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
/
Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions
(USC Thesis Other)
Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6 1
Building the Next Generation of Leaders in K–6 Institutions
by
Daniel Tae-Min Kim
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
August 2018
Copyright 2018 Daniel Tae-Min Kim
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
2
Acknowledgements
First, I would like to acknowledge the Trojan family, which supported and encouraged
me throughout this journey. A special thanks to my dissertation committee chairperson, Dr.
Kathy Stowe, who provided the guidance and support I needed to complete my dissertation.
Thank you for your time and energy—for always being available to provide meaningful
feedback. I would also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Michael Escalante and Dr.
Courtney Malloy, who provided extensive knowledge and insight. Next, I would like to thank
my dissertation group members, Brenda, Kristine, Lauren, and R.J., for your friendship. Thank
you for always checking in with me and motivating me to keep writing! Finally, I would like to
thank Brenna, David, and the Wednesday cohort for being kindred spirits throughout this
process.
Also, I would like to acknowledge and thank my family who made this dissertation
possible. Thank you to my supportive wife, Karen Kim, who gave so generously, taking care of
our family while I was away at the library. Karen, I love you so much, and any success is a
family success. Also, I want to thank my children, Karis and Zoey, who encouraged me with
notes, pictures, smiles, and prayers. Karis and Zoey, may this dissertation be a reminder to you
that “you can do everything through Christ, who gives you strength.” Lastly, I would like to
thank my parents, Il Nam and Kun Boon, for your unconditional love. Thank you for your daily
prayers and teaching me always to do my best. Also, to my in-laws, Peter and Jenna, thank you
for your unwavering support and always showing care and thoughtfulness.
Finally, I would like to thank God for being with me throughout this entire process.
During the most challenging times, your promises of love and faithfulness sustained me. I
dedicate this dissertation to you.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
3
Table of Contents
List of Tables 5
List of Figures 6
Abstract 7
Chapter One: Introduction 8
Introduction of the Problem 8
Background of the Problem 9
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 14
Research Questions 14
Significance of the Study 15
Limitations and Delimitations 16
Definitions 16
Organization of the Study 17
Chapter Two: Literature Review 18
Historical Context for the Changing Role of the Principal 18
1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s 19
2000s 20
Today 21
Reluctance of Candidates to Pursue the Principalship 22
Principal Turnover 23
Building Leadership Capacity 24
Succession Planning 24
Tapping 25
Challenges With Tapping 26
Job-Embedded Learning 28
Mentoring 29
Transformational Leadership Theory 31
Transformational Theory 32
Model the Way 32
Inspire a Shared Vision 32
Challenge the Process 33
Enable Others to Act 33
Encourage the Heart 34
Summary 34
Chapter Three: Methodology 36
Research Questions 36
Research Design 37
Sample and Population 38
Overview of Organization and Participants 38
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
4
Theoretical Framework 39
Conceptual Framework 40
Instrumentation 42
Data Collection 43
Data Analysis 44
Ethical Consideration 45
Summary 46
Chapter Four: Findings 47
Overview of the Organization 47
Overview of the Participants 48
Research Questions 49
Results for Research Question 1 50
Building Effective Working Relationships 51
Nurturing Through Mentoring 55
Discussion of Finding for Research Question 1 62
Results for Research Question 2 65
Not Having Enough Time 66
Low Self-Efficacy 68
Discussion of Findings for Research Question 2 70
Summary 73
Chapter Five: Summary 74
Purpose of the Study 74
Summary of the Findings 75
Implications for Practice 78
Principals 78
Districts 79
Recommendations for Future Research 80
References 81
Appendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter 91
Appendix B: Interview Protocol for Mentors 92
Appendix C: Interview Protocol for Mentees 94
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
5
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Data Collection Used in the Study 44
Table 2: ABC Elementary School Student Demographics 48
Table 3: Participant Descriptions 50
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
6
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 41
Figure 2: Creswell’s Model for Qualitative Data Analysis 45
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
7
Abstract
Schools and districts throughout the United States are having difficulty identifying highly
qualified leaders to fill principal vacancies. Despite the surplus of candidates holding
administrative credentials, many are unwilling to pursue the principalship because of the time
demands and stress associated with the position. Additionally, high turnover rates as well as a
large proportion of principals reaching retirement age have contributed to the difficulties filling
principal vacancies.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the practices used to increase leadership
capacity among potential school leaders. One elementary school principal served as the case
study for this research. Data were gathered through interviews and document analysis.
Additionally, transformational leadership theory was used to examine means of developing
future administrators within a K–6 school. Five practices associated with transformational
leadership were examined: (a) modeling the way, (b) inspiring a shared vision, (c) challenging
the process, (d) enabling others to act, and (e) encouraging the heart.
Findings from this study revealed that the principal increased capacity among future
leaders by providing mentoring, feedback, and opportunities to lead hands-on administrative
tasks. The principal was always accessible and created a culture that valued developing
relationships with school stakeholders. This study can benefit principals and district leaders
seeking to adopt a model of leadership development.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
8
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Introduction of the Problem
Leadership is critical to the successful functioning of any organization (Marzano, Waters,
& McNulty, 2005). According to Northouse (2012), a leader is an individual who exercises
influence, provides direction, and mobilizes resources for a group of people in order to
accomplish a common goal. Leaders empower the right people in the right roles, helping to
generate the best outcomes for those whom they serve (Collins, 2011; DePree, 2011; O’Reilly,
Caldwell, Chatman, Lapiz, & Self, 2010). Leadership is important to all organizations, including
in education, where it is essential to school success and positively impacts student academic
achievement (Marzano et al., 2005). Education today requires leaders to be experts in multiple
areas, including curriculum, instruction, and organizational management (Hitt & Tucker, 2016).
In having these skills, leaders can serve and support teachers in the intricate process of
influencing the minds of students (Hitt & Tucker, 2016).
Schools and district offices are having difficulty recruiting and developing leaders to fill
principal vacancies (Béteille, Kalogrides, & Loeb, 2012). There are several concerns related to
addressing the problem of filling principal vacancies in K–12 institutions. The U.S. Bureau of
Labor Statistics (2018) indicated that a limited number of principals are available, as the
employment outlook for elementary and secondary principals is projected to grow 6% between
2014 and 2024. The limited number of principals available is expected to affect California
significantly. Although there are no recent data published, based on the retirement projections
among principals by county, California is anticipated to need approximately 5,000 new
administrators in 2018 (White, Fong, & Makkonen, 2010).
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
9
Another concern related to addressing the problem of filling principal vacancies in K–12
institutions is the impact of the aging population of school administrators. Currently, baby
boomers comprise a large portion of administrative roles, and as they retire, principal vacancies
are expected to increase significantly. The U.S. Department of Education (2016) indicated that
38% of school administrators retired during the 2012–2013 academic year and this number is
expected to increase as the population ages.
Compounding the complications involved in filling principal vacancies is the high
turnover rate among school leaders. Data indicated that schools and district offices are having
difficulty retaining principals, as research by Goldring and Taie (2014) revealed that 1 in 5
principals leave their school sites after only 1 academic year due to retirement, transferring to
another school, or accepting other work.
Researchers have referred to the need to recruit and support the development of school
leaders in order to address the problem of principal vacancies in K–12 institutions (Brewer,
1993; Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Leithwood, Patten, & Jantzi, 2010). Further research is needed
to examine the impact of building a principal pipeline that will foster leadership capacity among
potential school leaders, helping them to enter the pool of highly qualified leaders. Therefore,
this study aimed to investigate the practices that contribute to building the next generation of
school leaders within a K–6 public institution, while also examining the challenges to supporting
and maintaining these practices over time.
Background of the Problem
The role of the principal has evolved substantially over time. Principals in the 1800s
were uninfluential figures who were only responsible for administering and managing clerical
duties, with little to no accountability (Rousmaniere, 2007). However, a 1983 report
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
10
commissioned by the federal government called A Nation at Risk changed the educational
landscape (Bell, 1993). A Nation at Risk delivered a new era of legislative mandates,
accountability directives, and various other changes in education policies (Bell, 1993). In calling
for increased student academic achievement and accountability, the role of the principal changed
to become an instructional leader, problem solver, and resource provider (Goodwin,
Cunningham, & Eagle, 2005). According to Hallinger (1992), A Nation at Risk called for
principals to actively engage in prioritizing the school’s instructional curriculum, staff
development, and student outcomes. The advent of A Nation at Risk also produced significant
school reforms through the implementation of standards-based teaching and assessment, which
became the new norm among schools and district offices (Hunt, 2008).
The role of the principal continued to evolve with the emergence of No Child Left
Behind (NCLB) in 2002, which mandated standards-based education. A necessary component in
NCLB was the implementation of high-stakes assessment for student achievement (Jorgensen &
Hoffmann, 2003). NCLB ushered in a new era of assessments, parental involvement, and
funding systems directly connected to accountability and expectations (Jorgensen & Hoffmann,
2003). The primary goal of NCLB was to create an educational system that increased
accountability for student performance by creating procedures for testing as well as
consequences for schools and districts whose students did not meet benchmark standards
(Goodwin et al., 2005).
Through NCLB, both states and schools were accountable for every child’s learning.
States were legislated to construct assessment systems that reported every student’s achievement
using a set of high instructional standards (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003). Schools and districts
had to make certain that all students learned the fundamental knowledge and skills determined by
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
11
the state’s grade-level standards (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003). As a result, principals dealt
with many assessments, supporting subgroups of students struggling to meet benchmark goals,
while also dealing with increasingly rigid hiring practice, and encouraging parents to become
more involved in their child’s education (Goodwin et al., 2005). Regulations sanctioned by
NCLB implemented greater accountability by making principals responsible for providing
resources to help every child learn and succeed (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003).
Not only did legislative mandates change the role of the principal, but in addition, few
candidates are choosing to seek school leadership positions (Fink, 2010). Increased levels of
bureaucratic accountability have negatively impacted the role of the principal, causing many
candidates to become reluctant to pursue school leadership positions (Myung, Loeb, & Horng,
2011; Zepeda, Bengtson, & Parylo, 2012; Stone-Johnson, 2014). The principal’s increased
workload—endless administrative duties, long work hours, and stress—accompanied by
relatively low compensation, has contributed to candidates’ unwillingness to pursue school
administrative positions (Jorgensen & Hoffmann, 2003; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Zepeda et al.,
2012). As a result, many candidates have been opposed to making the necessary life sacrifices
for the job (Stone-Johnson, 2014). The cost of being a principal—having to deal with
demanding requirements, overwhelming pressure, and having to wear too many hats—has
created tremendous reluctance among candidates to pursue school leadership positions (Gilman
& Lanman-Givens, 2001).
Increased accountability and responsibilities associated with the role has also impacted
many candidates already holding administrative credentials, ultimately causing them not to
become school leaders (Myung et al., 2011). According to the California Commission on
Teacher Credentialing (2015), 1,500 candidates received a certificate of eligibility (i.e.,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
12
completed requirements but had not yet received an offer of employment as an administrator)
annually from 2009 to 2014, which amounted to 7,500 potential principals. Despite the surplus
of candidates holding administrative credentials, many are unwilling to pursue school leadership
positions because of the time demands and job stress associated with increased accountability
(Stone-Johnson, 2014). Instead, many candidates have chosen to use their administrative
credentials for professional development, aiming to gain salary increases (Kearney, 2010;
Myung et al., 2011). Despite having an excess of candidates holding administrative credentials,
schools and district offices continue to have difficulty identifying individuals who are willing to
assume the responsibility of becoming a school leader (Kearney, 2010).
While there is no shortage of candidates holding administrative credentials, few principal
preparation programs have been successful in effectively developing leaders (Clayton, Sanzo, &
Myran, 2013; Fink, 2010; Kearney, 2010). According to Kearney (2010), traditional university
programs have been criticized for being too theoretical, academic, and irrelevant in developing
school leaders (Kearney 2010). The same was true for non-traditional alternative leadership
development programs, as these programs lacked the rigor and requirements to foster leadership
capacity among new principals (Kearney, 2010). Additionally, Clayton et al. (2013) revealed
that a large proportion of both traditional and non-traditional principal preparation programs
were outdated and provided limited opportunities to apply learned theories to real-life situations.
As a result, many principals who have been a product of these preparation programs have felt
“short-changed” and ill-prepared to lead a school (Clayton et al., 2013).
Statement of the Problem
Leadership development is critical to organizational growth and is defined as building the
collective organizational capacity among members by directing and engaging leadership
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
13
opportunities within a structured and systematic environment (McCauley, Moxley, & Van
Velsor, 1998; Rooke & Torbert, 2005). The process of leadership development involves current
leaders helping to produce new leaders by selecting individuals who have similar traits and
characteristics (Fullan, 2005). Therefore, one way for schools and districts to fill principal
vacancies is by building leadership capacity—identifying, developing, and supporting
administrators to become school leaders (Quinn, 2002).
Studies have revealed that increasing leadership capacity through a carefully designed
and managed succession plan can positively impact schools and districts (Peters, 2011; Quinn,
2002). Establishing a pipeline for administrators to enter the pool of principal candidates is
critical, as it can help schools and districts to address the organizational instability associated
with high principal turnover (Peters, 2011). The practice of building leadership capacity among
potential school leaders should help to fill vacant principal positions (Quinn, 2002).
Although a systematic approach to building leadership capacity among potential
administrators is critical to the long-term success of schools and students, district offices often
choose to use unplanned quick fixes that disrupt continuity in the school (Fink, 2010; Hargreaves
& Fink, 2011; Quinn, 2002). Despite the difficulty that K–12 institutions are experiencing in
filling principal vacancies, many district offices have yet to groom and prepare the next
generation of principals (Fink, 2010). According to Fink (2010), “Succession is rarely planned
and prepared for in advance; it is usually a reactive, rushed-together process” (p. xii). Failure to
develop leadership capacity among potential school leaders through succession planning can be
detrimental to both school success and student achievement.
The inability to fill vacant principal positions will likely negatively impact schools’
efforts to improve student achievement. Thus, the failure to develop leadership capacity among
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
14
potential school leaders will impede organizational efforts to build a school culture that supports
student success (Leithwood, Seashore, Anderson, & Wahlstrom, 2004). Overall, schools and
districts that disregard building leadership capacity in preparing the next generation of leaders
will likely have a negative impact on the student learning experience.
Purpose of the Study
In response to the growing need for high-quality leaders, schools and districts are
beginning to recognize the importance of identifying, developing, and supporting school
administrators to assume principal roles. While multiple factors have contributed to the serious
challenge of filling principal vacancies, this study aimed to expand on the existing literature by
examining practices used to build an effective principal pipeline that increases leadership
capacity among potential school administrators. Examining the perceived practices that
contribute to building the next generation of leaders is critical for schools and districts to
understand how to increase leadership capacity among future school leaders.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the perceived practices that contributed to
building leadership capacity within a K–6 public institution and to identify challenges to
maintaining these practices over time. Through a qualitative exploratory process, this study
sought to identify effective strategies for school practitioners to utilize to help them build
leadership capacity among potential school leaders.
Research Questions
The research questions were constructed collaboratively by five members of a thematic
group at the University of Southern California. This investigation examined the following
research questions:
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
15
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at ABC Elementary School within the Bryce Unified School District?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Significance of the Study
While there is a considerable amount of literature that focuses on building leadership
capacity among school leaders, there is an insufficient understanding of the perceived practices
that contribute to developing leaders in elementary school settings. Understanding how schools
and district offices develop policies, programs, rules, and procedures that sustain leadership in
elementary settings may help to develop a capacity-building model for K–6 institutions
(Lambert, 2005).
