University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Race to the Top funding: allocation, accountability and distributed leadership

(USC Thesis Other)

Race to the Top funding: allocation, accountability and distributed leadership

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: RACE TO THE TOP 1

RACE TO THE TOP FUNDING: ALLOCATION, ACCOUNTABILITY AND
DISTRIBUTED LEADERSHIP

by

Kimberly Ivey Shinno

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, 2017

RACE TO THE TOP 2

DEDICATION
For My Daughters
This dissertation is dedicated to my four beautiful daughters, Malina, Aly, Emmaleigh
and Elleianna. Thank you to my husband for supporting me during this process. I could not
have accomplished this without you. I hope that I set an example for my children to never give
up on your dreams and to strive to do your very best. Hard work really does pay off in the end.
Education is empowerment, something that can never be taken away from you.

RACE TO THE TOP 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my advisor and committee chair, Dr. Lawrence Picus, for all of his
knowledge, guidance and expertise throughout the dissertation process. My successful
completion is a direct result of his support, leadership and tireless patience. I would also like to
thank my committee members, Dr. Monique Datta and Dr. Alan Green for the invaluable
guidance and feedback provided during the dissertation process.
Additionally, I am grateful for the support of my thematic dissertation group. I greatly
appreciate all of their hard work, support and inspiration. Finally, I offer great thanks to my
loving family, to my husband, and friends for their constant support and understanding.

RACE TO THE TOP 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication 2

Acknowledgements 3

List of Tables 7

Abstract 8

Chapter 1: Overview of the Study 9
Introduction 9
Background of the Problem 10
Statement of the Problem 19
Purpose of the Study 19
Research Questions 20
Importance of the Study 20
Research Design 21
Limitations and Delimitations 22
Assumptions 22
Definitions 23
Organization of the Study 24

Chapter 2: Literature Review 25
Introduction 25
Distributed Leadership, Teacher Enthusiasm, Morale 25
Definition of Distributed Leadership 26
Building Capacity 27
District and School Leadership 28
Importance of the Leadership Role 28
Reframing School Leadership and Management 29
Distributed Leadership as an Alternative Leadership Model 30
Influence and Leadership Success 31
Leadership Accountability 33
Comparison of Leadership in ZSI and non-ZSI Schools 35
Impact of School Leadership 35
Importance of Study 36
Community Partnerships 37
Effective Leadership 38
Democratic Leadership 38
Leadership Framework 39
Empirical Evidence 39
Distributed Leadership Criticism 41
Teacher Supervision 41
School Leader Job Satisfaction 42
School Leader Job Satisfaction Variables 43
RACE TO THE TOP 5

International Leadership Reform 44
International Leadership Recruitment and Selection 46
International Shared Leadership 47
National Concern 49
Leadership Supply and Demand 49
Leadership Preparation Programs 51
Leadership Candidates 52
Leadership Retention 54
Compensatory Recommendations 55
Sustainable Improvement 56
Professional Networks and School Improvement 56
Principal Recruitment and Retention 57
Principal Burnout 58
Reduced Leadership Tenure 59
Leadership as Social Validation 61
Professional Socialization 62
Organizational Socialization 62
Leadership Succession 63
Stages of Socialization 66
Conclusion 67

Chapter 3: Methodology 68
Introduction 68
Methodology 69
Interview and Observation 70
Research Questions 72
Purposeful Sample and Population 72
Identifying Complex Areas and Schools 73
Data Analysis 73
Credibility and Trustworthiness 73
Ethics 74
Summary 75

Chapter 4: Results 76
Introduction 76
Case Study Schools 77
Sampling Criteria 77
Case Study School Characteristics 77
Organizational Structure of the Hawaii DOE 80
Findings for Research Question 1 81
Leadership Strategies 81
Complex Area Superintendent 82
Principal Leadership and Challenges 83
Reform Strategies and Funding Options 84
Race to the Top Funding Provisions 85
Race to the Top Mandates 87
RACE TO THE TOP 6

Community of Support 87
Extended Learning Time 88
Reform Strategies 88
Educator Effectiveness System 89
Race to the Top Funding Realities 90
Lack of Sustainability 93
Findings for Research Question 2 94
Inconsistent Leadership Approaches 95
Implementation of Required Initiatives 96
Culture of Distrust 96
Best Practices to Utilize Funding 98
Race to the Top Sustainability 98
Summary 100

