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 middle 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 middle 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 PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs
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
Tatiana I. Duran
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 Tatiana I. Duran
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 2
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
by
Tatiana I. Duran
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 Garcia, Ed.D.
Committee Chair
____________________________________
Rudy Castruita, Ed.D.
Committee Member
_____________________________________
Michael Escalante, Ed.D.
Committee Member
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL 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,
Helmer H. Gonzalez. 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 (Gonzalez,
2017).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 5
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my family.
My loving mother. Silvia Amaya for her unconditional love and numerous sacrifices. Through
her guidance and support, she instilled in me what and who I am. Although in spirit, she will
forever continue to guide me every step of the way. She will live with me in memory, and will
for evermore. You are loved beyond words, missed beyond measure. I love you mom! RIP.
My three caring children. Tatiana, Erica, and Michael. I sincerely thank my three children for
putting up with me through my long hours at work and studying. We went through some hard
times but we made it! I am very thankful and feel blessed to be called your mom.
My wonderful husband. Helmer Gonzalez, without whose unconditional love and patience this
dissertation would not be finished. Thank you, Amor for your love, wisdom, and support in all
my endeavors.
My dear grandchildren. Jasmine and Isabella. You have brought new meaning to my life. In
your eyes, I see hope and love. I adore you both beyond measure.
My trustworthy siblings. Silvia, Mario, and Jose. Thank you for your enduring love,
encouragement, and for always believing in me. Who would’ve thought that I would make it this
far. Si se pudo!
My devoted grandmother. Maria Colon for making the sacrifice to come to this country and
opening doors for us all. Your sacrifice will never go unnoticed, you are a true inspiration of
hard work and honor. Gracias abuelita.
My family and friends. Thank you for your continuous support and encouragement.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 6
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am very grateful for having Dr. Pedro Garcia as my chair and advisor. You have set an
example of excellence as an educator, mentor, instructor, and role model. I feel blessed to have
had the opportunity to be your mentee.
I would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee: Dr. Rudy Castruita (co-chair)
and Dr. Michael Escalante. Their guidance and mentoring through this dissertation process has
been invaluable.
My dissertation could not be completed without the participation of the middle school principals
who took the time to complete the survey and those principals who offered me their time and
expertise during the interviews.
To Marie Painter, my editor, thank you for sharing your expertise with me.
This work is dedicated to all teachers, principals, and school leaders who commit themselves to
the process of being and becoming the best instructors, they can, and to all English Language
Learners who inspire me every day with their perseverance in life-long learning.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables ...........................................................................................................9
List of Figures ........................................................................................................10
List of Appendices .................................................................................................11
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .....................................................................12
Background of the Problem .......................................................................12
Statement of the Problem ...........................................................................24
Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................29
Research Questions ....................................................................................30
Significance of the Study ...........................................................................31
Limitations .................................................................................................32
Delimitations ..............................................................................................33
Organization of the Study ..........................................................................33
Definition of Terms....................................................................................34
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .................................................................42
Theories of Learning ..................................................................................44
Leadership Skills ........................................................................................52
Current Policies in Education ....................................................................62
Summary ....................................................................................................85
Chapter Three: Methodology .................................................................................87
Introduction ................................................................................................87
Purpose and Research Questions ...............................................................88
Research Design.........................................................................................89
Methodology ..............................................................................................92
Sample and Population ..............................................................................93
Instrumentation ..........................................................................................94
Data Collection ..........................................................................................95
Data Analysis .............................................................................................97
Validity and Reliability ..............................................................................98
Ethical Considerations .............................................................................100
Summary ..................................................................................................101
Chapter Four: Findings ........................................................................................102
Background ..............................................................................................102
Methodology ............................................................................................104
Demographic Data ...................................................................................105
Qualitative Demographic Data ................................................................112
Research Question 1 ................................................................................115
Research Question 2 ................................................................................130
Building A School Community ...............................................................131
Instructional Leadership...........................................................................136
Research Question 3 ................................................................................149
Research Question 4 ................................................................................158
Leadership Practices, Approaches, and Frameworks ..............................158
Emergent Themes ....................................................................................160
Summary ..................................................................................................163
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 8
Chapter Five: Summary, Conclusions, and Implications .....................................166
Overview ..................................................................................................166
Implications..............................................................................................174
Recommendations for Further Studies.....................................................176
Closing Remarks ......................................................................................177
References ............................................................................................................178
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 9
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summary Demographic Data on Survey Participants Gender
(n=24) ....................................................................................................106
Table 2. Summary Demographic Data on Relevant Principal Characteristics
(n=24) ....................................................................................................107
Table 3. Summary Demographic Data on Principal Professional
Characteristics (n=24) ...........................................................................109
Table 4. Summary Demographic Data on Principal Experience (n=24) ............111
Table 5. Broad Percentage Estimates of Students’ Primary Home Language
(n=24) ....................................................................................................112
Table 6. Demographics of the Individual Principals Interviewed (n=5) ............114
Table 7. Frequency of Professional Development Training Received by
Principals (n=24) ...................................................................................116
Table 8. Principal Management Activities and Behaviors (n=24) ......................117
Table 9. Principal Reflection Practices (n=24) ...................................................123
Table 10. Principals’ Responses to Effective Decision Making (n=24) .............125
Table 11. Principals Confidence Responses on Meeting the Needs of
All Students .........................................................................................129
Table 12. Collaboration Practices .......................................................................132
Table 13. Attributes of a School Leader .............................................................134
Table 14. Frequency of Teacher Evaluation .......................................................145
Table 15. Effective Models of Supervision (n=24) ............................................147
Table 16. Improving English Language Learner Achievement (n=24) ..............151
Table 17. Overall Philosophy of Instruction (n=24) ...........................................154
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Triangulation Diagram ..........................................................................90
Figure 2. Six-Step Data Analysis Framework ......................................................97
Figure 3. Conceptual Model of Successful Middle School Principals ..............162
Figure 4. Principal Skills, Knowledge, and Training Practices ..........................176
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 11
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A. Leadership Survey ..........................................................................200
Appendix B. Preparing English Language Learners to be College- and
Career-Ready for the 21st Century ..........................................................210
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 12
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, 2014) 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, Nation 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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 13
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 14
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 were 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 15
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 16
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
(Lee & Orfield, 2006). The bipartisan bargain that led to the enactment of the law was designed
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 17
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 (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. 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,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 18
several interconnected factors must work together as no silver bullet exists (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; Saracho & Gerstl,
1992; Ford & Moore, 2013); 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 as a result
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 19
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). In order 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,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 20
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 21
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 22
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 23
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, are able to 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 24
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 in order to maintain a globally competitive economy (U. S. Department of
Education, 2016b). Students who bring to school diverse languages and cultures provide a rich
resource of experiences on which to develop a scientifically literate work force (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
particular challenge to teachers 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 25
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 in order 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, 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).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 26
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 the majority of 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, 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, 2014). 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 27
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, 2014). 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).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 28
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)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 29
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 30
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 middle school
principal have in order to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
2. In what ways do middle 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?
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 31
3. How do school principals influence how middle 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 middle 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 32
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. In an effort 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 33
opportunity to 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 1 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 2 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 2 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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 34
Chapter 3 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 4 is a presentation of the findings from the study by analyzing and organizing the
data collected.
Chapter 5 provides conclusions and established the generalizability of the findings.
Chapter 5 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 35
academic instruction in English (SDAIE). See the definition for SDAIE. Primary language
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 36
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
English Language Mainstream Classroom - Students Meeting Criteria: English learners
who have met local district criteria for having achieved a “good working knowledge” (also
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 37
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 38
Other Instructional Services: An instructional service specifically designed for EL
students that does 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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 39
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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
fluency”) of English are enrolled in an English language acquisition process for young children
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 40
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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, 2014)
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
(option 3) are those teachers who have met CDE-approved district-adopted criteria for primary
language instruction. (R30-LC). (California Department of Education, 2014)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 41
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, 2014)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 42
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 (2016a), 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, 2016b).
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 43
Education, 2016b). 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’
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 44
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 45
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 46
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 the majority of modern-day schools.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 47
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 48
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 49
learning is Self-Directed Learning (SDL; Hiemstra, 1994). Self-directed Learning is seen as 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 in particular (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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 50
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 51
found in Davenport (1993), Jarvis & 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 52
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 are 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 53
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 54
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).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 55
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 56
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 57
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 58
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).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 59
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 have to do with 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 60
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 is
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 61
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 62
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 (2016c) 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,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 63
2016c). 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 (2016b) 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, 2016c). 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, 2016c). 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, 2016c). 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, 2016c).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 64
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, 2016c).
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, 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,
2015) along with the U. S. Department of Education (2016c) 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 as team leaders; [more
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 65
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 66
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 takes,
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)
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 67
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).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 68
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,
2016a). 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 69
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 70
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). Needless to say, 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 plethora 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 71
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 72
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 should
stimulate their teachers intellectually, provide teachers with individualized support, and provide
teachers with an appropriate Teacher Professional Development (TPD) model to guide them. In
the area of 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 hone in their instructional leadership and pedagogical knowledge and
engage in joint learning with their teachers, so as 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 73
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 74
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 as a whole begins to learn from the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 75
collective 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-
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 76
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 their
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 77
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 78
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 &
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 79
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 80
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 81
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 82
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 83
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, 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 84
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 85
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,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 86
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 87
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, Wilkinson-Flicker, Kristapovich, Rathbun, Wang, & Zhang, 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 (2014), 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
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants, this dissertation used pseudonyms to refer to the school,
district, and community.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 88
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 middle school
principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
2. In what ways do middle 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 middle 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 middle 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), and Response to Intervention (RtI), there is an intensified
focus on instructional considerations of core concepts with academic language proficiency
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 89
resulting in deepened 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 90
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 91
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 advance 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 handwritten
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 92
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 middle 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 93
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 middle public 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. marie
Sampling the population of middle principals in southern California included multiple
steps as follows:
1. Review of School Accountability Report Card (SARC, California Department of
Education, 2016) regarding English Language Learners subgroup growth over time.
2. The researchers reviewed the documents to generate a complete list of middle 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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 94
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 95
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 96
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 97
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 were consistent with patterns
which have enough information to create categories or themes. As Merriam (2009) stated, if
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 98
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 should 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 99
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 (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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 100
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 as a result 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 101
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 102
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Background
The school principal plays a pivotal role in the improvement of a school. Effective
school principals are leaders of learning who can shape the vision of academic success for all
students, create and cultivate leadership in others, and improve classroom instruction through
data and processes with the goal of school improvement. Principals, as well as all stakeholders,
seek to create improvement plans as lasting foundations of learning that will impact English
Language Learners (ELLs) and drive both school and student proficiency performance.
Nowhere are these expectations more important than in our middle schools, which provide the
building blocks all students’ need for success, both towards high school graduation and in life
towards 21st Century college and career readiness. More than ever, school principals need to be
diverse instructional leaders and effective in creating a quality learning environment that impacts
effective teaching for ELL student achievement and all students at their school sites.
Through careful analysis of the survey and interviews, this study uncovered some of the
skills, knowledge, professional development, reflective practices, and leadership abilities of
middle school principals who have improved language proficiency and academic achievement of
English Language Learners (ELLs) at their school sites. This study focused on principals
leading in comprehensive public middle schools in southern California’s urban areas with high
populations of English Language Learners.
This chapter presents the findings of the data collected and analyzed under the current
study, which investigated the relationships between the instructional leader’s professional
development training, leadership skills, knowledge, and reflection practices to support the
academic demands and reform initiatives to improve the English Language and proficiency of
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 103
English Language Learners (ELLs) as they progress through secondary public schools. 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.
A review of southern California’s middle schools with high ELL proficiency as a
predictor of academic achievement was used to select school principals. The California
Department of Education’s (CDE) School Accountability Report Cards (CDE, 2016) were used
to compare and analyze student performance on a variety of indicators; primarily the ELL
proficiency growth overtime. The SARC report (CDE, 2016) 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 Learners (ELL) as
a subgroup. Fifty surveys were distributed to public middle school principals across southern
California of which 24 were completed, providing a response of 48%. Of these respondents, five
principals were selected and interviewed. The five principals have been referred to as Principal
A, B, C, D, and E and no identifiable information will be discussed or reported about their
person, schools, or districts within this study. Specific information regarding the demographics
of the survey and interview participants is provided in the next section.
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 purpose for this chapter is to analyze,
disaggregate, and present the data collected in this quantitative and qualitative mixed-methods
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 104
research study. Additionally, this chapter reports the findings of the four research questions that
drive this study and identifies common qualities and traits of effective middle school principals.
• Research Question 1: What professional development training, skills, and knowledge
should a middle school principal have in order to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
• Research Question 2: In what ways do middle 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?
• 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?
• Research Question 4: What are the key leadership elements of an effective middle school
program that can assist in the evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
This chapter includes a presentation of the methodology used for this research study.
Next, is a presentation of the general demographic quantitative data collected from volunteer
Southern California principal participants. Then, qualitative data from the interviews is
examined and emerging themes from the interviews are presented; after, the research questions
guiding this study are reviewed and a report of the findings are presented. The last portion of
this chapter is the theoretical framework and a summary of the findings a well as the researcher’s
reflections on the significance of the findings.
Methodology
Creswell (2014) discussed a properly designed survey will give the researcher the
numerical data of the respondents; current attitudes and opinions, allowing the researcher to
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 105
generalize or make claims about the population surveyed. The survey data was reviewed by the
researcher using Creswell’s data analysis process for interpretation procedures and to ensure
validity and reliability of the study. Furthermore, Merriam’s (2009) qualitative research step-by-
step process of analysis was utilized to answer the research questions. As Merriam explained,
the step-by-step process includes: a) category construction; b) sorting of categories and data;
c) coding; d) data analysis; and e) deriving meaning through interpretation. The survey
questions are included in Appendix A.
An interview protocol was established with semi-structured interview questions that
allowed for the flexibility of the interviewer to ask additional probing questions to gain
additional perspective, perceptions, and insight from the persons being interviewed (Merriam,
2009). The creation of a protocol allowed for greater consistency from the respondents to ensure
that they were asked the same initial questions, thus establishing the validity and reliability of the
interview protocol (Merriam, 2009). The interview questions contained in the protocol were
sequential, and the questions were grouped to correspond to the four research questions in this
research study. The interview protocol used is included as Appendix B.