Principals can use the findings from this study to implement practices that increase
leadership capacity among potential school leaders. Principals may consider implementing the
strategies identified in this study to foster the development of potential candidates for principal
positions. The identified practices for building the next generation of school leaders can support
principals with strategies to develop leadership development programs at their respective school
sites.
The outcomes of this study will assist district offices to prepare a principal pipeline that
increases leadership capacity among potential school leaders to fill vacant principal positions
(Fink, 2010). Findings from this study may help districts to develop succession plans for
administrators (Quinn, 2002). Additionally, the results may help districts to develop sustainable
leadership programs that foster future school leaders. Finally, the practices identified for
building leadership capacity may help districts to develop “grow your own” principal programs.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
16
Limitations and Delimitations
In this study, there were three main limitations. The first limitation was time: Data were
collected over only a 3-month period by the Ed.D. program at the University of Southern
California. Another limitation was that the study’s unit of analysis was only one elementary
school principal. The results may not be generalizable to other settings (Creswell, 2014).
Finally, the researcher was the primary instrument for data collection and analysis within this
qualitative case study, potentially causing bias in projecting one’s own beliefs, experiences, and
interests onto the data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In recognizing these limitations, every effort
was made to ensure that the researcher remained honest, objective, and transparent, and data
triangulation was also used to minimize the impact of any bias.
Delimitations reflect what the researcher can control within the study. In this study, there
were two main delimitations. The first delimitation was the unit of analysis, as it was selected
based on the collaborative criteria determined by the thematic group. It was agreed upon as a
group to choose a school or organization that implemented a leadership pipeline using succession
practices to build leadership capacity. The second delimitation was the selection of the unit of
study. I chose an elementary school that had a principal and an assistant principal to oversee the
school’s operations because I am a first-grade classroom teacher who seeks to understand how
leadership is developed at the primary educational level.
Definitions
Several relevant terms were referenced during the course of this study. They will be
defined below.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
17
Leadership capacity: an organizational concept meaning broad-based, skillful
participation in the work of leadership that leads to lasting institutional
improvement (Lambert, 2005).
Leadership pipeline: the development of individuals from within an organization for the
purposes of succession planning (Mehrabani & Mohamad, 2011).
Succession management: efforts by leadership to establish a protocol and processes to
develop leadership capacity for the purpose of finding and developing future leaders from
within the organization (Fitzgerald & Sabatino, 2014).
Organization of the Study
This study aimed to investigate the practices that contributed to building the next
generation of school leaders within a K–6 public institution, while also examining the challenges
to supporting and maintaining these practices. The study is divided into five main chapters. This
current chapter provided an overview of the problem of principal shortages in K–12 institutions;
it also focused on the urgent need to develop school leaders through systematic succession plans.
Chapter 2 will review scholarly work that has explored building leadership development among
principals in K–12 public institutions. It will also include a description of the theoretical
framework chosen for this study. Chapter 3 will focus on the research design; it will outline the
qualitative methodology and instruments used to collect and analyze the data. In Chapter 4, the
findings will be reported. Finally, the findings will be interpreted and discussed in Chapter 5,
reinforcing the overall importance of the research.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
18
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
Leadership is the mechanism that influences and organizes people toward a purposeful
direction to efficiently achieve a goal (Burke et al., 2006; Collins, 2011; Leithwood et al., 2004;
Northouse, 2012; Yammarino, 2013). According to Yammarino (2013), leadership involves a
leader-follower interaction process: “a multi-level leader-follower interaction process . . . occurs
in a situational context where a leader and followers share a purpose and jointly accomplish
things such as goals, objectives, and tasks willingly” (p. 150). By influencing a group of
individuals, leaders can facilitate the development of people through organizational practices that
value honesty, integrity, and coaching (Burke et al., 2006; Leithwood et al., 2004; Northouse,
2012). Therefore, leadership is the developmental process of helping people to use their skills to
achieve organizational goals (Collins, 2011).
This literature review will have three main sections. The first section will review the
existing literature, focusing on the historical context of the changing role of the principal. The
second section will include an examination of the existing research on succession planning
strategies used by schools and district offices to build leadership capacity, such as tapping and
mentoring. The final section will address transformational leadership, the theoretical framework
for this study.
Historical Context for the Changing Role of the Principal
The role of the principal has evolved to address various educational issues and needs
(Kafka, 2009). Changes over time in governmental legislative policies that regulate school
leadership have significantly impacted the role and responsibilities of the principal. Policies
such as Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972, A Nation at Risk, and NCLB have
been reactionary measures by the government aimed at improving public schools and reversing
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
19
low student achievement (Goodwin et al., 2005). As a result, the role of the principal has
become more complex and wider-reaching (Goodwin et al., 2005). In the following section, the
historical context for the changing role and functioning of the principal will be examined.
1960s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s
A dramatic change in the role of the principal occurred in the 1960s and 1970s as
principals were defined as program managers who mainly focused on implementing, managing,
and monitoring programs. The role of the principal during this time was primarily carrying out
and executing federal programs such as Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 and
Federal Public Law 94-142, the Education for Handicapped Children Act of 1975, ensuring
access and due process for all students (Goodwin et al., 2005). The priority among principals
during the 1960s and 1970s was compliance over student success (Goodwin et al., 2005;
Hallinger, 1992).
The 1980s brought new changes to the role of the principal, as school administrators
shifted away from being program managers toward becoming instructional leaders, engaging in
training and supervising classroom pedagogy (Goodwin et al., 2005; Hallinger, 1992; Hitt &
Tucker, 2016). A critical factor influencing this change was published reports such as A Nation
at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983), Action for Excellence
(Education Commission of the States, 1983), and High School (Boyer, 1983). All of these
publications demanded a greater increase in student achievement and accountability by requiring
the principal to actively direct the school’s curricular program to have a more significant impact
on student achievement (Goodwin et al., 2005). No longer was it professionally acceptable for
administrators to solely maintain and mange school programs. The increased expectations
changed the principal’s role to that of a knowledgeable instructional expert-leader, who had an
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
20
in-depth understanding of the school’s curricula and teaching practices (Hallinger, 1992; Hitt &
Tucker, 2016).
The role of the principal as a transformational leader shifted in the 1990s, as schools were
organizationally restructured to improve the process of identifying and meeting the differentiated
needs of students across different locations (Hallinger, 1992; Hitt & Tucker, 2016). Improving
the process of meeting the student’s needs was accomplished by using transformational
leadership. This was influenced by a 1990 Carnegie report on education and the economy,
which recommended the decentralization of administrator roles. The recommendations included
a call for shared leadership that fostered an egalitarian approach, inviting school stakeholders to
participate in the decision-making process, such as to improve curricula and instruction
(Hallinger, 1992). Principals employing a transformational leadership style developed
comprehensive systems for making school-level decisions that included teachers and parents,
ultimately increasing student achievement (Hallinger, 1992; Hitt & Tucker, 2016).
2000s
The legislative demands and expectations to improve student achievement have increased
the complexity of the principal’s role throughout the 2000s. The implementation of NCLB of
2001 brought a significant amount of stress and pressure to the role of the principal, as the
federal government mandated strict accountability measures for student success (Jorgensen &
Hoffmann, 2003). The accountability measures of NCLB involved the implementation of severe
consequences for schools and districts that failed to meet the yearly academic student progress
goals (Goodwin et al., 2005; Kafka, 2009). During this time period, school leaders were thus
required to take on more responsibilities, with greater accountability (Goodwin et al., 2005; Hitt
& Tucker, 2016; Kafka, 2009). According to Jorgensen and Hoffmann (2003), NCLB increased
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
21
accountability expectations by directly linking funding with student academic outcomes, and as a
result, principals had to ensure that all students learned the essential standards-based skills. In
having stringent accountability measures, high demands were placed on school administrators to
be responsible for administering annual standards-based, high-stakes assessments, while also
subgrouping students with academic needs (Goodwin et al., 2005; Kafka, 2009). NCLB
increased pressure on school leaders to be highly accountable for student achievement at both the
school and classroom levels, as failure to meet these expectations resulted in serious
consequences (Kafka, 2009).
Today
The role of the principal continues to evolve today in complexity and difficulty, with
continuously added responsibilities. Current policies such as Race to the Top, a federal grant
program, and Common Core State Standards have changed the role of the principal to fully
integrate transformational leadership and instructional leadership to improve curricula,
instruction, and student achievement (Hitt & Tucker, 2016). According to the U.S. Department
of Education (2016), the federal grant program Race to the Top legislated $4 billion, creating
financial incentives for states that complied with educational policies such as the adoption of the
Common Core State Standards. As a result of these new legislative policies, principals became
transformative and instructional leaders, who aimed to equip teachers with the pedagogical
strategies needed to meet content standards (Gewertz, 2012). Today, principals must be experts
in grading practices, daily schedules, student groupings, monitoring, special education, and
instruction for English-language learners (Gewertz, 2012). Overall, principals in today’s
educational climate have come to fulfill complex and dynamic roles, maneuvering through the
exceedingly high demands and expectations of government, communities, and schools.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
22
As the role of the principal has evolved, building leadership capacity among principals
has become essential to school success (Davis, Darling-Hammond, LaPointe, & Meyerson,
2005). However, as governmental legislation increases, accountability for student success has
required principals to take on higher demands, resulting in higher stress and making the role
unattractive, ultimately causing many candidates to be reluctant to pursue leadership roles.
Reluctance of Candidates to Pursue the Principalship
Evidence demonstrates that increasing demands and expectations for principals has
caused many candidates to carefully rethink their career paths as school leaders (Hargreaves &
Fink, 2011; Kearney, 2010; Russel & Sabina, 2014; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Zepedia, Bengtson, &
Parylo, 2012). According to Kearney (2010), many candidates perceive serving as a principal as
not worth the tradeoffs because of having to deal with stressful government accountability
mandates, lack of parental support, loss of close interaction with students, and difficulties with
work–life balance. In a study conducted by Stone-Johnson (2014), participants were reluctant to
pursue school administration because of the imbalance between work and home life; they saw
their principals working at school until 9:00 p.m. or later for 110 days out of the 180-day school
year. In a related study, Zepedia et al. (2012) interviewed 32 participants across four Georgia
school districts, finding that individuals were reluctant to pursue school leadership positions due
to the accountability measures for student achievement, as well as stress and long working hours,
with very little compensation. The reluctance among many candidates to pursue school
leadership positions has been a challenging factor in producing an efficient principal pipeline
that increases leadership capacity among potential school leaders. In the next section, the
literature on principal turnover will be reviewed.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
23
Principal Turnover
Studies have revealed that high turnover rates among principals have been negatively
impacting schools and districts throughout the United States (Béteille et al., 2012; Goldring &
Taie, 2014; Kena et al., 2016; Miller, 2013; Stone-Johnson, 2014). Grissom, Mitani, and Blissett
(2017) defined principal turnover as “the event that a principal leaves a district, exits the state
education system, or takes a position other than principal” (p. 273). Multiple factors have
contributed to principal turnover in public K–12 institutions. One major factor has been the
aging population of school leaders. According to Kena et al. (2016), 38% of public school
principals with more than 10 years of experience left their leadership positions during the 2012–
2013 school year due to retirement.
Another factor that has affected principal turnover is lack of support given to novice
principals serving in low socioeconomic areas. Miller (2013) found that approximately 20% of
public school principals with less than 10 years of experience left their leadership positions
annually when schools experienced low academic achievement. Furthermore, the principal
turnover rate was higher in schools serving low socioeconomic areas with a large proportion of
minority students. Béteille et al. (2012) found that school districts throughout the United States
with high concentrations of poor and low-achieving students experienced 15% to 30% higher
principal turnover rates each year. High principal turnover negatively impacts student
achievement, contributing to an unstable learning environment and lack of continuity (Béteille et
al., 2012).
Turnover also negatively impacts the organizational system of the school. Béteille et al.
(2012) found that high principal turnover was associated with high teacher turnover. High
turnover contributes to late hiring, insufficient professional development, and lack of leadership
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
24
support. To confront principal turnover, the next section will examine strategies to build
leadership capacity in schools and districts.
Building Leadership Capacity
Building leadership capacity is vital to organizational success (Flanary, 2009; Fullan,
2005; Harris & Lambert, 2003; Slater, 2008). Harris and Lambert (2003) defined leadership
capacity as “broad-based, skillful involvement in the work of leadership” (p. 13). Organizational
practices are needed to provide individuals with opportunities to take risks in applying their
theoretical understandings of leadership into real-life organizational situations (Slater, 2008).
Therefore, building leadership capacity is about developing leaders by identifying underutilized
talent and supporting professional growth by providing opportunities to increase experiential
knowledge, skills, and attitudes to sustain organizational success (Flanary, 2009; Fullan, 2005).
A primary method to leadership development in educational organizations is through succession
planning (Gray & Bishop, 2009).
Succession Planning
Succession planning is an organizational commitment and mindset to fostering the
development of leaders in schools and districts (Hitt, Tucker, & Young, 2012). According to
Quinn (2002), the purpose of succession planning is to build a key group of potential school
leaders who have developed the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to fill future principal vacancies.
According to Conger and Fulmer (2003) the fundamental goal of succession planning is to get
“the right skills in the right place” (p. 2). Research also supports that efficient and purposeful
succession planning for leadership can positively benefit schools and districts (Peters, 2011). In
the past, succession planning among K–12 institutions often involved unplanned quick fixes
(Peters, 2011). According to Hargreaves (2005), succession planning was frequently described
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
25
as a form of principal replacement rather than principal development. However, schools and
districts are now realizing the positive impact of implementing a conscientious, thoughtful, and
deliberate planning for leadership as a means of reducing organizational instability (Peters,
2011). Succession planning avoids the “hire and hope” approach and involves the accelerated
development of potential leaders for both current and future leadership positions (Fink, 2010).
Therefore, the next section of this review will explore the literature on succession-planning
practices involved in building leadership capacity within K–12 institutions.
Tapping
Tapping is a succession-planning practice used by schools and districts to identify
teachers for leadership development. According to Myung et al. (2011), tapping is defined as
current school leaders purposefully approaching, encouraging, and identifying teachers who have
demonstrated leadership qualities to pursue leadership positions. Tapping can either be formal or
informal. Formal tapping consists of highly structured training that informs teachers of the
expectations, roles, and responsibilities of a school administrator (Pounder & Crow, 2005).
Informal tapping often involves a principal approaching and encouraging a teacher to enter a
school administration certification program (Pounder & Crow, 2005). Tapping specifically
targets the development of leadership capacity among teachers to assist them in moving into the
administrative pipeline for principal positions.
Tapping used as a practice for succession planning has been effective in identifying
potential candidates for the principalship (Fink, 2010; Myung et al., 2011; Russell & Sabina,
2014). According to Myung et al. (2011), effective succession plans incorporate the practice of
tapping, helping to build the next generation of school leaders. Results from Myung et al.’s
study, which included surveys with principals and assistant principals in the largest school
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
26
district in Florida, indicated that 93% of principals and 89% of assistant principals were tapped
for school leadership positions by at least one individual while they were teachers. Russell and
Sabina (2014) also supported the effectiveness of tapping, showing that it helps to ensure that
quality leaders who have demonstrated skills such as risk taking, collaboration, instructional
expertise, and problem solving enter the succession pipeline.
