secondary school
program that can assist in the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
How Does the Principal Know if What He or She is Doing
is Working to Help ELLs?
Research-Based Curriculum
Teaching and learning in the 21st Century is filled with challenges and opportunities,
especially when teaching students for whom English is not their first language (Echeverria, Vogt,
& Short, 2004). Since the publication of A Nation at Risk (1983), academic excellence has been
at the forefront of the school reform debate concerning policy, research-based curriculum, and
leadership practices to reshape education outcomes (Thomas & Collier, 2002). Considering
these matters, a non-English-speaking student is expected to perform just as proficient as a
native-English-speaking student on state and national assessments when he or she has not been
exposed to the academic discourse as an English-speaking student (Coltrane, 2002). Therefore,
to ensure high levels of academic achievement, the state of California has adopted the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010) to help students obtain a good education throughout various
districts. In addition, in 2012 a panel of experts convened to make recommendations on the Next
Generation Science Standards (NGSS, CDE, 2017d) along with the English Language
Development (ELD, CDE, 2012) Standards taking into account initiatives such as Response to
Intervention (RtI, Mellard, 2008), a multi-tier approach that begins with a high-quality
instruction and universal screening of all children in the general education classroom where
struggling learners are provided with interventions at increasing levels of intensity to accelerate
their rate of learning (Mellard, 2008). The goal is to ensure that all students are qualified to
succeed in a four-year college, trade school, life, and have the leadership skills necessary to
compete in a world economy in the 21st Century (Beetham, & Sharpe, 2013).
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 186
Inclusive Learning
To create inclusive learning environments, educators who value diversity are seeking
ways to promote justice and enhance learning and performance of all children regardless of race,
gender, culture, language, and ability (Peterson, & Hittie, 2003). In addition, people from
different backgrounds, ideals, beliefs, and ways of thinking require inclusive learning, and
teaching to enable students, staff, and stakeholders to develop their full potential (Rodriguez-
Falcon, Evans, Allam, Barrett, & Forrest, 2010). As Principal A stated, “The staff really believes
in equity and access for everybody.” Principal A explained,
This year we started organizing not only for ELLs, but for the whole school, we were all
over the place for collaborative inclusive learning. This year instruction in the classroom
is going to be thematic and inquiry based and the kids must be effective communicators.
Inclusion is a belief system, not just a set of strategies; it is about an attitude and
disposition that a school intentionally teaches by example. Once adopted by a school, or district,
an inclusion vision drives all decisions and actions (Villa & Thousand, 2005). Inclusive
education is about embracing everyone and making a commitment to provide each student in the
community, each citizen in a democracy, with the inalienable right to belong. Inclusion assumes
that living and learning together benefits everyone, not just children who are labeled as having a
difference (e.g., those who are gifted, are non-English proficient, have a disability) (Villa &
Thousand, 2005).
Language Acquisition
To lead and guide teachers of English Language Learners (ELLs), principals must be
knowledgeable of the community and the student population they serve. The five Principals
interviewed coincided that the instructional leader must have knowledge of language acquisition,
pedagogy, and the different learning modalities. “Understanding how you acquire language, the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 187
challenges, the struggle, and the stages of progression makes you a knowledgeable leader,”
asserted Principal B. “The principal has to be aware of the different stages of development
between Long-Term English Language Learners versus English Language Learners (ELLs) who
have recently arrived without the foundational structure of the English language and the pillars of
literacy,” added Principal B. Principal C stated that, “knowing the stages of progression of how
language acquisition works, both oral and written, it is essential for both administrators and
teachers; however, they must also consider teaching practices that work.” To accomplish this,
principals must be students of best practices (Marzano et al., 2005). Marzano et al. (2005)
exemplified that leadership is the guidance and direction of instructional improvement.
Involvement in curriculum, instruction, and assessment attests to the importance of hands-on
approach of day-to-day tasks of teaching and learning (Marzano et al., 2005). The most
powerful modification that enhances achievement is feedback (Marzano et al., 2005). However,
feedback does not occur automatically; it is a function of design, a system that provides feedback
on the effectiveness of school practices, and the impact of student achievement (Marzano et al.,
2005).
Interventions/Credit Recovery
In general, for struggling students, those who have invisible disabilities as well as those
who happen to be learning the English language, Principals outlined many safety nets available
to support those packets of students. For instance, Principal A relies heavily on the work
performed by the EL coordinator who monitors ELLs as well as Long-Term English Language
Leaners (LTELS) by looking through students’ files and records to figure out exactly who the
kids with the greatest areas of need are and draw a plan to support those kids individually.
Principal A exemplified,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 188
You have five tutoring days a week after school. I am here today because we have about
100 kids here for Saturday school making up classes; credit recovery; they have like three
versions of tutoring freedom versus credit recovery and a lot of monitoring, winter
classes and the A-G recovery.
In harmony to the above quote, Principal D explained “We have special programs; our
school opens around 6:50 and kids take a variety of classes like credit recovery, and we have like
30 different partnerships. That’s something special we have at our school, not all schools have
that.” The narrative describing the different interventional programs available at the different
learning agencies coincided among the five Principals who shared their valuable information
about themselves and about their school atmosphere.
Summary of Interviews
The information provided by all five Principals through one-on-one interviews and the
electronic survey have provided enough data or evidence for analysis to develop the themes and
subthemes around the topic of instructional leadership and high-quality instruction designed to
effectively serve the needs of English Language Learners. The conclusions drawn for this study
are based on this snapshot in time and space allowed to conduct the study. Some aspect of the
study need further follow-up: (e.g. classroom observation, language acquisition strategies, and
professional development implementation, one-on-one interviews with English Language
teachers, general education teachers, and intervention effectiveness).
Emergent Themes
The following are nine emergent themes that were apparent from the findings of this
study:
• Community Schools: An emerging school model known for expanding the number of
hours of services for students through authentic partnerships, bringing additional
resources, promoting social justice, a positive growth-mindset, parental involvement,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 189
coherent curriculum, promotes collaboration, and professional development and building
teacher capacity.
• School-Based Management Model: A distributive model of power where shared
leadership, shared decision-making, among diverse members of the school community
such as faculty, staff, students, parents, and the community participate in transparent
decision-making.
• Curriculum and Standards: To ensure high levels of academic achievement for all
students, the state of California has adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS,
2010), aligned the English Language Developing (ELD, CDE, 2012) Standards, along
with Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS, CDE, 2017d) to qualify all students to
be college and career ready with rigorous and relevant 21st Century skills.
• Transformational Leader: Is a role model that sets the mood at the center or radial of
the mechanism who brings everything together with knowledge of school reform,
curriculum and instruction, training on management styles, adaptive school models,
public relations skills needed to build a collaborative community of learners, effective
communicator in all realms of the word, with a strong ethical and philosophical
foundation. Furthermore, the leader is well-versed in the art of problem solving and
decision making directed towards maximizing asset-based leadership.
• Strategic Planning: Is one of the most important documents developed by any academic
organization to carry out its functions more effectively. The instructional leader
recommends and organizes teams to design a plan of actions directed to raise the
academic performance of all students to the level of performance goals established under
the California Academic Performance Index (API; Campbell, 2005). Every school
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 190
selects S.M.A.R.T goals that are achievable, planning academic activities, and aligning
programs in a blueprint called Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA). Monitoring
and adjustments occur throughout the academic year to ensure positive results.
• The Four Frames of Leadership: A leadership model that consists of structural frame,
the human resource frame, the political frame, the symbolic frame. Together the frames
decipher the full array of significant clues, capturing a more comprehensive picture of
what is going on and what to do as a leader (Bolman & Deal, 2013).
o Structural Frame- Focus is on building effective structures for schools by helping to
clarify school goals and lines of authority, and focusing on tasks, facts, and logic
rather than on personality or emotions (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011).
o Human Resource Frame- School principals empowering, supporting, advocating,
and inspiring all school personnel to participate in decision making processes through
attitudes of trust and professionalism (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011).
o Political Frame- Transformational leaders use both formal and informal authority to
build support structures through persuasion, collaboration, and negotiation to
overcome barriers that limit progress (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011).
o Symbolic Frame- Combines various elements in an organization on which actors
play their role to communicate the right impression to their audience through a
community of faith, shared beliefs, traditions, myths, rituals and ceremonies (Bolman
& Deal, 2013).
• Professional Development: Is when faculty and staff are trained to move forward with
instruction to assist students in achieving at their highest levels. Recruiting and retaining
qualified staff that know their content and modify instruction to maximize student
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 191
learning. Providing feedback during formal and informal evaluations to individual
educators. Aligning professional development and conference attendance according to
data-driven needs of students. The leader creates a culture of collaboration at all levels of
the organization.
• Data and Assessments: Educators need tools to help them monitor students’ progress
and adjust instructional strategies to target student needs. By using valid and reliable
assessments aligned to the CCSS (2010) and the ELD standards (CDE, 2012) as well as
the NGSS (CDE, 2017d), faculty and administrators can make informed decisions about
instruction throughout the year.
• College and Career Ready: The goal is to ensure that all students are qualified to
succeed in a four-year college, trade school, life, and have the leadership skills necessary
to compete in a world economy in the 21st Century (Beetham & Sharpe, 2013).
Conceptual Model of Successful High School Principals
The conceptual framework represents the findings of the study. The most logical way to
organize each of the themes is by creating a cyclical model where each of the spheres orbit
around the instructional leader independently and inter-depend on the leader for guidance and
vice versa.
The 21st Century Transformational Instructional Leader has been placed in the center of
the conceptual framework as an essential element, the master mind that orchestrates the
movement of everything that happens at the school site. The instructional leader is the go-to
person, the problem solver, the person constituents look up to for answers and solutions.
In clockwise motion, Community Schools has been placed on top, at the twelve o’ clock
position as a symbol to represent a true north, a pillar of the community where the school stands
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 192
geographically. The community school serves its surrounding community through its various
programs and services for the betterment of society.
Figure 3: Conceptual Model of Successful High School Principals
School-Based Management is another essential part of the school design. The
management model represents an operating system adopted or chosen by the people as a form of
governance that gives the school community autonomy to make changes according to their
needs. School personnel through their daily interactions understand the needs of the student
population better than any outside entity.
Another aspect of equal importance that remained appearing constantly in the narrative of
the interviews was curriculum and standards. All programs adopted by the schools in the study
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 193
adhere to the guidelines stipulated by the local district, state, and federal mandates. Any
program adopted either by the school or through partnerships must adhere to the Common Core
State Standards (2010), English Language Development Standards (CDE, 2014b), and the New
Generation Science Standards (CDE, 2017d).
The transformative instructional leader joins the school community after a consensus
approval by an internal review committee who rate his/her competency based on knowledge,
skills, and training. After assessing and analyzing all areas of the organization, the instructional
leader keeps working systems and eliminates systems that are not producing favorable results.
The ultimate-goal of the instructional leader is to build a collaborative school community
capable of competing with similar entities spread throughout the neighboring communities.
Strategic planning is initiated by the instructional leader as a vision of where he or she
wants to take the school. Without that vision or blueprint, the school community cannot embark
on the mission of educating all students. The instructional leader, along with leadership
committees. Leverage responsibility to accomplish short- and long-term goals delineated as a
course of actions that need to occur throughout the academic year. Capitalizing on that
intelligence, the school adjusts sails according to traced objectives without losing sight despite
minor distractions.
The four frames of leadership sphere do not work in isolation, it is not a separate entity
within the conceptual frame, and it is the foundation by which the instructional leader anchors
strategic systems to accomplish desired goals and objectives of the organization. Scattered
throughout the other spheres of influence, the structural frame, the resource frame, the political
frame, and the symbolic frame keep working silently in the background as part of the school
culture.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 194
Professional development is another sphere of equal importance for the instructional
leader as well as for the teachers and staff responsible for delivering instruction. As new
strategies and new technologies emerge, educators need to stay current in their professional field.
Every leader and every teacher is at a different working capacity based on experience or lack of
it; however, everyone needs to synchronize their practice according to the strategic design
created by the school community. Every leader interviewed stated that they provide consistent
professional development and/or conference time attendance for teachers to improve their
practice.
In an age of digital information, educational leaders and educators have access to student
data through grades, records, and standards’ based assessments which are vital to analyze student
achievement. By utilizing reliable data, administrators and faculty can make informed decisions
about curriculum and instruction, intervention programs needed to assist struggling students, or
students with special needs, or modified curriculum. The leadership team benefits by analyzing
school data and reflecting on areas that need adjustment and improvement for current programs.
With data analysis, leadership teams develop the strategic plan for the upcoming year with more
confidence.