Demographic Data
The quantitative data was obtained by an electronic survey system. From the survey data,
five middle school principals were chosen based on the ELL student population as a deciding
variable. A second deciding variable was the proficiency growth rates of the ELL population at
the schools.
The 24 survey responses indicated middle school enrollment ranging from 105 to 2,084
students at the middle school sites. The first portion of this survey contained demographic
information questions. These questions asked for the principal’s: (a) gender; (b) age;
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 106
(c) ethnicity; (d) language(s) spoken as a child; (e) highest level of school completed; (f) years
spent as a classroom teacher; (g) years in other leadership role(s); (h) years of experience as a
principal; (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.
The demographic data on Table 1 on the gender of the research participants indicates that
11 or 46% of the middle school Principals surveyed were male; with the remaining 13 or 54%
being female. Given these points, most principals surveyed were females.
Table 1
Summary Demographic Data on Survey Participants Gender (n=24)
Demographic
Independent
Variable
f
%
Gender Female 13 54
Male 11 46
Total 24 100
Table 2 represents the personal principal characteristics of the survey responses. The
characteristics include age, ethnicity, and background information of the survey respondents.
Twelve and a half percent of the participants were between the ages of 30-39; 50% of the
participants were within the age range of 40-49 years of age; 25% of the participants were in the
50-59 age range; and 12.5% were within the 60-69 age range. As shown, the age range of most
participants were between 40-49 years old. Moreover, the participants identified their ethnicity.
Twelve and a half percent of participants reported to be of Black/African American ethnicity;
62.5% reported to be Hispanic/Latino(a); 12.5% reported to be White/Caucasian; 6.25% reported
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 107
to be Middle Eastern; and 6.25% reported to be of Asian Pacific/Islander ethnicity. In summary,
most participants are of Hispanic/Latino(a) ethnicity. Furthermore, participants responded to
their childhood home/community language exposure. Thirty-seven and a half percent of the
participants were raised in homes/communities where Standard English was mainly spoken; 50%
of the participants were raised in a home/community in which a language other than English was
spoken; and 12.5% of the participants were raised in a home/community in which more than two
languages were spoken. Given these points, most of the participants were raised in a home in
which a language other than English was spoken.
Table 2
Summary Demographic Data on Relevant Principal Characteristics (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Age 22-29 years 0 0
30-39 years 3 12.5
40-49 years 12 50
50-59 years 3 12.5
60-69 years 3 12.5
70+ years 0 0
Total 24 100
Ethnicity American Indian or
Alaskan Native
0 0
Asian Pacific Islander 0 0
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 108
Table 2 (Cont’d.)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Black or African
American
3 12.5
Hispanic/ Latino 15 62.5
White Caucasian 3 12.5
Middle Eastern 2 8.33
Other: Chicano/a 1 4.17
Total 24 100
Language Spoken
as a Child
Standard English was
spoken
9 37.5
A language other than
English was spoken
12 50
More than one language
was spoken
3 12.5
A non-standard English
variety was spoken
0 0
Other: 0 0
Total 24 100
Table 3 represents relevant principals’ professional characteristics. Of the participants,
75% hold a Master’s degree; 12.5% hold Ed. D degrees; and 12.5% hold Ph D degrees. The
highest level of school completed by most participants is a Master degree. On another question,
principals responded to the amount of years they spent teaching in the classroom; 62.5% taught
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 109
for 3-10 years before leaving the classroom; 25% taught for 11-15 years; and 12.5% taught for
20+ years. Comparatively, principals responded to their years of experience on an out-of-the-
classroom leadership role (Coordinator, Instructional Coach, Assistant Principal, etc.) before
becoming principals. Thirty-seven and a half percent spent 1-5 years in other leadership roles;
37.5% spent 6-10 years in other leadership roles; 12.5% spent 11-15 years in other leadership
roles; and 12.5% spent 16-20 years in other leadership roles. Given these points, most principals
spent between 1-10 years in other leadership roles before becoming principals.
Table 3
Summary Demographic Data on Principal Professional Characteristics (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Highest Level of
School Completed
Bachelor’s
BA/BS
0 0
Master’s
MA/MS
18 75
Doctor of Education
Ed. D
3 12.5
Doctor of Philosophy
PhD
3 12.5
Total 24 100
Years Spent as a
Classroom Teacher
None 0 0
Less than 3 years 0 0
3-10 years 15 62.5
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 110
Table 3 (Cont’d.)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
11-15 years 6 25
16-20 years 0 0
20+ years 3 12.5
Total 24 100
Years in other
Leadership Roles
None 0 0
1-5 years 9 37.5
6-10 years 9 37.5
11-15 years 3 12.5
16-20 years 3 12.5
20+ years 0 0
Total 24 100
Table 4 indicates principal experience based on survey responses; 62.5% had one to five
years of experience as principals; and 25% had six to ten-year experience. Most experience was
between two to five years of experience as a principal margin. In addition, the survey showed
the years of service at the school site. Twenty-five percent of the principals reported that this
was their first year at the work location; 37.5% have been at their current location for one to two
years; 12.5% have been at their current location for three to five years; and 25% have been at
their current location for six to ten years. The highest percentage is that of principals who have
been at the site for one to two years.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 111
Table 4
Summary Demographic Data on Principal Experience (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Years of Experience
as a Principal
First Year 0 0
1-5 years 15 62.5
6-10 years 6 25
11-15 years 0 0
16-20 years 3 12.5
20+ years 0 0
Total 24 100
Years as a Principal
at this site
First year 6 25
1-2 years 9 37.5
3-5 years 3 12.5
6-10 years 6 25
11+ years 0 0
Total 24 100
Table 5 represents survey responses in which principals estimated the broad percentage
of students at the school sites whose first language is different than the language of instruction.
Forty-nine percent of principals estimated that 60% of their student population come from
households in which the primary language is not English; 1% of the principals estimated having
20% or more but less than 40% of their student population from households in which English is
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 112
not the primary language; 37.5% of the principals estimated that 20% or more but less than 40%
of their student population come from households in which English is not the primary language;
and 12.5% of the principals estimated that 10% or more but less than 20% of the students come
from households in which English is not the primary language. In summary, most principals
estimated serving school communities in which Standard English is not spoken.
Table 5
Broad Percentage Estimates of Students’ Primary Home Language (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Primary Language
other than English
60% or more 13 55.56
40% or more but less
than 60%
0 0
20% or more but less
than 40%
8 33.33
10% or more but less
than 20%
3 11.11
Less than 10% 0 0
Total 24 100
Qualitative Demographic Data
The researcher analyzed the data gathered from the interviews using Creswell’s (2014)
data analysis steps and Merriam’s (2009) method for coding. The researcher followed
Creswell’s (2014) detailed eight-step coding process, which is an analysis of the data collected
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 113
that breaks down the material into chunks or segments, allowing the researcher to better organize
the data.
To effectively code the data, the researcher used the techniques described by Creswell
(2014), whereby the researcher identified descriptive wording within the interview and survey
data and turned them into subcategories. The researcher used a printed copy of the interviews
and surveys to highlight key phrases, assigning a color to each of the identified categories. Once
the qualitative interview data were collected, an open-coding system was utilized to analyze the
data. The interviews were documented with a digital recorder and handwritten field notes. The
recordings and field notes were reviewed, analyzed, and coded for documentation of the
findings. The interviews were transcribed verbatim so as not to lose any valuable information
gathered from the conversations.
The five principals met the selection criteria and volunteered to be a part of the interview
process. Each of the hour-long interviews resulted in deep discussions about the role the
principal believed he or she played at their school site in facilitating improvements in ELL
student academic achievement.
An analysis of the data in Table 6 indicates that three out of the five principals who were
interviewed were female and all five of the principals were currently leading comprehensive
middle schools which serve a 50%+ English Language Learner school population. The
respondents had been principals between two and twenty years, and three of the five principals
have obtained doctoral degrees. The mean or average student population for the principals
interviewed was 829 students and the English Language Learners student populations ranged
from 44% to 85%.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 114
Table 6
Demographics of the Individual Principals Interviewed (n=5)
Principal
Gender
Highest
Educational
Level
Years as a
Middle School
Principal
School
Enrollment
English
Language
Learner
(ELL)
Population
(Percent)
A Female Ed. D 16-20 775 60
B Male Ed. D 1-5 1500 85
C Female MA 6-10 500 75
D Male MA 1-5 662 50
E Female Ed. D 1-5 710 44
Comparative analysis of the quantitative data from the survey and qualitative data from
the interviews gave light to the interviewed principals’ beliefs about their own leadership
practices. The survey responses from the five selected principals were consistent with the
information drawn from the interviews.
A thematic team of two members developed the four research questions. While each
member of the thematic team is conducting their own study, and writing an individual
dissertation, the research questions and instrumentation used in the study were developed
collectively. The analysis is grounded in three conceptions of leadership: systematic,
collaborative, and instructional throughout the organizational structure (Anderson, 2003).
The research questions aimed to identify the knowledge, skills, and training required of effective
urban secondary school principals.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 115
Research Question 1
What professional development training, skills, and knowledge should a Middle School
Principal have to lead/guide teachers of ELLs?
Successful school leadership lies in linking the demands of the environment, the students,
the community, and the staff to create an understanding of each situation as it arises. The
successful leader then draws the knowledge of a repertoire of possible strategies to respond
successfully and keep the school environment in balance (Goddard, 2003). To achieve the
balance, strong leadership is stressed as necessary to bring our middle urban schools to a state of
excellence. The building blocks of quality, school leadership ability are the communication
skills, motivation, organizational development, management, and creativity (Palestini, 2005).
The first research question was answered through a descriptive analysis of the responses given
by principals in their survey responses and their face-to-face interviews. Principals responded to
key leadership elements of an effective middle school academic program that were separated into
categories in the survey and interviews. Principals responded to instructional leadership
functions that were separated into seven main categories within the survey: a) frame of the
school goals, b) professional development, c) training, d) skills, e) comprehensive school action
plan, f) priorities for action, and g) learning outcomes.
Table 7 shows the frequency in which principals are engaged in professional
development opportunities. The findings from survey responses indicated that 22.22% of the
principals attended professional development on a weekly basis; 33.34% of the principals took
part in professional development bi-monthly; and 44.44% of the principals attended professional
development monthly. Most of the principals are part of monthly professional development
opportunities.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 116
Table 7
Frequency of Professional Development Training Received by Principals (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Professional
Development
Weekly 5 22.22
Opportunities Bi-monthly 8 33.34
Monthly 11 44.44
Other
Total 24 100
Table 8 shows the means and standard deviation for the survey responses measured for
principal management behaviors on a Likert scale ranging from 0-4 points (0=never; 1=seldom;
2=quite often; 3=very often). The management behavior that most principals identified
themselves as exhibiting was to ensure that teachers work per the school's educational goals with
a mean of 2.54 and the standard deviation of 1.59. The second management behavior identified
by principals was making sure that the professional development activities of teachers are in
accordance with the teaching goals of the school with a mean of 2.46 and a standard deviation of
1.59. Four management behaviors received a mean score of 2.42 and a standard deviation of
1.55 respectively. These were observing instruction in the classrooms; use of student
performance results to develop the school’s educational goals; ensuring that there is clarity
concerning the responsibility for coordinating the curriculum; and when a teacher brings up a
classroom problem, we solve the problem together. The mean score of 2.33 and standard
deviation of 1.53 was the response from principals to check to see whether classroom activities
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 117
are keeping up with the school’s educational goals. The mean of 2.21 and standard deviation of
1.49 provided the mean response of principals giving teachers suggestions as to how they can
improve their teaching. Principals scored themselves with the second to last mean response of
2.08 and standard deviation of 1.44 when asked if they inform teachers about possibilities for
updating their knowledge and skills. Principals scored themselves the lowest with the last mean
response of 1.83 and standard deviation of 1.35 when asked if they take exam results into
account in decisions regarding curriculum development.
Table 8
Principal Management Activities and Behaviors (n=24)
Principal Leadership Behaviors
Never
0
Seldom
1
Quite
Often
2
Very
Often
3
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
I make sure that the professional
development activities of teachers
are in accordance with the
teaching goals of the school.
55.56%
13
44.44%
11
2.46 1.57
I ensure that teachers work per the
school's educational goals.
44.44%
11
55.56%
13
2.54 1.59
I observe instruction in the
classrooms.
11.11%
3
33.33%
8
55.56%
13
2.42 1.55
I use student performance results
to develop the school’s
educational goals.
11.11%
3
33.33%
8
55.56%
13
2.42 1.55
I give teachers suggestions as to
how they can improve their
teaching.
77.78%
19
22.22%
5
2.21 1.49
2.08 1.44
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 118
Table 8 (Cont’d.)
Principal Leadership Behaviors
Never
0
Seldom
1
Quite
Often
2
Very
Often
3
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
I inform teachers about
possibilities for updating their
knowledge and skills.
11.11%
3
66.67%
16
22.22%
5
I check to see whether classroom
activities are keeping up with the
school’s educational goals.
66.67%
16
33.33%
8
2.33 1.53
66.67%
16
33.33%
8
2.33 1.53
I take exam results into account in
decisions regarding curriculum
development.
11.11%
3
11.11%
3
55.56%
13
22.22%
5
1.83 1.35
I ensure that there is clarity
concerning the responsibility for
coordinating the curriculum.
11.11%
3
33.33%
8
55.56%
13
2.42 1.55
When a teacher brings up a
classroom problem, we solve the
problem together.
22.22%
3
22.22%
8
58.33%
13
2.42 1.55
Analysis of the transcriptions and field notes gave light to three recurring themes with a
focus on the academic program: (1) Strategic Planning, (2) Effective Decision Making, and
(3) The Principal: The Person and the Profession.