Effective tapping requires that principals at the school-site level understand their role in
identifying potential candidates for the principalship (Fink, 2010). Principals who have
incorporated the practice of tapping into their existing role contribute to building future school
leaders. In a mixed-methods study that examined effective succession planning within three
school districts, across three different countries (i.e., Canada, England, and United States), Fink
(2010) found that over 90% of participating principals implicitly understood that their role as a
school administrator included actively tapping prospective leaders to apply for leadership
positions. Tapping teachers for leadership development through a coordinated and strategic
succession plan provided a focused method for establishing a pool of highly qualified school
leaders.
Tapping teachers for leadership positions has thus been highly effective. There are
nonetheless challenges to providing a fair and equitable approach to identifying potential school
leaders, especially among minorities and females. The next section will examine these
challenges.
Challenges With Tapping
Research indicates that current principals often tap teachers with strong leadership
potential whose profiles, values, and behaviors resemble their own (DeAngelis & O’Connor,
2012; Myung et al., 2011; Parylo, Zepeda, & Bengtson, 2013; Russell & Sabina, 2014). Myung
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
27
et al. (2011) found that tapping decisions made by principals favored teachers based on their race
and gender. In a quantitative study including over 16,000 online surveys with teachers, assistant
principals, and principals, Myung et al. found that a “race match” increased the likelihood of
tapping. In fact, teachers whose race matched the race of their principal had a 30% probability
of being tapped. Results from the study also revealed a “gender match,” as there was a higher
tendency of males being tapped by principals at the elementary- and middle-school levels. One
of the main reasons for these biases was because most schools and districts did not have formal
succession-management systems. As a result of having no systematic structure for identifying
potential school leaders, the decisions regarding recruitment and promotion often gravitated
toward personal attributes and preferences, such as race and gender (Myung et al., 2011).
According to DeAngelis and O’Connor (2012), biased tapping can disadvantage minority
candidates. Results from a quantitative study that randomly surveyed 300 educators from Illinois
after 2 years of earning their general administrative credential found that minorities who applied
for principal positions received fewer job offers compared to nonminority applicants. In fact, job
offer rates for a school leadership position in urban schools among minority applicants were
57.1% compared to 80.6% for nonminority applicants. Findings from this study showed that
minority applicants were often disadvantaged at the job offer stage, even after controlling for
characteristics such as education and experience (DeAngelis & O’Connor, 2012).
In summary, the use of tapping for leadership development was examined in this section.
Tapping has been effective in mobilizing potential principal candidates into the leadership
pipeline (Myung et al., 2011).
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
28
Job-Embedded Learning
Another succession-planning practice involved in building leadership capacity within K–
12 institutions is job-embedded learning. Effective leadership development occurs when
potential school leaders are presented with real-life and on-the-job contextual opportunities to
problem solve in making decisions. In the next section, the practices of job-embedded learning
and mentoring used in many succession plans will be explored.
The job-embedded learning approach contributed to effective leadership development
among potential school leaders, as it provided high-quality training with on-the-job applications
of knowledge and practices (Amagoh, 2009; Gray & Bishop, 2009; Fullan 2009). According to
Fullan (2009), job-embedded approach refers to the continuous support of capacity building
among leaders by providing real and on-the-job opportunities to observe, participate in, and learn
high-quality leadership. The Ontario Ministry of Education (2009) developed future leaders
using a job-embedded leadership approach in the province’s On-the-Move initiative, which
placed potential school leaders in schools experiencing high achievement in literacy and math for
3 successive years (Fullan, 2009). The job-embedded approach resulted in potential school
leaders experiencing an exemplary leadership model that fostered a collaborative environment
focusing on building capacity for instructional practices such as distributing leadership, using
student data analysis to improve learning, and participating in learning networks with other
school leaders. The objective of this job-embedded approach was to allow potential school
leaders to participate in a model of what effective leaders do to achieve school results (Fullan,
2009).
Building leadership capacity among potential school leaders is effective when
opportunities to manage real-life situations and consequences are presented (Gray & Bishop,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
29
2009). Research by Gary and Bishop (2009) supported the job-embedded approach as leadership
development is most useful when candidates are confronted with challenges to disrupt their
“comfort zones” by facing new leadership experiences and developing new capacities in the
process. Amagoh (2009) also indicated that successful leadership development requires an
“action learning” approach in which leaders work collaboratively in teams to engage in a broader
and diversified perspective to improve school performance. Action learning in a collaborative
team context helps to develop a leader’s self-efficacy and self-esteem through a supportive
network that fosters continuous leadership development (Amagoh, 2009).
Mentoring
Mentoring is a strategic job-embedded approach that builds leadership capacity by
learning from experience (Amagoh, 2009; Daresh, 2004; Peters, 2011). According to Amagoh
(2009), mentoring is defined as developing leadership through a supportive relationship whereby
an experienced mentor helps a less experienced mentee with professional instruction and career
guidance. As a result, mentoring is an interactive and inclusive process that aims to help new
leaders achieve their full potential (Boerema, 2011). Through this exchange, new principals are
provided with career support, emotional support, and role modeling, learning special techniques
from mentors (Amagoh, 2011). Therefore, the primary goal of mentoring is to train and provide
new principals with a sustained opportunity to learn and increase their leadership capacity to do
their jobs successfully (Peters, 2011).
In education, mentoring positively impacts districts by ensuring the continuity and the
development of principals (Parylo et al., 2013). Among district offices, mentoring is beneficial
in two main ways. First, it is flexible including methods such as one-on-one mentoring, peer
mentoring, or group mentoring (Amagoh, 2009). Second, mentoring can help to ensure that new
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
30
principals receive continuous support, helping them to remain motivated and productive, and
encouraging them to become lifelong learners (Daresh, 2004).
The evidence demonstrates that mentoring is a reciprocal process that positively benefits
the development of both mentors and mentees (Amagoh, 2009; Clayton et al., 2013; Daresh,
2004). Daresh (2004) found that mentors increased their leadership capacity through mentoring,
as they gained new insight, knowledge, and talent through their relationship with their mentees.
In having mentees share ideas, methods, and perspectives for solving organizational problems,
mentors benefited from their energy and new perspectives, applying new information to their
leadership practice. Mentoring is thus a reciprocal process that allows both mentors and mentees
to grow professionally through their interactions with each other, as they share and reflect on
their administrative practices (Daresh, 2004).
Clayton et al.’s (2013) study also found that mentoring had a positive impact on
leadership development among mentors and mentees. In this qualitative study, which included
interviews with eight mentor–mentee pairs from a rural mid-Atlantic district, mentors discussed
how they were challenged to rethink and reevaluate their philosophies and beliefs when
confronted with differences in leadership style from their mentees. When both mentors and
mentees can collaboratively learn from each other, leadership capacity increases, which
ultimately promotes high levels of student achievement (Clayton et al., 2013).
According to Amagoh (2009), mentors can build leadership capacity when using an
egalitarian approach to guiding, leading, and supporting the mentees. Amagoh examined
leadership development initiatives, finding that professional development occurred when
mentors encouraged their mentees to observe and give feedback to them (Amagoh, 2009).
Through this supportive and transparent approach, continuous two-way learning and
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
31
development between mentors and mentees promoted a robust global perspective, positively
impacting organizational leadership. In fostering an egalitarian approach to mentoring,
leadership capacity increased for both the experienced and the novice. Thus, mentoring provided
an opportunity for mastery, especially when the relationship was inclusive and open, allowing
for interdependent and interactive communication (Amagoh, 2009).
Mentoring is an effective component of succession planning that can offset the difficulty
of filling principal vacancies (Daresh, 2004). The job-embedded practice that mentoring
provides for school leaders to increase leadership capacity through a real-life and on-the-job
learning experience ensures that future and current principals in the leadership pipeline are
provided with support to succeed, sustain, and positively impact student success (Parylo et al.,
2013). The following section will summarize the theoretical framework that will be used to
conduct this study examining the conditions and practices that build leadership capacity.
Transformational Leadership Theory
The theoretical framework used for this study was transformational leadership.
According to Northouse (2012), transformational leadership is defined as the interactive process
that enables a leader to empower his or her followers by positively increasing the level of
motivation through charisma and vision. The transformational leadership approach functions
through the leader’s awareness of the follower’s needs, which helps the follower to achieve his
or her fullest potential (Northouse, 2012). Therefore, transformational leadership is a framework
that is committed to establishing a shared vision that aims to develop people by collaboratively
achieving goals and overcoming challenges (Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008). Through these
supportive elements of transformational leadership, principals can develop and involve teachers
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
32
to work in a collaborative environment of shared leadership that works toward the common goal
of student achievement.
Transformational Theory
Transformational leadership, as outlined by Kouzes and Posner (2002) is organized into
five central practices of leadership: (a) model the way, (b) inspire a shared vision, (c) challenge
the process, (d) enable others to act, and (e) encourage the heart (Northouse, 2012). The
theoretical framework of transformational leadership will connect this study by examining all
five practices as outlined by Kouzes and Posner). The study will use these five practices of to
identify the practices used by schools and districts to build leadership capacity among potential
school leaders. More specifically, transformational leadership will be used to identify practices
that help to build of an efficient pipeline, helping potential school leaders to enter the pool of
highly qualified leaders. The following subsections will describe each of the chosen practices in
detail.
Model the Way
Modeling the way consists of two main parts. First, transformational leaders model the
way by having strong convictions that enable them to communicate their core beliefs, passions,
joys, and purposes. The second part consists of transformational leaders modeling the way by
setting the example for building and affirming shared values (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). In
examining leadership development, this study will explore how principals increase capacity
among potential school leaders by setting the example within a productive working environment.
Inspire a Shared Vision
Inspiring a shared vision also consists of two main parts. The first part requires
transformational leaders to develop a forward-looking vision to forecast both the short- and long-
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
33
term success of an organization or school. The second part requires transformational leaders to
recruit others by developing a shared vision through teaching, engaging, and having inclusive
dialogues with others to inspire a collaborative realization of future possibilities (Kouzes &
Posner, 2002). For schools and district offices to build future school leaders, they need an
interactive shared vision fostered by the principal to help encourage teachers to look forward to
possibilities for pursuing school leadership positions.
Challenge the Process
Challenging the process is the mindset of having the willingness to change the status quo
by taking the initiative to look outward in making creative innovations (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
By challenging the process, transformational leaders are willing to experiment, take risks, and
most importantly, learn from their mistakes. In examining the perceived practices that contribute
to building the next generation of leaders, this study will explore how principals develop
leadership capacity in others through a safe learning environment.
Enable Others to Act
Enabling others to act requires transformational leaders to foster collaboration and
cooperation among the people within the organization. In building an environment that values
teamwork, leaders must skillfully build a relationship of trust that supports and facilitates mutual
dependence, allowing others to collaborate in order to achieving goals and overcome challenges
(Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Therefore, this qualitative study will examine how schools and
district offices build leadership capacity through a collaborative approach that strengthens the
competencies and confidence of teachers pursuing school leadership.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
34
Encourage the Heart
Encourage the heart involves supporting, recognizing, and rewarding individuals within
the organization who meet or exceed the set of standards established by the organization (Kouzes
& Posner, 2002). It is important that leaders expect the best, pay attention, and engage in
capacity building by providing timely feedback to monitor individuals’ progress. In this study,
schools and district offices were examined to understand what practices they used to foster and
sustain relationships by motivating, encouraging, and providing high expectations for positive
possibilities (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Kouzes and Posner’s (2002) transformational leadership is a model that enables leaders to
achieve extraordinary things within their organization (Northouse, 2012). Kouzes and Posner’s
model values meeting the needs of others as a necessary way to build and sustain leadership
capacity. Therefore, transformational leadership was used in this study to examine how schools
and district offices developed leadership capacity in potential candidates wanting to be the next
generation of school leaders.
Summary
This review examined the research on building leadership capacity for the next
generation of school leaders. Many schools and districts are experiencing significant difficulty
filling vacant principal positions. The role of principal has evolved substantially, and principals
now influence student achievement, classroom instruction, and teacher quality (Branch et al.,
2013; Grissom, Loeb, & Mitani, 2013; Hitt & Tucker, 2016; Hill et al., 2016; Williams, Kirst, &
Haetel, 2005). This review examined the practices used to develop a pipeline to increase
leadership capacity among potential school leaders. Although many schools and district offices
have yet to implement a succession plan, some have employed practices such as tapping and
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
35
mentoring. Additionally, there are a number of challenges to building leadership capacity.
Overall, there is a lack of research specifically focusing on how schools and districts can
formalize systematic approaches in order to develop an effective leadership pipeline.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
36
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of this study was to examine practices for building leadership capacity
within a K–6 public institution. It specifically aimed to identify the practices that helped to
develop sustainable leadership capacity among the next generation of school leaders, as well as
the challenges to supporting and maintaining these strategies over time. The strategies connected
to building leadership capacity will be viewed through the theoretical lens of five
transformational leadership practices: (a) modeling the way, (b) inspiring a shared vision, (c)
challenge the process, (d) enable others to act, and (e) encourage the heart (Northouse, 2012).
The strategies used to increase capacity among potential K–6 school leaders will serve as a guide
for schools and district offices to promote leadership development.
Chapter 3 will outline the research design of the study. First, the sample and population
selection process will be described, followed by an overview of the organization and
participants. The third section will focus on transformational leadership, the theoretical
framework for the study. The fourth section will include a comprehensive summary of the data
collection and analysis process. The final section will address ethical considerations, including
the provisions taken to ensure the safety and security of participants in the study.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided the study, which was collaboratively developed
by five members of a thematic group at the University of Southern California. In order to gain
greater insight into means of developing next-generation school leaders, this study aimed to
address the following research questions:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at ABC Elementary School within the Bryce Unified School District?
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
37
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Research Design
A qualitative case study was used to investigate practices for building leadership capacity
within a K–6 public school. According to Creswell (2014), a case study is defined as a
qualitative design that allows the researcher to conduct a comprehensive and detailed exploration
using rich descriptive data of a phenomenon (e.g., program, event, activity, process, or one or
more individuals) within its real-life context. Using a case study approach, the researcher acted
as the primary instrument, aiming to collect rich, thick, and descriptive data by triangulating
multiple sources such as interviews and documents like meeting agendas, application forms, and
professional development brochures to address the research questions (Creswell, 2014).
A qualitative case study was needed because this study aimed to understand the process
of how schools and districts play a role in building leadership capacity among potential school
leaders. According to Agee (2009), a qualitative case study examines the why and how of
human interactions. More specifically, a qualitative case study allows the researcher to
inductively understand the meaning people have constructed of a particular phenomenon
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). For this reason, interviews and document analysis were used to
make sense of how schools build leadership capacity through succession planning. In
conducting face-to-face interviews and collecting documents, such as emails, meeting notes, and
pictures the goal of this case study was to gather rich descriptive data to help theorize of how
leaders are developed in K–6 institutions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
38
Sample and Population
A fundamental component of a qualitative method is deciding where to conduct the
research and who to include in the study (Maxwell, 2013). One way to select the sample and
population of the study is through purposive sampling. According to Patton (2015), purposive
sampling allows the researcher to discover and understand the central issues of the inquiry.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) also stated that purposive sampling enables the researcher to select a
sample from which the most can be learned. Overall, purposive sampling ensures that
researchers will choose participants who will most effectively help to gather the necessary
information to construct clear and detailed meaning from the research (Creswell, 2014).