The cycle closes with the college and career ready sphere. A revolution that graduates a
high percentage of 12th grade students on time yearly. However, the cycle begins anew with
incoming 9th grade students who are assessed early to determine levels of competency thereby
giving them early intervention to graduate them successfully in four years.
Summary
Based on statistical projections, the total number of enrolled school-aged children in
public elementary and secondary schools is projected to continue increasing to 51.7 million in
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 195
2025-26 (NCES, 2017a, p. 1) and private Pre-kindergarten through grade 12 is projected to
decrease by 6% to 5.1 million students in 2025-26, when it will reach a combined total of 56.8
million (NCES, 2017b, Fig. 1, p. 1). Since educators are expected to prepare virtually all
students for higher-order thinking skills, as Darling-Hammond and Bransford (2007) best
described it, high school principals at the radial need to orchestrate, manage, and lead learning
institutions with 21st Century students in mind. The transformational leader’s philosophy,
mission, and vision must be aligned to the goals and expectations of the collective mindset of the
institution. As a role model, the principal demonstrates knowledge of curriculum and
instruction, strategic planning skills, problem solving and ethical decision-making skills, self-
efficacy, life-long learning habits, and various other qualities such as building a collaborative
community in a healthy, social-emotional environment where teachers, staff, students, and
stakeholders thrive in a safe school environment.
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of high school principals in the support
of English Language Development Programs and school-wide approaches to instructional
decisions as schools prepare English Language Learners (ELLs) to be college and career ready
for the 21st Century. This study focused on the relationship between the instructional leaders’
professional development training, skills, knowledge, and reflection practices to support the
academic demands and school reform initiatives to improve the English and language
proficiency of ELLs as they progress through public secondary schools. Moreover, this study
examined ways in which instructional leaders guide teachers to plan concrete learning objectives
for student learning, how they purposefully determine the kinds of learning activities, and check
for understanding as an assessment strategy to obtain feedback on student learning to check
whether the planned outcomes have been accomplished. In conjunction with principal
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 196
responsibilities, the study delineated leadership practices, approaches, and frameworks that
promote student achievement. The findings of the study are practical themes that have the
potential to lead to the development of a systematic protocol that will assist principals in gaining
the knowledge, skills, and training that may support them with the ability to put in practice
strategies that will ensure quality in production of school output as a critical factor in
determining school effectiveness.
The themes that emerged from the coding process generated specific practices,
approaches, and frameworks that principals can consider towards innovation, change, and
continuous learning for the school community. The explicit transformational leadership actions
that emerged were: community schools; school-based management; curriculum and standards;
strategic planning; the four frames of leadership; professional development; data and
assessments; college and career ready. The themes were examined using Bolman and Deal’s
(2013) four frames of organization: human resources, structural, political, and symbolic.
Transformational leadership practices include a strong school culture and systematic
pedagogical practices that support the learning of all students. Goal setting is established by
building a culture of trust. The principal supports the school vision and assists staff to
continuously grow by refining school improvements, remains deeply involved in improving
instruction, and sees that the managerial details are done well. The principal as curriculum
leader sets forth clear school improvement objectives and game plans so that the academic needs
of all students are met. Furthermore, effective principals lead change and provide a clear and
compelling vision and direction to build staff capacity to support teacher and student needs.
Conclusively, effective school principals are those that cultivate the expertise of teachers to
deliver high quality instruction for all students and nurture a culture of caring.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 197
Chapter Five will present a summary of the findings of this study, the implications, and
concluding thoughts on how this study can contribute to the literature of schools that demonstrate
progress in closing the achievement gaps for English Language Learners.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 198
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
Overview
This chapter includes a summarization of the research and its results, and a discussion of
the conclusions, implications, and recommendations for future research. The purpose of this
study was to examine the role of high school principals in the support of English Language
Development programs and school-wide approaches to instructional decisions as schools prepare
English Language Learners (ELLs) to be college- and career-ready for the 21st Century. This
mixed-methods study explored the relationships between the instructional leaders’ professional
development training, skills, knowledge, and reflection practices to support the academic
demands and school reform initiatives to improve the English and language proficiency of ELLs
as they progress through public high schools. Moreover, this study examined ways in which
instructional leaders guide teachers to plan concrete learning objectives for student learning, how
they purposefully determine the kinds of learning activities, and check for understanding as an
assessment strategy to obtain feedback on student learning to check whether the planned
outcomes have been accomplished. In conjunction with leadership practices, this study
delineated school-wide cultural practices that promote proficiency in English Language
development.
Chapter One provided an overview of the study. It provided a historical perspective
regarding the issues surrounding English Language Learners (ELLs). In addition, it introduced
the issues that lead to the role of the principal’s knowledge and perception in relation to quality
of instruction and academic success of ELLs. Chapter Two included a review of the literature,
which determined important issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language Learner
students, the focus issues occurring within the school leadership, and an examination of how
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 199
ELL language training leads to English-language proficiency. This literature constructed an
understanding of the leadership necessary to create socially-just schools for English Language
Learners (ELLs) by addressing the implications for school leaders that build on the literature,
social justice leadership, and the work of the principals, staffs, and communities at the schools.
In addition, Chapter Two presented various socio-cultural perspectives on the importance of
language development and cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978) as related to student
learning and achievement. Moreover, it explored the social and political roles and how these
have an impact on quality and focus of educational opportunities provided to English Language
Learners. Chapter Three presented the methodology applied to investigate internal beliefs and
values of principals. This chapter presented the research questions, the design of the study,
detailed information about various instruments used in collecting data from the participants.
Furthermore, a description of the data analysis process was provided along with the validity and
reliability of the methodology. Chapter Four presented the findings of the study responding to
the four research questions and the emerging themes from the collected data were exposed.
Chapter Five will include the conclusions and establish the generalizability of the findings. This
chapter will also comprise a summarization of recommendations and related educational
implications. Finally, direction for further research will be explained.
Key Findings
In determining important issues surrounding the academic gap of English Language
Learner students, both the focus issues occurring within the school leadership and an
examination of how ELL language development training leads to English-language proficiency
were researched. In the discussion below, key findings from the triangulation process of the data
presented in chapter four brought light to the nine emerging themes of this study: community
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 200
schools; school-based management; curriculum and standards; transformational leader; strategic
planning; the four frames of leadership; professional development; data and assessments; college
and career ready.
Emergent Themes
Community Schools
Community Schools is an emerging school model with a student-centered philosophy,
considering the social emotional learning of students, expanding the number of hours of service
and bringing other services for student achievement through authentic partnerships, targeted
interventions, and parent involvement in a collaborative and safe school environment.
Social emotional learning plays a major role in adults as well as school-aged children
who struggle with learning and behavior by creating a meaningful learning environment or
experience by building caring relationships with teachers, family, and peers. By building
working relationships, students develop academic learning skills of self-efficacy, in a culture of
caring relationships filled with trust and respect in every direction. By providing extended hours
of service before and after school, academic facilities create an inclusive community of learners’
equal in status to engage in academic programs through which they develop capacities to
compete successfully with peers.
These partnerships bring additional resources and programs to support school mandated
core curriculum reforms through intervention programs such as, tutoring, and credit recovering
classes. In addition, approved A-G online credit recovery classes are offered for students who
need it. Partnership with trade schools allows students to get project-based learning. Partnership
with community colleges or universities allows students to take a variety of blended classes.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 201
Under the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and the Local Control Accountability
Plan (LCAP) parent involvement takes place in a variety of forms at the community schools.
Schools seek input from parents and guardians through parent surveys, participation in school
site council, and in the English Leaner Advisory Committee (ELAC). Parents and guardians also
participate by being part of the parent center, participating in parent workshops, and offering
volunteer hours at various school-related events.
Another big component of a community school is the collaboration element. Building on
the capacities, strengths, gifts, and talents of individuals, the school creates a productive learning
environment for students, teachers, staff, parents, and community members to collaborate
efficiently. Maximizing on asset-based or social capital, instructional leaders mobilize the
school community to work collaborative to accomplish agreed-upon goals. That task is
accomplished through formal and or informal associations of professionals who create systems
or teams of inquiry to share best practices and standards-based instructional ideas.
All the interactions between adults and students in a community school take place under
the umbrella of a safe school environment. A culture of support and understanding takes place in
a climate of trust and respect among students, teachers, staff, and parents where decision making
is inclusive and transparent in all directions of the school spectrum.
School-Based Management
The school-based management model represents an operating system, a form of
governance that gives the school community autonomy to hire their own school personnel, utilize
school resources according to their needs and make academic decisions within the perimeters of
their authority. This model of governance is characterized for employing effective leadership
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 202
which is highly distributive, collaborative, transparent, and communicative in the process of
decision-making.
To exemplify the effectiveness of distributed leadership, Briggs and Wohlstetter (2003)
stated that principals are more likely to focus on distributing power, generating agreement
around the school goals, encouraging all teachers to participate in school improvement efforts,
collecting information, and utilizing the skills and abilities of many individuals. Based on the
findings, collaborative decision-making is also an ethical decision-making founded on justice,
honesty, transparency, and serves everyone respectfully. Inclusive decision-making bridges all
groups and individuals in equal representation for transparency in all aspects of a school.
Another key element in managing and building school communities is creating effective
channels of communication among the different pockets of decision makers and stakeholders.
The inclusion of diverse members of the school community in creating actionable goals
for student achievement conduces to a trusting climate among stakeholders at the local setting.
Alvy and Robbins (1998) asserted a principal must become efficient in the management areas
related to policies, procedures, rules and regulations, school records, finances, the master
contract and collective bargaining and grievance procedures, the school facility, and operating
the school within the limits of the law. Knowing all legal aspects related to education allow the
instructional leader the ability to create sustainable programs aligned and in harmony with
working relationships among leadership groups as school site council, lead teachers, department
chairs, student government, partnered organizations, and the parent community.
In summary, all participating Principals demonstrated a clear understanding of the
structures needed to run an effective school community using school-based management and
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 203
utilizing asset-based resources in a collaborative, trusting school culture centered on classroom
instruction and student learning.
Curriculum and Standards
To guarantee a successful completion of A-G graduation requirements in four years to
every 9th grade student, the State of California along with different public-school districts have
created rigorous curriculum programs aligned the Common Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010),
the English Development Standards (ELD, CDE, 2012), and the Next Generation Science
Standards (NGSS, CDE, 2017d) to assist the needs of every student with an Individualized
Graduation Plan (IGP). The task of delivering these objectives rises on the shoulders of the
instructional leader and the teachers who deliver rigorous and relevant instruction to every
student. All Principals agreed that, since we are all language learners, to help students reach a
level of fruition or to master grade level concepts; the instructional leader, that is administration
and faculty, must have a broad understanding the foundational skills of language acquisition, and
the stages of language development. Under equity and access, instructional leaders guide
instructional programs involving numerous students to participate in standards’ based instruction
with 21st Century expectations in mind, college and career ready. All instructional leaders
interviewed and surveyed agreed that reclassification of English Language Learners (ELLs) is
one of their targets or common denominator in their school agenda.
In summary, to monitor progress instructional leaders depend on the California English
Language Development Test (CELDT, CDE, 2016d) reports and Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC, CDE, 2017e) data now produced annually where schools, districts, and
parents can assess student learning or progress based on grade level and subgroup information
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 204
such as English Language and low social economic results for educators to modify or enhance
student achievement through improved instruction.
Strategic Planning
Strategic planning does not occur accidentally; it takes the collaborative effort of all
stakeholders inside the school community to develop more than the mission and vision to reach
agreed upon goals. All elected decision makers such as academy lead teachers, department
chairs, parents, and student representatives engage in the goal oriented elaboration of a Single
Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) following federal, state and local district, accountable
measures for the scholastic journey to unfold successfully every year.
The instructional leader recommends and organizes teams to design a plan of action
directed to raise the academic performance of all students to the level of acceptable performance
established under the California Academic Performance Index (API; Campbell, 2005). Every
school selects and outlines S.M.A.R.T goals which are achievable as part of their strategic plan.
Academic activities are planned in accordance to the master schedule and aligning these
programs to the A-G requirements, standards-based curriculum, and adhering to the assessment
guidelines necessary to measure student progress, stated most of the Principals.
Instructional leaders guide their instructional program based on the master schedule,
assigning teachers’ talents with the needs of diverse learners. Throughout the interviews,
instructional leaders agreed that dedicated teachers who are self-directed learners themselves
make the different in student learning. Another element exemplified by instructional leaders is
high quality instruction in the classroom. English learners as well as students in other programs
benefit from having teachers who understand curriculum and instruction. They mentioned caring
teachers who listen to their students and do not do anything unless it is good for kids. When
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 205
asked ‘What makes other schools succeed and others seem to fail with similar student
population?’ they all pointed out teacher quality and academic instruction as the main factors
influencing student achievement.