Strategic Planning
Palestini (2005) described that when considering the leadership practices of an academic
program the planning process clearly defines objectives and assesses both the internal and
external situation of the organization to formulate strategies, plan the implementation of these
strategies, evaluate the progress, and adjust as necessary to stay on task. The role of the principal
serves as a model for professional development. Just like teachers, their own professional
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 119
development must be planned, long term, and embedded in their jobs, focused on student
achievement and supportive of reflective practice and must include opportunities to work,
discuss, and solve problems with colleagues (Drake & Roe, 2003). Each of the five principals
interviewed reported that instructional leadership is all about how a principal makes a positive
difference for the school community. The principals discussed shifts in education and most
importantly the shift towards leadership practices. These include teacher empowerment; site-
based decision making; rapidly developing technology in the workplace, home, and school; and
the idea of transformational leadership. Some of the strategic planning characteristics noted
from the five principals include a) the development of a vision and mission statement; b) the
development of a set of instructional goals; c) the development of a comprehensive needs
assessment; and d) the development of a list of priorities. According to the principal interview
process, the four items mentioned are essential elements of an effective professional
development plan.
The mission statement process involves establishing a strong school consensus about the
goals and purpose(s) of the school community. “Many times, schools have an existing mission.
However, the planning process should not begin until there is enough buy-in from all
stakeholders” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). In addition, Principal A (February 9, 2017)
explained “the mission needs to be adapted to meet the current needs of the school community.”
Additionally, Principal C (February 23, 2017) discussed that the core vision of the principal
facilitates and leverages the school’s vision and mission statement. In a like manner, all five
principals discussed that the school’s goals and objectives are summarized in the mission and
vision statements.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 120
From an operational and instructional standpoint, school administrators can specify the
school’s vision and mission by setting clear instructional goals. Stiggins and Duke (2008)
argued that clear academic goals form an essential structural foundation for a balanced
assessment system. According to Stiggins and Duke, instructional goals best serve the needs of
all stakeholders when they are integrated into learning progressions within and across all grade
levels. Principal E (February 27, 2017) explained that when establishing goals these need to be
specific and give direction to the action that needs to take place to achieve them. In addition,
Principal E explained, “the goals need to be expressed in terms that promote easy assessment,
and are clear so that they may be assessed easily and, of course, they should complement the
school’s vision and mission.” The comprehensive message captured through all five interviews
was that clearly articulated goals are the center of the instruction-based classrooms in which
ideal learning environments occur and in which the pedagogical shifts have occurred from
teaching to learning, from what must be covered to what a student should be able to do with the
material regardless of their language proficiency.
The needs assessment is a crucial part of the strategic planning process (Palestini, 2005).
It must involve a comprehensive identification of both internal and external strengths and
weaknesses and include an analysis of instructional practices (Palestini, 2005). Principal D
(February 25, 2017) explicated,
A need is a discrepancy or a gap between what is and establishes what should be as a
goal. A needs assessment is a systematic set of procedures that are used to determine the
needs of a school, examine the nature and causes of the problem, and sets priorities for
the future; there is never enough funding to meet all the needs of a school. Principals use
needs assessments to identify and select resources needed to get the job done.
To recap, all five principals exchanged similar views on the importance of a needs
assessment. All five principals spoke about creating a comprehensive needs assessment plan to
document the status of the schools, the “what is” of the concerns/issues, to compare the status
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 121
with the vision of “what should be,” and to determine the magnitude of the needs and/or causes
of the school. The major output is to create a tentative order of priority, based on the criticality
of the need and its causes.
Subsequently, creating an order of priorities towards a comprehensive needs assessment
is an essential component towards the understanding of the demands of the school community.
Principal B (February 20, 2017) explained “having a sound understanding of both the needs and
conditions of a priority population, for example English Language Learners (ELLs), are critical
in developing a program that addresses those needs.” Prevailing discussion points in the five
interviews were the importance of determining the priorities, setting specific and actionable
goals; establishing benchmarks, and interventions based on disaggregated data which focuses on
student needs. Principal B discussed a sequential order of how to create an order of priorities,
To set an order of priorities, the principal needs to be skillful. Priorities need to have
time frames to be measured. You start by determining target groups. Then you
determine the scope of the needs assessment – i.e., English Language Learners (ELLs)
meeting proficiency levels. After, data needs to be gathered to define the needs and
specify the desired outcome based on the school goals. The data needs to be collected to
determine the current state of the target group in relation to the desired outcome. It is
important to note that the needs assessment needs to be formulated based on
discrepancies between current and desired outcomes. Afterwards, needs to be prioritized
based on the data. A list of concerns or areas of needs to be ranked in order of
importance. Within each area of concern, the identified needs must be placed on a
separate identified rank. (February 20, 2017).
Encompassing the viewpoints of all five principals, in the analysis with the goals that
show the need for developmental action are prioritized based on their relationship to the
identified mission and the severity of the need. Therefore, action plans are developed from each
of the priorities.
Effective Decision Making
Survey and interview findings showed that principals exhibited a stronger belief in their
own leadership capacity when they make decisions in ways that involve stakeholders, that are
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 122
more comprehensive, and that incorporate current information. Bandura (2009) explained that a
great deal of professional work involves making decisions and finding solutions to problems by
drawing on one’s knowledge, constructing new knowledge structures, and applying decision
rules. Competency in problem solving requires the development of thinking skills for how to
seek and construct reliable information and put it to good use. Palestini (2005) pointed out that
decision makers must systematically analyze the situation; set objectives; generate, evaluate, and
select alternatives; make decisions; and evaluate the decision made. In the course of the survey
responses, interviews, and field notes, some of the effective decision-making competences
described by principals consist of a) interpersonal; b) ethical; and c) decision-making skills.
Table 9 summarizes principals’ survey responses on the frequency of their reflective
practices which compare the time spent in instructional activities versus managerial ones;
55.56% of the principals stated spending time on a weekly basis on instructional activities;
33.33% reported spending daily time on instructional practices; and 11.11% reported spending
semi-monthly time on instructional practices. Most principals reported spending at least half of
their time on instructional activities. At least a third of the principals reported spending
instructional time daily. Therefore, most the time is spent on instructional decisions.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 123
Table 9
Principal Reflection Practices (n=24)
Demographic Independent Variable f Percent (%)
Frequency of
Principals reflection
Daily 8 33.33
on: What portion of
the day is spent on
Weekly 13 55.56
instructional
activities versus
managerial ones?
Semi-Monthly 3 11.11
Monthly
Other
Total 24 100
The Impact of Leaders in Classrooms
Table 10 shows the mean and standard deviation for the survey responses measured for
principals’ reflective behaviors on time spent on instructional activities versus time spent on
managerial ones on a Likert scale ranging from 1-5 points (1= strongly disagree; 2= disagree;
3= undecided; 4=Agree; 5= Strongly Agree). The mean scores and standard deviation for the
survey responses represented on Table 10 are as follows: the highest mean score of 4.67 and
standard deviation of 2.16 was for the response “An important part of my job is to create a
school-wide orderly atmosphere conducive of learning;” the second highest mean score of 4.13
and standard deviation of 2.03 was for the response “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;” the third highest mean score of 4.12 and standard deviation
of 2.03 was for the response “An important part of my job is to present instructional updates to
parents;” the fourth highest mean score of 3.75 and standard deviation of 1.94 was for the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 124
response “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; the fifth highest mean score of
3.67 and standard deviation of 1.91 was for response “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;” the sixth highest mean score of 3.54 and standard deviation of 1.88
was for response “I influence that decisions about the school are taken at a higher administrative
level;” the seventh mean score of 3.5 and standard deviation of 1.87 was for response “It is
important for the school that I see that all the mandates are followed;” the eighth mean score of
3.29 and standard deviation of 1.81 was for the response “An important part of my job is to
resolve instructional problems with teacher’s lesson planning;” the last mean of 3.08 and
deviation of 1.75 was for two responses respectively “Using test scores of students to evaluate
teacher’s performance devalues the teacher’s professional judgement” and “ Giving teachers too
much freedom to choose their own instructional techniques can lead to poor teaching.” The
breakdown of the mean and standard deviation served as an analysis tool to determine priorities
of effective decision-making practices by effective principals. Some attributes extracted from
the analysis were that when effective principals make decisions they have orderly, schoolwide
research-based instructional approaches and systems to monitor teachers of English Language
Learners (ELLs), have open lines of communication with the whole school community
stakeholders, and prioritize school goals with standards-based instruction. More detailed
explanation of the approaches mentioned above were described during the interviews.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 125
Table 10
Principals’ Responses to Effective Decision Making (n=24)
Principal Beliefs
about School, Job, and
Teachers
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
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
12.51%
3
8.33%
2
34.72%
8
44.44%
11
4.13 2.03
Using test scores of
students to evaluate
teacher’s performance
devalues the teacher’s
professional judgement
54.16%
13
29.17%
7
16.67%
4
3.08 1.75
Giving teachers too
much freedom to
choose their own
instructional techniques
can lead to poor
teaching
44.45%
11
22.22%
5
11.11%
3
22.22%
5
3.08 1.75
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
11.11%
3
22.22%
5
44.45%
11
22.22%
5
3.75 1.94
An important part of
my job is to present
instructional updates to
parents
22.22%
5
44.44%
11
33.33%
8
4.12 2.03
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 126
Table 10 (Cont’d.)
Principal Beliefs
about School, Job, and
Teachers
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
I influence that
decisions about the
school are taken at a
higher administrative
level
44.44%
11
55.56%
13
3.54 1.88
It is important for the
school that I see that all
the mandates are
followed
11.11%
3
44.44%
11
22.22%
5
22.22%
5
3.5 1.87
An important part of
my job is to resolve
instructional problems
with teacher’s lesson
planning
4.17%
1
8.33%
2
41.66%
10
44.44%
11
3.29 1.81
An important part of
my job is to create a
school-wide orderly
atmosphere conducive
of learning
33.33%
8
66.67%
16
4.67 2.16
I have a system for
monitoring whether
teachers of English
Language Learners plan
and align their
instructional objectives
and align their
instructional objectives
and assignment plans
with the Common Core
State Standards
(Bogatin, 2010) and the
English Language
Development Standards
(CDE, 2012)
33.33%
8
33.33%
8
33.33%
8
3.67 1.91
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 127
Decision making is a critical part of running an effective school. The personal value
systems of individuals influence the decision-making process and outcomes by affecting
perceptions of situations, problems, individual and organization success, the choice process,
interpersonal relations involved in decision making, limits ethical behavior, and acceptance of
organizational goals (Palestini, 2005). Development of the interpersonal skills of school leaders
is a key goal of the overall success of a school. During the interview, Principal B (February 20,
2017) pointed out “the effective implementation of a strategic decision making requires that
individuals have a set of skills, knowledge, experiences, and values.” When making effective
decisions, it is crucial for the school leaders to consider the needs of those affected by the
decision, including students, teachers, and staff. “In addition, the decisions that meet the
financial, human, time, and other constraints that may exist in the situation” (Principal B,
February 20, 2017). Throughout the five interviews, the principals mentioned that decision-
making skills are the basic abilities of the principals that allow the performance of the
components of analysis, objective setting, and selection of alternatives.
In addition, the five principals interviewed pointed out the that as school leaders the
decisions need to always be ethical. “Your core vision needs to facilitate and leverage the
decisions being made at the school” (Principal C, February 23, 2017). All five principals
discussed the importance of shared decision making when making decisions for the school
community. Principal C (February 23, 2017) illustrated,
All decisions at the school site are made using a collaborative model. I always keep an
open ear to the needs and viewpoints of the various stakeholders when I converse with
them. In addition, communities have been established in which representatives from all
stakeholder groups are present. We usually discuss the needs and shared perspectives. It
is crucial to always have transparency. Transparency comes in various forms. It comes
from your actions, from your decisions, from the way you carry yourself daily. You need
to walk the talk as they say. Your actions speak louder than words. If you expect for
teachers to come in on a weekend for professional development, you need to be present at
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 128
the professional development yourself. Moreover, as a principal I carefully identify the
goals and objectives that need to be accomplished and as the school leader I facilitate and
specify the criteria that needs to be used to assess the quality, acceptance, and ethical
appropriateness.
Throughout all five interviews, the topic of decision-making was discussed. From the
findings, the researcher concluded that there is not a single style that is effective at all times
during the decision-making process; there are advantages to having group participation in the
process; and that principals need to have interpersonal, ethical, and creative thinking skills when
making organizational decisions.
The Principal: The Person and the Profession
A careful analysis of the various leadership approaches and theories such as: Skills,
Behaviors, and Traits (Yukl, 2002); Followership (Baker, 2007); Intellectual Stimulation
(Ginsburg & Opper, 1988); Situational (Vecchio, 1987); Contingency (Fiedler, 1964);
Charismatic (Conger & Kanungo, 1988); Social Cognitive (Bandura, 2001); and Path Goal
(Evans, 2002) were used to pinpoint the recurring theme found as principals explained their
personal philosophy and definition of leadership. Transformational leaders are theorized to
achieve superior results with their followers compared with other leadership styles (Bass &
Riggio, 2006) in part because they are a role model to their followers, have a large amount of
integrity, inspire and motivate, intellectually stimulate, provide consideration, are charismatic,
and are trusted (Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam, 2003). Transformational leadership
includes four distinct dimensions, also called the four I’s: idealized influence, inspirational
motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass & Riggio, 2006).
Transformational leadership encompassed the experiences of all five middle school principals
with their leadership and personal beliefs and styles.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 129
Table 11 shows the mean and standard deviation for survey responses measured for the
confidence in which the middle school leaders feel that they can meet the needs of all students at
their school site. On a Likert scale ranging from 0-4 points (0= not confident; 1= slightly
confident; 2= somewhat confident; 3= very confident; 4= extremely confident) the mean score
was 2.75 and standard deviation for the survey responses represented on Table 11 was 1.66.
Principals that felt very confident was 66.67% and 11.11% felt extremely confident to meet the
needs of all students at their school site. The percentage who did not feel confident was 11.11%
and 11.11% felt somewhat confident to meet the needs of all students.
Table 11
Principals Confidence Responses on Meeting the Needs of All Students
Principal Beliefs
about Meeting the
Academic Need of
All Students
Not
Confident
0
Slightly
Confident
1
Somewhat
Confident
2
Very
Confident
3
Extremely
Confident
4
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
How confident are
you in your ability
to make sure all
students learning
needs are met?