Within this study, a purposive, convenience sampling process was used, as the selection
of the school site was based on time, availability, and location (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
sample for this study was one principal of a K–6 school located within a large urban school
district in Southern California. The principal chosen for this study provided an in-depth
description and analysis of the leadership capacity building practices used at ABC Elementary
School (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
A recruitment letter, which was approved by the district, was used in this study. The
letter stated the purpose of study, significance to school leaders, and expectations. The letter was
sent out through the school requesting participants for the study.
Overview of Organization and Participants
This case study was conducted at ABC Elementary, a California Distinguished School
and a Title 1 Academic Achievement Award school. ABC Elementary is over 50 years old and
is geographically located in a large urban school district in Southern California, serving 1,098
students in Kindergarten through sixth grade. The demographics of students at ABC Elementary
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
39
are as follows: 95.2% Hispanic or Latino, 0.3% Black or African American, 3% Asian, 0.3%
White, 65.4% English Learners, and 10.7% students with disabilities (School Accountability
Report Card [SARC], 2017). Within ABC Elementary, 97.5% of the student population is
socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Among the 2016–2017 certificated staff at ABC Elementary, there were 43 fully
credentialed teachers, one psychologist, one nurse, one speech/language/hearing specialist, and
one resource specialist. School leadership is comprised of a principal and assistant principal,
who oversee the operations of the school.
Principal Karis Zoey served at three school sites with a total of 9 years of experience as
the principal. Before moving into school administration, she served 17 years within Bryce
Unified School District as an elementary classroom teacher, teaching Grades 1, 2, and 3.
Principal Karis Zoey was chosen for this study because she has demonstrated a past performance
of developing leaders to pursue school administrative positions and has served as a mentor in
building leadership capacity for many individuals within the district.
Theoretical Framework
According to Maxwell (2013), a theoretical framework is defined as the concepts, ideas,
and understandings of the investigated unit of analysis. Within this study, the theoretical
framework of transformational leadership developed by Kouzes and Posner (2002) was used to
guide the construction of the conceptual framework. Transformational leadership theory was
chosen for this study’s worldview because of its flexibility to provide a broad range of
perspectives on the process of building an individual’s capacity to its fullest potential
(Northouse, 2012).
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
40
The theoretical framework of transformational leadership developed by Kouzes and
Posner (2002) consists of five exemplary leadership practices that facilitate leaders to help
followers improve their performance (Northouse, 2012). The first practice in Kouzes and
Posner’s model is modeling the way, which refers to leaders setting the example by clearly
communicating their expectations and values to followers (Northouse, 2012). Next, leaders
inspire a shared vision by challenging followers to go above and beyond the current situation,
and do something positive for others. Once a shared vision is established, the leaders then
challenge the process or the status quo by having the followers improve the organization by
taking innovative risks and trying new creative things. A working environment that fosters trust,
collaboration, teamwork, and cooperation with others comprises the fourth practice, enabling
others to act. Within this exemplary leadership practice, followers are empowered through the
support of others to make collective and collaborative choices. Finally, leaders encourage the
heart by celebrating, recognizing, and rewarding followers for their effortful accomplishments
and growth (Norhtouse, 2012). These are Kouzes and Posner’s five exemplary leadership
practices that provide a model for leaders to implement a process of change which will help
people to transform and build their leadership capacity. In this study, these five exemplary
leadership practices helped to guide the exploration of practices that contribute to building the
next generation of leaders.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework, designed by the thematic group, was based on emerging
themes from the review of the literature (see Figure 1). It was used to identify ways schools and
district offices aimed to develop a principal pipeline. The conceptual framework is comprised of
three main components.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
41
Figure 1. Conceptual framework.
First, the outer circle represents Kouzes and Posner’s (2002) five exemplary leadership
practices: (a) modeling the way, (b) inspiring a shared vision, (c) challenging the process, (d)
enabling others to act, and (e) encouraging the heart. Through the lens of transformational
leadership, the organization’s leadership acted as the starting point, executing the developmental
process of increasing leadership capacity among future school leaders. In this study, Principal
Karis Zoey served as the input by initiating the leadership development process among potential
school leaders.
Second, the conceptual framework recognized the organizational and societal challenges
associated with the process of developing future school leaders. In acknowledging the
challenges that inhibit professional growth and improvement, the leadership development
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
42
practices are organized into three categories of practice: (a) identification of potential leaders, (b)
developing individuals’ leadership capacity, and (c) ongoing support of school leaders. In
building the next generation of school leaders, the organizational and individual challenges will
be considered.
Finally, the conceptual framework indicates an ongoing and continuous increase of
leadership capacity among the future school leaders in the pipeline, as effective school
administrators never stop growing and learning. The outcome is thus increased individual and/or
organizational leadership capacity, which has been thoroughly developed through
transformational leadership practices. Increased leadership capacity broadens the pool of
qualified leaders, creating a cyclical effect in which school leaders are continuously produced
across generations.
Instrumentation
Multiple instruments were used to collect rich, thick, and descriptive data in this
qualitative case study. Using multiple instruments is important because it increases
triangulation; additional data sources increase validity, reliability, and the quality of the findings
(Maxwell, 2013). Also, using multiple instruments provides the researcher with different
perspectives on how schools and district offices build leadership capacity (Maxwell, 2013). In
this study, semi-structured interviews and document analysis were the two primary forms of
instrumentation.
First, semi-structured interviews were conducted. This allowed for the inclusion of
formal and informal questions types, providing the researcher with the flexibility to gather
specific information to understand the leadership capacity-building process in K–6 institutions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Also, in a semi-structured format, questions need not be in a
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
43
predetermined order, allowing the researcher the ability to make adjustments and effectively
respond to participants.
The second form of instrumentation was document analysis. Document analysis allows
the researcher to unobtrusively examine the unstructured literary data for meanings that
communicate symbols, values, or qualities (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this study, document
analysis included school and district memos, websites, agendas, minutes, and SARCs.
Data Collection
According to Maxwell (2013), data collection is defined as the method a researcher
employs to gather information. To gain access to the research site, ABC Elementary School, I
sought approval from the Deputy Superintendent of Administrative Services in the Bryce Unified
School District. I emailed the superintendent requesting to meet in order to discuss in detail the
purpose of the study. In response, the Assistant Superintendent of K–12 Teaching and Learning
explained the process for conducting research within the district, which includes a
comprehensive application.
Prior to data collection, an introductory recruitment letter was given to participants
informing them of the purpose, expectations, and the role they would play in the research (see
Appendix A). The key participants in this study were Principal Karis and her current and former
mentees, along with her mentor.
Given that the researcher served as the primary instrument for data collection, the
relationship between the researcher and participants was complex and constantly evolving
(Maxwell, 2013). Therefore, safety and security in protecting the participants’ anonymity and
confidentiality was a priority.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
44
Table 1 summarizes the participants, instruments, and documents analyzed for each
research question.
Table 1
Summary of Data Collection Used in the Study
Research Question Interviews Documents
RQ1: What are the perceived
practices that contribute to
building the next generation
of leaders at ABC Elementary
School within the Bryce
Unified School District?
1. Principal Karis
2. Current mentee
3. Former mentee
4. Principal Karis’s
mentor
1. Meeting agendas and notes
2. Websites
3. Brochures
4. Mentoring advertisements
5. Job descriptions, job postings (e.g.,
advertisements)
RQ2: What are the challenges
to supporting and maintaining
the strategies designed to
build leadership capacity?
1. Principal Karis
2. Current mentee
3. Former mentee
4. Principal Karis’s
mentor
1. Meeting agendas and notes
Data Analysis
Data analysis for this qualitative case study was done using Creswell’s (2014) six-step
model. Creswell’s model for qualitative data analysis suggests a linear approach; however, the
process can be interchanging, allowing the six steps to be used in a flexible order. The first step
in Creswell’s model is organizing and preparing the data for analysis. This includes transcribing
interviews, typing up field notes, and cataloging the data. Examining all the collected data for
topical themes is the second step, and this marks the initial stages of the coding process through
which the researcher begins to scan the data for similarities and common themes. The next step
involves applying the coding process by categorizing the data based on emergent themes from
the research. The fourth step involves extending the coding process by describing in detail the
categories or themes that have emerged from the analysis. The fifth step is developing an
advanced narrative that represents the discovered themes; findings are often interconnected and
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
45
can be conveyed through illustrations as well as detailed discussion. The final step is
interpreting and making meaning of the data. The focus in this step is to examine the lessons
learned from the qualitative case study. Lessons drawn from a research study include the
researcher’s personal interpretation, a comparison with existing literature and findings, as well as
the identification of new questions that have emerged from the data analysis (Creswell, 2014).
The Ed.D. thematic group thus adopted Creswell’s model for qualitative data analysis, and the
six steps were used to analyze the findings in this study (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Creswell’s model for qualitative data analysis.
Ethical Consideration
According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), “Ensuring validity and reliability in qualitative
research involves conducting the investigation in an ethical manner” (p. 237). For this reason,
ethical considerations were a priority throughout this study. Before carrying out the study, the
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
46
thematic dissertation group followed the rules and regulations outlined by the University of
Southern California’s Institutional Review Board. Also, permission to access the site and
participants was granted by the gatekeepers of the district office and school. The implementation
of ethical practices throughout this study helped to increase the trustworthiness and credibility of
findings.
At the beginning of the research, participants were contacted and informed about the
purpose of the study. After discussing the purpose of the study, participants had a choice to
continue by signing the consent form. During this beginning process, the researcher made every
effort to clearly communicate the means for protecting the confidentiality of participants and
their respective organizations. Pseudonyms were used in reporting the findings. The researcher
also discussed how study data were protected. Data were stored in a password-protected
computer and will be destroyed after 1 year.
Summary
This chapter provided an overview of the qualitative case study method, data collection
process, and data analysis procedure used in this study. Chapter 4 will present the findings from
this study in relation to the two research questions.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
47
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Educational organizations have difficulties recruiting and developing school leaders to
fill principal vacancies (Béteille et al., 2012; Brewer, 1993; Hallinger & Heck, 1998; Leithwood
et al., 2010). This study investigated the practices one elementary school principal employed to
build leadership capacity among potential school administrators identified (i.e., tapped) to enter
the principal pipeline. The following chapter will be organized into four sections. The first
section will provide an overview of the organization and participants in the case study. Findings
from this study based on the research questions will be reported in the second section, followed
by a discussion of each research question. Finally, this chapter will conclude with a summary of
the study.
Overview of the Organization
ABC Elementary has been serving the Bryce Unified School District community for over
50 years and has an enrollment of 1,098 students from kindergarten through sixth grade.
Geographically located in a low socioeconomic urban neighborhood of southern California,
97.5% of the student population comes from families who qualify for free or reduced lunch. In
addition to an increasing population of socioeconomically disadvantaged students, the
demographics at ABC Elementary are as follows: 95.2% Hispanic or Latino, 0.3% Black or
African American, 3% Asian, and 0.3% White (SARC, 2017). Over half of the student
population is English-language learners, and approximately 10% of students have disabilities
(SARC, 2017). Table 2 presents an overview of the student population at ABC Elementary.
ABC Elementary is one of 36 elementary schools in the district. Among the 2016–2017
certificated staff at ABC Elementary, there were 43 fully credentialed teachers, one psychologist,
one nurse, one speech/language/hearing specialist, and one resource specialist.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
48
Table 2
ABC Elementary School Student Demographics
Enrollment Group Total Enrollment
Student enrollment by group (%)
Black or African American
American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian
Hispanic or Latino
White
Socioeconomically disadvantaged
English-language learners
Students with disabilities
Student enrollment by grade level (n)
Kindergarten
Grade 1
Grade 2
Grade 3
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Total enrollment
0.3
0.1
3.0
95.2
0.3
97.5
65.4
10.7
189
180
171
161
188
160
49
1,098
Note. Data compiled from 2016–2017 California Department of Education Student
Accountability Report Card.
One principal and one assistant principal were in charge of overseeing and managing the
operations of the school.
Overview of the Participants
The unit of analysis for this case study was Principal Karis Zoey of ABC Elementary.
Her pathway to becoming a school administrator began as an elementary classroom teacher. She
spent 17 years teaching Grades 1, 2, and 3 across three different school sites, all within Bryce
Unified School District. After completing a Master’s in Educational Administration, Mrs. Karis
Zoey then began her career as a principal. She was tapped to be the principal of an elementary
school within Bryce Unified School District. Altogether, she has served as a principal at three
different elementary school sites, with a total of 9 years of experience, all within the same school
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
49
district. In 2015, Mrs. Karis Zoey was recognized as both the regional Elementary Principal of
the Year for the Association of California School Administrators and the National Distinguished
Principal for the State of California. Currently, she is entering her third year as the principal of
ABC Elementary.
Principal Karis Zoey was chosen as the unit of analysis for this study because she has
demonstrated a track record of developing leaders to become school administrators. Principal
Karis has identified, developed, and supported four individuals to become assistant principals or
principals.
Principal Karis Zoey and five other participants were selected and interviewed for this
study. One participant was an assistant principal serving under Principal Karis Zoey at ABC
Elementary. The other three participants were former teachers and assistant principals who were
tapped by Principal Karis and were serving as principals at their respective school sites. The last
participant was Principal Karis Zoey’s mentor and former principal, who tapped Mrs. Karis Zoey
to pursue school administration. A total of six interviews were conducted, each lasting
approximately 1 hour. Additionally, artifacts such as emails, pamphlets, SARCs, professional
development flyers, and meeting agendas were analyzed. As previously mentioned in Chapter 3,
pseudonyms were used for all participants to ensure confidentiality. Table 3 describes the
participants in this study.
Research Questions
With the intent of identifying the various approaches that a principal used to tap, recruit,
and build the next generation of school leaders, two research questions were developed in
tandem with five members of a thematic group at the University of Southern California.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
50
Table 3
Participant Descriptions
Name
Years in
Education Years as Mentee
Current Leadership
Role
Karis Zoey 26 n/a Principal
Karen 34 n/a Retired principal
Andrew 20 2 as teacher
2.5 as assistant principal
Principal
Grace 26 9 months Principal
Cephas 24 2 Principal
Elizabeth 28 1 Assistant principal
The following research questions guided this case study:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of
leaders at ABC Elementary School within the Bryce Unified School District?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Throughout this qualitative case study, multiple sources of data were triangulated to
increase the validity of the findings. Face-to-face interviews and document analysis were the
main instruments used to gather data.
Results for Research Question 1
The first research question aimed to identify the practices that one principal used to build
leadership capacity among potential school administrators. After collecting and analyzing the
data, two central themes emerged addressing how this principal worked to build the next
generation of leaders: building effective working relationships and nurturing through mentoring.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
51
Building Effective Working Relationships
A fundamental practice that Principal Karis used to increase leadership capacity among
potential school administrators was creating a school culture that supported effective working
relationships. Principal Karis promoted building effective working relationships in two main
ways: (a) having mentees understand the importance of building strong, meaningful, and positive
relationships with school stakeholders such as teachers, students, and parents; and (b) fostering
the “people before paper” shared value. Principal Karis discussed the importance of effective
working relationships: “In order to develop leaders, I believe that they [potential school leaders]
need to have a support system in place by building relationships with staff members and people
from the community to learn from one another and their experiences.”