Embedded in the objectives of the single plan for student achievement is the element of
decision-making and problem-solving. There are certain aspects when instructional leaders must
make decisions on their own judgement and expertise. However, part of managing a successful
school, consistently depends on the cycles of decision making and conflict resolution systems,
where the leadership team must know where and when to push and pull certain levers without
infringing on the rights of the constituents or disrupting the four frames of leadership. Schools
are multicultural organizations that need to give equal participation and representation to all
stakeholders across all strata. The leader as the role model has high expectations of support from
everyone at the organization. The leader expects that positive results will emerge from the short-
and long-term strategies sketched in the blueprint.
In summary, the Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a guide that helps
teachers plan concrete learning objectives with positive student outcomes. It is one of the most
important documents developed by any academic organization to carry out its functions more
effectively. The single plan is a live document, a constitution in many ways. When all members
of the learning organization implement the planned objectives with fidelity, monitoring and
adjusting become easy tasks for both leader and decision makers.
The Four Frames of Leadership
To create sustainable working relationships with all members of the community, the
leader utilizes the four frames of leadership as a management tool to make decisions. The four
frames of leadership metaphorically speaking are decodified through the different colors in the
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 206
quilt of the organization. These four colors are not equally distributed, one is heavier in some
areas, and in others they complement each other. However, the presence of these frames is
embedded in every aspect of the organization.
The structural frame focuses on building effective structures for schools by helping to
clarify school goals and lines of authority, and focusing on tasks, facts, and logic than on
personality or emotions (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011). All participating Principals via surveys
and anecdotal information agreed and confirmed how they have created systems to help them run
their schools much more effectively in terms of distributing responsibilities to diverse groups
within the organization. Laying the proper foundation is vital for running an efficient school
organization.
In direct parallel, the human resource frame is of vital importance for school principals
because it is empowering, supporting, advocating, and inspiring all school personnel to
participate in decision making processes through attitudes of trust and professionalism (Alsmadi
& Mahasneh, 2011). The resources are managed much more efficiently when there’s mutual
understanding among stakeholders and transparency of how funding is prioritized and distributed
with small learning communities. All participating Principals agreed 100% in the online survey
as well as in the one-on-one interview how the distribution of resources is vital to run a school
with minimal conflict among all stakeholders.
Transformational leaders utilize the political frame in both formal and informal authority
to build support structures through persuasion, collaboration, by building internal and external
alliances, and engage in negotiation across the board of the organization to overcome barriers
that limit progress (Alsmadi & Mahasneh, 2011). All participating Principals engaged in
creating alliances with outside organizations and build networking circles with elementary,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 207
middle, and high schools to market their school programs to aspiring school children and parents
who want the best services for their own children.
Furthermore, the combined day-to-day activities of the seen and unseen aspects of the
school culture form the symbolic frame of the organization on which actors play their inclusive
role to communicate the right impression to their audience through a community of faith, shared
beliefs, traditions, myths, rituals, and ceremonies (Bolman & Deal, 2013). All participating
Principals shared the different areas that make their schools standout and what makes the school
community proud in terms of awards, academic recognitions, achievements in sports, the number
of partnerships, clubs, and college acceptance. All Principals have a clear understanding of how
to utilize the four frames in the developing of goal setting and accomplishing these objectives
with the asset-based resources available at their school site.
Professional Development
Another common factor across all organizations arbitrarily chosen for this study revealed
that a lot of time and effort is invested in professional development. Careful analysis of
desegregated data places that responsibility on the shoulders of the instructional leader and the
professional leadership team to allocate time and resources for teachers, support staff, elected
department chairs and lead academy teachers, counselors, coordinators, administrators, and the
community to collaborate to improve student learning. Throughout the interviews and the
surveys, instructional leaders emphasized weekly, biweekly, and monthly scheduled meeting
time for teachers to get together and improve their practice. All professional development is
aligned to the accountability mandates outlined by federal, state, and local districts. Curriculum
and instruction is standard’s based. Core content in every subject is aligned to the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010) and the Next Generation State Standards (NGSS, CDE,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 208
2017d). The emphasis for this study focused mainly on the English Language Arts (ELA) and
the English Language Development (ELD) framework. Instructional leaders provided a lot of
information related to collaborative lesson planning, research-based teaching strategies, and
inquiry-based learning.
Every leader interviewed stated that they attend district led professional development
themselves to improve their practice. By doing so, they bring back valuable knowledge and
information to share with their school communities. In addition, they are subscribed to several
sources of educational value to keep current with educational practices. By being life-long
learners themselves, they model positive professional behaviors to their school personnel and the
student community. Once a month, some of them facilitate professional development to a
congregation of teachers on various topics of imminent importance for the school to grow
academically. At other times, they bring professional presenters from various academic
companies to facilitate or promote programs as adaptive school models, writing across the
curriculum for building teacher capacity across the board.
The key element in facilitating efficient and productive professional development comes
from the dedicated Instructional Learning Team (ILT). Instructional leaders referenced them
continuously during the interviews. Instructional Learning Teams (ILT) meet every two weeks
to provide professional development for department chairs, lead teachers, counselors,
coordinators, and administrators for department chairs to facilitate professional development
aligned to the school goals delineated in the strategic planning. The same sequence is followed
by lead teachers in their small learning communities or their academies as Principals
interchangeably refer to them. Every school has a different meeting calendar structure; some
schools meet by department three times per month and others meet by small learning
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 209
communities or academies three times per month, depending on what works best for each
community. The ILT is also responsible for building teacher capacity in the areas of lesson
study and inquiry-based learning. Instructional rounds, lesson study, peer observations emerged
as part of their responsibility, whereby, they train school leaders to plan and carry out the
processes with their faculty members who collaborate in carrying out the agreed upon goals
stipulated in the strategic plan.
As new technologies and new research about learning emerge, educators need to stay
current in their professional strategies and methodologies to do their job more efficiently. To
build teacher capacity among new and veteran members of their learning organization,
instructional leaders mentioned a few of the programs they have implemented schoolwide for
teacher and student learning to reach competent levels of capacity. To differentiate student
learning, instructional leaders mentioned Specifically Designed Academic Instruction in English
(SDAIE) strategies, such as cooperative learning, using graphic organizers, modification of the
language, and implementing multicultural activities for English Language Learners. Training
teachers on the implementation of Kagan strategies, Bloom’s Taxonomy, and social emotional
learning, on habits of the mind, and exposing teachers and students to research-based growth
mindset versus a fixed mindset transfer to student achievement.
To prepare and provide teachers the information they need to understand the
reclassification processes for the California English Language Development Test (CELDT, CDE,
2016d), soon to be replaced by the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California
(ELPAC) aligned to the English Language Development (ELD, CDE, 2012) standards and the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS, 2010), the instructional leaders across the five
organizations outlined different strategies embedded in professional development utilizing whole
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 210
team approach, presenting relevant data pertaining to the different clusters of students who need
additional intervention to reclassify. Other leaders leveraged themselves by allowing
instructional coaches and/or bilingual coordinators desegregate student data and provide
individualized student profiles for all teachers regardless of subject matter to present or provide
one-on-one data chats with each student to encourage them to make a deliberate effort to score
better on the test.
A recurring cycle of target or purposeful professional development at every learning
institution studied was evident and confirmed through the intensive data provided by the five
high school Principals. For principals having knowledge or a clear understanding of language
acquisition, pedagogy and the different modalities of learning are handy when evaluating
programs and teachers. Furthermore, a distributed model of leadership leverages the abilities of
the instructional leaders. A well-exemplified model is the advantaged of having communities of
practice at some of their schools. Principals and faculty have a chance to network and share best
practices with schools of equal standing. Having meaningful professional conversations,
observations, and reflections allow these professional teams to learn from each other and
improve their practice. Another form of improving teacher relationships is the co-teaching
model employed at various schools keeping in mind the subgroups that need individualized
attention. As educators collaborate, they discover tacit knowledge, difficult to verbalize
concepts or ideas that are part of the mystery of learning the tricks of the trade as some say.
Some Principals talked about the implementation cycles of lesson study being part of their
professional development agenda. Paralleled to lesson study is the implementation of
instructional rounds where teaching and learning improve every day. Another powerful tool
instructional leaders employed to improve teaching practices is the art of peer observations.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 211
Educators learn from each other about what works and what needs improving at the school level
as well as their own practice. Through these formal and informal interactions, quality instruction
begins to take shape in new and veteran teachers at these learning institutions. The type of
learning activities varies from teacher to teacher and from school to school; however, the essence
of what students need to learn is embedded in the innovative strategies, planning, and the
delivering of the lessons. In summary, the presence of Professional Teaching and Learning
cycles (PTLC) was evident at every school site.
Data and Assessments
Another important theme that emerged during the analysis of the information provided by
the five instructional leaders was the proper interpretation of multiple sources of data and the
effectiveness of assessing the intricate areas of the organization. In this over-arching theme, the
instructional leader must have the skills sets necessary to deal with numerous duties and
responsibilities of which the instructional leader and the team of assessors must categorize and
prioritize in accordance to federal, state, local district mandates, and the necessities of the local
learning organization. Throughout the interviews, instructional leaders talked about having
access to standardized tests results, evaluating personnel and program effectiveness.
Everything begins with the instructional leader steering the organization towards the
agreed-upon goals of the country, state, and local community to graduate students in the scope of
four years college and career ready. However, during the interviews, instructional leaders talked
about some of the informal assessments that occur as part of their daily routine which is not
recorded as part of a tangible document containing data for analysis. Instructional leaders as
observational tools gathered intelligence about their school environment during brief lapses of
supervision, interactions with students, chatting with parents, and faculty. Being aware of
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 212
everything that is occurring on their school campuses gives high school principals the advantage
of making prudent, informed decisions about sustainability of educational programs and the
enrichment of the school community. By having open communication, teacher and student
morale improve, and a healthy working environment for everyone who walks into the school
grounds.
Furthermore, to make informed decisions and run effective schools, instructional leaders
depend on statistical data and reliable assessments produced by standardized testing. During the
interviews, instructional leaders mentioned interim assessments, benchmarks assessments,
formative and summative assessments numerous times to indicate that that is part of their
professional development culture to improve teacher quality instruction and student learning. In
addition, instructional leaders depend on the SBAC data or Smarter Balanced Assessment
Consortium to evaluate student progress and to evaluate interventions and other instructional
programs directly related to that area of need. For example, most of the schools highlighted
doing well in the English section of the SBAC, and needing to score higher in the Mathematical
portion of the test. To address that area of need, math teachers meet by grade level or subject
area to desegregate student data and pinpoint weak areas indicated some Principals. Another
instrument on which Principals rely on for informed decision making is the information released
by the SARC data, or the School Accountability Report Card (CDE, 2016a). They pay close
attention to that report card because it contains accountability measures vital for the
sustainability of the learning institution. The School Report Card surfaced repeatedly throughout
the interviews. Annually, teachers, students, and parents evaluate the performance of the school
at multiple levels of competency. The results of those surveys are released for the public to
access them, revealing academic data, school safety and climate for learning, teacher and staff
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 213
information, and curriculum and instruction descriptions all related to national and state
educational agenda (CDE, 2016a). Under the umbrella of the California Assessment of Student
Performance and Progress (CAASPP, CDE, 2017e), all Principals are using the necessary tools
to prepare all students for 21st Century skills in Mathematics, English Language Arts, and
Science (CDE, 2017e).
In the melting pot of informed decision-making, Principals utilized data and assessments
to plan strategically according to federal and state fiscal projections and based on student
enrolment. Based on that intelligence, prioritization of available resources at the learning
institution are distributed on order of need such as teacher professional development to improve
instruction, implement computer technology in the classroom, plan and implement targeted
interventions for subgroups or clusters of students identified through statistical analysis.
These projections help instructional leaders foresee troubles ahead of time and prepare
accordingly. For example, considerable evidence surged from the interviews with the Principals
in terms of losing students to the competition of reformed schools. To ensure that all students
are qualified to succeed in a four-year university, trade school, and in life, learning institutions
assess incoming 9th grade students through a battery of assessments in reading, writing, math,
and science for early interventions. Some Principals mentioned RtI (Response to Intervention)
being one way to help them identify who needs additional help in terms of academics and
behavior.