11.11%
3
0% 11.11%
3
66.67%
16
11.11%
3
2.75 1.66
The interviews gave insights in which principals shared their philosophy as school
leaders. The underlying message received from the five principals was that of leadership and
performance beyond expectation. As Principal A (February 9, 2017) explained, “My job is about
empowering all to reach their fullest potential. By reinforcing a shared decision-making
approach, I can build a culture of trust and support.” The five principals conveyed the message
of raising a level of awareness amongst all staff and faculty, a level of consciousness about the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 130
importance and value of designated outcomes in ways that bridge the gap between the group
dynamics and the school leadership. Encircling the topic, Principal D (February 25, 2017)
commented, “The major function of a principal is to exert leadership to make positive difference
and improve the quality of life of each individual within the school.” The task is done by
articulating and developing a shared decision, empowering, and developing a community of
learners and leaders. “A leader motivates people to go the extra mile, goes beyond their own
self-interest for the sake of the team” (Principal C, February 23, 2017). In short,
transformational leaders lead with the heart, are reflective in their practice, are thoughtful and
shift goals away from personal gains. The five principals interviewed were transformational
leaders who lead at their respective school sites with the mind as well as with the heart.
Research Question 2
In what ways do middle 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?
In an increasingly diverse world, there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to school
community development. Strategies must be locally relevant and culturally specific.
Examination of successful middle school programs underscores common themes and features;
mobilization of local people, local talent; and community definition of issues, processes, deep
and broad mobilization of local people in their common interest. An asset-based approach
demands a major paradigm shift in leadership (Haines, 2009). This approach of leadership
catalyzes change and development based on utilizing the existing gifts and capacities of people
and their community. Its fundamental premise is that all communities have capacities, gifts, and
skills which, if identified, mobilized and applied can bring about significant economic and social
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 131
change (Haines, 2009). Focusing on needs fails to harness the wisdom and strengths of
community members, boxes them in, and reinforces a client-fix-me mentality. Focusing on
assets empowers individuals and communities by energizing change and development from
within.
Analyzing data from the surveys and interviews gave light to two common themes for
Research Question two: (1) Building a school community, culture, and climate; (2) Instructional
Leadership – creating opportunities for all students to be successful and college and career ready.
Building A School Community
Collaboration Practices
A growing body of research confirmed the benefits of building a sense of school
community. Students with a strong sense of community are more likely to be academically
motivated (Battistich, Schaps, Watson, Solomon, & Lewis, 2000); to act ethically and
altruistically (Battistich, Solomon, Watson, Schaps,1997); to develop social and emotional
competencies (Battistich, Schaps et al, 2000); and to avoid several problem behaviors, including
drug use and violence (Battistich, Schaps et al., 2000). This study examined the practices of
principals which had developed highly collaborative relationships in the context of school
improvement. The results suggested specific strategies associated with their transformational
leadership. The summarized evidence indicated that transformational school principals are those
who grow the school’s vision, assists the staff to continuously grow, keeps refining school
improvements, provides means to get things done, remain deeply involved in improving
instruction in the school, and see that the managerial details are done well.
Table 12 shows the means and standard deviation for the survey responses measured for
principal collaboration practices on a Likert scale ranging from 0-4 points (0= not at all well; 1=
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 132
slightly well; 2= somewhat well; 3= very well; 4= extremely well). The response with the
highest percentage was 55.56% of the principals felt that teachers at their school sites collaborate
very well with the leadership team and their colleagues; the second highest response was of
33.33% of the principals felt that the teacher and leadership team collaborate extremely well; and
lastly, 11.11% of the principals felt that the teachers and leadership team collaborate slightly
well. The mean response was of 3.09 and a standard deviation of 1.76. Many studies have
reported positive outcomes of collaboration for teachers, including improved efficacy (Shachar
& Shmuelevitz, 1997), more positive attitudes toward teaching (Brownell, Yeager, Rennells, &
Riley 1997), and higher levels of trust (Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001).
Table 12
Collaboration Practices
Principal Opinions
About Collaboration
Practices
Not at
All
Well
0
Slightly
Well
1
Somewhat
Well
2
Very
Well
3
Extremely
Well
4
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
How well do teachers
at this school
collaborate with the
leadership team and
their colleagues?
11.11%
3
55.56%
13
33.33%
8
3.09 1.76
The interviews gave insight to the principals’ efforts to promote collaboration at the
school sites. Principal E (February 27, 2017) mentioned, “Parents and teachers are included in
democratic decision processes. In addition, teachers are encouraged to work toward greater
collaboration with their colleagues.” Data findings conclude that there was a significant link
between collaboration and trust. Findings suggested an interrelationship that reinforced the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 133
importance of trust in predicting the overall level of nurturing collaborative relationships within
a school. Principal support for community involvement was one of the central factors in
developing meaningful community connections. Principal D (February 25, 2017) explained,
I’ve said to my staff, I think that most parents in the community are afraid of the
unknown. I think that they are weary of coming into a school where they don’t feel
welcome. That is the first key, that people are made to feel welcome.
Moreover, the principals emphasized the importance of honesty in communications with all
stakeholders so that each partner is fully aware of the intent and expectations of the other. “I
have found that initial, honest and upfront conversations prevent both parties from wasting each
other’s time and resources” (Principal D, February 25, 2017). The principal uses a simple
measure to determine if a decision is “right” for the school. The measure is whether the decision
will make a positive impact for students. Principal D (February 25, 2017) explained,
If I think that it is going to have a positive good for the students, then basically that’s how
I determine if the school will pursue the decision. I’ll listen to determine if a program or
decision is beneficial to our students, how it will be monitored, and so forth, but I don’t
think that there is such a thing as too much or too many collaborative discussions, if it is
worthwhile I say come on.
Principals emphasized the importance of honest, open dialogue in which the school needs are
expressed and all stakeholders take part in collaborating and finding the best solution.
The findings revealed five factors that supported the principal’s ability to develop and
maintain collaboration practices. These were: a) open lines of communication about school
improvement matters; b) a welcoming school climate; c) principal support for community
involvement; d) a high commitment to learning; and e) building trust. These factors were closely
linked to principal’s actions as school leaders; their abilities to maintain a school environment
where teachers and parents focused on students’ academic success; to model for faculty and staff
genuine open-door policy; establish an expectation of emulation; and to actively inform all
stakeholders of growths and challenges.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 134
Attributes of a School Leader
Table 13 reports frames employed by leaders. There are four frames leaders perceive
organizational situations, and, in turn, shape how these respective situations are defined and the
manner in which they can be managed (Bolman & Deal, 2013). The results suggested that
principals most frequently used the human resources frame and were least likely to use the
political frame. The percentages of attributes perceived by principals to be of importance as a
school leader were: 100% of the principals felt that human resources were an utmost virtue of
effective leaders; 88.89% of the principals felt that structural was a quality of an effective
principal; 66.67% of the principals felt that symbolism was a characteristic of effective
principals; and 44.44% felt that the political attribute was important.
Table 13
Attributes of a School Leader
Attributes of a School
Leader
Political
Symbolic
Human
Resources
Structural
In your opinion, what are the
attributes of a school leader?
44.44% 66.67% 100% 88.89%
Bolman and Deal (2013) developed four perspectives, or frames, in which leaders
perceive organizational situations, and in turn shape how these respective situations are defined
and the manners in which they can be managed: structural, human resource, political, and
symbolic. The structural frame explores the key role that social architecture plays in the
functioning of organizations; the human resource frame explores the properties of both people
and organizations, and what happens when the two intersect; the symbolic frame spells out basic
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 135
symbolic elements in organizations: myths, heroes, metaphors, stories, humor, play, rituals, and
ceremonies; the political frame views organizations as arenas; individuals and groups compete to
achieve their parochial interests in a world of conflicting viewpoints, scarce resources, and
struggles of power (Bolman & Deal, 2013). This study sought to demonstrate the educational
leadership frames in which principals’ behaviors were developed.
The interview data was used to address several significant questions about leadership
frames and perceptions. The principals rated themselves in the survey on each of the four frames
and provided narratives about their experiences. “A caring leader can cultivate a culture of
caring. A culture of caring is marked by a stable professional practice that functions within an
innovative environment to improve student and community goals and achievement” (Principal B,
February 20, 2017). Principal B’s interview response is a representation of the human resource
frame in which the principal pointed out an example of high sensitivity and concern for the
student and parent stakeholder subgroup at the school site. In addition, Principal B illustrated the
importance of building trust and showing high support and concern for others through an open-
door policy, model of collaborative relationships, and discussing the importance of listening well
and being receptive to the input of others. “If you use these basic techniques, you will generate
loyalty and enthusiasm from your colleagues and the parent community” (Principal B,
February 20, 2017). During the interview process, most principals discussed in-depth how to
build school teams that are consistently helpful and responsive to the needs of others.
Moreover, Principal C shared the importance of careful planning and having clear
timelines. “To show school improvement is crucial to set specific, measurable goals. Having
clear goals gives people clear structures. These structures in return hold individuals accountable
because they know exactly what is expected of them” (Principal C, February 23, 2017).
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 136
Furthermore, Principal C (February 23, 2017) explained the importance of developing and
implementing clear and logical policies towards school improvement. The structural frame of
leadership is evident in the examples provided by Principal C’s approach. Generally, all
principals pointed out the importance of using logical analysis and careful thinking to problem
solve; logical approaches and clear structures were emphasized. These are a few examples of the
structural frame in the principal’s leadership practices.
The principals’ interview responses suggested which frames leaders use with most
frequency and how well frames capture the principal’s thinking. The results showed the use of
one or two frames concurrently; but the use of all four frames were seldom present. Interview
data conclusions indicated the human resources frame was used with most frequency, followed
by the structural frame, the symbolic was second to last, while the political frame was rarely
evident.
This study highlighted some of the leadership orientations or frames delineated by
effective middle school principals. To discern their leadership competencies, it was also
important to examine the instructional leadership practices carried out by principals.
Instructional Leadership
Curriculum Leaders
Findings from this study suggested that effective urban middle school principals are also
curriculum leaders responsible for sorting out and prioritizing the school’s curriculum
development processes. Principals play a vital and multi-faceted role in setting the direction for
schools that are positive and productive workplaces for teachers and vibrant learning
environments for children (Davis, Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson, 2005). During the
interview process, principals asserted having to focus on daily problem solving, reviewing
materials, and the implementation of instructional routines including the alignment of human and
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 137
other resources, the motivation of all stakeholders at the school site, and the production of
meaningful change for school improvement. Succinctly, all principals discussed that curriculum
leadership includes clear school improvement objectives and action plans; structured
professional development formats; adult learning theory practices; and planning of professional
development topic relevance.
“My role as an instructional leader is to keep the school informed of district, state, and
national initiatives ensuring compliance with state and federal laws affecting curriculum and
teacher delivery of instructional practices” (Principal D, February 25, 2017). In addition,
Principal D (February 25, 2017) discussed the implementation of professional learning
communities as a school-wide change and collaborative form of mentorship. “As a professional
learning community, we dovetail up-to-date research and literature on learning, plan and carry
out school goals, and identify school improvement possibilities from the learning” (Principal D,
February 25, 2017). Correspondingly, during the interviews all principals discussed the
implementation of professional learning communities as a structure for professional development
to foster collaborative learning among colleagues and working on problems of practice.
Principals defined themselves as engineers of curriculum who target knowledge,
behavior, and attitudes to achieve school goals. “We plan curriculum practices that are
purposeful, clearly defined, and carried out with precision. The activities are planned to shape
the student behaviors we seek to replicate” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). The curriculum
represents a set of desired goals or values that are activated through a development process and
culminate in successful learning experiences for students (Wiles & Bondi, 1998). The interview
responses in unison revealed, that as curriculum leaders, effective principals execute clear school
improvement practices by providing a mission, organizational structures, and encouragement
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 138
practices to move beyond the management functions in pursuit to address school action plans
urgently.
Principals discussed the importance of having leadership, competency, and strong
organizational skills. “We need to review student achievement data and maintain summary
records of these achievements” (Principal B, February 20, 2017). Principal B explained that
principals receive a myriad of paperwork that they must be able to manage. “It is important to
set a record keeping system, deadline schedules, and on-going maintenance” (Principal B,
February 20, 2017). All-embracing, principals shared the importance of having clear school
improvement objectives and specific targeted action plans.
As you move into developing your plan for implementing research-based strategies that
have been identified, it is important to understand the research around effective
implementation. The components are based in an organization’s vision, mission, and
beliefs. It is important to very purposefully consider each component in any
implementation. (Principal B, February 20, 2017)
The leadership capacity within the organization refers to the principal’s capacity to provide
vision and direction of the growth process. The professional development leadership capacities
discussed by principals were technical and adaptive.
The adaptive component of leadership refers to the ability of the leadership to minimize
resistance and to create support for high quality implementation (Daly & Chrispeels, 2008). “If
staff members are being asked to implement a new strategy, it is critical that the leadership
understands the possible effect that such change may have on those being asked to implement it”
(Principal A, February 9, 2017). Resistance to implementation may result from several factors,
including experiencing a sense of loss regarding a past practice or a lack of competency in the
new practice. According to Principal A (February 9, 2017), understanding and addressing such
factors prior to implementation will decrease the resistance and increase the chance that
research-based strategies will be implemented with fidelity. Technical leadership refers to
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 139
whether the leadership fully understands the components of the innovation/strategy being
implemented. This is critical if leadership is to effectively monitor and evaluate the
implementation of the strategy.
Professional Development
Considerable research exists on professional development (PD) opportunities thereby
providing insight into the use of effective professional growth practices within the educational
setting. All five principals stated that as school leaders they must have the competency to build
staff capacity to support students with improvement strategies and organizational capacity to
support the implementation process. Competency focuses on building staff capacity, including
the skills and abilities within the team/individuals that will be responsible for implementation of
the strategy/activity. The selection process refers to the choice of individuals to be involved and
trained in the strategy/activity; these are the individuals who will take a leading role in
implementation. “Consider that you’re building leaders both formal and informal, who will
support the work. At the same time, it is important to consider how you will build capacity by
building understanding and skills in the entire staff” (Principal A, February 9, 2017).