Importance of building relationships among school stakeholders. One practice that
Principal Karis employed in building leadership capacity among her mentees was having them
understand the importance of building relationships with school stakeholders. She highly valued
relationships with stakeholders: “A huge piece of administrative training is developing
relationships because to get support, administrators need a relationship with the district office,
your secretary, your custodians, your families, and your students.” When asked about her
understanding of leadership development for the next generation of school leaders, Principal
Karis commented, “If you [school leaders] cannot develop relationships, it will be hard for you
to succeed because you won’t have the support in any aspect.” Principal Karis believed that
relationships must be cultivated by communicating and interacting with people: “You build
relationships by listening, being honest, caring, understanding, and humble because you don’t
have all the answers.”
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
52
Documents collected for this study also confirmed how Principal Karis prioritized school
stakeholders, attending numerous community and school events. During the interview, she
provided several flyers for events she attended, such as an evening gala hosted by a local
Kiwanis Club, which she has since partnered with to help fund programs that enhance
educational and recreational activities for families. Another event Principal Karis attended was
the “Neighbors and Police Officers for Coffee and Conversation,” an event that provides people
in the community an opportunity to ask questions, voice concerns, and establish relationships
with local police officers. Other examples included business networking mixers, school district
principal meetings, school district board meetings, staff birthday parties, and school-site monthly
parent meetings. In recognizing that more can be achieved when administrators understand the
importance of developing relationships with school stakeholders, the established relationships
helped Principal Karis’s mentees increase their leadership capacity by learning to communicate
and interact through listening, caring, and understanding people.
Principal Karis’s mentees echoed the importance of building relationships with school
stakeholders. When Andrew, now in his second-year as an elementary school principal, was
asked to describe the practices Principal Karis used to develop leadership capacity, he replied as
follows:
It was a lot of relationship building, which made me realize how huge relationships are
because when you build relationships with teachers, you have them on your side and then
you can get into good conversations and really tackle on curriculum and instruction.
Grace, who is serving her first year as principal at a K–6 elementary school also agreed that
building relationships with stakeholders was critically important. When asked which strategies
used by Principal Karis were most useful in developing her leadership capacity, she responded,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
53
“Building and extending relationships with teachers and parents to have a culture of
connectedness.” In describing how she developed relationships, Grace shared the following:
“Principal Karis would tell me to attend community events, even if it’s on a weekend because I
hear that doesn’t happen with other principals—I should be there to be visible in connecting with
parents and our kids.” With Principal Karis’s help, Grace understood the importance of
connecting with people as a school leader.
Documents also verified that all of Principal Karis’s mentees valued building
relationships with stakeholders. They attended community events and viewed them as essential
aspects of their development as school leaders. During the interview, all of Principal Karis’s
mentees shared event flyers and pictures of themselves at community and school events. For
example, Grace showed pictures of events like the School Choice Fair hosted by the school
district, which informs families about various school programs and offerings for students. Grace
also volunteered at the annual Toys for Tots during the Christmas season; she sorted and
organized toys for impoverished children in the community. Cephas shared pictures of events he
attended, like the school district’s math Olympics and Girls on the Run, which empowers female
students in the community through running. Both Andrew and Elizabeth showed their calendars
during the interviews, which contained school district board meetings and student athletic events.
Developing relationships with school stakeholders by attending community and school events
was one essential practice that Principal Karis and her mentees used to build leadership capacity.
Fostering the people-before-paper shared value. The second vital element that
increased leadership capacity among Principal Karis’s mentees was fostering the people-before-
paper” shared value. People before paper refers to a relationship-building framework that
centers on caring for the whole person. Karen, a retired principal with 34 years of experience in
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
54
education and a mentor to Mrs. Karis Zoey, described people before paper as a guiding principle
in leadership: “The true focus in education is to help and grow the well-being of both students
and families.” Karen continued, “People before paper is a core value that prioritizes human
needs, as it supersedes any kind of administrative duty and work deadline.” When asked to
describe the meaning of people before paper, Principal Karis defined it as follows:
Putting people first. As administrators, we have lots of paperwork, reports, and
deadlines, but it’s important to make sure we are connecting with people, addressing
issues and concerns, and building relationships. It means taking the time to listen to
people, even when a million things happen. Students, parents, and staff need to feel
valued and listened to. It means asking administrators to take the time and truly listen.
In building leadership capacity among her mentees, Principal Karis modeled the
conceptual shared value of people before paper in her leadership practice. This modeling helped
her mentees to adopt this shared value within their school settings. Modeling the people-before-
paper shared value involved Principal Karis taking the time to answer questions and being
accessible to help her mentees learn new processes: “It’s about taking the time to discuss how we
[Principal Karis and her mentees] work with people and modeling how we listen and talk to
people in making them feel valued and listened to.” Cephas discussed how Principal Karis
modeled this shared value: “She taught by example, as she practiced it herself.” Cephas
continued to share how he remembered a time when Principal Karis modeled this value:
We went on several home visits to see a family being raised by a single father who was in
constant need of support. We wanted to make sure they were being taken care of. This
included going out to the house to interview the father, so that the kids could get
Christmas gifts that they wanted from a nonprofit organization.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
55
Elizabeth also recalled a time when Principal Karis modeled this value: “If somebody is new, she
does not hesitate to say, “Hi, what’s your name? How are you? Welcome to ABC. We’re glad
you’re here.’ She even welcomes a substitute custodian, who many other people might not even
converse with.” Mentees confirmed how Principal Karis’s modeling fostered their leadership
capacity, helping them to see importance of building effective working relationships. Andrew,
for instance, stated, “My purpose as a school leader is to serve my school and community.”
Likewise, Elizabeth shared the following:
While the people are there [school], and the school is alive, and they [school
stakeholders] need your undivided attention, you give it them—because the paperwork
will always be there after hours and later at night when they’re not there.
By fostering the people-before-paper shared value, Principal Karis demonstrated the
transformational practice of modeling the way, which allowed her mentees to increase their
leadership capacity.
Nurturing Through Mentoring
A second practice that Principal Karis used to increase leadership capacity was nurturing
potential school administrators through mentoring. Amagoh (2009) described mentoring as
fostering leadership development through a supportive relationship in which a mature and
knowledgeable mentor provides professional guidance to a mentee who is inexperienced in a
field of work or situation. Principal Karis described mentoring as “providing guidance, support,
and real-life experiences. A mentor is someone you can turn and talk to with your questions
without being judged to work through problems and things together.” In establishing mentoring
relationships with her mentees, Principal Karis nurtured leadership development in three ways.
First, she provided access, encouraging her mentees to approach her by asking questions, sharing
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
56
ideas, and speaking up when situations arose. The second way Principal Karis nurtured
mentorship was by giving timely feedback. Final, the third way she developed leadership
capacity was through hands-on administrative duties. For Principal Karis, providing a nurturing
mentoring relationship was crucial to building leadership capacity.
Providing access. Providing access was an indispensable mentoring practice that
Principal Karis used to develop leadership capacity among her mentees. An essential aspect of
this was her open-door policy, which encouraged communication with her mentees, whether they
were teachers, school leaders, or district administrators. Andrew discussed how Principal Karis
was always accessible: “Open door policy. Principal Karis was always visible around campus,
showing the teachers and us [mentees] that she was going to support us, always be there for us,
regardless of the good or the bad.” Principal Karis maintained close working relationships with
her mentees, helping them to feel comfortable and frequently stopping by for conversations to
discuss issues, situations, or ideas. Principal Karis stated, “I talk almost every other day with
them [mentees] to work through things and help each other by sharing ideas, advice, and
resources.” She recalled when Cephas began his new role as a principal: “He [Cephas] was still
calling me, and together we were able to develop new systems that made his school safer.”
Grace discussed how Principal Karis always ensured that her time and energy were devoted to
her mentees: “She was always available, as she always touched basis with me. I think if she saw
me overwhelmed, she would pull me aside and bring me back and ask me what support I
needed.” Cephas shared the following:
Her door was always open, as she took phone calls 24 hours a day. I still talk to her when
I’m dealing with something and say, “What do you think? What would be my best
course of action?” She would always give me her advice.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
57
All of Principal Karis’s mentees confirmed how she used different modes of
communication to support them. They discussed how they could always go to her for advice.
Andrew discussed how she was always available for face-to-face discussions. He remembered
asking Principal Karis questions about the steps involved in making school-related decisions:
“I’d ask questions to understand her process and the reasons why she was doing what she was
doing.” Andrew further shared how the meetings were never formal: “We would sometimes sit
down and dialogue, but we really had a good working relationship—and so it was throughout the
day at whatever moment.” Principal Karis was also accessible to her mentees through email, text
messages, and phone conversations to provide feedback and encouragement, as well as to
express her gratitude. Elizabeth recalled, “The other day, we did a parent meeting, and the next
morning I woke up and had this text message from Principal Karis about how well it went and to
thank me for the good job.” Grace recounted meeting regularly with Principal Karis to check
progress, set timelines, and delegate tasks for ongoing projects. Grace stated, “There was a lot of
communication—things that she would help me to consider and texting back and forth—working
together to coordinate looking for materials or student awards.” Principal Karis was thus
accessible and approachable through various methods of communication. Her mentees discussed
how she was always available to listen, provide support, and encourage them in their
professional development, helping them become next-generation school leaders.
Giving feedback. Another way that Principal Karis nurtured mentoring relationships
with her mentees was by providing timely feedback. Principal Karis’s feedback often aligned
with research-based practices, such as those discussed by Clayton et al. (2013), helping to foster
confidence and self-efficacy in her mentees. Principal Karis described the importance of
feedback as “a way of guiding someone in being honest with people and really telling them how
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
58
they can develop whatever skills it is that they need to develop.” In understanding that
leadership development was an ongoing professional experience, the feedback that Principal
Karis provided aimed to help her mentees improve their school leadership skills and knowledge.
The feedback that Principal Karis gave to her mentees was frequently aimed at
encouraging them to expand and increase their leadership capacity by helping them develop a
comprehensive school-wide perspective on tasks, responsibilities, and problems through a
thoughtful approach to questioning. Principal Karis described the school-wide perspective as
school leaders having the ability to “see things from the student point of view, school point of
view, the teacher point of view, the office point of view, and the whole school community point
of view.” In developing future school administrators to enter the pool of highly qualified
leaders, Principal Karis’s goal was to give meaningful and timely feedback to help her mentees
see the “bigger picture.” She explained this further: “Helping my mentees see the bigger picture
is my number one priority because they often understand things through a teacher perspective.
Through my feedback, I want to help them approach things from a whole school perspective.”
Principal Karis also shared an example scenario:
What if my kindergarten teachers want to change their lunchtime? Who else is it going to
affect? How is this going to affect first grade and everybody else? When I give
feedback, it’s just talking through a situation saying, “Okay, what’s the problem? What
do we need to deal with? What are the different ways? What are the ideas that you’ve
thought of? Tell me how you feel we can best handle this? Okay now, let’s think about
the school’s impact.”
When asked about Principal Karis’s feedback, Grace also agreed that the informal feedback
helped her to develop a school-wide perspective:
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
59
She made me see beyond by asking me, “How is that going to help this?” Sometimes, I
had a grand idea, but sometimes I didn’t see the big picture, and so she would pose
questions. She wouldn’t say, “No, you’re going to do it this way.” It was more like,
“Well, what about this” or “What do you expect on this” or “Have you considered this?”
I guess, reflective mentoring.
The feedback that Principal Karis provided not only involved debriefing after dealing with
specific issues, but also helping her mentees understand the whole-school perspective—how
decisions can impact the community, school, and student learning. Principal Karis’s feedback
was a critical component in mentoring and building leadership capacity among her mentees.
Being accessible also contributed to timely feedback. Cephas discussed how Principal
Karis was always available to provide feedback: “She gave me feedback on the job, within the
context of situations that we were working on. It was given during phone calls, in person in her
office, or as we were working together on a variety of tasks.” Andrew discussed how Principal
Karis’s frequent feedback and communication felt like a constant dialogue: “I would go to her
and say, ‘I’m brainstorming this, what do you think?’ And, then she would just give me some
feedback to make sure that I was on the right track.” Elizabeth had a friendship and a very open
working relationship with Principal Karis, also describing their dialogue as ongoing: “In being
the assistant principal, you’re just constantly moving and grooving. You’re in the hallway, and
she says, ‘Oh, great job.’ And I say, ‘Oh, thanks. Okay.’ Then you just keep going.” Elizabeth
continued to share that because of the busy work environment of the school, feedback also
included providing “little notes left on one another’s desk and through text messaging.”
Whether face-to-face, on the go, or through a text message, Principal Karis’s feedback was a
critical mentoring practice for building leadership capacity in her mentees.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
60
Hands-on administrative experiences. The opportunity for mentees to receive hands-
on administrative experiences in leading both day-to-day duties and special projects was a vital
practice that Principal Karis used to nurture mentoring relationships. The mentees who have
served with Principal Karis not only learned theories, lessons, and skills from professional
development classes or district administrator induction programs, but also applied and exercised
leadership through hands-on practice of doing administrative tasks. Principal Karis explained:
When developing leaders, I think more than anything, there needs to be some sort of
hands-on experience. I think that’s the best way, as your [mentees are] right there doing
it as you would be doing it as a principal. I think that’s the best rather than just talking or
showing them things.
Thus, the goal for Principal Karis was to “give mentees real hands-on practice to see what it truly
means to be an administrator.” When asked how she supported her mentees and teachers
wanting to pursue leadership, Principal Karis responded as follows:
I invite them to take on additional roles and duties such as joining committees, but when
there is a person who has their administrative credential, I’ll ask them to help with IEP
[individualized education plan] meetings or the Saturday program for attendance
recovery.
For example, when Andrew was a teacher under Principal Karis, he was chosen to take on
various leadership roles like School-Site Council, Grade-Level Lead, the Curriculum committee,
the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports committee, the Safety committee, and several
district committees. Andrew shared:
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
61
She was always good about giving me experiences because she wanted to make sure that
I experienced everything about a school so that when I did have my school, I at least
would be familiar with all the aspects of running a school.
The experience was also very similar for Cephas when he was Assistant Principal under
Principal Karis. He received hands-on administrative experiences to evaluate teachers and
collaboratively work through a bond measure, while also being the Testing Coordinator for
California State Testing. By providing hands-on administrative tasks, Principal Karis aimed to
ensure that mentees had an opportunity to plan and manage various school projects.
Principal Karis also carefully considered the needs of each mentee by ensuring that every
hands-on experience was purposeful and meaningful in building leadership capacity. In
recognizing that each mentee had different leadership strengths and weaknesses, Principal Karis
strategically coordinated her mentees’ day-to-day administrative duties and special projects, as
her goal was to produce versatile, well-rounded leaders who had full comprehensive experiences
in school leadership roles. Principal Karis planned administrative duties by conducting face-to-
face meetings with her mentees, having open discussions to identify specific areas for leadership
growth and development. The mentees discussed their face-to-face meetings with Principal
Karis, recalling how she assigned administrative tasks based on the areas for growth that they
identified. For example, Andrew remembered sharing with Principal Karis his desire to gain
more skills with the budget—more specifically, learning how to read reports: “I knew the theory
of budget, and I understood that this money comes from here, it was just the actual manipulating
of the budget that I wanted to learn more about.” By using a collaborative approach that
promoted open discussions to carefully consider the needs of each mentee, Principal Karis
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
62
ensured that her mentees received hands-on administrative experiences to develop into skillful
and resourceful school leaders.