In addition, teacher qualitative data is considered a valuable input in the informed
decision making of the school. Teachers work collaboratively in their own departments or by
grade level, to analyze students’ grades. They look at areas of strengths and weaknesses and
then interchange their findings among departments during whole group professional
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 214
development. Another strategy employed by these learning institutions is having data chats with
students about their Individual Graduation Plan (IGP). Going over graduation requirements
early in their high school career helps them tremendously to focus on completing the A-G
requirements, therefore graduating on time with their peers and cohort, asserted all instructional
leaders. In conclusion, working with statistical data and using reliable standardized assessments,
as well as any other form of intelligence, makes instructional leaders better decision makers and
more trustworthy in the community as schools transform daily.
College and Career Ready
The goal is to make sure that all students who enter high school qualified at the end of
four years to compete side by side with man and women of their age regardless of race or social
standing in a two- or four-year university, trade school, and in life with the necessary leadership
skills to create and innovate a 21st Century world economy (CDE, 2014a). The consensus
among all instructional leaders is to allow more students to have access to college and career
classes that will count towards college credit once they are ready to attend. Equity and access to
core academic classes was a major topic repeatedly discussed during the interviews. Standards’
based curriculum and instruction, as well as assessments emerged during decoding, and analysis
of data. Each instructional leader took pride in describing the number of students graduating
each year and being accepted to four-year universities. Educational leaders reflected on how
hard all stakeholders worked to accomplish the mission and vision of the institution.
Another finding or aspect revealed during the analysis process, all Principals emphasized
to allow high school students to have access to educational technology and expose them to
technical experiences such as coding, data entry, or web-design and have them experience
outside the classroom so that they can see the value and meaning of where knowledge can be
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 215
applied. In other words, expose students to a curriculum that reflects life and prepares them for
successful careers after high school. Under the distributed leadership model, inclusion drives all
decisions and actions. The promotion of social justice in all aspects of the learning organization
enhances learning and performance regardless of race, gender, culture, and language ability. It
was a consensus among the Principals interviewed. Furthermore, in the voice and lexicon of the
instructional leaders, these words and phrases were constantly repeated: (e.g. 21st Century
learning, critical thinking skills, effective communicators, collaborative skills, team players,
creators, innovators, informed citizens, global economy, and workforce).
Implications
Dispersed throughout the complex and chaotic world of education, there are patterns that
emerge as researchers take a small sample encapsulated in time and space to study and analyze
the intricate interactions and behaviors of five high school Principals, their learning institutions,
and the communities they serve. These instructional leaders at the radial bring it all together by
providing both innate and learned qualities of leadership to manage all aspects within and outside
the learning institution. Under all kinds of accountability measures from federal, state, local
districts, and the parent community, public high schools must deliver at the end of four years,
qualified, college- and career-ready, competent individuals with skills and abilities needed to live
and work in a 21st Century era. Academic success is expected from everyone who enters as
freshmen at any institution regardless of age, race, gender, cultural background, social economic
status, and learning ability. Under current projections, English Language Learners enrollment
will reach 56.8 million by the year 2025 (NCES, 2017b, Fig. 1, p. 1). To close the achievement
gap between none native English speakers and native English speakers, educational leaders must
educate themselves and capacitate their teaching community in the art of language acquisition,
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 216
pedagogical practices, and understand the social emotional aspect of learning to serve everyone
in a safe working environment. Every instructional leader indicated having equity and access
available for everyone who wishes to participate in the college bound curriculum. Proof of that
is the collaborative effort of faculty, staff, and leadership committees to reclassify English
Language Learners to proficiency level, thereby allowing them to participate in core, content
standards-based curriculum. Without the guidance and leadership of the instructional leaders,
projected goals of graduating everyone on time would not come to fruition. Starting with the end
in mind instructional leaders: guide instruction in every direction; build in teachers and students
a growth mindset; create habits of mind; build habits, efficiency, and efficacy; and produce
critical thinkers, creators, and innovators for life in a collaborative team effort.
The results of this research demonstrated a direct correlation between the innate abilities,
learned skills, knowledge of education, and the training high school principals or instructional
leaders need to succeed in incorporating English Language Learners to a core, content standards-
based curriculum. The multiple examples dispersed throughout the nine themes and subthemes
should serve aspiring principals and district leaders as a blueprint of what instructional leaders
need to have to perform duties and responsibilities according federal, state, and districts
accountabilities.
The aim of the project was to find implications of transformational leadership qualities
such as leadership skills, knowledge, and training practices that set them apart. The following
are some of those implications:
• To prepare 21st Century learners, principals need to know standards-based curriculum
and instruction.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 217
• To facilitate and maximize professional development, principals need to know or be
familiar with the adaptive model of leadership.
• To solve problems and make effective decisions, principals need to know or be familiar
with School Based Management Models and the four frames of leadership.
• To create a safe and healthy school climate, principals need to know the social emotional
aspects of learning in adults and adolescents.
• To maximize student learning, principals need to know research-based teaching strategies
that work.
• To close achievement gaps, principals need to know how to interpret data and read
assessments efficiently to make decisions and guide instruction.
• To be accountable and in compliance, principals need to know or be familiar with federal,
state, and district policies.
• To serve the needs of individual or diverse student subgroups, principals need to stay
current on legislative policies and issues concerning laws and fiscal budgets or grants
available.
• To build capacity at the school site, principals should accommodate time and resources
for inclusive, collaborative professional development.
• To build effective communication with all stakeholders in the community, principals
must first build networks and coalitions with diverse pockets of decision makers both
internally and externally.
• To serve all families in the community, principals must create multicultural events
relevant to the community they serve.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 218
• To evaluate teacher effectiveness in the implementation of agreed-upon programs or
strategies, principals must know or be familiar with the specific language acquisition
practices designed to build conceptual understanding and language competence.
• To lead diverse institutions of learners, principals must create an empathetic and a caring
culture of respect across all strata of the organization.
• To create open channels of communication across all strata of the organization, principals
must be knowledgeable or be familiar with the multiple mediums of technology available
to distribute and obtain information.
• To embrace all in the academic learning, principals must inspire trust and model life-long
learning habits always.
• To graduate students on time, principals must rely on the strategic plan as the most
important instrument that will produce desired student outcomes.
• To leave no student behind, principals through the elected distributive leadership teams
create S.M.A.R.T attainable goals and or objectives for every individual and every
subgroup within the school communities orbiting the nucleus of the learning
organization.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 219
Figure 4: Principal Skills, Educational Knowledge, and Training Practices
Recommendation for Further Studies
The findings of the data collected and analyzed under the current study revealed
numerous research-based strategies high school Principals utilized in support of English
language development programs to support ELLs throughout their scholastic journey to college
and 21st Century careers. Furthermore, the study confirmed that the instructional leaders’
professional development training, leadership skills, knowledge, and reflection practices helped
to support the academic demands and school reform initiatives to improve the English and
language proficiency gap. Moreover, this study examined numerous ways in which instructional
leaders strategize to guide instruction, to train teachers in multiple capacities such as research-
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 220
based inquiry learning, and how targeted collaboration during professional development
produces favorable student outcomes.
This mixed-methods study provided the researchers the opportunity to identify a problem
of practice, create four research questions, find sufficient evidence to support a literary review on
the subject, create a multi variable scale questionnaire and or online survey based on that
evidence and then gather statistical data from random respondents and analyze scripted responses
from one-on-one recorded interviews on the subject of principal skills, knowledge, and training
to improve English Language Learner student achievement in high schools studied. Although
the researcher set out to conduct an all-inclusive study, results and conclusions led to further
questions pertaining to the impact of instructional leadership in the high schools. The results and
conclusions of this study are not absolute; they represent the multiple views from the
instructional leaders interviewed and the interpretation of some qualitative and quantitative
evidence by the researcher.
The conclusions drawn from this study are based on this snapshot in time and space
allowed to conduct the study. Some aspects of the study need further follow-up: (e.g. classroom
observation, language acquisition strategies, and professional development implementation; one-
on-one interviews with English Language teachers, general education teachers, and intervention
effectiveness; and district support for leadership professional development).
1. Opportunities to study high school principals in areas of leadership skills, knowledge, and
training abound in all states and districts.
2. Opportunities to observe classroom implementation of the four domains of language
acquisition abound in the high school classroom arena.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 221
3. Opportunities to observe ‘in vivo’ professional development and implementation of
collaborative training, research-based strategies, and objective lesson planning abound in
high school.
4. Opportunities to conduct one-on-one interviews with teachers of English Language
Learners, general education teachers and intervention teachers also abound in the high
school environments.
5. Opportunities to participate and analyze district leadership professional development, and
building teacher capacity in language acquisition and instructional practices.
Closing Remarks
According to the California Department of Education (2016e), 22.1% of the total public-
school population have been identified as English Language Learners (ELLs), most of English
Language learners, 73% are enrolled in Elementary school, kindergarten through six, the rest,
27% are enrolled in the secondary grades, seven through twelve and in the ungraded category
(CDE, 2005). To meet these educational challenges, the instructional leader must have the
leadership skills, knowledge, training, courage, and tenacity to persist in the quest for student
achievement. To fulfill this mission, the instructional leader must find creative ways to diversify
and leverage professional responsibilities and find balance amid the demands of personal life.
To help new and veteran instructional leaders, future research should consider secondary
schools with similar English Language Learners’ population and study the success or lack of it in
a comparative study taking into consideration the following: the composition of the leadership
team; formal levels of education and training in language acquisition for both leaders and
teachers; the quality of professional development at each school site; effective lesson planning;
and inquiry-based leaning applying the cycles of lesson study throughout the academic year.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 222
References
Alhassan, A. M., & Kuyini, A. B. (2013). Teaching immigrants Norwegian culture to support
their language learning. International Education Studies, 6(3), 15.
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, C. A. (2007). Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress, 40(7),
64.
Alsmadi, R., & Mahasneh, R. (2011). Jordanian school counselors’ leadership behaviors.
International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 33(3), 161-171.
Alvy, H. B., & Robbins, P. (1998). If I only knew...: Success strategies for navigating the
principalship. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Anderson, S. E. (2003). The school district role in educational change: A review of the
literature. International Centre for Educational Change. Retrieved from
http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~icec/workpaper2.pdf
Arestis, P., & Sawyer, M. C. (2010). 21st century Keynesian economics. Basingstoke; NY:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Aud, S., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Kristapovich, P., Rathbun, A., Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2013). The
condition of education 2013 (NCES 2013-037). U. S. Department of Education, National
Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013037.pdf
August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary
development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,
20(1), 50-57.
Austermuhl, E. B. (2007). Empowering school leaders: Personal political power for school
board members and administrators. Arlington, VA: American Association of School
Administrators.
Austin, G. T, Bono, G., Cheng, Z., & Hanson, T. (2007). The achievement gap, school well-
being, and learning supports. California Health Kids survey fact sheet Issue 8, Los
Alamitos, CA: West Ed.
Babbie, E. (1990). Survey research methods (2nd ed.). Belmont. CA: Wadsworth.
Bagin, D., Gallagher, D., & Moore, H. (2007). The school and community relations (9th ed.).
New York, NY: Allyn & Bacon.
Baker, S. D. (2007). Followership: The theoretical foundation of a contemporary construct.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(1), 50-60.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 223
Bandura, A. (2000). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In
E. A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organization behavior (pp. 120-136).
Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Retrieved from http://stanford.edu/dept/psychology/bandura/
Barth, R. S. (1986). On sheep and goats and school reform. The Phi Delta Kappan, 68(4), 293-
296.
Barton, P. E. (2003). Parsing the achievement gap: Baselines for tracking progress. Princeton,
NJ: Policy Information Report.
Barton, P. E., & Coley, R. J. (2008). Measuring the achievement elephant. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: Free
Press.
Basurto, I., Wise, D., & Unruh, R. (2006). California school principals' perceptions of the effects
of Proposition 227. Educational Leadership and Administration, 18, 99.
Bates, B. (2015). Learning theories simplified and how to apply them to teaching. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for
21st century learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Bennett, W. J., Fair, W., Finn, C. E., Jr., Flake, F. H., Hirsch E. D., Jr., Marshall, W., & Ravitch,
D. (1998). A nation still at risk. Policy Review, (90), 23.
Black, R. W. (2009). English ‐language learners, fan communities, and 21st ‐century skills.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(8), 688-697.
Bland, P., Church, E., & Luo, M. (2014). Strategies for attracting and retaining teachers.
Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice, and Research, 4(1).
doi:10.5929/2014.4.1.2
Bloomberg, L. D., & Volpe, M. (2008). Completing your qualitative dissertation: A roadmap
from beginning to end. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Blumberg, A. (1984). The craft of school administration and some other rambling thoughts.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(4), 24-40.