Professional development training is identification and delivery of the appropriate professional
learning required for the selected individuals to be able to successfully implement the
strategy/activity with fidelity. “If folks are not ‘fluent’ in the strategy/activity, they will become
frustrated, angry, etc.” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). Additionally, coaching provides the
ongoing support that must be put in place to ensure that the individuals involved in the
implementation will have ongoing opportunities to reflect and to evaluate the progress being
made in the implementation. Performance assessment is the point at which the individuals are
fully implementing the strategy/activity. “It is important to monitor and evaluate both the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 140
fidelity of the implementation by adults as well as to monitor and evaluate the impact that the
innovation/strategy is having on the students; both intended and unintended” (Principal E,
February 27, 2017). Based on the findings, effective leaders make modifications or adjustments
to professional development as they find necessary.
The next professional development constituent presented by principals was that of
organization. This component addresses the need for a system-wide organization to support the
professional development implementation process. “Critical to school improvement is data-
driven decision making, a strategic and purposeful process to collect and organize the data to
support the decisions that are being made throughout the implementation” (Principal E, February
27, 2017). The principals explained the need to consider what decision-making processes and
mechanisms are in place to evaluate data throughout the implementation process. “This support
should occur at the school and the district level” (Principal E, February 27, 2017). Leadership
support is needed for formal and informal leadership within a school site to be involved in the
implementation process, helping to provide necessary supports and remove barriers that may be
impeding the success of the implementation. “It is crucial to consider what systemic leadership
structures need to be provided to ensure implementation with fidelity, what resources are
available to the end users, and how professional learning is identified and supported by the
leadership” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). Having internal system support within the school
must be in place to support the implementation. “For example, time built into the school day for
planning for the implementation and for working as a team to support each other in the
implementation” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). An example of system support would be a
school implementing a co-teaching model in which a structure is in place to allow the co-
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 141
teachers to plan together. In this example, a critical component of successful implementation
would result in the gains needed.
Professional development is a fundamental element in educational improvement.
Improvement requires accountability systems that are essential to meeting schoolwide goals
(Snyder & Bristol, 2015). All-inclusive principals illustrated some of the accountability systems
necessary at every school site as follows: a) goals – including Common Core State Standards
(CCSS, Bogatin, 2010) for college and career readiness and goals for teaching as in the Teaching
and Learning standards; b) structures – methods in the organization to meet schoolwide goals
and follow-up to meet the goals; c) processes – approaches used to engage stakeholders to enact
their commitment; d) feedback – an assessment mechanism in which the school collects data
towards improvement; e) safeguards – protections put in place to make sure that the plan works;
f) incentives – motivate and sustain ongoing change, encouraging all members to focus
continuously in the strengths. These elements constitute professional accountability for school
improvement. “Growth can be measured when goals are established with clear structures and
processes are in place to meet these goals” (Principal D, February 25, 2017). Findings from this
study suggested that professional accountability is an ongoing process that requires continuous
evaluation of how the school meets the established goals and restructures the goals as necessary.
Leading Teaching and Learning
Principals possess a key responsibility for developing a culture of effective teaching
practices, designing and managing the quality of teaching and learning, and leading professional
development of teachers. Effective principals ensure the school values underpin and support
high-quality professional development practices. Leaders can assist their teachers to meet the
teaching demands through promoting professional learning in ways that impact entrenched
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 142
problems of teaching and learning (Timperley, 2011). Findings from this study indicated that
effective principals set school-wide expectations so that all activities yield sustainable
improvements in student performance. “As an instructional leader, I keep up to date with and
share current developments in pedagogy and student engagement practices with all staff”
(Principal B, February 20, 2017). Principals discussed the importance of teacher inquiry and
knowledge building being essential factors that promote effective student outcomes. “Our
pedagogical actions impact valued student performance and outcomes, all our decisions are
student centered, which means we make decisions on what’s best for kids” (Principal A,
February 9, 2017). A common discussion topic presented by all principals was the knowledge
and skills possessed as professionals need to meet the learning needs of students. “As the school
leader, it is my duty to deepen my own professional knowledge and refine my skills by engaging
in further professional learning practices” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). As mentioned earlier
in this study, principals are engaged in professional development opportunities provided at their
respective districts. They spoke about bringing back the professional development to the school
site. “At the beginning of the summer, we are engaged in a principal’s institute; in addition, we
attend monthly meetings” (Principal D, February 25, 2017). The professional development is
brought back first to the Instructional Leadership Team (ILT). During these structured meetings,
the ILT maps out the Professional Development topics according to the needs of the school. In
addition, the need to re-structure goals if necessary was discussed. “As a team, we reflect on
how smoothly the action plans are being implemented. As the school’s leadership team, we are
responsible for connecting the dots towards school improvement” (Principal C, February 23,
2017). To summarize, effective principals lead teachers in learning effective instructional
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 143
practices and are current with research-based teaching methods. These leaders tap into teacher
expertise to build communities of learning.
Differentiation of Teacher Needs
Effective principals are well-rounded leaders who possess task oriented and social
leadership capacities. Task oriented leaders monitor progress by tracking the achievements of
the team, and judge the success of the project based on the extent to which the goals were
completed (Sahertian & Soetjipto, 2011). The social leader prioritizes individual
accomplishments, personal development, and employee satisfaction (Sahertian & Soetjipto,
2011). Results from this study suggested that effective principals possess both task oriented and
social leadership capacities. “Teacher morale is a crucial component of school performance”
(Principal E, February 27, 2017). Principals exchanged their views on teacher retention, teacher
morale, and perceived student learning. All discussed success factors of having cohesive school
teams and professional development that is meaningful to the needs of the teachers, which in turn
is visible in classroom implementation. Effective principals are leaders who feel comfortable
guiding their subordinates, but also exhibit their leadership role when making important
decisions.
Effective principals are leaders who genuinely care about their staff. They are available,
approachable, and genuinely care about the individual needs and concerns of their subordinates.
“As a team, we create urgent message posters” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). Principal A
discussed setting individualized teacher goal targets. Altogether the principals discussed the
importance of staff appreciation, but on the other hand, they also mentioned motivating
employees by requiring them to meet specific deadlines, goals, and expectations.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 144
Each principal mentioned the careful management of resources, such as financial,
systems, and personnel. “Teacher morale and perceived student learning have a great impact on
student learning and content acquisition and higher order thinking” (Principal B, February 20,
2017). Principals mentioned both job satisfaction and motivation when discussing teacher
morale. All five principals discussed that teacher retention occurs when leaders value and
support individual teacher needs. “Teachers feel motivated when there is high, consistent output
and curriculum alignment procedures are paramount” (Principal E, February 27, 2017).
Additionally, principals discussed that when teachers feel part of the collaborative team and
participate in the decision making of the school they are more open to change. Furthermore,
principals mentioned the evaluation process in which teachers and administrators have
professional conversations that lead towards a positive learning experience and, therefore,
improve student learning outcomes.
Principal Supervision
Teven and McCroskey (1997) reported a relationship to the construct of perceived caring
in the instructional context which is believed to be related to the classical construct of good will
in Aristotelian rhetorical theory as well as to more contemporary social scientific views of intent
toward receiver in conceptualizations of source credibility. Student perceptions of caring on the
part of their teachers were found to be substantially associated with teacher evaluation (Teven &
McCroskey, 1997). During the interview discussion, principals shared that teacher evaluation
supports professional growth. “When evaluating teachers, it is key to focus on the quality of
teaching, the whole process should be a learning experience” (Principal D, February 27, 2017).
Principals mentioned that teachers respect the administrator’s instructional expertise from the
evaluation process. The culture that is established impacts the risk-taking atmosphere, has
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 145
greater objectivity, and specificity to complex learning. As a result, a constructivist approach to
knowledge and problem solving is the outcome.
Table 14 shows the mean and standard deviation of the frequency in which teachers are
evaluated at the school sites on a Likert scale ranging from 1-5 points (1= less than once every
year; 2= once every two years; 3= once per year; 3= very well; 4= Twice or more per year; and
5= at least monthly). The principals who reported that teachers are evaluated twice or more per
year was 44.44%; 33.33% at least monthly; and 22.22% once every two years. The mean
response was 3.92 and a standard deviation was 1.98.
Table 14
Frequency of Teacher Evaluation
Administrator to Teacher
Evaluation
Less
than
Once
Every
Two
Years
1
Once
Every
Two
Years
2
Once
Per Year
3
Twice or
More
Per Year
4
At Least
Monthly
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
How often is the work of
teachers at this school site
appraised by an
administrator?
22.22%
5
44.44%
11
33.33%
8
3.92 1.98
The principal’s role is to lead the school’s teachers in a process of learning to improve
their teaching, while learning alongside them about what works and what doesn’t (Fullan, 2014).
The purpose of teacher evaluation is to enhance the professional practices of teachers. Danielson
and McGreal (2000) suggested two principle purposes for teacher evaluation: a) quality
assurance; and b) professional development. Findings from this study proposed that a formative
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 146
approach to teacher evaluation through: a) providing constructive feedback with specific advice;
b) reinforcing outstanding pedagogical practices; c) using evaluation as a measure to provide
direction for staff development; and d) unifying teacher and principal expertise around student
learning. Teacher evaluation discussions should be genuine professional conversations, with a
focus on the quality of teaching and contribute to the professional learning of the teacher and the
principal.
Table 15 shows the mean and standard deviation for the survey responses measured for
principal collaboration practices on a Likert scale ranging from 1-5 points (1= strongly disagree;
2= disagree;3= undecided; 4= agree; 5= strongly agree). The responses with the highest mean of
4.79 and standard deviation of 2.19 were a) leaders facilitate the implementation of the school
vision; b) leaders encourage teacher collaboration; and c) leaders promote opportunities for
professional development. The second most effective model of supervision identified by
principals with a mean of 4.67 and standard deviation of 2.16 was leaders promote team building
opportunities. A mean of 4.66 and standard deviation of 2.16 was the third model which stated
leaders are trustworthy. The fourth most effective model of supervision with a mean of 4.21 and
a standard deviation of 2.05 was leaders exhibit a broad knowledge and understanding of
assessments. Leaders demonstrate courage/perseverance in resolving challenges was the fifth
model of supervision with a mean of 4.54 and standard deviation of 2.13. Leaders engage
community stakeholders in a shared responsibility for student success was the sixth model of
supervision with a mean of 4.5 and standard deviation of 2.12. Leaders are innovative in
addressing school issues and leaders demonstrate a positive role model approach for faculty and
staff had the same mean of 4.46 and standard deviation of 2.11. The last model of supervision
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 147
with a mean of 4.33 and standard deviation of 2.08 was leaders display a broad knowledge and
understanding of curriculum.
Table 15
Effective Models of Supervision (n=24)
Identifying Models of
Supervision that are
Most Effective in
promoting School
Improvement
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
Leaders display a broad
knowledge and
understanding of
curriculum.
66.67%
16
33.33%
8
4.33
2.08
Leaders are trustworthy. 33.33%
8
66.67%
16
4.66 2.16
Leaders facilitate the
implementation of the
school vision.
22.22%
5
77.78%
19
4.79 2.19
Leaders are innovative in
addressing school issues.
55.56%
13
44.44%
11
4.46 2.11
Leaders engage
community stakeholders
in a shared responsibility
for student success.
50.00%
12
50.00%
12
4.5 2.12
Leaders demonstrate a
positive role model
approach for faculty and
staff.
55.56%
13
44.44%
11
4.46 2.11
Leaders exhibit a broad
knowledge and
understanding of
assessments.
77.78%
19
22.22%
5
4.21 2.05
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 148
Table 15 (Cont’d.)
Identifying Models of
Supervision that are
Most Effective in
promoting School
Improvement
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
Leaders encourage
teacher collaboration.
22.22%
5
77.78%
19
4.79 2.19
Leaders demonstrate
courage/ perseverance in
resolving challenges.
44.44%
11
55.56%
13
4.54 2.13
Leaders promote
opportunities for
professional
development.
22.22%
5
77.78%
19
4.79 2.19
Leaders promote team
building opportunities.
33.33%
8
66.67%
16
4.67 2.16
A positive school climate exists when all members of a school community feel safe,
included, accepted, and actively promote positive behaviors and interactions. Principles of
equity and inclusive education are embedded in the learning environment to support a positive
school climate and a culture of respect (Marshall, 2004). School climate is multi-dimensional
and influences many individuals, including students, parents, school personnel, and the
community. School climate can significantly impact educational environments as Freiberg
(1998) noted, “school climate can be a positive influence on the health of the learning
environment or a significant barrier to learning” (p. 22). School leaders play an important role in
modeling positive, inclusive, and respectful collaboration practices at middle schools.
Principal E (February 27, 2017) described,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 149
To help develop and sustain a positive school climate, school leaders should actively
promote and support behaviors that reflect a code of conduct, equity, educational policy,
and character development. As school leaders, we need to make sure to invite members
of the broader community to become involved in this effort as part of the school
community.
Overall, principals discussed the importance of fostering teacher collaboration by providing
instructional leadership practices, structures, and sharing leadership with teachers.
Research Question 3
How do school principals influence how middle 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?
The primary goal of school leaders is to make sure that all students achieve their fullest
academic potential. This potential can be reached when every student is exposed to daily quality
instruction. Effective middle school principals offer school-wide systems, structures, and
supports to influence and coordinate curricula. Educational experts agree that quality teaching is
the single most important factor in improving educational outcomes for all students. Teaching is
a highly sophisticated and complex endeavor requiring deep expertise on the part of teachers and
school leaders (Fink & Markolt, 2011). Effective middle school principals have deep subject
matter and pedagogical content knowledge. Findings from this study suggested that effective
middle school principals build a shared understanding of effective teaching and learning by
enhancing teacher capacity, developing backwards planning, improving knowledge of Common
Core State Standards (CCSS, Bogatin, 2010) and English language Standards (ELD), and
deepening school-wide communication.