Principal Karis’s supportive process did not involve micromanagement. She was not
excessively involved with minor details, but rather delegated with full trust, ensuring that her
mentees received the space to lead with full ownership of the tasks given to them. Therefore,
Principal Karis understood that to increase leadership capacity among her mentees, she could not
interfere by controlling their work. Karen said, “When you delegate, you’re there to support,
answer questions, or guide, but the task belongs to them.” Mentees were given the freedom to
make their own choices. Elizabeth shared her experience: “She assigned my duties and then lets
me run with them, yet still meeting with me and still giving me advice.” Grace also added, “She
didn’t hold my hand, but she lets me do what I needed to do, and if I had questions or other
ideas, she was available for me.” By providing mentees with a trusting, flexible, and supportive
learning environment with a safe space to lead using their own methods, Principal Karis ensured
that she was building leadership capacity through real hands-on administrative experiences.
Discussion of Finding for Research Question 1
The first research question addressed two emergent themes, which highlighted the
practices that one school principal used to develop leadership capacity in potential school
leaders. Findings from this study were consistent with the theoretical framework of
transformational leadership, as the practices demonstrated by Principal Karis built leadership
capacity among her mentees. Principal Karis emphasized the importance of building
relationships with school stakeholders, which inspired a shared vision. The people-before-paper
shared value, which prioritized caring and listening to people, allowed Principal Karis to model
the way within a school context. Principal Karis was also accessible to her mentees, working
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
63
collaboratively with them and fostering trust and cooperation. Nurturing mentees through timely
feedback with clear standards encouraged the heart. Finally, providing opportunities for mentees
to lead hands-on administrative tasks was consistent with the practice of challenging the process.
In building the next generation of school leaders, Principal Karis applied all five transformational
practices of exemplary leadership.
Establishing relationships with school stakeholders was a foundational practice that
Principal Karis used to develop leadership capacity. According to Kouzes and Posner (2002),
exemplary leaders have a passion that is expressed by caring for something that will make a
positive difference in their communities. This passion should be expressed through care, helping
others in the organization to develop a sense of commitment (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Principal
Karis conveyed and demonstrated organizational commitment by prioritizing the importance of
building relationships with school stakeholders, employing the transformational practice of
inspiring a shared vision. This shared vision, which focused on caring, listening, and valuing
school stakeholders, was implemented to set the agenda and give direction to school leaders.
Understanding the importance of building relationships allowed mentees to increase both their
leadership capacity and social capital, helping them to make a positive difference in their school
community.
Findings from this study revealed that Principal Karis increased leadership capacity
among her mentees by fostering the value of people before paper. By providing mentees with a
conceptual understanding that prioritized the needs of the people, Principal Karis used the
transformational practice of modeling the way to demonstrate and instruct her mentees
appropriate techniques to build effective working relationships within school settings (Amagoh,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
64
2011; Boerema, 2011). By modeling the way, Principal Karis directly participated in the
process, leading by example and applying essential skills in caring for people.
Principal Karis established close and collaborative working relationship with her
mentees. In fostering a collaborative mentoring relationship, she used the transformational
practice of enabling others to act, which created a climate of trust through listening, learning, and
considering the mentees’ viewpoints. Her openness, honesty, and consistency allowed her
mentees to trust her, facilitating positive interdependence and cooperation (Kouzes & Posner,
2002). By being constantly accessible, her mentees were able to rely on her, seeking her
frequently for nurturing and feedback, which ultimately helped to expand their leadership
capacities.
Principal Karis provided timely feedback, which helped to increase mentees’ productivity
and qualifications. She used the transformational practice of encouraging the heart to build
leadership capacity among her mentees. Feedback, which is a form of encouragement, kept
mentees engaged and motivated, allowing them to track their progress toward the goal of
becoming school leaders (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Furthermore, by establishing individualized
standards and goals for each mentee, Principal Karis gave feedback that was personal and
positive (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Encouraging the heart through feedback positively affected
motivation, performance, and leadership development among mentees.
Providing opportunities to lead hands-on, real-life, and on-the-job contextual
administrative tasks was useful in building leadership capacity. Principal Karis used the
transformational practice of challenging the process to create a purposeful plan for leadership
development among her mentees. According to Fullan (2009), providing opportunities to lead
hands-on administrative tasks allows mentees to increase their leadership capacity by observing,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
65
participating, and learning the processes of high-quality leadership. Principal Karis used a job-
embedded learning approach to facilitate a climate for mentees to gain mastery on administrative
tasks one step at a time (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). By training her mentees with hands-on
administrative tasks, Principal Karis aimed to foster self-efficacy and a “can-do” attitude. The
goal of this training was also to prepare mentees to understand how to manage various situations
and issues through a comprehensive school-wide perspective. Hands-on administrative
experiences provided the necessary guidance and support for mentees to develop confidence in
their leadership capabilities.
Principal Karis’s practices for building leadership capacity among her mentees were
supported by current research and the transformational leadership theory. Her practices of
building effective working relationships and nurturing through mentoring contributed to
developing next-generation school leaders. The methods applied by Principal Karis can serve as
a model for educational organizations aiming to nurture future leaders.
Results for Research Question 2
The second research question investigated the challenges to supporting and maintaining
strategies designed to build leadership capacity. Identifying challenges that inhibit capacity
building among potential school leaders is critical in order to minimize the obstacles that schools
and districts face in filling principal vacancies. Data collection revealed two challenges that
hindered the building of next-generation school leaders. The first challenge was not having
enough time, as the participants in this study had an overwhelming workload and as a result, had
difficulty establishing a work–life balance. A second challenge experienced by mentees was
feelings of low self-efficacy in their abilities to be school leaders.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
66
Not Having Enough Time
Two themes emerged which challenged the strategies used to build leadership capacity
among mentees. First, the overwhelming administrative workload interfered with Principal
Karis’s ability to build leadership capacity among her mentees. Having too many responsibilities
related to managing the school consumed her time and energy. Second, the long working hours
at school and stressful government accountability measures made it very difficult for Principal
Karis’s mentees to establish work–life balance (Kearney, 2010). Principals increased workload
and work hours are often associated with accountability pressures (Jorgensen & Hoffmann,
2003; Stone-Johnson, 2014; Zepeda, Bengtson, & Parylo, 2012).
Overwhelming workload. The first major challenge faced by Principal Karis was the
lack of time because of the overwhelming school administrative workload. Being a school
leader takes an immense amount of time, as Principal Karis stated, “I am too busy trying to get
everything done. You’ve got to do all your duties and fulfill them. It’s been the hardest
challenge here at this school because it’s so large with so much to do here.” She described the
overwhelming workload as “The feeling of being pulled in a million different directions.” The
overwhelming workload also included working with her mentees, as Principal Karis provided
additional time out of her daily schedule to meet with mentees, which was more than expected
by the district. Thus, Principal Karis felt stressed in having to be responsible for competing
demands—completing her regular school duties and nurturing her mentees. She shared the
following:
Time is huge because you need the time to communicate with your assistant principal and
mentees. You need the time to be able to sit down with them to discuss things and work
through things. It’s been the biggest challenge.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
67
Lack of time because of the overwhelming workload directly impacted Principal Karis’s
ability to foster leadership capacity in her mentees. Being “pulled in a million different
directions” to fulfill her administrative duties, she was occasionally unavailable for face-to-face
meetings with her mentees. Although accessible through email, notes, phone conversations, and
text messages, it was periodically challenging to arrange face-to-face meetings. Elizabeth
acknowledged how the overwhelming workload interfered with her leadership development:
We try to meet. That’s been one of our focuses—to try to come together every day. It’s
difficult. The school is almost 1,100 children and when I get out of my car, I don’t take a
break. She doesn’t take a break. We just hit the pavement running.
Like Elizabeth, Grace also experienced Principal Karis’s overwhelming administrative workload
as inhibiting her professional growth as a school leader: “The biggest challenge was her busy
schedule because; at times, she wasn’t available. When she wasn’t there, I found myself asking,
‘What would Principal Karis do? Or, can I bug her at the conference to ask her a question?’”
These findings were consistent with Russel and Sabina’s (2014) findings that principals’
overwhelming workload and increased work hours negatively impacted teachers’ performance.
Difficulty establishing a work –life balance. The second challenge faced by mentees
was difficulty establishing a work–life balance, as being a school leader involved endless
administrative duties, long working hours, and considerable stress (Zepeda et al., 2012).
Mentees’ experiences in this study—namely, having difficulty establishing a work–life
balance—mirrored the findings found in the literature. According to Stone-Johnson (2014),
administrative duties of the principal have become less desirable because of the imbalance of
home and work life caused by the long working hours and job stress associated with greater
school accountability. Andrew shared his challenges juggling the demands of the job and his
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
68
personal life: “Balancing my professional and personal life has been difficult. I can turn into a
workaholic and work 7 days a week, ten hours a day, but the challenge for me is finding that
balance.” Cephas also discussed his struggle to achieve work–life balance: “I thank my wife for
being very supportive and understanding and not resenting me. But, it was hard for the family
with my late nights, bringing work home, and trying to keep up with all of my assigned work.”
Additionally, Grace stated the following: “Time away from my family. Constantly adjusting my
time to my family because that area in my life was suffering and so I would do my work after the
kids were gone.”
Difficulty establishing work–life balance led to a sense of guilt, especially if mentees felt
they were unsuccessful in managing their multiple roles. Elizabeth shared her difficulties with
guilt: “I feel a lot of guilt. I feel bad because there are some days when I don’t give a lot of
attention to my husband because I’m so tired when I get home so late.” Elizabeth shared how
she felt torn between work and home: “Finding balance is one of the biggest challenges that I’m
having in my present position as the assistant principal because even when I leave school and
leave Principal Karis there, I feel tremendously guilty.” Difficulties establishing a balance
between work and family responsibilities inhibited the building of leadership capacity among
Principal Karis’s mentees.
Low Self-Efficacy
The second challenge that inhibited leadership development among Principal Karis’s
mentees was low self-efficacy in their abilities to be school leaders. Uncertainty and low self-
efficacy were often expressed in the areas of assessing students, student instruction, and
instruction for special education and English-language learners (Gewertz, 2012). Low self-
efficacy has been reflected in the research; for instance, Kearney (2010) found that many
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
69
individuals have considered the increasing responsibilities for principals to have made the role
seemingly impossible. Feelings of uncertainty and self-doubt impede leadership development in
mentees. In this study, low self-efficacy among Principal Karis’s mentees was related to
uncertainty and self-doubt, which will be discussed in the next section.
Carrying uncertainty and self-doubt. Throughout their time serving under Principal
Karis, the mentees mentioned having feelings of uncertainty, self-doubt, and low self-efficacy in
their abilities to become school leaders. Principal Karis remembered counseling her mentees as
they felt uncertain and doubtful: “One challenge is people really doubt their abilities, and so it’s
getting people to see beyond what they think . . . helping them to understand that they can do
this.” Cephas discussed how Principal Karis helped to counsel and encourage him when he was
dealing with uncertainty and self-doubt: “I generate self-doubt on my own just fine. Principal
Karis actually helps me overcome my self-doubt because I was able to bounce ideas off her and
she would give me her opinion.” Now serving as a principal, Cephas recalled how his feelings
of uncertainty and self-doubt as a mentee were harmful, challenging his growth as a school
leader: “I think the main obstacle for me are the obstacles of having low self-confidence and self-
doubt—thinking if I can handle the challenges.” Grace also felt self-doubt in her abilities as a
school leader; she felt insecure and apprehensive about building relationships with teachers,
students, and parents: “I felt I couldn’t keep up with all the demands in building those
relationships, but I learned to be more confident by just being myself.” Andrew also struggled
with low self-confidence, relying on Principal Karis for affirmation and to assuage his self-
doubt: “When I doubted myself or didn’t feel that I can become a principal, she believed in me.”
Mentees also experienced uncertainty and self-doubt when Principal Karis was overwhelmed
with stress due to her administrative duties. They indicated that they felt exasperated from
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
70
doubting and questioning their abilities to be leaders, especially when Principal Karis was
struggling due to her own feelings of being overwhelmed, exhausted, or overworked. When
Elizabeth was asked to describe a time when she felt uncertain or doubtful, she replied as
follows: “There are days when I feel very overwhelmed with uncertainty, especially when I hear
that principals who I look up to, emulate, and want to be like are really feeling the stress of
everything that’s expected of us.” Similar to the results of Zepedia et al. (2012), increased stress,
long working hours, and perceived lack of support from the district office created an adverse
effect whereby mentees felt exceptional pressure and became reluctant to pursue leadership
positions.
Discussion of Findings for Research Question 2
Findings indicated that Principal Karis not having enough time and mentees experiencing
low self-efficacy were challenges to building leadership capacity. All of the participants in this
study were confronted with these challenges in one form or another as school leaders. These
challenges appeared to correspond with existing literature on the difficulties faced by school
personnel in pursuing leadership positions.
Not having enough time. The literature validated the challenges that impeded
leadership development among Principal Karis’s mentees. Principal Karis’s overwhelming
workload and mentees’ difficulties to establish a work–life balance were similar to the findings
from Ni, Sun, and Rorrer (2015), who noted that the role of the principal has become
increasingly sophisticated with intensifying demands for accountability. There has been an
increasing expectation that principals operate both as instructional leaders and building managers
(Hargreaves & Fink, 2011). The pressure to be responsible for the performance of students and
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
71
teachers, while also complying with growing bureaucratic measures, has made establishing a
work–life balance nearly impossible (Boerema, 2011).
Findings from this study suggested that time constraints—both for Principal Karis and
her mentees—were influenced by the utility value model, “defined as the usefulness of a task for
individuals regarding their future goals” (Wigfield & Eccles, 1992, p. 63). Based on the utility
value model, the usefulness or value of a task was the determining factor in how Principal Karis
and her mentees prioritized their responsibilities over other duties when they experienced time
constraints (Schunk, Meece, & Pintrich, 2012). Principal Karis and her mentees often had to
work long hours in order to manage all of their administrative duties. This at times comprised
their value of people before paper; at other times, making the active choice to devote a
significant amount of time to engage with school stakeholders perpetuated time constraints.
Low self-efficacy. A delimitation to the finding that mentees experienced low self-
efficacy should be taken with caution. Although feelings of low self-efficacy to lead can be a
problematic, these feelings should not be generalized to all leadership capabilities or contexts.
Mentees in this study discussed having low self-esteem prior to assuming leadership roles; it is
possible that their efficacy increased with time on the job.
According to Bandura (1986), self-efficacy is defined as “people’s judgments of their
capabilities to organize and execute courses of action to attain designated types of performance”
(p. 391). Self-efficacy involves an individual’s perceptions of his or her capabilities to perform
actions related to specific task (Bandura, 1997). Low self-efficacy can contribute to poor
engagement or failure to complete tasks (Schunk et al., 2012). Avoiding tasks related to
leadership development may impede growth because individuals will not have the opportunity to
receive corrective feedback or to challenge their negative self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997).