Blumberg, A., & Greenfield, W. (1986). The effective principal: Perspectives on school
leadership. Newton, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bogatin, K. (2010). Common core state standards. Retrieved from http://sr-
57444.csd509j.net/Portals/1/Administration/Key%20Initiatives/CCSS/Parent%20Flier%2
0-%20Color.pdf
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 224
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership
(5th ed.). San Francisco, California: John Wiley & Sons.
Boone, H. N., Jr., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2).
Bossert, S., Dwyer, D., Rowan, B., & Lee, G. (1982). The instructional management role of the
principal. Educational; Administration Quarterly, 18(3), 34–64.
Bourdieu, P. (2011). The forms of capital [1986]. In I. Szeman & T. Kaposy (Eds.), Cultural
theory: An anthology, (81-93). Madden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brainy Quote. (2017a). Francis Bacon Quotes. Retrieved from
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/f/francisbac107166.html
Brainy Quote. (2017b). Napoleon Hill Quotes. Retrieved from
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/n/napoleonhi152865.html
Briggs, K. L., & Wohlstetter, P. (2003). Key elements of a successful school-based management
strategy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 14(3), 351-372. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Priscilla_Wohlstetter/publication/237956473_Key_
Elements_of_a_Successful_School-
Based_Management_Strategy/links/54f9069c0cf28d6deca30ae1/Key-Elements-of-a-
Successful-School-Based-Management-Strategy.pdf
Brown, G., III. (2015). What’s the difference? Principal practices that support the achievement of
low-income students in demographically diverse schools. Academy of Educational
Leadership Journal, 19(2), 11.
Brown, J. E., & Doolittle, J. (2008). A cultural, linguistic, and ecological framework for
response to intervention with English language learners. Retrieved from
http://www.rti4success.org/sites/default/files/framework_for_rti.pdf
Bryan, J., & Henry, L. (2012). A model for building school-family-community partnerships:
Principles and process. Journal of Counseling and Development, 90(4), 408-420.
doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2012. 00052.x
Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: A new pursuit of happiness (Vol. 213). New
York, NY: Grove Press. Retrieved from
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=d5r6dul5Mv0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&ots=
AGtwTwN81e&sig=4OU2CuKg0zD8AhkunkJ-S8A1qE0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Byrnes, D. A., Kiger, G., & Lee Manning, M. (1997). Teachers' attitudes about language
diversity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(6), 637-644. Doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X
(97)80006-6
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 225
California Department of Education. (2005). Meeting the challenge: A history of adult education
in California: From the beginnings to the 21st century. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ae/ir/documents/meetchallenge.pdf
California Department of Education. (2012). California English language development
standards: Kindergarten through grade 12. Adopted by the California State Board of
Education. Sacramento, CA: Author.
California Department of Education. (2014a). Chapter ten of the English language arts/English
language development framework for California public schools: Kindergarten through
grade twelve. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter10.pdf
California Department of Education. (2014b). Curriculum and instruction. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/
California Department of Education (SARC). (2016a). School accountability report card
(SARC). Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/
California Department of Education News Release. (2016b). State schools chief Tom Torlakson
announces California ranks 5th nationally in advanced placement exam scores.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr16/yr16rel16.asp
California Department of Education News Release. (2016c). District-level English learner
advisory committee. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/cr/delac.asp
California Department of Education (CELDT). (2016d). California English language
development tests: CalEDFacts. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el/cefceldt.asp
California Department of Education. (2016e). Facts about English learners in California –
CalEdFacts. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/sd/cb/cefelfacts.asp
California Department of Education. (2017a). California accountability model & school
dashboard. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/index.asp
California Department of Education. (2017b). Title III, authorized costs: Title III, language
instruction educational program for English learners and immigrant children and youth.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/el/t3/authorizedcosts.asp
California Department of Education (LCFF). (2017c). Local control funding formula overview.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/aa/lc/lcffoverview.asp
California Department of Education. (2017d). NGSS for California public schools, K-12.
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/pd/ca/sc/ngssstandards.asp
California Department of Education (SBAC). (2017e). Understanding the CAASPP student score
reports. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caasppssreports.asp
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 226
California English Language Development Standards. (2014). California English language
development standards: Kindergarten through grade 12. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/pn/rc/edresourcecatalog2016.asp#CALeldS
Calkins, A., & Vogt, K. (2013). Next generation learning: The pathway to possibility.
Washington, DC: Educause. Retrieved from
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/NGW1301.pdf
Callahan, D., & Jennings, B. (2002). Ethics and public health: Forging a strong relationship.
American Journal of Public Health, 92(2), 169-176. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bruce_Jennings/publication/11542278_Ethics_and_
public_health_forging_a_strong_relationship/links/00b4952169a188fead000000.pdf
Callahan, R. M. (2005). Tracking and high school English learners: Limiting opportunity to
learn. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 305-328.
Callahan, R. M. (2013). The English learner dropout dilemma: Multiple risks and multiple
resources. Santa Barbara, CA: California Dropout Research Project #19. Retrieved from
http://www.cdrp.ucsb.edu/researchreport19.pdf
Campbell, J. (2005). Single plan for student achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.venturausd.org/edserv/EducationalServices/StudentPerformance/SPSA.aspx
Canagarajah, A. S. (2012). Teacher development in a global profession: An autoethnography.
TESOL Quarterly, 46(2), 258-279.
Carbonaro, W. (2005). Tracking, students' effort, and academic achievement. Sociology of
Education, 78(1), 27-49. doi:10.1177/003804070507800102
Cawelti, G., & Protheroe, N. (2002). A policy brief for leadership teams: High student
achievement: How six school divisions changed into high-performing systems. Arlington,
CA: Educational Research Service.
Chavez, L. (2013). The Latino threat: Constructing immigrants, citizens, and the nation.
Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Chirichello, M. (2004). Collective leadership: Reinventing the principalship. Kappa Delta Pi
Record, 40(3), 119-123. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/232055936
Clark, M. C., & Wilson, A. L. (1991). Context and rationality in Mezirow’s theory of
transformational learning. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(2), 75-91.
Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (2004). Equity in heterogeneous classrooms. Handbook of
Research on Multicultural Education, 2, 736-750.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 227
Cole, R. W. (Ed.). (2008). Educating everybody’s children: Diverse teaching strategies for
diverse learners (Rev. and expanded 2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Coleman, J. S., & Department of Health USA. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity (Vol.
2). Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of
Education.
Collard, S., & Law, M. (1989). The limits of perspective transformation: A critique of Mezirow’s
theory. Adult Education Quarterly, 2(39), 99-107.
College Board. (2014). The 10th annual AP
®
report to the nation: State supplement, February
11, 2014. Retrieved from http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/rtn/10th-
annual/10th-annual-ap-report-state-supplement-california.pdf
College Board. (2017). AP
®
coordinator’s manual. Retrieved from https://secure-
media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/ap/ap-coordinators-manual.pdf
Coltrane, B. (2002). English language learners and high-stakes tests: An overview of the issues.
ERIC Digest. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED470981.pdf
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Application of common core state standards for
English language learners. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org
Cooper, R., Chenail, R. J., & Fleming, S. (2012). A grounded theory of inductive qualitative
research education: Results of a meta-data-analysis. Qualitative Report, 17, 8.
Cox, E. (2015). Coaching and adult learning: Theory and practice. New Directions for Adult and
Continuing Education, 2015(148), 27-38. doi:10.1002/ace.20149
Crawford, J. (1989). Bilingual education: History, politics, theory, and practice (4th ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Bilingual Education Services.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research. Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners. Increasing participation and facilitating learning. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 228
Curtin, T. R., Ingels, S. J., Wu, S., & Heuer, R. (2002). National education longitudinal study of
1988: Base-year to fourth follow-up data file user’s manual (NCES 2002-323).
Washington, DC: US Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (1988). The evolution of teacher policy. Santa Monica, CA:
Publications Department, The RAND Corporation.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2007). Preparing teachers for a changing world:
What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Darío, R. (2013). Azul. 1ª edición. Pequeño Dios Editores, 2013. © Pequeño Dios Editores
Nueva de Lyon 19, departamento 21 Providencia, Santiago de Chile. Retrieved from
https://insulabaranaria.wordpress.com/2017/05/18/el-soneto-caupolican-de-ruben-dario/
Davenport, J., III. (1993). Is there any way out of the andragogy morass? In M. Thorpe, R.
Edwards, & A. Hanson (Eds.), Culture and processes of adult learning, 109-117.
DeBevoise, W. (1984). Synthesis of research on the principal as instructional leader. Educational
Leadership, 41(5), 14-20.
De Costa, P. I., & Jou, Y-S. (2016). Unpacking the ideology of cosmopolitanism in language
education: Insights from Bakhtin and systemic functional linguistics. Critical Inquiry in
Language Studies, 13(2), 73-97. doi:10.1080/15427587.2015.1132628
Demski, J. (2012). The seven habits of highly effective tech-leading principals: Unwrapping the
key attributes that transform principals into effective technology leaders in their schools
and in their districts. THE Journal (Technological Horizons in Education), 39(5), 48.
Retrieved from https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-295058357/the-seven-
habits-of-highly-effective-tech-leading
DiNitto, D. M., & Johnson, D. H. (2015). Social welfare: Politics and public policy (8th ed.).
New York, NY: Pearson Education.
Domina, T. (2014). The link between middle school mathematics course placement and
achievement. Child Development, 85(5), 1948-1964. doi:10.1111/cdev.12255
Drake, T. L., & Roe, W. H. (2003). The principalship (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
DuFour, R. (2002). The learning-centered principal. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 12-15.
Duran, T. I. (2017). Preparing English language learners to be college and career ready for the
21st century: The leadership role of middle school principals in the support of English
language learners. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California, Los
Angeles, CA.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 229
Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2001). Rethinking English language instruction: An architectural
approach. In G. Garcia (Ed.), English learners: Reaching the highest level of English
literacy (pp. 227–258). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Dweck, C. (2015). Carol Dweck revisits the growth mindset. Education Week, 35(5), 20-24.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
Dwyer, D. C. (1986). Frances hedges: A case study of instructional leadership. Peabody Journal
of Education, 63(1), 19.
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. (2004). Making content comprehensible for English
learners: The SIOP model. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15-24.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). (1965). Elementary and secondary
education act of 1965. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/nonpublic/eseareauth.pdf
Elfers, A. M., & Stritikus, T. (2014). How school and district leaders support classroom teachers’
work with English language learners. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50(2), 305-
344. doi:10.1177/0013161X13492797
Elmore, Randy. (2000). Leadership of effective middle school practice. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(4),
291–291.
Elmore, Richard (1993). The role of local school districts in instructional improvement. In
S. Fuhrman (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 96-
124). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Elmore, Richard (with Burney, Deanna). (1997). Investing in teacher learning: Staff
development and instructional improvement in community school district #2, New York
City. New York, NY: Consortium for Policy Research in Education and National
Commission on Teaching & America’s Future, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Epstein, J. L. (May 1995; 701). School/family/community partnerships. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/openview/9e3a9e802f80705150dceec414b8ed1c/1?pq-
origsite=gscholar&cbl=41842
Everling, K. M. (2009). Lau v. Nichols 40 years later - where are we now? A study of
philosophical, political, cultural and societal issues impacting bilingual education in the
early 21st century. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University). Retrieved from
http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/ETD-TAMU-2009-12-
7391/EVERLING-DISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 230
Faulkner, R., (2007). The case for greatness: Honorable ambition and its critics. New Haven.
CT: Yale University Press.
Ferguson, R. (1998). Can schools narrow the Black-White achievement gap in the Black-White
test score gap? American Educational Research Journal, 375-400.
Ford, D. (2010). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students (2nd ed.). Waco, TX:
Prufrock Press Inc.
Ford, D. Y., & Moore, J. L., III. (2013). Understanding and reversing underachievement, low
achievement, and achievement gaps among high-ability African American males in urban
school contexts. The Urban Review, 45(4), 399-415. doi:10.1007/s11256-013-0256-3
Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2002). Survey research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Frantz, R. S., Bailey, A. L., Starr, L., & Perea, L. (2014). Measuring academic language
proficiency in school-age English language proficiency assessments under new college
and career readiness standards in the United States. Language Assessment Quarterly,
11(4), 432-457.
Frawley, W., & Lantolf, J. P. (1985). Second language discourse: A Vygotskian perspective.
Applied Linguistics, 6, 19-44.