Building Teacher Capacity
The middle years of schooling are increasingly recognized as a crucial stage in students’
lives, one that has significant consequences for ongoing educational success (Pendergast & Bahr,
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 150
2005). The major task of an effective school leader is to make sure that quality instruction takes
place in every classroom and that every student is exposed to the best curriculum. “That is my
primary goal – achievement,” (Principal B, February 20, 2017). All five principals expressed
being deliberate in their actions. Principal A explained working diligently to ensure that teachers
have the instructional materials and supports they need to be “focused and ready to do their job
and fulfill their responsibilities” (Principal A, February 9, 2017). In addition, all five principals
discussed the importance of offering and maintaining a secure, well maintained and orderly work
environment. Once a healthy and positive school atmosphere is provided, the five principals
discussed the importance of building teacher capacity. Providing quality instruction to English
Language Learners requires leaders who are skilled in a variety of curricular and instructional
strategies.
Critical to providing quality education for ELLs is an understanding that pedagogical
content knowledge and knowledge of learning must encompass the skills and knowledge to
engage English language learners with the content of the discipline (Ballantyne, Sanderman, &
Levy, 2008). Although knowledge of learners may stay constant across disciplines, pedagogical
content knowledge is highly discipline specific. “Teachers need to have the skills and
knowledge of language acquisition and standards and be able to implement this knowledge in
their daily English Language Development instruction” (Principal B, February 20, 2017).
Leading a school that provides quality instruction to English Language Learners (ELLs) requires
teachers who are skilled in a variety of curricular and instructional strategies.
Table 16 shows the responses of the curricular shifts asked of teachers to implement in
efforts to improve the achievement of ELLs. One hundred percent of the principals felt that
literacy skills are a key factor in improving student achievement; ELA/ELD standards, Language
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 151
Proficiency, 21st Century skills, and reclassification were shifts that shared a 77.78% link
between teacher learning and student achievement; and content specific framework received a
rating of 33.33% in the survey responses. Findings from this study suggested that effective
leaders’ positive expectations for, and acknowledgement of, the teachers’ efforts are key factors
leading to success in English Language Learner success. Setting high expectations for a school
community is a key indicator of school success. Leaders skillfully enable a school community to
integrate a range of instructional approaches and resources to meet the diverse needs of their
students.
Table 16
Improving English Language Learner Achievement (n=24)
Specific
Instructional and
Curricular Shifts
ELA/ELD
Standards
Language
Proficiency
Content
Specific
Frameworks
21st
Century
Skills
Reclassification/
Re-designation
Literacy
Skills
What are specific
instructional and
curricular shifts
teachers are asked
to implement in
effort to improve
ELL student
achievement?
77.78% 77.78% 33.33% 77.78% 77.78% 100%
Staff development includes the education of teaching as part of the ongoing professional
development of the teachers as practitioners. Perhaps the most widely-known standards in staff
development have been produced by the National Staff Development Council (NSDC, 2003).
The standards include a commitment to intellectually rigorous learning that enhances the
“knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs necessary to create high levels of learning for all
students” (NSDC, 2003, p. 2). The standards define learning communities as “teams that meet
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 152
on a regular basis … for learning, joint lesson planning, and problem solving (NSDC, 2003).
Learning communities were recognized by all principals as a powerful tool for improving
teaching and student learning. The principals discussed having continuous meetings in which all
content teachers are represented including English language learner coaches and/or experts.
“The purpose of PLCs or Professional Learning Communities is to allow teachers to coordinate
their content standards with English Language Development (ELD) standards to develop
learning objectives” (Principal B, February 20, 2017). Findings from this study suggested that
when designing teacher professional development, principals need to structure professional
development around the teacher’s knowledge, craft skills, and their dispositions. Staff
development needs to be focused on the learning of all students and requires skillful leaders who
guide continuous instructional improvement.
Backwards Planning
Student learning is affected by student standards, curricular frameworks, textbooks,
instructional programs, and assessments. Findings from this study imply that effective teacher
professional development should be given adequate time and should take place as part of the
workday. The expertise of colleagues, mentors, and leaders should be engaged in a consistent
basis. The commitment of a school-wide approach to long-range lesson planning should be
made available. In planning instruction, school leaders shared that they draw upon a repertoire
of instructional approaches and methods, and use a combination of these in lesson and unit
planning. Principals shared that supporting effective school-wide instructional practices requires
for leaders to ensure that a variety of classroom activities in which students are engaged with
various intelligences and a wide range of learning approaches, and therefore achieve
instructional goals.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 153
Table 17 presents the means and standard deviation for the survey responses measured
for principals’ philosophy of instructional approaches on a Likert scale ranging from 1-5 points
(1= strongly disagree; 2= disagree; 3= undecided; 4= agree; 5= strongly agree). In this part of
the survey, principals were asked their viewpoints about their jobs and the jobs of teachers at the
school site. The instructional approach with the highest mean of 4.66 and standard deviation was
2.15, an important part of my job is to create a school-wide orderly atmosphere conducive of
learning; 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, was
the second highest mean of 4.04 and a standard deviation of 2.0; 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) and the English Language
Development (ELD) standards, was the third highest ranking mean of 3.66 with a standard
deviation of 1.91; 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, was the fourth ranking mean
of 3.75 and a standard deviation of 1.94; I influence that the decisions about this school are taken
at a higher administrative level, was fifth in ranking with a mean of 3.54 and a standard deviation
of 1.88; an important part of my job is to present instructional updates to parents and it is
important for the school that I see to it that all mandates are followed, both ranked sixth with a
mean of 3.5 and a standard deviation of 1.87; an important part of my job is to resolve
instructional problems with teacher lesson planning, ranked seventh with a mean of 3.38 and a
standard deviation of 1.84. Giving teachers too much freedom to choose their own instructional
techniques can lead to poor teaching, ranked second to last with a mean of 3.08 and a standard
deviation of 1.75. Using test scores of students to evaluate a teacher’s performance devalues the
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 154
teacher’s professional judgement, ranked last with a mean of 2.75 and a standard deviation of
1.66.
Table 17
Overall Philosophy of Instruction (n=24)
Principals’
Instructional
Philosophy
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
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.
22.22%
5
11.11%
3
33.33%
8
33.33%
8
4.04 2.0
Using test scores of
students to evaluate a
teachers’ performance
devalues teachers’
professional judgement.
55.56%
13
22.22%
5
22.22%
5
2.75 1.66
Giving teachers too
much freedom to
choose their own
instructional techniques
can lead to poor
teaching.
44.44%
11
22.22%
5
11.11%
3
22.22%
5
3.08 1.75
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
11.11%
3
22.22%
5
44.44%
11
22.22%
5
3.75 1.94
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 155
Table 17 (Cont’d.)
Principals’
Instructional
Philosophy
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
2
Undecided
3
Agree
4
Strongly
Agree
5
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(SD)
An important part of
my job is to present
instructional updates to
parents
22.22%
5
22.22%
5
44.44%
11
33.33%
3
3.5
1.87
I influence that the
decisions about this
school are taken at a
higher administrative
level
44.44%
11
55.56%
13
3.54 1.88
It is important for the
school that I see to it
that all mandates are
followed
11.11%
3
44.44%
11
22.22%
5
22.22%
5
3.5 1.87
An important part of
my job is to resolve
instructional problems
with teacher’s lesson
planning
8.33%
2
44.44%
11
44.44%
11
3.38 1.84
An important part of
my job is to create a
school-wide orderly
atmosphere conducive
of learning
33.33%
8
66.67%
16
4.66 2.15
I have a system for
monitoring whether
teachers of English
Language Learners plan
and align their
objectives and
assignment plans to the
Common Core State
Standards (Bogatin,
2010) and the English
Language Development
Standards (CDE, 2012).
33.33%
8
33.33%
8
33.33%
8
3.66 1.91
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 156
Lesson planning is the heart of effective instruction. Planning, engaging, and effective
lessons for middle and high school learners is one of the fundamental components of secondary
school teaching (Jones, Vermette, & Jones, 2009). The goal of lesson planning is to engage
students. But lesson planning goes beyond class preparation as Principal A (February 9, 2017)
explained, “backwards planning involves more time and greater depth of planning than typical
class preparation.” Principals discussed the elements of lesson planning as an initial structure of
suitable outcomes. The principals interviewed believed that the knowledge of effective
instructional strategies and practices were vital to positive school outcomes. Principal B
(February 20, 2017) commented on a conceptual review of planning elements used at the school
which is followed by a description of a supervisory procedure in which the elements are
integrated to meet the learning needs of each teacher. “The aim of this model is to enhance the
effectiveness of supervisory teaching across grades and across content areas” (Principal B,
February 20, 2017). In addition, Principal A and Principal D both discussed facilitating a
backwards planning approach at their respective schools to allow teachers to stay focused on
learning outcomes.
the idea is to start with the end in mind; you must have a clear understanding of the
ultimate objective, your end goal, and then work backwards. You can mentally prepare
yourself for success, map out specific milestones, and identify where in your plan you
should implement specific strategies. (Principal A, February 9, 2017).
Moreover, Principal D (February 25, 2017) expressed
it’s like a good presentation, when the presenter tells you where he’s headed right at the
beginning. Then the presentation unfolds, it’s easy for you to follow along with the
concepts and for you to think critically about the ideas being presented.
To condense, findings from this study suggested that effective principals use backwards
planning as a design to make decisions of what content and strategies are needed for all students
to achieve their academic learning goals. Deliberate and focused instructional design requires
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 157
teachers and school leaders to think about learning outcomes, what the teacher will do to provide
quality teaching and learning activities, and a focus on the desired objectives from which
effective teaching will follow.
Common Core State Standards and English Language Standards
For students to achieve a comprehensive, well-rounded education, the teamwork between
all stakeholders of a school community is vital. Principal E (February 27, 2017) shared that the
more teamwork fundamentals exhibited, the more opportunity exists for students to learn vital
skills of compromise and collaboration which represent the next generation of K-12 standards.
The aim of the Common Core State Standards (CSSS, Bogatin, 2010) is to prepare all students
for success in college and career readiness by the time they graduate from high school. Principal
D (February 25, 2017) revealed that there is a great need for all teachers to be knowledgeable of
literacy demands to address the language needs of all students. English language development or
proficiency (ELD/P) standards promise to play an important role in the instruction and
assessment of the language development of English Language Learner (ELL) pre-K-12 students,
but to do so effectively they must convey a progression of student language learning in authentic
school contexts for authentic academic purposes (Bailey & Huang, 2011). Principal A’s
(February 9, 2017) statements revealed that collaborative school culture is essential for school
improvement:
Part of our weekly professional development includes a team-based approach. Teachers
can plan their lessons with grade-level and content-specific teams. We have a team-
based approach to lesson planning. During the weekly lesson planning meetings,
teachers collaborate and produce lessons that are geared to meet the language demands of
our ELL student population. The ELD expert or a member of the support team is always
present to facilitate the discussions and to establish meeting outcomes.
The principals’ statements indicated that the role of the principal should be that of a
culture builder. Results from this middle school study suggested that principals are the key team
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 158
members who can foster collaborative cultures and who facilitate school-wide plans towards
improvement. Findings also suggested that those principals who are aware of research-based
instructional strategies are those who can motivate pedagogical shifts at the school sites.
Furthermore, the strategies which appear to be important are those aligned to the natural
approach to acquisition of language.
Research Question 4
What are the key leadership elements of an effective middle school program that can assist in the
evaluation of language acquisition of ELL students?
This section addresses the role of middle school principals in the language acquisition of
English language learners. The use of leadership practices and frameworks that guide learning
opportunities and participation will be explored. In addition, the examination of different
leadership approaches used by effective principals are revealed. It is important to note that some
of the findings for Research Question 4 overlap with findings from Research Questions 1, 2, and
3.
Leadership Practices, Approaches, and Frameworks
When asked on their perception as a school leader, Principal C (February 23, 2017)
revealed,
that is when being a life-long learner becomes a reality; I learn and share new strategies
and approaches to create and sustain a focus on school-wide learning, organize
instructional shifts and systems across the school, and align lessons that have direct
impact on student learning and outcomes.
This and other statements made through the interviews indicated that being an effective
leader means living up to commitments to the students and their families, usage of the most
recent research-based practices and knowledge, and a commitment to the profession. As Kouzes
and Posner (2010) discussed, “to effectively model the behavior they expect from other leaders
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 159
must first be clear about their guiding principles” (p. 5). As diverse instructional leaders,
principal statements revealed they are at the forefront of managing effective educational
programs, personnel, and facilities while promoting effective professional development that
addresses language acquisition.
I have learned to organize tasks and projects to include the participation of various staff
members and the diversity of the student population. The use of reflective practices that I
have learned in my own professional development grant me the opportunity to evaluate
community attitudes, cultures, and appropriate communication strategies. (Principal D,
February 25, 2017).
During their interview, Principal A, B, and D referred multiple times to the amount of
time they spend in the classrooms. Findings from this analysis suggested that effective
principals hold several leadership qualities that identify them as both instructional and
transformational leaders. Horng, Klasik, and Loeb (2010) clarified that a successful teacher
leader is engaged with the issues of curriculum and instruction, is unafraid to work directly with
teachers, and is highly visible in the classrooms. Hence, there is a relationship between the time
principals spent on different activities and positive school outcomes.
School principals have complex responsibilities. Conclusions made from this study are
the necessity to follow-up from professional development and the time spent in classrooms
observing implementation of professional development language acquisition strategies are
related to overall school improvement. Principal B (February 20, 2017) shared,
I am active in encouraging teachers to support the needs of English Language Learners. I
set opportunities for all teachers to collaborate on issues of curriculum, instruction, and
language development to meet the needs of ELLs. We calendar regular meetings, and
weekly staff development.
All five principals discussed the importance of building language literacy for all students
with the purpose of giving these students language structures. Comprehensively, effective
school principals focus on the important discussions of students’ language development, observe
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 160
instruction as a basis of providing feedback to teachers, and examine how well interventions and
instruction are implemented.
Emergent Themes
The following are eight emergent themes that were apparent from the findings of this
study:
• Strategic planning: A process used to set an organization’s priorities, focus energy and
resources to ensure that all stakeholders are working towards common goals, establish
agreements around intended outcomes/results, and assess to adjust the organization.