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
72
Difficulties with self-efficacy have been described in the literature on leadership
development. Clayton et al. (2013) found that new school leaders felt uncertain and
uncomfortable and had low levels of confidence in their leadership abilities. Also, the stress of
having too many pressures and being responsible for the growing accountability demands has led
many school leaders to feel lonely, isolated, and discouraged from doing the job (Parylo et al.,
2012). Low self-efficacy has thus been an inhibiting factor challenging the development of
future school leaders in schools and district offices.
Research indicates that several strategies could be used to mitigate low self-efficacy. The
first way to support self-efficacy is by having individuals set performance goals that have an
appropriate level of challenge when engaging in a task (Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro, Lovett, &
Norman, 2010). Adding structure and support through instructional scaffolding to a practice
activity, such as the hands-on administrative tasks that Principal Karis gave to her mentees, is the
second way to promote self-efficacy. According to Ambrose et al. (2010), allowing individuals
to demonstrate their knowledge and skills through an activity that is purposeful increases self-
efficacy. The final way self-efficacy can be developed is by providing feedback that provides
information about the individual’s current state of knowledge and performance, but also guides
future behavior toward the learning goal (Ambrose et al., 2010). When self-efficacy is high,
individuals who believe they are capable will participate and engage in the completion of tasks,
which will promote the development of their skills and knowledge (Schunk et al., 2012).
In this study, Principal Karis served as an exemplary leader who helped to increased self-
efficacy among her mentees by utilizing research-based practices such as giving feedback,
mentoring, and providing opportunities to lead hands-on administrative tasks. Additionally, her
effectiveness as a school leader has been demonstrated through her past performance, increasing
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
73
confidence among her mentees through counseling and encouragement. School and district
leaders can utilize similar practices to identify, develop, and support more mentors like Principal
Karis, who foster confidence and self-efficacy in future school leaders.
Summary
This chapter described the practices used by one principal to build leadership capacity
and overcome challenges that inhibited leadership development. An essential practice that
increased leadership capacity among Principal Karis’s mentees was building effective working
relationships. Through a shared value of people before paper, mentees understood the
importance of developing relationships with school stakeholders. Furthermore, in nurturing
mentoring relationships, Principal Karis also increased leadership capacity among her mentees.
She was accessible, fostered open communication, and offered meaningful feedback. She also
offered opportunities for mentees to engage in hands-on administrative tasks.
Additionally, three main challenges to leadership development were identified in this
study. First, Principal Karis often did not have not enough time to fulfill all her responsibilities
as an administrator and mentor. Another challenge that inhibited leadership development was
mentees having difficulty establishing a work–life balance because of the overwhelming
workload. Finally, mentees at times had low self-efficacy, self-doubt, and feelings of uncertainty
related to their abilities to lead, which negatively impacted their development as future school
leaders.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
74
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY
Organizational success is promoted when leadership influences, motivates, and mobilizes
groups of people toward a desired shared outcome (Collins, 2011; DePree, 2011; Marzano et al.,
2005; Northouse, 2012). Leadership affects all organizations, including schools.
Knowledgeable and skilled principals who are experts in curriculum, instruction, and
management are vital to school success and student achievement (Hitt & Tucker, 2016; Marzano
et al., 2005). However, studies have shown that districts have been experiencing trouble
recruiting and developing high-quality school leaders to fill principal vacancies, despite having
an excess of educators holding administrative credentials (Béteille et al., 2012; Kearney, 2010).
Educators holding administrative credentials have become reluctant to pursue school leadership
positions because of the increasingly complex and overwhelming workload, including endless
administrative duties, greater legislative accountability, long work hours, and accountability
pressures (Stone-Johnson, 2014; Zepeda et al., 2012). High turnover rates along with the aging
population of principals (i.e., retiring baby boomers) have contributed to the inability to fill
vacant principal positions (Goldring & Taie, 2014; Leithwood et al., 2010).
The practices that principals employ can serve as a model for developing the next
generation of leaders. This chapter will provide a summary of the findings from this study, the
implications for professional practice, and recommendations for future research.
Purpose of the Study
Leadership development through a systematic approach that builds a pool of highly
qualified leaders is critical to student achievement and the long-term success of schools (Fink,
2010; Hargreaves & Fink, 2011; Quinn, 2002). As such, this study investigated the practices that
one elementary school principal used to build leadership capacity among potential school leaders
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
75
within a K–6 public institution. The study also identified challenges that inhibited leadership
development. With the aim of developing an efficient and sustainable leadership pipeline, this
study sought to identify specific strategies for districts and schools to foster leadership capacity
among potential school administrators and to identify challenges to implementing these
strategies. The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of leaders
at ABC Elementary School within the Bryce Unified School District?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Summary of the Findings
This study described the means by which Principal Karis developed leadership capacity
in her mentees, with the goal of supporting their entry into principal positions. Principal Karis
understood the development of the next generation of school leaders as part of her role as an
administrator and recognized the need to build a sustainable leadership pipeline to increase
leadership capacity in potential leaders at the school-site level. Rigorous preparation was
involved in building leadership capacity among Principal Karis’s mentees. Her style of
mentorship included promoting effective working relationships through the value of people
before paper, remaining accessible and offering timely feedback, and creating opportunities for
hands-on administrative experiences. Building the next generation of leaders involved receiving
the necessary support to observe, practice, and understand the full scope of the school
administrator’s role.
The five transformational practices—(a) modeling the way, (b) inspiring a shared vision,
(c) challenging the process, (d) enabling others to act, and (e) encouraging the heart—served as
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
76
the theoretical framework for this study, creating a systematic process for building leadership
capacity. These practices were evident in Principal Karis’s approach to mentorship.
Modeling the way. Principal Karis modeled the way by promoting the value of people
before paper with her mentees. She encouraged learning techniques to build relationships with
school stakeholders (Amagoh, 2011; Boerema, 2011). She fully immersed herself in the
developmental process, valuing people over paperwork, demonstrating her care through listening
and consistent feedback, and continuously fostering relationships with stakeholders. She set the
example for her mentees, always remaining accessible and continually demonstrating the
importance of interpersonal relationships.
Inspiring a shared vision. Principal Karis applied the second transformational practice
of inspiring a shared vision to develop leadership capacity among her mentees. She inspired
others by showing her commitment to both the school and the community (Kouzes & Posner,
2002). She emphasized the importance of building positive relationships with school
stakeholders in order to convey the message that their interests are at heart (Kouzes & Posner,
2002). She worked collaboratively with mentees, demonstrating her care and value for their
personal development, allowing them to take ownership of hands-on administrative tasks.
Challenging the process. Principal Karis also used the third transformational practice,
challenging the process, used to increase leadership capacity among her mentees. In nurturing
mentoring relationships, Principal Karis provided her mentees with opportunities to master
school administration through hands-on experiences. Principal Karis understood that providing
opportunities to lead both day-to-day and special administrative tasks allowed her mentees to
increase their leadership capacity by understanding how to manage a range of situations from a
schoolwide perspective. By using the job-embedded learning approach, Principal Karis provided
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
77
a personalized plan for each of her mentees, scaffolding administrative opportunities to foster
leadership development. Principal Karis encouraged her mentees to take risks in creating,
innovating, and improving the school system.
Enabling others to act. Principal Karis implemented the fourth transformational
practice of enabling others to act by providing mentees with an open flow of communication.
She developed a trusting and collaborative culture that enabled others to increase their leadership
capacity both in terms of skills and knowledge. Kouzes and Posner (2002) indicated that trust is
central in enabling others to act, for without trust, leaders ultimately do all the work themselves,
or they supervise in a controlling manner. Through a mentoring relationship founded on trust,
Principal Karis helped her mentees to believe in their abilities to make a positive difference
within the school. She acted as a coach, listening to her mentees’ viewpoints and facilitating
ongoing cooperation and interdependent interaction (Kouzes & Posner, 2002).
Encouraging the heart. Encouraging the heart through timely feedback was the final
transformational practice used by Principal Karis to increase leadership capacity in her mentees.
Ongoing feedback encouraged mentees not to quit but rather to persevere in their pursuit of
leadership roles (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). According to Kouzes and Posner (2002), “Goals
without feedback, and feedback without goals have little effect on motivation” (p. 319). For this
reason, Principal Karis provided her mentees with timely feedback that was clear and
constructive; her encouragement allowed mentees to do their best in making progress toward
their objectives and goals (Kouzes & Posner, 2002). Thus, by providing timely feedback,
Principal Karis helped her mentees to develop self-efficacy and confidence in their abilities as
school leaders.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
78
The findings from this study also revealed the challenges to supporting and maintaining
strategies to build leadership capacity. Challenges included not having enough time to manage
the complex and overwhelming workload as well as establishing a work–life balance.
Additionally, Principal Karis’s mentees also experienced low self-efficacy, doubting their
abilities to become school leaders.
Implications for Practice
The findings from this study have implications for the education field with regard to
building and strengthening leadership from within. The study identified promising practices for
building leadership capacity that will be useful for school and district leaders seeking to adopt a
model of leadership development. Principals and district leaders may find the results of this
study helpful in refining and implementing their own practices for leadership development.
Principals
This study suggests that principals have an important role in building leadership capacity
within a school. Principals who mentor potential school administrators help to improve the pool
of qualified leaders. Principals may consider establishing a formal mentoring program at their
school sites, which involves identifying potential leaders among faculty and then working to
increase their leadership capacity through hands-on administrative tasks (Amagoh, 2009; Daresh,
2004; Peters, 2011). According to Boerema (2011), mentoring that provides an interactive and
inclusive process equips new leaders with the support to achieve their full potential. When
principals carefully regard their role as an administrator to also include mentoring, a culture of
professional growth and improvement can be fostered to increase leadership capacity among
potential school leaders. Mentoring programs can help potential school leaders to learn the
necessary skills to serve in administrative roles.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
79
In this study, the principal who participated had an influential role in fostering self-
efficacy among aspiring school leaders. Principals may consider using research-based practices
such as setting performance goals, implementing instructional scaffolding, providing practice,
and giving feedback to increase self-efficacy. Applying these practices may contribute to the
development of leadership capacity, fostering positive beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes among
aspiring school leaders.
Districts
This study also found that improvements could be made to provide a more cohesive plan
to consolidate district and school-site efforts to build leadership capacity for the next generation
of school leaders. Districts may consider establishing a shared vision for a districtwide
leadership capacity-building plan. Throughout this study, the data showed that there were
limited efforts to collaborate with other principals or district leaders. Districts and principals
could align their efforts in order to build structured leadership programs. According to Peters
(2011), efficient and purposeful succession planning for leadership development can positively
benefit schools and district offices. A streamlined program for developing leaders both at the
school-site level and district level could provide aspiring leaders with ongoing professional
development.
In order to address the challenges that impede leadership development, districts may
consider providing financial support to principals who have demonstrated a past performance of
building leadership capacity among school leaders. This financial support could reduce
principals’ workload, helping to restructure their responsibilities and allowing them to focus
primarily on the necessities for managing the school, ultimately creating additional time to
develop leaders. Funding from the district could also be allocated to additional human resources,
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
80
such as hiring supplemental support to alleviate the stress placed on principals. Were districts to
offer both financial and human resources, this would reduce the challenges impeding principals’
abilities to develop the next generation of principals.
Recommendations for Future Research
This study examined the practices used by one elementary school principal to build
leadership capacity among potential school administrators tapped to enter the leadership pipeline.
Participants included only one elementary principal and some of her mentees. Although
participants provided insight into leadership-development strategies, future studies should
include multiple schools—both elementary and secondary schools—within the district in order to
compare common practices. Analyzing data from multiple principals would help to generalize
the findings on effective strategies for building leadership capacity (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
A second recommendation for future research is to conduct a longitudinal study that
follows participants mentored by Principal Karis to assess the long-term impact of the identified
leadership practices. Research conducted over time may provide additional evidence to better
understand the effects of practices being used to develop quality school leaders.
In this study, mentees reported low self-efficacy and lacked confidence in their abilities
to assume leadership roles. The final recommendation for future research is to examine the
effectiveness of building self-efficacy among potential school leaders. Studies on means of
increasing self-efficacy among aspiring administrators may provide valuable insight to address
the challenge of supporting and maintaining strategies to build leadership capacity.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
81
References
Agee, J. (2009). Developing qualitative research questions: A reflective process. International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 22, 431–447.
doi:10.1080/09518390902736512
Amagoh, F. (2009). Leadership development and leadership effectiveness. Management
Decision, 47, 989–999. doi:10.1108/00251740910966695
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How
learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Basingstoke, United Kingdom:
Macmillan.
Bell, T. H. (1993). Reflections one decade after A Nation at Risk. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(8), 592.
Retrieved from http://pdkintl.org/publications/kappan/
Béteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2012). Stepping stones: Principal career paths and
school outcomes. Social Science Research, 41, 904–919.
doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.03.003
Boerema, A. J. (2011). Challenging and supporting new leader development. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 39, 554–567.
doi:10.1177/1741143211408451
Boyer, E. L. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. Harper & Row,
Inc., 10 East 53rd Street, New York, NY 10022.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
82
Brewer, D. J. (1993). Principals and student outcomes: Evidence from US high schools.
Economics of Education Review, 12, 281–292. doi:10.1016/0272-7757(93)90062-L
Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What
type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership
Quarterly, 17, 288–307. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.02.007
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2015). A report card on California teacher
preparation programs for the academic year 2013 –2014. Retrieved from
https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/commission/reports/titleii-2013-14-
annualrpt.pdf
Clayton, J. K., Sanzo, K. L., & Myran, S. (2013). Understanding mentoring in leadership
development: Perspectives of district administrators and aspiring leaders. Journal of
Research on Leadership Education, 8, 77–96. doi:10.1177/1942775112464959
Collins, J. C. (2011). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap . . . and others don’t.
New York, NY: HarperBusiness.
Conger, J. A., & Fulmer, R. M. (2003). Developing your leadership pipeline. Harvard Business
Review, 81(12), 76–85. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Daresh, J. (2004). Mentoring school leaders: Professional promise or predictable problems?
Educational Administration Quarterly, 40, 495–517. doi:10.1177/0013161X04267114
Davis, S., Darling-Hammond, L., LaPointe, M., & Meyerson, D. (2005). School Leadership
Study: Developing successful principals. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Educational Leadership
Institute.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
83
DeAngelis, K. J., & O’Connor, N. K. (2012). Examining the pipeline into educational
administration: An analysis of applications and job offers. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 48, 468–505. doi:0.1177/0013161X11436269
DePree, M. (2011). Leadership is an art. New York, NY: Crown Business.
Fink, D. (2010). The succession challenge: Building and sustaining leadership capacity through
succession management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fitzgerald, M., & Sabatino, A. (2014). Leadership succession planning in Catholic education:
An ongoing plan for leadership development, identification, and selection. Arlington,
VA: National Catholic Education Association.
Flanary, D. (2009). Building leadership capacity. Principal Leadership, 10(4), 60–62. Retrieved
from https://www.nassp.org/news-and-resources/publications/principal-leadership/
Fullan, M. (2005). Leadership & sustainability: System thinkers in action. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Fullan, M. (2009). Leadership development: The larger context. Educational Leadership, 67, 45–
49. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership.aspx
Gewertz, C. (2012). Common core training for principals on increase. Education Week, 31(33),
20.