Frontline. (2011). 21st Century schools: Learning in the digital age. Retrieved from
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/resources/teachers/
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Fullan, M. (2002a, May). Principals as leaders in a culture of change. Educational Leadership,
Special Issue. Retrieved from http://michaelfullan.ca/wp-
content/uploads/2016/06/13396053050.pdf
Fullan, M. (2002b). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge management in
schools. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 409-419.
Fusarelli, L. D. (2008). Flying (partially) blind: School leaders’ use of research in decision
making. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(5), 365+.
Gallant, D. J., & Moore, J. L., III. (2008). Ethnic-based equity in teacher judgment of student
achievement on a language and literacy curriculum-embedded performance assessment
for children in grade one. Journal of Educational Foundations, 22(1/2), 63.
Garcia, O. (2011). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Malden, MA:
John Wiley & Sons.
García, O., & Baker, C. (Eds.). (1995). Policy and practice in bilingual education: A reader
extending the foundations (Vol. 2). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 231
Garmston, R. J., & Wellman, B. M. (2016). The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing
collaborative groups (3rd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Garofalo, C., & Geuras, D. (1994). Ethics education and training in the public service. American
Review of Public Administration, 24(3), 283-297. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/027507409402400304
Garrison, D. R. (2003). Self-directed learning and distance education. In M. G. Moore & W.
Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education, 161-168. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Gates, S. M., Ringel, J. S., Santibanez, L., Chung, C. H., & Ross, K. E. (2003). Who is leading
our schools? An overview of school administrators and their careers (No. 1679). Santa
Monica, CA: Rand Corporation. Retrieved from
https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1679.html
Gindis, B. (1999). Vygotsky’s vision reshaping the practice of special education for the 21st
century. Remedial and Special Education, 20(6), 333-340.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success. Retrieved from
http://www.lequydonhanoi.edu.vn/upload_images/S%C3%A1ch%20ngo%E1%BA%A1i
%20ng%E1%BB%AF/Outliers-%20The%20Story%20of%20Success.pdf
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (2001). Supervision and instructional
leadership: A developmental approach (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon/Longman
Publishing.
Goldberg, M., & Harvey, J. (1983). A nation at risk: The report of the national commission on
excellence in education. The Phi Delta Kappan, 65(1), 14-18.
Goldenberg, C. (2013). Unlocking the research on English learners: What we know–and don't
yet know–about effective instruction. American Educator, 37(2), 4.
Goldenberg, C., & Coleman, R. (2010). Promoting academic achievement among English
learners: A guide to the research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gore, V. (2013). 21st century skills and prospective job challenges. IUP Journal of Soft
Skills,7(4), 7.
Green, R. L. (2010). The four dimensions of principal leadership: A framework for leading 21st-
century schools. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gurr, D., & Drysdale, L. (2007). Models of successful principal leadership: Victorian case
studies. In C. Day & K. Leithwood (Eds.), Successful principal leadership in times of
change (pp. 39-57). Netherlands: Springer.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 232
Gutierrez, K. D., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L. C., Olson, K., Horng, E. L., . . . & McCarty,
T. L. (2002). Sounding American: The consequences of new reforms on English
language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(3), 328-343.
Hallett, T. (2007). Between deference and distinction: Interaction ritual through. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 70(2). 146-171; ProQuest Education Journals pg. 148. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/education/docview/212752132/fulltextPDF/
ECF29BD1337044F4PQ/5
Hallinger, P. (2003). Leading educational change: Reflections on the practice of instructional and
transformational leadership. Cambridge Journal of Education, 33(3), 329-351.
Hallinger, P. (2010b). Leadership for 21st century schools: From instructional leadership to
leadership for learning. In Asia Leadership RoundTable 2010: Developing an agenda for
research on leadership and change in the Asia Pacific—Key Speeches of a conference
held in Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, and January 11–12, 2010. Hong
Kong, The Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research.
Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996a). Reassessing the principal’s role in school effectiveness: A
review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1),
5–44.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996b). The principal’s role in school effectiveness: An assessment
of methodological progress, 1980–1995. In K. A. Leithwood, J. D. Chapman, P. Corson,
P. Hallinger, & A. Hart (Eds.), International handbook of research in educational
leadership and administration (pp. 723–783). New York, NY: Kluwer.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school
effectiveness: 1980-1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 157-191.
Handford, V. & Leithwood, K. (2013). Why teachers trust school leaders. Journal of
Educational Administration, 51(2), 194–212.
Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and
nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3-41.
Harper, C., & de Jong, E. (2004). Misconceptions about teaching English-language learners.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(2), 152-162. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/216915027
Hayes, W. (2004). Are we still a nation at risk two decades later? Lanham, MD: Scarecrow
Education.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 233
Haynes, J., & Zacarian, D. (2010). Teaching English language learners across the content areas.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1999). Changes in the Black-White gap in achievement test scores.
Sociology of Education, 72(2), 111.
Hesselbein, F., & Shinseki, E. (2004). Be * Known * Do: Leadership the Army way: Adapted
from the official Army leadership manual. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hiemstra, R. (1994). Self-directed learning. The Sourcebook for Self-Directed Learning. In
T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education
(2nd ed.) (pp. 9-19), Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Hill, J., Ottem, R., & DeRoche, J. (2016). Trends in public and private school principal
demographics and qualifications: 1987-88 to 2011-12. Stats in Brief. NCES 2016-189.
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED565484.pdf
Hill, L. E., Weston, M., & Hayes, J. M. (2014). Reclassification of English learner students in
California. Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from
http://www.ppic.org/publication/reclassification-of-english-learner-students-in-california/
Hopp, H., & Schmid, M. S. (2013). Perceived foreign accent in first language attrition and
second language acquisition: The impact of age of acquisition and bilingualism. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 34(02), 361-394.
Hvidston, D. J., Range, B. G., McKim, C. A., & Mette, I. M. (2015). The views of novice and
late career principals concerning instructional and organizational leadership within their
evaluation. Planning and Changing, 46(1/2), 109.
Imel, S. (1998). Transformative learning in adulthood. ERIC Digest No. 200. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED423426
Jarvis, P., & Thomas, A. M. (1987). Twentieth century thinkers in adult and continuing
education. London, England: Croom Helm.
Jones, B. A. (Ed.). (2000). Educational leadership: Policy dimensions in the 21st century.
(Volume 1). Stamford, CT: Ablex Pub. Corp.
Kayser, T. (2011). Six ingredients for collaborative partnerships. Leader to Leader, (61), 48-55.
Retrieved from http://globaldialoguecenter.com/conf_center/LIVEdec5/6-ARTICLE-
Collaborative_Partnerships.pdf
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult learning
(pp. 1-21). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 234
Koh, C. (Ed.). (2015). Motivation, leadership and curriculum design: Engaging the net
generation and 21st century learners. New York; Singapore; Springer. doi:10.1007/978-
981-287-230-2
Krieg, J. M. (2008). Are students left behind? The distributional effects of the No Child Left
Behind Act. Education, 3(2), 250-281.
Krasnoff, B. (2015). Leadership qualities of effective principals. Retrieved from
http://nwcc.educationnorthwest.org/filesnwrcc/research-brief-leadership-qualities-
effective-principals.pdf
Kurpius, S. E. R., & Stafford, M. E. (2006). Testing and measurement: A user-friendly guide.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lakin, J. M., & Young, J. W. (2013). Evaluating growth for ELL students: Implications for
accountability policies. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 32(3), 11-26.
Lantolf, J. P., & Beckett, T. G. (2009). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition.
Language Teaching, 42(04), 459-475.
Lee, J., & Orfield, G. (2006). Tracking achievement gaps and assessing the impact of NCLB on
the gaps: An in-depth look into national and state reading and math outcome trends.
Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.
Lee, O., Fradd, S. H., & Sutman, F. X. (1995). Science knowledge and cognitive strategy use
among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32(8), 797-816.
Lee, T. (2002). Mobilizing public opinion: Black insurgency and racial attitudes in the civil
rights era. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Leithwood, K., Begley, P. T., & Cousins, J. B. (2005). Developing expert leadership for future
schools. London: Farmer Press.
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences
student learning. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.
Leithwood, K. A., & Riehl, C. (2003). What we know about successful school leadership.
Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
Levitan, M., Mathison, C., & Billings, E. S. (2010). The effect of primary language podcasts on
third grade English language learners’ performance in English-only science education
contexts. Electronic Journal of Literacy Through Science 9.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 235
Lewis, C. W., & Moore, J. L., III. (2008). African American students in K-12 urban educational
settings Implications for teachers, counselors, social workers, psychologists, and
administrators. E-Journal of Teaching and Learning in Diverse Settings, 2, 1-8. Retrieved
from http://www.subr.edu/coeducation/ejournal/v2i1
Lezotte, L. (1994). The nexus of instructional leadership and effective schools. School
Administrator, 51(6), 20-23.
Lightsey, R. (1999). Albert Bandura and the exercise of self-efficacy. Journal of Cognitive
Psychotherapy, 13(2), 158.
Lin, A. M. Y. (2013). Toward paradigmatic change in TESOL methodologies: Building
plurilingual pedagogies from the ground up. TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), 521-545.
Louis, K. S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2012). Shared and instructional leadership. In K. Leithwood &
K. S. Louis (Eds.), Linking leadership to student learning. San Francisco, CA: Josey-
Bass.
Lubell, E. (2011). Building community schools: A guide for action. Children's Aid Society.
Retrieved from
http://www.nccs.org/sites/default/files/resource/NCCS_BuildingCommunitySchools.pdf
Lunenburg, F. C. (2010). The decision-making process. National Forum of Educational
Administration and Supervision Journal, 27(4).
Lynch, E. W., & Hanson, M. J. (1992). Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for
working with young children and their families. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes
Publishing.
Lyons, J. E., & Algozzine, B. (2006). Perceptions of the impact of accountability on the role of
principals. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(16), 1-19. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v14n16.2006
MacIver, D. J., & MacIver, M. A. (2006, April). Effects on middle grades’ mathematics
achievement of educational management organizations (EMOs) and New K–8 Schools.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Francisco, CA.
Madu, C. N., & Kuei, C. H. (2012). Handbook of sustainability management. Singapore: World
Scientific.
Mangin, M. M. (2007). Facilitating elementary principals’ support for instructional teacher
leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(3), 319-357.
Martínez, Y. G., & Velázquez, J. A. (2000). Involving migrant families in education. ERIC
Digest. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 236
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., McNulty, B. A., (2005). School leadership that works: From
research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development; Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
Massell, D., & Goertz, M. E. (2002). District strategies for building instructional capacity. In
A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School
Districts and Instructional Renewal, 43-60. New York, NY: Teacher College, Columbia
University.
Masumoto, M., & Brown-Welty, S. (2009). Case study of leadership practices and school-
community interrelationships in high-performing, high-poverty, rural California high
schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education (Online), 24(1), 1.
Mathie, A., & Cunningham, G. (2003). From clients to citizens: Asset-based community
development as a strategy for community-driven development. Development in Practice,
13(5), 474-486.
Maxwell, J. A. (2009). Designing a qualitative study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.) The
Sage handbook of applied social research methods (2nd ed.), (pp. 214-253). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41, 3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
McCardle, P., Mele ‐McCarthy, J., Cutting, L., Leos, K., & D'Emilio, T. (2005). Learning
disabilities in English language learners: Identifying the issues. Learning Disabilities
Research & Practice, 20(1), 1-5. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00114
McElroy, E. J., LaCour, N., & Cortese, A. (2007). Meeting the challenge: Recruiting and
retaining teachers in hard-to-staff schools. American Federation of Teachers. Retrieved
from https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/hardtostaff_2007.pdf
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research: What’s good, what’s not,
and how to tell the difference. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781483328591
Mekinda, M. A. (2012). Support for career development in youth: Program models and
evaluations. New Directions for Youth Development, 2012(134), 45-54.
Mellard, D. (2008). What is RtI. Lawrence, KS: National Center on Response to Intervention.
Mendels, P. (2012). The effective principal. Journal of Staff Development, 33(1), 54-58.
Retrieved from http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/The-
Effective-Principal.pdf
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 237
Menzel, D. C. (1997). Teaching ethics and values in public administration: Are we making a
difference? Public Administration Review, 57(3), 224-230. Retrieved from
http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy2.usc.edu/docview/1
97166133
Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self ‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory.
New directions for adult and continuing education, 2001(89), 3-14.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (Revised and
expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education) (2nd ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2014). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (3rd ed.).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Self-directed learning (3rd ed.).
Learning in adulthood, 105-129.