• Effective decision making: The process of making choices by identifying a decision,
gathering information, and assessing alternative resolutions
• Transformational leadership: A style of leadership where a leader works with
subordinates to identify needed change creating a vision to guide the change through
inspiration, and executing the change in tandem with committed members of a group
• Building a school community, culture, and climate: Provide ways to increase
engagement activities, a sense of belonging, and provide a clear direction to build a path
of school success
• Instructional leadership: Setting clear goals, managing curriculum, monitoring lesson
plans, allocating resources and evaluating teachers regularly to promote student learning
and growth
• Four frames (human resources, structural, political, symbolic): The frames assist leaders
to conceptualize different approaches to an issue or decision
o Human resource – Focus on people, emphasize support, empowerment, and
responsiveness to employee needs
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 161
o Structural – Focus on structural elements within the organization as well as strategy
implementation and adaptation
o Political – Dealing with interest groups, building power bases, coalition-building,
negotiating conflicts over limited resources, and creating compromises
o Symbolic – Focus on vision and inspiration
• Backwards planning: A method of designing educational curriculum by setting goals
before choosing instructional methods and forms of assessment
• Leadership practices, approaches, and frameworks: Observable set of principal skills
and abilities
o Model the way – Establish principles concerning the way people (constituents, peers,
colleagues, and customers alike) should be treated and the way goals should be
pursued
o Inspire a shared vision – Create an ideal and unique image of what the organization
can become
o Challenge the process – Search for opportunities to change the status quo. Look for
innovative ways to improve the organization, experiment and take risks, accept the
inevitable disappointments as learning opportunities
o Enable others to act – Foster collaboration and build spirited teams. Actively involve
others, understand that mutual respect is what sustains extraordinary efforts; create an
atmosphere of trust and human dignity by strengthening others, making each person
feel capable and powerful
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 162
Figure 3 exemplifies the findings of this study. The graphic represents cyclical
movement of the ultimate core responsibilities of 21st century college- and career-ready
principals leading in diverse schools.
The results of this study indicated that all eight responsibilities are of equal importance
towards effectively leading diverse middle schools. Each of the foundational responsibilities
support the leadership behaviors identified by Collins (2001) in his research on businesses that
have gone from “good to great.”
Figure 3: Conceptual Model of Successful Middle School Principals
The Effective
21st Century
Principal
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 163
Summary
Given current demographic changes in the population of the United States, it is likely that
K-12 teachers at some point in their careers will encounter students who do not yet have
sufficient English proficiency to access academic content in traditional classrooms. The
discourse on 21st Century education is changing the ways of teaching and learning. School
improvement requires effective leadership practices to prepare college-bound and career-ready
students for the 21st Century. Effective leaders must consider instructional requirements, teacher
expertise, and the ultimate needs of students. Moreover, to meet the needs of a diverse student
population, it is imperative to deeply consider the strategies and practices of successful
leadership and their influence on effective teaching and learning that will develop middle-school
aged students who will lead our society with the knowledge, skills, and sense of purpose to
positively influence on a local and global scale.
The purpose of this study was to examine the role of middle 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 principals 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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 164
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
yielded were: strategic planning; effective decision making; ways of building a school
community, culture, and climate; instructional leadership; backwards planning; and leadership
practices, approaches, and frameworks. 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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 165
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 166
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 middle 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 middle 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. 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 led 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 ELL
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 167
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 had
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. In addition, 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 includes conclusions and establishes the generalizability of the findings.
This chapter will also summarize 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 following discussion, key findings from the triangulation process of the
data presented in chapter four brought light to the eight emerging themes of this study: strategic
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 168
planning; effective decision making; transformational leadership; building a school community,
culture, and climate; instructional leadership; four frames of leadership; backwards planning; and
leadership practices, approaches, and frameworks.
Strategic Planning
The process of strategic planning was evident at the middle schools researched in this
study. The overall purpose of strategic planning is to set overall goals and develop an action
plan to achieve those goals. Strategic planning involves having short- and long-term plans. The
study revealed that effective principals have established common values, beliefs, and
perceptions. In addition, there were school-wide classroom and out-of-classroom rules and
procedures in place. These structures were apparent when principals spoke about the purpose
behind the outcomes they sought. The interviews revealed how each of the principals laid a step-
by-step schoolwide plan for phasing the desired improvement outcomes. Moreover, the study
revealed how effective principals were facilitators at the school sites and involved all
stakeholders to play part in both the plan development and the outcomes. Part of the facilitation
process involved the way in which principals reinforced the vision, mission, and core values on a
consistent basis. This study revealed how effective principals clarified and communicated the
purpose and/or restated the goal behind their school plans, celebrated the school’s successes, and
led their schools with transparency.
Effective Decision Making
Decision making is a central focus of school and district reform efforts, in part because of
accountability policies. Through the review of the California Department of Education’s (2016)
school report cards (SARC), assessment data results, and the interviews, the researcher found
common attributes of effective leadership practices at the various school sites. The dialogue
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 169
during the interviews revealed methods by which principals created systems that provided
feedback at the core of the responsibility of monitoring and evaluating teacher and student
performance. It was evident that these schools agreed on the norms, values, and expectations
that shaped the work of their organizations. The principals explained how they established clear
expectations through shared norms and values of the school community to get the year’s work
accomplished. To establish the norms, the principals set forth an awareness and clear
understanding of the school, district, and state measures. Once these were disclosed, each school
collectively created a consensus agreement. The schools closed learning and language gaps by
establishing formal and informal evaluation protocols, feedback, clear accountabilities of
teacher’s responsibility for student learning, and school-wide student academic and behavior
expectations. Furthermore, the findings from this study revealed that effective leaders used data
from multiple measures to ensure that they had high quality and high performing staff that was
trained to meet the needs of their diverse student population.
Transformational Leadership
This study revealed how principals at the various sites worked with subordinates to
identify needed change, creating a vision to guide the change, and executing the action plan in
tandem with committed members of the school’s leadership. The master calendar, meeting
agendas, and minutes were some of the artifacts that were shared with the researcher. Through
these documents, it was evident that the principals facilitated an ongoing collection of and
subsequent discussion of the pieces of the data puzzle so that decisions about program focus can
be made in full awareness of what students can and cannot do and which instructional
approaches and curricular emphasis are most likely to be effective. Part of this process of
acculturation involved embracing the notion that learning is a social activity that requires
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 170
community engagement for renewal (Vygotsky, 1978). This process involved the development
of a conceptual framework to guide the work (outcome, demographic, and process data). This
was apparent as the principals shared how they established an ongoing process of staff support.
The interviews revealed the principals’ finesse in guiding conversations and providing
opportunities for teachers to thoughtfully consider instructional practices, analyze data, and plan
for next steps. This study revealed that effective principals develop capacity within the school
culture for creative problem solving and reflective approaches within themselves and guide their
staff to do the same. In addition, principals facilitated how to plan and apply research-based
knowledge about best pedagogical practices, develop capacity within the school culture for
creative problem solving, and reflection approaches. Furthermore, this study revealed that
effective principals discussed and developed a comprehensive understanding of research and
review of data; revisited instructional decisions, and school objectives on a regular basis to help
participants monitor, refine, and modify their practices.
Building a School Community, Culture, and Climate
The study revealed that school climate referred to the quality and character of school life.
School climate is based on the patterns of students’, parents’, and staff experiences of school life
and reflects on the norms, goals, values, interpersonal relationships, teaching and learning
practices, and organizational structures. The focus of a school is not just on achievement, but on
growth, and that growth includes social-emotional learning and academic achievement.
Principals implemented processes that enhanced communication among community members,
provided for efficient reconciliation of disagreements, and kept all members attuned to the status
of the school community. The principals began with a thoughtful dialogue regarding the
importance of a team approach to schooling, providing examples that illustrated the power of
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 171
operating as a team. The leadership team is developed with a team with a complex array of
skills. The schools closed achievement gaps through ongoing meetings in which they discussed
collective efficacy and capability to develop and use assets to accomplish goals that mattered to
all community members through agreed-upon processes, decided on use of tangible assets,
financial, and physical resources, talents that members brought, technology, and access to
information. Moreover, school teams discussed and decided on intangible assets – shared vision,
shared assumptions about what is important within the school, and shared ideals and beliefs
about the core mission of the schools and decided on strong, well-articulated reasons for existing.
In short, they developed a shared belief “we can make a difference.” It was evident that
principals played an active role to build a climate of trust and continuous school improvement.
Instructional Leadership
Instructional practices need to include the very diverse student population school
buildings may have enter them each day. Principals, as instructional leaders, defined academic
rigor as: high expectations + high relevance + appropriate support = higher student engagement
and learning. The study revealed that the vision/mission and core values of a school provides
clarity towards the school plan. Principals, as instructional leaders, fostered mindset through
established goals, discussed the relationship between instructional rounds and professional
development, and described the relationship between effective professional development and
feedback. It was evident that effective principals have developed a theory of action-protocol
(always under revision) and shared the theory of action with stakeholders on an ongoing basis.
The sharing of the theory of action is the distribution performance on instructional tasks which
led to the levels of student engagement in tasks that require academic discourse. As instructional
leaders, principals modeled describing the relationship between school-wide student learning
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 172
frameworks. The interviews revealed that a major task of the instructional leader is to organize
the school’s tasks into academic and social learning experiences for all students.
Four Frames of Leadership
The study revealed the use of Bolman and Deal’s (2013) leadership frameworks. These
frames are used by effective principals to conceptualize different approaches on an issue. The
relevance of each approach is dependent on the circumstance. The structural frames were
evident as the school leaders focused on strategies, implementation, and adaptation within the
organization. The structural frame was used by principals when changing institutional structures,
setting clear goals, to clearly establish cause-and-effect relationships, and when solving
organizational policies. The human resource frame was evident in the way leaders approached
change within the organization. The support, empowerment through distributive leadership, staff
development, and responsiveness to employee needs are some examples of ways that principals
used this frame to build the morale of the school. The political frame was evident in the
principals’ responses on ways they facilitated change based on the focus of political realities that
existed within and outside organizations. Some examples of this frame were present in how
principals built coalitions with partnerships, built power bases, and created compromises to make
up for limited resources facing schools. The symbolic frame was evident as an approach that
focused on the vision and mission of the organization. This frame was evident as principals
presented the traditions and ceremonies at the school sites. Also, this frame was evident when
principals shared their personal beliefs about their work and the work organization.
Backwards Planning
Backwards planning is a method of designing instructional goals, choosing instructional
methods, and determining forms of assessments. This study revealed innovative approaches
used to increase ELL student achievement. The processes in place to study data and define
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 173
service gaps to assist all students were evident. The schools’ closed achievement gaps by setting
the stage of instructional units aligned with English Language Development Standards (CDE,
2012) and Common Core State Standard (Bogatin, 2010) proficiency level continuum. The
leadership ensured to identify resources and materials to support implementation of the ELD
standards, that units/lessons were designed to develop student skills and abilities; interacted in
meaningful ways, learned how English works through cohesive texts, expanded and enriched
ideas, and recorded/transcribed student conversations. The professional development was
aligned to consider research-based scope and sequence for instruction in the building blocks of
literacy, used Language and ELD objectives, standard progression (K-12), and essential
background knowledge about the construction of English speech and print. The allocation of
resources was aligned to capitalize on teachers’ expertise and involved them in lesson planning
and peer professional development. This was apparent in the monitoring of teacher performance
and ongoing feedback on their effectiveness and opportunities for growth provided by the
leaders.
Leadership Practices, Approaches, and Frameworks
The study revealed that there was representation for all stakeholders at the various school
communities. It was evident that successful strategies have been used to share the
vision/mission/ and core values with the community. Moreover, the alignment of appropriate
resources, both human and financial, were shared with all stakeholders within the school
community. Parent-teacher conferences are scheduled at varying times of the year and day to
accommodate all parents (i.e. languages, work schedules). The leaders built partnerships to
bring additional resources to the sites. Through the review of the individual school websites, it
was evident that student participation events were featured for the school community to keep
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 174
everyone informed of the current events. This study revealed to cultivate positive relationships
with parents and the community leaders, treat everyone with respect, schedule meetings, and
publicize them with enough time to get positive results. In addition, it was evident that parent
insights were welcomed regarding views of the school’s discipline, climate, communication, and
instruction. Furthermore, the schools’ served as a community support service offering parents
resources such as: agencies, health, child care, and social support organizations. It was evident
that all financial resources have been allocated to meet the needs of a diverse student population.
Implications
Improving English Language Learner (ELL) student’s outcomes was an urgent issue that
needed to be addressed immediately. The academic success in English language proficiency was
essential as it was considered a primary indicator for a student’s ability to be college- and career-
ready for the 21st Century. Today’s middle school principals are under tremendous pressure to
improve the overall performance of their schools due to the current era of school
accountabilities. To create significant learning outcomes for all students, effective instructional
practices must be provided regardless of students’ language proficiency levels. Principals must
exploit their position as the instructional leader of a school to guide teachers to learn, develop,
grow, and refine their pedagogical practices. The results and conclusions of this study
emphasized the impact a principal can have on student achievement in language proficiency.
Principals in the field can use the results and conclusions from this study to inform their practice
as the leader of the school site.
Based on the findings of this research study, there is correlation between the principal’s
skills, knowledge, and training and middle school English-language student performance. The
following implications for the use of the data obtained in this research study should be
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 175
considered by school districts and site principals to develop leadership skills, knowledge, and
training practices that are required of middle school principals (see Figure 4).
• Principals need to be knowledgeable and trained in current research-based instructional
techniques, strategies, and standards to facilitate and maximize professional development.
• To close achievement gaps, principals need to be accountable and familiar and with
policy implications and issues facing diverse student population.
• Principals are instructional leaders that build the capacity of the stakeholders at the
school site. Principals need to be mindful that schools serve cultures, families, and
students with different attitudes, beliefs, and approaches to education.
• Principals that have English Language Learners at their school sites must be familiar with
the language acquisition instruction focused on providing ELLs with opportunities to
engage in discipline-specific practices designed to build conceptual understanding and
language competence.
• Effective leadership means more than knowing what to do; effective leadership means
knowing when, how, and why to do it. Principals lead with the heart.