Gilman, D. A., & Lanman-Givens, B. (2001). Where have all the principals gone? Educational
Leadership, 58(8), 72–74. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership.aspx
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
84
Goldring, R., & Taie, S. (2014, July 24). Principal attrition and mobility: Results from the 2012 –
13 Principal Follow-Up Survey (NCES Publication No. 2014-064). Retrieved from
National Center for Education Statistics website: https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch
/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2014064rev
Goodwin, R. H., Cunningham, M. L., & Eagle, T. (2005). The changing role of the secondary
principal in the United States: An historical perspective. Journal of Educational
Administration and History, 37, 1–17. doi:10.1080/0022062042000336046
Gray, C., & Bishop, Q. (2009). Leadership development. Journal of Staff Development, 30, 28–
33. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/j/ISSN-0276-928X/
Grissom, J. A., Mitani, H., & Blissett, R. S. (2017). Principal licensure exams and future job
performance: Evidence from the School Leaders Licensure Assessment. Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 39, 248–280. doi:10.3102/0162373716680293
Hallinger, P. (1992). The evolving role of American principals: From managerial to instructional
to transformational leaders. Journal of Educational Administration, 30(3).
doi:10.1108/09578239210014306
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Exploring the principal’s contribution to school
effectiveness: 1980‐1995. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 157–191.
doi:10.1080/0924345980090203
Hargreaves, A. (2005, June). Leadership succession. In The educational forum (Vol. 69, No. 2,
pp. 163-173). Taylor & Francis Group.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2011). Succeeding leaders: Supply and demand. In R. E. White & K.
Cooper (Eds.), Principals in succession: Transfer and rotation in educational
administration (pp. 11–26). The Hague, The Netherlands: Springer.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
85
Harris, A., & Lambert, L. (2003). Building leadership capacity for school improvement.
Philadelphia, PA: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hitt, D. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2016). Systematic review of key leader practices found to influence
student achievement: A unified framework. Review of Educational Research, 86, 531–
569. doi:10.3102/0034654315614911
Hitt, D. H., Tucker, P. D., & Young, M. D. (2012). The professional pipeline for educational
leadership. A white paper developed to inform the work of the National Policy Board for
Educational Administration. Charlottesville, VA: University Council for Educational
Administration.
Hill, J., Ottem, R., & DeRoche, J. (2016). Trends in Public and Private School Principal
Demographics and Qualifications: 1987-88 to 2011-12. Stats in Brief. NCES
2016- 189. National Center for Education Statistics.Hunt, J. W. (2008). A Nation at Risk
and No Child Left Behind: Déjà vu for administrators? Phi Delta Kappan, 89, 580–585.
doi:10.1177/003172170808900809
Jorgensen, M. A., & Hoffmann, J. (2003, August). History of the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 (NCLB). Retrieved from https://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/tmrs
_rg/HistoryofNCLB.pdf?WT.mc_id=TMRS_History_of_the_No_Child_Left_Behind
Kafka, J. (2009). The principalship in historical perspective. Peabody Journal of Education, 84,
318–330. doi:10.1080/01619560902973506
Kena, G., Hussar, W., McFarland, J., de Brey, C., Musu-Gillette, L., Wang, X., . . . Barmer, A.
(2016, May 26). The condition of education 2016 (NCES Publication No. 2016-
144). Retrieved from National Center for Education Statistics website:
https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2016144
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
86
Kearney, K. (2010). Effective principals for California schools: Building a coherent leadership
development system. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2002). The leadership challenge (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lambert, L. (2005). What does leadership capacity really mean? Journal of Staff Development,
26, 38–40. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/j/ISSN-0276-928X/
Leithwood, K., Patten, S., & Jantzi, D. (2010). Testing a conception of how school leadership
influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46, 671–706.
doi:10.1177/0013161X10377347
Leithwood, K., Seashore, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). Review of research: How
leadership influences student learning. Retrieved from University of Minnesota, Center
for Applied Research and Educational Improvement website:
https://conservancy.umn.edu/bitstream/handle/11299/2035/CAREI%20ReviewofResearc
h%20How%20Leadership%20Influences.pdf?sequence=1
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.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McCauley, C. D., Moxley, R. S., & Van Velsor, E. (1998). The center for creative leadership
handbook of leadership development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mehrabani, S. E., & Mohamad, N. A. (2011). Succession planning: A necessary process in
today's organization. International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management
and e-Learning, 1, 371–377. doi:10.7763/IJEEEE.2011.V1.61
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
87
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Miller, A. (2013). Principal turnover and student achievement. Economics of Education Review,
36, 60–72. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.05.004
Myung, J., Loeb, S., & Horng, E. (2011). Tapping the principal pipeline: Identifying talent for
future school leadership in the absence of formal succession management programs.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 695–727. doi:10.1177/0013161X11406112
Ni, Y., Sun, M., & Rorrer, A. (2015). Principal turnover: Upheaval and uncertainty in charter
schools?. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51(3), 409-437.
Northouse, P. G. (2012). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2009). Schools on the move. Toronto, Canada: Literacy
Numeracy Secretariat.
O’Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F., Chatman, J. A., Lapiz, M., & Self, W. (2010). How leadership
matters: The effects of leaders’ alignment on strategy implementation. The Leadership
Quarterly, 21, 104–113. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.10.008
Parylo, O., Zepeda, S. J., & Bengtson, E. (2013). Career paths in educational leadership:
Examining principals’ narratives. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 58, 565–599.
Retrieved from http://ajer.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage.
Peters, A. L. (2011). (Un)planned failure: Unsuccessful succession planning in an urban district.
Journal of School Leadership, 21, 64–86. Retrieved from https://rowman.com/page/JSL
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
88
Pounder, D., & Crow, G. (2005). Sustaining the pipeline of school administrators. Educational
Leadership, 62(8), 56–60. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-
leadership.aspx
Quinn, T. (2002). Succession planning: Start today. Principal Leadership, 3(2), 24–28. Retrieved
from https://www.nassp.org/news-and-resources/publications/principal-leadership/
Robinson, V. M., 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, 635–674. doi:10.1177/0013161X08321509
Rooke, D., & Torbert, W. R. (2005). Seven transformations of leadership. Harvard Business
Review, 83(4), 66–76. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/
Rousmaniere, K. (2007). Go to the principal’s office: Toward a social history of the school
principal in North America. History of Education Quarterly, 47, 1–22.
doi:10.1111/j.1748-5959.2007.00072.x
Russell, J. L., & Sabina, L. L. (2014). Planning for principal succession. Journal of School
Leadership, 24, 599–634. Retrieved from https://rowman.com/page/JSL
Schunk, D. H., Meece, J. R., & Pintrich, P. R. (2012). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications. New York, NY: Pearson.
Slater, L. (2008). Pathways to building leadership capacity. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 36, 55–69. doi:10.1177/1741143207084060
Stone-Johnson, C. (2014). Not cut out to be an administrator: Generations, change, and the
career transition from teacher to principal. Education and Urban Society, 46, 606–625.
doi:10.1177/0013124512458120
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
89
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2018, January 30). Occupational outlook handbook:
Elementary, middle, and high school principals. Retrieved from
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/elementary-middle-and-high-school-
principals.htm
U.S. Department of Education. (2016, June 6). Programs: Race to the Top Fund. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html
U.S. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The
imperative for educational reform: A report to the Nation and the Secretary of Education,
United States Department of Education. The Commission.
White, M. E., Fong, A. B., & Makkonen, R. (2010). School-site administrators: A California
County and regional perspective on labor market trends (REL 2010-No. 084). Retrieved
from Institute of Education Sciences website: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions
/west/pdf/REL_2010084.pdf
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical
analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265–310. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(92)90011-P
Williams, T., Kirst, M., & Haertel, E. (2005). Similar Students, Different Results: Why Do Some
Schools Do Better? A Large-Scale Survey of California Elementary Schools Serving
Low-Income Students. Initial Report of Findings. EdSource.
Yammarino, F. (2013). Leadership: Past, present, and future. Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies, 20, 149–155. doi:10.1177/1548051812471559
Zepeda, S. J., Bengtson, E., & Parylo, O. (2012). Examining the planning and management of
principal succession. Journal of Educational Administration, 50, 136–158.
doi:10.1108/09578231211210512
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
90
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
91
Appendix A
Participant Recruitment Letter
You have been selected to participate in this study due to your experiences with leadership
capacity building strategies in your school or district. As a participant in this study, your
contribution will assist those interested in implementing or expanding leadership capacity
building strategies in the educational settings in which they work.
The intent of this study is to discover how some schools and districts are building leadership
capacity and creating the next generation of school and district leaders. Some schools and
districts are able to shape the next generation of leaders despite the increasing rates of retirement
and attrition of educational leaders, teachers’ lack of desire and/or motivation to enter leadership,
and the increasing demands of educational leaders.
To that end, the following research questions are posed in an effort to gain insight into successful
leadership capacity building strategies:
1. What are the perceived practices that contribute to building the next generation of leaders
at ABC Elementary School within Bryce Unified School District?
2. What are the challenges to supporting and maintaining the strategies designed to build
leadership capacity?
Identifying strategies that schools and districts use to successfully build the next generation of
education leaders may provide a guide for other districts to follow. Exploring the perceptions of
stakeholders regarding the leadership capacity building strategies may improve the content,
execution and reach of such programs. Finally, the identification of facilitators and inhibitors of
the strategies may help others recognize catalysts and pitfalls for their current or future
leadership capacity building efforts.
Your participation in this study should take approximately two hours of your time over a period
of six weeks and will consist of the following activities:
One or two interviews
One observation of you in your work setting
Thank you in advance for considering my request for you to participate. Your involvement is
critical to the success of this study.
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
92
Appendix B
Interview Protocol for Mentors
The following questions framed the semi-structured interviews:
1. Tell me briefly about your experience and role as a leader at the school.
2. Describe the mission of this organization.
3. Tell me about the culture of leadership in this district.
4. Describe how you came to be an administrator. Were you interested in leadership or
were you encouraged by someone else to pursue administration?
5. What leadership standards or benchmarks guide the identification and formation of future
principals in your district?
6. How does your organization identify and recruit the next generation of leaders?
7. Your school is identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. How
would you describe these practices?
8. What leadership development opportunities or experiences do you find most useful in
developing leadership capacity?
9. What are the areas that need the most development/attention before moving teachers into
leadership roles?
10. What forms of formal or informal mentoring are available at your site?
a. How have these mentoring relationships led to leadership succession?
11. What resources are accessible for developing future leaders in your district?
12. What obstacles have you faced in in implementing and sustaining your leadership
development program?
13. In your option, how can this district more effectively develop future principals?
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
93
14. As we finish the interview, to help me fully capture your experience with building
leadership capacity, is there anything else you would like to share that you feel is
important?
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
94
Appendix C
Interview Protocol for Mentees
The following questions framed the semi-structured interviews:
1. Tell me briefly about your experience and role at this site.
2. Describe the mission of this organization.
3. Tell me about the culture of leadership in this district.
4. What influenced you to take on a leadership role?
5. What leadership standards or benchmarks does your district use to define an effective
leader within your organization?
6. Your school is identified as having promising practices in leadership succession. How
are those practices communicated to you?
7. What does your site/organization succession plan look like?
a. How has that been communicated to you?
b. What has been your response?
8. How have you been supported by the leadership at your site/organization?
9. What leadership opportunities have been offered to you?
a. How did you benefit from these opportunities?
b. How were these opportunities communicated to you?
10. What district/institution/school supports are in place to help develop future leaders?
a. What support have you received from your district/institution/school in developing
leadership capacity?
11. What obstacles have you faced in growing as a leader?
12. What forms of formal and informal mentoring are available at your site?
a. Can you give me an example?
NEXT-GENERATION LEADERS IN K–6
95
13. In your opinion, how can the district better prepare the next generation of leaders?
14. What else would you like to share with us about your experience as a leader?
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Schools and districts throughout the United States are having difficulty identifying highly qualified leaders to fill principal vacancies. Despite the surplus of candidates holding administrative credentials, many are unwilling to pursue the principalship because of the time demands and stress associated with the position. Additionally, high turnover rates as well as a large proportion of principals reaching retirement age have contributed to the difficulties filling principal vacancies. ❧ The purpose of this study was to investigate the practices used to increase leadership capacity among potential school leaders. One elementary school principal served as the case study for this research. Data were gathered through interviews and document analysis. Additionally, transformational leadership theory was used to examine means of developing future administrators within a K–6 school. Five practices associated with transformational leadership were examined: (a) modeling the way, (b) inspiring a shared vision, (c) challenging the process, (d) enabling others to act, and (e) encouraging the heart. ❧ Findings from this study revealed that the principal increased capacity among future leaders by providing mentoring, feedback, and opportunities to lead hands-on administrative tasks. The principal was always accessible and created a culture that valued developing relationships with school stakeholders. This study can benefit principals and district leaders seeking to adopt a model of leadership development.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals
PDF
Building leadership capacity to support principal succession
PDF
Principal leadership succession: developing the next generation of leaders
PDF
Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools
PDF
A new era of leadership: preparing leaders for urban schools & the 21st century
PDF
Building leadership capacity: Practices for preparing the next generation of Catholic school principals
PDF
Leadership capacity building: promising practices in principal preparation
PDF
Principal perceptions of educational leader evaluation practices in Los Angeles County
PDF
Building the leadership capacity of women in K-12 education: successful strategies that create the next generation of women school and district leaders
PDF
Leadership succession: promising practices to develop a sustainable leadership pipeline at a secondary school
PDF
An exploration of leadership capacity building and effective principal practices
PDF
Leadership pipeline and succession: promising practices for building leadership capacity in a K-12 school district
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams
PDF
Promising practices for building leadership capacity: a community college case study
PDF
Promising practices for developing leadership capacity in future school administrators
PDF
Promising practices: developing principal leadership succession
PDF
Preparing leaders for the challenges of the urban school
PDF
Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools
PDF
Developing the next generation of organization leaders: a gap analysis
Asset Metadata
Creator
Kim, Daniel Tae-Min
(author)
Core Title
Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
06/27/2018
Defense Date
03/22/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
building leadership capacity,building next generation of school leaders,changing role of the principal,culture,develop,developing relationships with school stakeholders,elementary,feedback, opportunities to lead hands-on administrative tasks,highly qualified leaders,identify,job-embedded learning,K-6,leadership capacity,leadership development,leadership pipeline,mentoring,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational leadership,Principal,principal turnover,principal vacancies,school administration,school district leaders,strategies,succession management,succession planning,support,tapping,transformational leadership theory
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Stowe, Kathy (
committee chair
), Escalante, Michael (
committee member
), Malloy, Courtney (
committee member
)
Creator Email
dan_kim@outlook.com,kim484@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-506285
Unique identifier
UC11266802
Identifier
etd-KimDanielT-6350.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-506285 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-KimDanielT-6350.pdf
Dmrecord
506285
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Kim, Daniel Tae-Min
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
building leadership capacity
building next generation of school leaders
changing role of the principal
develop
developing relationships with school stakeholders
elementary
feedback, opportunities to lead hands-on administrative tasks
highly qualified leaders
identify
job-embedded learning
K-6
leadership capacity
leadership development
leadership pipeline
mentoring
organizational leadership
principal turnover
principal vacancies
school district leaders
strategies
succession management
succession planning
support
tapping
transformational leadership theory