Merriam-Webster. (1828). Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/technology
Meyer, D., Madden, D., & McGrath, D. J. (2004). English language learner students in US
public schools: 1994 and 2000: Issue Brief. NCES 2004-035. Washington, DC: U. S.
Department of Education.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Million, S. K., & Vare, J. W. (1997). The collaborative school: A proposal for authentic
partnership in a professional development school. The Phi Delta Kappan, 78(9), 710-713.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
Mizell, H. (2010). Why professional development matters. Oxford, OH: Learning Forward.
Retrieved from https://learningforward.org/docs/pdf/why_pd_matters_web.pdf
Moller, J., Eggen, A., Fuglestad, O. L., Langfeldt, G., Presthus, A-M., Skrovset, S., . . . &
Vedoy, G. (2007). Successful leadership based on democratic values. In C. Day & K.
Leithwood (Eds.), Successful principal leadership in times of change (pp. 71-86).
Dordrecht: Springer.
Montero-Fleta, B., & Pérez-Sabater, C. (2010). A research on blogging as a platform to enhance
language skills. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 773-777. doi:
10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.100
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 238
Moore, R. (2007). Diverse behaviors, diverse results: A motivation-based model for student
academic outcomes. Diversity and the Postsecondary Experience, 129-143.
Morse, R. S., Buss, T. F., & Kinghorn, C. M. (Eds.). (2007). Transforming public leadership for
the 21st century: Transformational trends in governance & democracy (illustrated).
Armonk, NY: Sharpe. doi:10.4324/9781315698588
Munro, M. J., & Derwing, T. M. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in
the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45(1), 73-97.
Murphy, J., & Hallinger, P. (1989). A new era in the professional development of school
administrators: lessons from emerging programmes. Journal of Educational
Administration, 27(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578238910004004
Murphy, J. A., & Hallinger, P. (1984). Policy analysis at the local level: A framework for
expanded investigation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 6(1), 5-13.
Murphy, J. F., Weil, M., Hallinger, P., & Mitman, A. (1982). Academic press: Translating high
expectations into school policies and classroom practices. Educational Leadership, 40(3),
22-26.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, Medicine. (2017). Next generation science
standards: For states, by states. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18290/next-
generation-science-standards-for-states-by-states
National Association of Elementary School Principals, NAESP. (2010). A conversation with
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/principal-
novdec-new-developments-math-language-arts/conversation-secretary-education-arne-
duncan
National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2015). Rethinking principal evaluation:
A new paradigm informed by research and practice. Retrieved from
http://legisweb.state.wy.us/Interimcommittee/2013/SEARptNAESP.pdf
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2016a). Spreading NBCT expertise.
Retrieved from http://www.nbpts.org/spreading-nbct-expertise
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2016b). What teachers should know and
be able to do. Arlington, VA: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.nbpts.org/sites/default/files/what_teachers_should_know.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (n.d.). Fast facts: Enrollment trends. Retrieved
from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=65
National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Dropout rates in the United States: 2005.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/dropout05/
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 239
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Status dropout rates. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_coj.asp
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2017a). The condition of education:
Elementary and secondary enrollment. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cge.asp
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2017b). Private school enrollment. Retrieved
from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cgc.pdf
National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2017). What is RtI? Retrieved from
http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/what/whatisrti
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (NCPPHE) and Southern Regional
Education Board (SREB). (2010). Beyond the rhetoric: Improving college readiness
through coherent. Authors. Retrieved from
http://www.highereducation.org/reports/college_readiness/CollegeReadiness.pdf
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). (2002). Public Law 107-110. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Nuthall, G., & Alton-Lee, A. (1990). Research on teaching and learning: Thirty years of change.
Elementary School Journal, 90(5), 547–570.
Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (Eds.). (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding
the net generation. Educating the Next Generation, 2(1-2), 20.
O’Donnell, R. J., & White, G. P. (2005). Within the accountability era: Principals’ instructional
leadership behaviors and student achievement. NASSP Bulletin, 89(645), 56–71.
doi:10.1177/019263650508964505 Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/216022467
Ogle, D. M. (1986). KWL: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The
Reading Teacher, 39(6), 564-570.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2012). Equity and quality
in education: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools. OECD Publishing.
Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/school/50293148.pdf
Orosco, M. J., Swanson, H. L., O’Connor, R., & Lussier, C. (2013). The effects of dynamic
strategic math on English language learners word problem solving. Journal of Special
Education, 47(2), 96-107. Retrieved from http://sed.sagepub.com/content/47/2/96
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 240
Owens, A., & Sunderman, G. L. (2006). School accountability under NCLB: Aid or obstacle for
measuring racial equity? Retrieved from
https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-
diversity/school-accountability-under-nclb-aid-or-obstacle-for-measuring-racial-
equity/owens-school-accountability-under-nclb-2006.pdf
Oxford. (1879). Dictionary: Technology. Retrieved from:
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/technology
Palestini, R. H. (2005). Educational administration: Leading with mind and heart (2nd ed.).
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Palmisano, M. (2012). Collaborative inquiry differs from traditional professional development.
Retrieved from http://www.literacyinlearningexchange.org/collaborative-inquiry-differs
Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2015). P21 Framework definitions. Retrieved from
http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_Definitions_New_Logo_2
015.pdf
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry a personal,
experiential perspective. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261-283.
Pennington, M. C. (2014). Teacher identity in TESOL. Advances and Current Trends in
Language Teacher Identity Research, 5, 16.
Perie, M., Marion, S., & Gong, B. (2009). Moving toward a comprehensive assessment system:
A framework for considering interim assessments. Educational Measurement: Issues and
Practice, 28(3), 5-13.
Peterson, J. M., & Hittie, M. M. (2003). Inclusive teaching: Creating effective schools for all
learners. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Petzko, V. (2008). The perceptions of new principals regarding the knowledge and skills
important to their initial success. NASSP Bulletin, 92(3), 224-250.
doi:10.1177/0192636508322824
Powers, K., & Green, M. (2016). Principals’ perspectives on social media in schools. The
Journal of Social Media in Society, 5(2), 134-168. Retrieved from
http://www.thejsms.org/tsmri/index.php/TSMRI/article/viewFile/174/82
Pratt, D. D. (1988). Andragogy as a relational construct. Adult Education Quarterly, 38(3), 160-
72.
Quintero, E. (2014). We cannot just raise expectations. Retrieved from
http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/we-cant-just-raise-expectations
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 241
Reardon, R. M. (2011). Elementary school principals’ learning-centered leadership and
educational outcomes: Implications for principals’ professional development. Leadership
and Policy in Schools, 10(1), 63-83. doi:10.1080/15700760903511798
Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
General, 118(3), 219-235. Retrieved from
http://bigfatgenius.com/532%20Summer%202008/Reber-
Implicit_Learning_and_Tacit_Knowledge.pdf
Reilly, P., & Kasperski, D. (2016). Teacher leadership and the evolution of education: Teachers
leading change for student success. In Success in High-Need Schools Journal, 12(2), 7-
24. Retrieved from
https://www.northcentralcollege.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2016-
11/Success_Online_Journal_Vol_12_Issue_2.pdf
Resnick, L. B., & Glennan, T. K. (2002). Leadership for learning: A theory of action for urban
school districts. School Districts and Instructional Renewal, 160-172.
Reynolds, A. J. (1992). Comparing measures of parental involvement and their effects on
academic achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(3), 441-462.
Rhoton, J., & Stiles, K. E. (2002). Exploring the professional development design process:
Bringing an abstract framework into practice. Science Educator, 11(1), 1-8.
Robbins, P., & Alvy, H. B. (Eds.). (2014). The principal's companion: Strategies to lead schools
for student and teacher success. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student
outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674.
Rodríguez-Falcon, E., Evans, M., Allam, C., Barrett, J., & Forrest, D. (2010). The inclusive
learning and teaching handbook. Sheffield: University of Sheffield.
Rubinstein-Avila, E., & Lee, E. H. (2014). Secondary teachers and English language learners
(ELLs): Attitudes, preparation and implications. The Clearing House: A Journal of
Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 87(5), 187-191.
Ruiz-de-Velasco, J., & Fix, M. (with Clewell, B. C.). (2000). Overlooked and underserved:
Immigrant students in US secondary schools. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
ED449275. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/overlooked.pdf
Rumberger, R. W., & Palardy, G. J. (2005). Does segregation still matter? The impact of student
composition on academic achievement in high school. Teachers College Record, 107(9),
1999-2045.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 242
Salant, P., & Dillman, D. A. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York, NY: Wiley &
Sons.
Santa Clara County of Education. (2017). Creating a single plan for student achievement.
Retrieved from
www.sccoe.org/schoolplan/SChoolPlan%20Charts%20Doc%20Library/SPSA%20Wor...
Saracho, O. N., & Gerstl, C. K. (1992). Learning differences among at-risk minority students. In
H. C. Waxman, J. Walker de Felix, J. E. Anderson, & H. P. Baptiste (Eds.), Students at
risk in at-risk schools. Improving Environments for Learning (pp. 105-136). Newbury
Park, CA: Corwin.
Schmeltzer, T. (2000). Creating leaders. Curriculum Administrator, 36(11), 2.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Sergiovanni, T. (2009). The principalship: A reflective practice approach (6th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Shenton, A. K. (2014). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.
Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75.
Shuell, T. (2013). Theories of learning. Retrieved from
https://www.education.com/reference/article/theories-of-learning/
Simon, H. A. (1982). The rural-urban population balance again. Regional Science and Urban
Economics, 12(4), 599-606. doi:10.1016/0166-0462(82)90009-6
Sinclair, J. MacHardy., & Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The
English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of
research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417-453.
Smith, M. K. (2002). Malcolm Knowles, informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy.
Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/malcolm-knowles-informal-adult-education-self-
direction-and-andragogy/
Smith, V. (Ed.). (2013). Sociology of work: An encyclopedia. (Vols. 1-2). Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE. doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.usc.edu/10.4135/9781452276199
Snipes, J., Doolittle, F., & Herlihy, C. (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how
urban school systems improve student achievement. Retrieved from
http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/foundations_for_success_fr.pdf
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 243
Social Welfare History Project. (2016). Elementary and secondary education act of 1965.
Retrieved from http://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/programs/education/elementary-and-
secondary-education-act-of-1965/
Squire, J. R. (2008). A policy research brief produced by the national council of teachers of
English. Retrieved from
http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/PolicyResearch/ELLResearchBrief.pd
f
Sudsberry, M., & Kandel-Cisco, B. (2013). Transformative leadership: An asset-based approach
to leadership for diverse schools and learners. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.butler.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1088&context=coe_papers
Sullivan, G. M., & Artino, A. R., Jr. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting data from Likert-type
scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(4), 541-542.
Swan, M., & Smith, B. (2001). Learner English. A teacher’s guide to interference and other
problems (2nd ed.). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Tan, O. S. (2007). Problem-based learning pedagogies: Psychological processes and
enhancement of intelligences. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 6(2), 101-
114. doi:10.1007/ s10671-007-9014–1
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. FO Onah Human resource
management. Author. Retrieved from https://wwnorton.com/college/history/america-
essential-learning/docs/FWTaylor-Scientific_Mgmt-1911.pdf
Taylor, H. L., Jr., McGlynn, L., & Luter, D. G. (2013). Neighborhoods matter: The role of
universities in the school reform neighborhood development movement. Peabody Journal
of Education, 88(5), 541-563.
Tennant, M. (1986). An evaluation of Knowles’ theory of adult learning. International Journal
of Lifelong Education, 5(2), 113-122.
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language
minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Retrieved from
http://cmmr.usc.edu//CollierThomasComplete.pdf
Thorson, G., & Krafft, L. (2014, August). Do no child left behind sanctions unfairly target poor,
minority schools? Paper prepared for delivery at the Annual Meeting of the American
Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
Timperley, H. (2011). Realizing the power of professional learning. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill Education.
Tirozzi, G. N. (2001). The artistry of leadership: The evolving role of the secondary school
principal. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(6), 434-439. doi:10.1177/003172170108200605
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 244
Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts can do to
improve instruction and achievement in all schools. A project of the Learning First
Alliance: A leadership brief. Retrieved from
http://www.learningfirst.org/publications/districts/
Torlakson, T. (2011). A blueprint for great schools. Sacramento, CA: California Department of
Education. Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/bp/documents/yr15bp0720.pdf
Trotter, R. J. (1986). The mystery of mastery. Psychology Today, 20(7), 32.
U. S. Census. (2010). United States census 2010: It’s in our hands. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/2010census/
U. S. Congress. (1970, February). Toward equal educational opportunity: The report of the
select committee on equal educational opportunity, United States Senate, Pursuant to S.