• Principals must be cognizant of clarity, concision, and open-mindedness in
communication skills. Communication skills are the heart of a successful organization.
• Principals must have a clear vision for learning. The funding of a school must match the
needs of the students served. Strategic planning involves granting access to a safe school,
student services, and academic achievement for all students.
• In the end, it comes down to the principal being accountable to his or her clients—that is,
the students who attend the school.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 176
Figure 4: Principal Skills, Knowledge, and Training Practices
Recommendations for Further Studies
This mixed-methods study analyzed the principal skills, knowledge, and training that led
to improved English Language Learner student achievement in middle schools. 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 on middle schools. Opportunities
for further research are plentiful. The following topics for future consideration became apparent
and warrant additional investigation.
1. There could be additional research studies using the research on leadership skills,
knowledge, and training required of principals at the middle schools.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 177
2. More research could be done around instructional practices that enhance student
engagement in literacy. Students continue to enter high schools without the necessary
literacy skills necessary to be college and career ready. High schools are faced with
having to close achievement gaps and have the responsibility to prepare students for a
21st Century work force.
3. Although this study revealed instructional leadership practices of five middle school
principals whose ELL students are showing academic success, future research may
consider conducting a comparative study in which high performing schools and low
performing schools with similar student populations are studied to determine the presence
or absence of instructional leadership characteristics and how these influence student
achievements.
4. This research study analyzed leadership practices from different school districts across
southern California, future research may consider effective school leadership within one
district and consider the role of district leadership in promoting language acquisition,
professional development, and specific instructional practices and tools.
Closing Remarks
California is a state that services a large ELL student population. Today’s principals
empower teachers, encourage students, and involve the community in ways that have a lasting
impact. Principals are key instructional leaders in the learning process of all students and fulfill
a vitally important role in achieving student success. Today’s principal must be visible on
campus and spend quality time performing classroom observations. Principals must have the
skills, knowledge, and training to be effective leaders.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 178
References
Alhassan, A. M., & Kuyini, A. B. (2013). Teaching immigrants Norwegian culture to support
their language learning. International Education Studies, 6(3), 15.
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
Antonakis, J., Avolio, B. J., & Sivasubramaniam, N. (2003). Context and leadership: An
examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the multifactor
leadership questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14(3), 261-295.
Arestis, P., & Sawyer, M. C. (2010). 21st century Keynesian economics. Basingstoke; NY:
Palgrave Macmillan.
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.
Bailey, A. L., & Huang, B. H. (2011). Do current English language development/proficiency
standards reflect the English needed for success in school? Language Testing, 28(3), 343-
365.
Baker, E. (2013). Ella’s song: We who believe in freedom cannot rest until it comes. Retrieved
from http://ellabakercenter.org/blog/2013/12/ellas-song-we-who-believe-in-freedom-
cannot-rest-until-it-comes
Baker, S. D. (2007). Followership: The theoretical foundation of a contemporary construct.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(1), 50-60.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 179
Ballantyne, K. G., Sanderman, A. R., & Levy, J. (2008). Educating English language learners:
Building teacher capacity. Roundtable Report. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse
for English Language Acquisition & Language Instruction Educational Programs.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of
Psychology 52, (2001), 1-26.
Bandura, A. (2009). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In
E. A. Locke (Ed.), Hand book of principals of organization behavior (2nd ed.), (pp. 179-
200). New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.
Barth, R. S. (1986). On sheep and goats and school reform. The Phi Delta Kappa, 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., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Bates, B. (2015). Learning theories simplified and how to apply them to teaching. Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Battistich, V., Schaps, E., Watson, M., Solomon, D., & Lewis, C. (2000). Effects of the child
development project on students’ drug use and other problem behaviors. Journal of
Primary Prevention, 21(1), 75-99.
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., Schaps, E. (1997). Caring school communities.
Educational Psychologist, 32, 137-151.
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 180
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
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.
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.
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
Brownell, M. T., Yeager, E., Rennells, M. S., & Riley, T. (1997). Teachers working together:
What teacher educators and researchers should know. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 20, 340-359.
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
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
California Department of Education. (2010). California high school exit exam (CAHSEE) results
for mathematics and English language arts (ELA) by gender and ethnic designation,
(March 2010) for all grades. Retrieved from http://cde.ca.gov/dataquest California
Department of Education
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 181
California Department of Education. (2014). Curriculum and instruction. Retrieved from
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/
California Department of Education. (2016). School accountability report card (SARC).
Retrieved from http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/
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
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 182
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.
Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap... and others don't.
New York, NY: Random House.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Application of common core state standards for
English language learners. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Charismatic leadership. The elusive factor in
organizational effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 183
Daly, A. J., & Chrispeels, J. (2008). A question of trust: Predictive conditions for adaptive and
technical leadership in educational contexts. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 7, 30-63.
doi:10.1080/15700760701655508
Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teach evaluation: To enhance professional practice.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (1988). The evolution of teacher policy. Santa Monica, CA:
Publications Department, The RAND Corporation.
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.
Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). Review of research.
School leadership study. Developing successful principals. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
Educational Leadership Institute.
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.
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.
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 184
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.
Evans, M. G. (2002). Path-Goal theory of leadership. In L. L. Neider, & C. A. Schriesheim
(Eds.), Leadership, (pp. 115-138). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
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
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.
Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A contingency model of leadership effectiveness. Advanced Experimental
Social Psychology, 1, 149-190.
Fink, S. L., & Markolt, A. (2011). Leading for instructional improvement: How successful
leaders develop teaching and learning expertise. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ford, D. (2010). Reversing underachievement among gifted Black students (2nd ed.). Waco, TX:
Prufrock Press Inc.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 185
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
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.
Freiberg, H. J. (1998). Measuring school climate: Let me count the ways. Realizing a Positive
School Climate, 56(1), 22-26.
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.
Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. San Francisco, CA: John
Wiley & Sons.
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 186
Gindis, B. (1999). Vygotsky’s vision reshaping the practice of special education for the 21st
century. Remedial and Special Education, 20(6), 333-340.
Ginsburg, H. P., & Opper, S. (1988). Paiget’s theory of intellectual development (3rd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
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.
Goddard, R. D. (2003). Relational networks, social trust, and norms: A social capital perspective
on students’ chances of academic success. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
25(1), 59-74.
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.
Gonzalez, H. H. (2017). 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. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, CA.
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.
Gutierrez, K. D., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L. C., Olson, K., Horng, E. L., Garcia, E., &
McCarty, T. L. (2002). Sounding American: The consequences of new reforms on
English language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(3), 328-343.
Haines, A. (2009). Asset-based community development. An Introduction to Community
Development, 38-48.
Hallett, T. (2007). Between deference and distinction: Interaction ritual through. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 70(2). 146-171; ProQuest Education Journals pg. 148. Retrieved
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 187
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.
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.
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.
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) (9-19), Oxford: Pergamon Press.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 188
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.
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal's time use and school effectiveness.
American Journal of Education, 116(4), 491-523.
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.
Jones, K. A., Vermette, P. J., & Jones, J. L. (2009). An integration of “backwards planning” unit
design with the “two-step” lesson planning framework. Education, 130(2), 357-361.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult learning
(pp. 1-21). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Koh, C., (Ed.). (2015). Motivation, leadership and curriculum design: Engaging the next
generation and 21st century learners. New York; Singapore; Springer. doi:10.1007/978-
981-287-230-2
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2010). The five practices of exemplary leadership, (2nd ed.,
Vol. 237). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Krieg, J. M. (2008). Are students left behind? The distributional effects of the No Child Left
Behind Act. Education, 3(2), 250-281.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 189
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 190
Mangin, M. M. (2007). Facilitating elementary principals’ support for instructional teacher
leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 43(3), 319-357.
Marshall, M. L. (2004). Examining school climate: Defining factors and educational influences.
Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9a35/49e3198a5232ae2176afc860680a6a76ef88.pdf
Martínez, Y. G., & Velázquez, J. A. (2000). Involving migrant families in education. ERIC
Digest. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
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.
School Districts and Instructional Renewal, 43-60.
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.
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
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.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 191
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.
Meyer, D., Madden, D., & McGrath, D. J. (2004). English language learner students in US
public schools: 1994 and 2000: Issue Brief. NCES 2004-035. U. S. Department of
Education.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
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
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). 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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 192
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. (2007). Dropout rates in the United States: 2005.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/dropout05/
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Status dropout rates. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_coj.asp
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
National Staff Development Council (NSDC). (2003). Moving NSDC's staff development
standards into practice: Innovation configurations. Oxford, OH: Author.
No Child Left Behind Act. (2002). Public Law 107-110. Retrieved from
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
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 next generation. Educating the Next Generation, 2(1-2), 20.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 193
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
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
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
Palestini, R. H. (2005). Educational administration: Leading with mind and heart (2nd ed.).
Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry a personal,
experiential perspective. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 261-283.
Pendergast, D., & Bahr, N. (2005). Teaching middle years: Rethinking curriculum, pedagogy
and assessment. Australia: Allen and Unwin.
Pennington, M. C. (2014). Teacher identity in TESOL. Advances and Current Trends in
Language Teacher Identity Research, 5, 16.
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
Pratt, D. D. (1988). Andragogy as a relational construct. Adult Education Quarterly, 38(3), 160-
72.
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
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 194
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.
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.
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.
Sahertian, P., & Soetjipto, B. E. (2011). Improving employee's organizational commitment, self-
efficacy, and organizational citizenship behavior through the implementation of task-
oriented and relationship-oriented leadership behavior. The Business Review, 19(2), 48-
60.
Salant, P., & Dillman, D. A. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York, NY: Wiley &
Sons.
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.
Schachar, H., & Shmuelevitz, H. (1997). Implementing cooperative learning, teacher
collaboration and teacher’s sense of efficacy in heterogeneous junior high schools.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22(1), 53-72.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 195
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. McH., & 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
Snyder, J., & Bristol, T. J. (2015). Professional accountability for improving life, college, and
career readiness. Education Policy Analysis Archives/Archivos Analíticos de Políticas
Educativas, (23).
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/
Stiggins, R., & Duke, D. (2008). Effective instructional leadership requires assessment
leadership. Phi Delta Kappan, 90(4), 287-291. doi:10.1177/003172170809000410
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 196
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.
Teven, J. J., & McCroskey, J. C. (1997). The relationship of perceived teacher caring with
student learning and teacher evaluation. Communication Education, 46(1), 1-9.
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). Knowledge and the leadership of learning. Leadership and Policy in
Schools, 10(2), 145-170.
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
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/yr11bp0709.pdf
Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education 17(7), 783-805.
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 197
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.
Aud, S., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., Kristapovich, P., Rathbun, A., Wang, X., and 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
U. S. Department of Education. (2016a). Progress in our schools. Retrieved from
https://www.ed.gov/k-12reforms?src=rn
U. S. Department of Education. (2016b). 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. (2016c). 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
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
Vecchio, R. P. (1987). Situational leadership theory: An examination of a prescriptive theory.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 444-451.
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
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 198
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.
Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (1998). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (5th ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
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
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
Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
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.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 199
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic
achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 200
Appendix A: Leadership Survey
Authors: Tatiana I. Duran and Helmer H. Gonzalez
3
Dear Participant,
Thank you for taking this survey. Your feedback is important to synthesize ways in
which Middle 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
3
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 Middle Schools – TD794
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 201
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 202
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 203
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 204
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 205
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 206
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 207
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 208
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 209
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 210
Appendix B: Preparing English Language Learners to be College- and Career-Ready for
the 21st Century
Authors: Tatiana I. Duran and Helmer H. Gonzalez
4
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.
4
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 Middle School Principals in the Support of English Language
Learners
4
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 211
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
5
look like in practice?
6. What Professional Development training, skills, and knowledge should a middle 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 middle 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?
5
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 ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 212
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?
LEADERSHIP ROLE OF PRINCIPALS IN SUPPORT OF MIDDLE SCHOOL ELLs 213
To me young people come first, they have
The courage where we fail
And if I can but shed some light, as they
Carry us through the gate
The older I get the better I know that the
Secret of my going on
Is when the reins are in the hand of the
Young, who dare to run against the storm.
Sweet Honey in the Rock about the work and words of
US Civil Rights Leader, Ella Baker (2013)
Abstract (if available)
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 secondary school principals in the support of English language learners
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
The role of district administrators in developing career technical education programs to assist students in becoming college- and career-ready
PDF
Common Core State Standards: implementation decisions made by middle school English language arts teachers
PDF
Restoring the value of a high school diploma in the United States using 21st century skills as pedagogy: a case study of 21st century skills development and preparation for the global economy
PDF
Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners
PDF
Effective leadership practices used by middle school principals in the implementation of instructional change
PDF
Elementary principal leadership and learning outcomes for low socioeconomic status Hispanic English learners
PDF
The influence of leadership on the development of 21st century skills throughout Irish schools
PDF
Leadership strategies employed by K–12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners
PDF
The role of music in the English language development of Latino prekindergarten English learners
PDF
Ready or not? Unprepared for community college mathematics: an exploration into the impact remedial mathematics has on preparation, persistence and educational goal attainment for first-time Cali...
PDF
Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement
PDF
Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study
PDF
Efective leadership practices used by elementary school principals in the implementation of instructional change
PDF
A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement
PDF
The allocation of resources for career technical education programs that improve college and career readiness
PDF
The role of superintendents as instructional leaders: facilitating student achievement among ESL/EL learners through school-site professional development
PDF
Role and influence of globalization, multinational corporations, and foreign direct investment on educational policy and science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and inquiry-based instructi...
Asset Metadata
Creator
Duran, Tatiana Ines
(author)
Core Title
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
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
09/29/2017
Defense Date
09/28/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
21st Century,academic risk,college and career ready,effective,English language learners,language acquisition,middle school,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals
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
tatianaduran1@gmail.com,tatianid@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-440950
Unique identifier
UC11263980
Identifier
etd-DuranTatia-5797.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-440950 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-DuranTatia-5797.pdf
Dmrecord
440950
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Duran, Tatiana Ines
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
academic risk
college and career ready
effective
English language learners
principals