Res. 359. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED072153
U. S. Department of Commerce. (1999). Education and Labor; National Institute of Literacy;
Small Business Administration. 21st century skills. Retrieved from
http://www.digitalliteracy.gov/resource/21st-century-information-fluency
U. S. Department of Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform.
Retrieved from https://www.edreform.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/A_Nation_At_Risk_1983.pdf
U. S. Department of Education. (2002). The condition of education 2002, NCES 2002-025.
Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
U. S. Department of Education. (2016a). Chapter 8: Tools and resources for monitoring and
exiting English Learners from EL Programs and Services. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oela/english-learner-toolkit/chap8.pdf
U. S. Department of Education. (2016b). Progress in our schools. Retrieved from
https://www.ed.gov/k-12reforms?src=rn
U. S. Department of Education. (2016c). The principal pipeline: Highlights of race to the top
state efforts to develop effective leaders for turnaround schools. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/implementation-support-unit/tech-assist/principal-
pipeline.pdf
U. S. Department of Education. (2016d). The principal ambassador fellowship program.
Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/programs/principalfellowship/index.html
U. S. Department of Labor. (2010). Labor force characteristics by race and ethnicity, 2009.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/race-and-
ethnicity/archive/race_ethnicity_2009.pdf
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 245
Vandevoort, L., Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Berliner, D. (2004). National board-certified teachers
and their students' achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12, 46.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v12n46.2004
Villa, R. A., & Thousand, J. S. (Eds.). (2005). Creating an inclusive school. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Vogt, L. (2014, winter). Education and poverty. Radical Teacher, (98), 68.
doi:10.5195/rt/2014.90
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. (Revised edition). Cambridge, MA:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Wang, Y., (Ed.). (2013). Education policy reform trends in G20 members. Berlin: Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38931-3
Wanzek, J., Swanson, E., Vaughn, S., Roberts, G., & Fall, A. (2016). English learner and non-
English learner students with disabilities: Content acquisition and comprehension.
Exceptional Children, 82(4), 428-442. doi:10.1177/0014402915619419
Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-
continent Research for Education and Learning.
Weis, L., & Dolby, N. (Eds.). (2012). Social class and education: Global perspectives. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Wertsch, J. V. (1984). The zone of proximal development: Some conceptual issues. New
Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1984(23), 7-18.
Wiese, A. M., & Garcia, E. E. (1998). The bilingual education act: Language minority students
and equal educational opportunity. Bilingual Research Journal, 22(1), 1-18.
Wiley, J. (2014). Build a classroom culture of trust and collaboration: Excerpt from leaders of
their own learning. Leaders of their own learning: Transforming schools through
student-engaged assessment. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Wissing, M., & Brink, A. (2012). A model for a positive youth development intervention.
Journal of Child & Adolescent Mental Health, 24(1), 1.
Wohlstetter, P., & Briggs, K. L. (1994). The principal’s role in school-based management.
Principal, 74(2), 14-16. Retrieved from
http://eric.ed.gov.libproxy1.usc.edu/?id=EJ492874
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 246
Wright, N. (2010). E-learning and implications for New Zealand schools: A literature review.
Wellington, NZ. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/ict/77614
Yang, R. K., Byers, S. R., Salazar, G., & Salas, R. A. (2009). Cultural adaptation to a university
campus: The case of Latino students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 8(2), 115-
129.
Young, M. D. (2015). The leadership challenge: Supporting the Learning of all students.
Leadership & Policy in Schools, 14(4), 389-410. doi:10.1080/15700763.2015.1073330
Young, S., Range, B. G., Hvidston, D., & Mette, I. M. (2015). Teacher evaluation reform:
Principals' beliefs about newly adopted teacher evaluation systems. Planning and
Changing, 46(1/2), 158.
Zehr, M. A. (2008). English-language learners. Education Week, 27(28), 5.
Zepeda, S. J., (2003). The principal as instructional leader: A handbook for supervisors.
Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Zins, J. E. (Ed.). (2004). Building academic success on social and emotional learning: What
does the research say? New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 247
Appendix A: Leadership Survey
Authors: Tatiana I. Duran and Helmer H. Gonzalez
7
Dear Participant,
Thank you for taking this survey. Your feedback is important to synthesize ways in
which High School Principals create asset-based, collaborative, and inclusive learning
opportunities and services for English Language Learns (ELLs).
All information that is collected in this study will be treated confidentially. You are
guaranteed that neither you, the school, nor any of its personnel will be identified in any of the
results of the study. This survey is designed to collect data and provide input into educators’
analysis on perceived leadership practices.
Please take a few minutes to read each statement and select the responses that most
appropriately describe the leadership dispositions that are necessary to lead a diverse
organization. Mark the option(s) that best indicates your opinion/beliefs or write a short
response to the questions. It is possible that some questions may not fit within your context;
in this case, please select the choice that best applies.
Thank you for sharing your voice!
* 1. What is your gender?
Female
Male
* 2. I am between the ages:
22-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
above 70
7
This Appendix was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting a team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by those listed.
Leadership Survey
Leadership in Diverse High Schools – TD794
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 248
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 249
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 250
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 251
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 252
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 253
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 254
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 255
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 256
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 257
Appendix B: Preparing English Language Learners to be College-and Career-Ready for
the 21st Century
Authors: Tatiana I. Duran and Helmer H. Gonzalez
8
Briefly explain your educational background. How many years have you been in your present
position? Briefly provide a little background of your school:
Size of district ___________________________________________________________
Number of students _______________________________________________________
Number of staff __________________________________________________________
Demographics of school and community ______________________________________
SBAC data ______________________________________________________________
Special programs or accomplishes that make this school proud _____________________
Any other unique information about the school, etc. ______________________________
Interview Questions:
1. Describe your philosophy of leadership and what this looks like in your school.
2. How was your school’s vision and mission created?
3. How much are your teachers, students, and parents involved in the decision making of the
school?
4. Explain and give examples of what you do to nurture a climate of trust and continuous
improvement in your school.
8
This Appendix was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting a team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by those listed.
Leadership Interview Protocol
The Leadership Role of High School Principals in the Support of English Language Learners
4
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 258
5. In what ways, do you create asset-based, collaborative, and inclusive learning opportunities
and services for ELLs? What do varying approaches of these services and your leadership
necessarily
9
looks like in practice?
6. What Professional Development training, skills, and knowledge should a high school
principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
7. Are you a member of any Educational Organizations?
8. What data do you use to guide your decisions about the professional development offered at
your school?
9. What opportunities do you and the leadership team set aside for teachers to collaborate with
peers, school team members, or administration on issues of language for ELL students?
10. How do you identify a gap or problem in the implementation of the ELD program?
11. What do you do if your school plan does not unfold as projected?
12. What are the key leadership elements of an effective high school program that can assist in
the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
13. How do you influence the teachers of English Language Learners’ (ELLs) plan and align
their instructional objectives and assessment plans with the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) and English Language Development (ELD) Standards?
14. How do your teachers of ELLs plan and align their instructional objectives and tasks with
ELA/ELD standards? What, if any, evidence is there in the classrooms of the
implementation of ELL strategies?
15. Why do you think that some schools outperform others on standards-based tests even when
they serve similar student populations?
9
This Appendix was jointly written by the authors listed, reflecting a team approach to this project. The authors are
listed alphabetically, reflecting the equal amount of work by those listed.
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 259
16. Describe your role in the school’s comprehensive plan for increased student achievement?
17. How do you differentiate teacher’s needs?
18. How do you and your staff demonstrate the belief that achievement follows effort and all
students are capable of increased achievement?
19. What safety nets do you have for struggling students? In some cases, students have invisible
disabilities and are also ELLs.
20. Describe what processes are in place to assist teachers who struggle to implement integrated
ELD strategies.
21. Take a moment and imagine that you just learned that the local philanthropist family recently
donated $500,000 to your school. They want you to help them figure out how to best spend
the money. What is the first thing you would advise them to do? What would you advise
them to do next? Why?
22. Is there is anything that you would add to our conversation today that I might not have
covered?
THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SECONDARY PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF ELLs 260
“If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end in doubts, but if he will content
to begin with doubts, he shall end in certainties.” (Francis Bacon, 1605.)
(Brainy Quote, 2017a)
“More gold has been mined from the thoughts of men than has been taken from
the earth.” (Napoleon Hill, 1937).
(Brainy Quote, 2017b)
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The educational system and current teaching practices in America are undergoing transformations in the instructional practices of language understanding and literacy development trajectories as it prepares its students to become global citizens in this rapidly changing 21st Century. The shift of teaching and learning with a focus on critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity are essential skills needed to prepare students for the future. An individual’s native language, culture, and background influence the individual’s ability to learn a second language, and to master that language to the point of communicating in that language in an academic context. English language learners are a high number of a continuing and growing student population with language barriers and considered to be at risk of failing or dropping out of school due to continuous, insufficient academic accomplishments. Poverty, cultural or language barriers, disability status, and/or gender are indicators that make it difficult for them to succeed academically. This study aims to represent a synthesis of findings of the influences of how learners can extract language, the implications of language acquisition, and the principals’ knowledge, skills, reflection, and professional development training influence in the process. In addition, this study will offer recommendations for improving the effectiveness of leadership dispositions.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Preparing English language learners to be college and career ready for the 21st century: the leadership role of middle school principals in the support of English language learners
PDF
Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners
PDF
The influence of leadership on the development of 21st century skills throughout Irish schools
PDF
Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement
PDF
Effective coaching of teachers to support learning for English language learners
PDF
Equitable learning opportunities for English Language Learners
PDF
A new era of leadership: preparing leaders for urban schools & the 21st century
PDF
Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis
PDF
Reflective practice and pre-service language teacher preparation
PDF
Defying odds: how teachers perceive academic language growth despite high poverty
PDF
Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study
PDF
The key essentials for learning in the 21st century: programs and practices
PDF
The influence of globalization, economics, and educational policy on the development of 21st century learning and education in the sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics in schools of...
PDF
Preparation for a global economy: 21st century career-readiness and academic-citizenship skills for African American workforce entrants
PDF
Using task based writing instruction to provide differentiated instruction for English language learners
PDF
A case study on the planning and implementation of a dual language immersion program in a K-12 school district
PDF
Elementary principal leadership and learning outcomes for low socioeconomic status Hispanic English learners
PDF
The use of culturally relevant authentic materials and L1 in supporting second language literacy
PDF
Perceptions of grade 4-6 teachers on historic failure of English language learners on standardized assessment
PDF
Teacher perceptions of English learners and the instructional strategies they choose to support academic achievement
Asset Metadata
Creator
Gonzalez, Helmer Hillton
(author),
González, Helmer Hillton
(author)
Core Title
Preparing English language learners to be college and career ready for the 21st century: the leadership role of secondary school principals in the support of English language learners
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Urban Education Policy
Publication Date
10/17/2017
Defense Date
09/05/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
21st-century leadership,21st-century learning,academic language,academic risk,adult-learning,building teacher capacity,college and career readiness,computer technology,data and assessments,differentiated instruction,English Language Development,English language mainstream classroom,fluent English proficient,high student expectations,instructional management,language learners,limited English proficient,long-term English language learners,Management of curriculum,OAI-PMH Harvest,primary language support,principal knowledge,principal training and skills,quality instruction,reclassification,second language acquisition,second language learners,self-efficacy,self-regulated learner,social capital,specially designed academic instruction in English,structured English immersion,The effective principal as a decision-maker,The principal as an instructional leader,theories of learning
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Garcia, Pedro Enrique (
committee chair
), Castruita, Rudy (
committee member
), Escalante, Michael (
committee member
)
Creator Email
hhelgonz@gmail.com,hhgonzal@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-447670
Unique identifier
UC11264134
Identifier
etd-GonzalezHe-5840.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-447670 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-GonzalezHe-5840.pdf
Dmrecord
447670
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
González, Helmer Hillton; Gonzalez, Helmer Hillton
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
21st-century leadership
21st-century learning
academic language
academic risk
adult-learning
building teacher capacity
college and career readiness
computer technology
data and assessments
differentiated instruction
English Language Development
English language mainstream classroom
fluent English proficient
high student expectations
instructional management
language learners
limited English proficient
long-term English language learners
Management of curriculum
primary language support
principal knowledge
principal training and skills
quality instruction
second language acquisition
second language learners
self-efficacy
self-regulated learner
social capital
specially designed academic instruction in English
structured English immersion
The effective principal as a decision-maker
The principal as an instructional leader
theories of learning