Chapter 5: Discussion 103
Introduction 103
Discussion of Findings 106
Leadership Strategies 106
Scarcity of Resources 107
Inconsistent Leadership Approaches 107
Sustainability 108
Support for Funding 108
Limitations 109
Recommendations 109
Conclusion 111

References 112

Appendix A: Teacher Interview Data Protocol 118

RACE TO THE TOP 7

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Demographic School Data from Case Study Schools 80

Table 2: Total Responses to Themes in Research Question 1 86

RACE TO THE TOP 8

Abstract
The conceptual framework for this study was based on the examination of school leadership and
management practices related to multiple individuals involved in leading and managing Hawaii
public schools during educational reforms. The study identifies effective leadership practices
implemented to support school leadership in complex areas and schools inside and outside the
Zone of School Innovation (ZSI). A complex area is a smaller section within a school district in
the Hawaii Department of Education. There are seven larger school districts divided into fifteen
smaller complex areas. Zones of School Innovation (ZSI) were established to target support for
struggling schools in rural or remote, hard-to-staff areas serving the largest population of native
Hawaiian and economically-disadvantaged students in the state. The purpose of this study was
to determine if Race to the Top funds were utilized to develop leadership partnerships that
benefitted the complex area and schools inside and outside of the Zone of School Innovation.
Also, this study sought to determine the administrators’ motivation to develop strategies that
complied with RttT federal mandates. Methods used in this study were interviews that were
conducted with complex area superintendents and principals. Schools in the study were selected
based on similar demographics including the total population, geographic location, the number of
Title I and the number of Native Hawaiian students. Data collection and analysis followed the
open coding method. Findings from this study revealed a lack of autonomy for money and a lack
of deliverables during Race to the Top. Further, complex area superintendents and school
principals were not trained in distributed leadership and money was not given directly to the
schools. The study reveals an overall lack of sustainability of RttT educational reforms.

RACE TO THE TOP 9

CHAPTER 1
OVERVIEW OF STUDY
Introduction
The Hawaii Department of Education state leadership team is responsible for driving
improvements and setting standards of excellence in the public school system. Areas include
academics, operations, facilities, human resources, technology and more. This group of leaders
charged with leading schools is comprised of the state superintendent, fifteen complex area
superintendents, and select group of principals. Complex area superintendents (CAS) are faced
with the task of monitoring and supporting public schools, specifically principals, to ensure
measured progress in student achievement is attained every year. Although the principal is the
educational leader of the school, charged with leading and managing the school community in its
quest for success, the CAS has a duty to ensure this occurs.
Hawaii sought to reform public education by applying for a grant from the U.S.
Department of Education’s Race to the Top program (2010). Federal funding made available
through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). The intent of RTTT’s
educational reform was to transform schools by increasing educational standards while
simultaneously aligning policies and structures to correspond with college and career readiness.
Hawaii was one of 12 states awarded a $75 million the U.S. Department of Education four-year
reform grant in August 2010 (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). Educational leaders in
Hawaii understood the need for large-scale reform to improve student achievement to prepare
students for post-secondary education or the workforce after high school.
The U.S. Department of Education (2010) Race to the Top program was authorized under
sections 14005 and 14006 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
RACE TO THE TOP 10

Race to the Top funds were made available by the U.S. DOE as a competitive grant program
intended to encourage and reward schools that were willing to adopt significant reforms in the
four education areas outlined in the Recovery Act (ARRA, 2009).
Background of the Problem
Education reforms began with Hawaii’s adoption of the Common Core State Standards
for all students in grades K-12 and by enrolling as a member of the Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortium, (Hawaii Department of Education, 2010). Hawaii Department of
Education divisions were restructured to address the needs of the reform movement and increase
accountability. Provisions were made to enhance professional development opportunities that
addressed new common curriculum requirements and focused on educational standards. Data
governance, a new division within the department, was formed to improve data systems and
develop a longitudinal data system intended to track student data using both formative and
summative assessments at the school level.
Goals were developed to focus on increasing the rate of public school graduates who are
college and career ready, recognizing the unique needs of Hawaii’s Native Hawaiian students
(Hawaii Race to the Top Application, 2010). The intent of RTTT was to ensure that over half of
graduates earn a two or four-year college degree by the year 2025, an impressive goal intended
to improve the economic future and local economy of Hawaii.
Adequate funding is necessary to staff, maintain, develop and implement instruction and
reform in all schools. American schools continue to struggle to effectively ensure high levels of
achievement for an economically and ethnically diverse population of students. Many schools
are faced with budget cuts in combination with an increase in further accountability (Hourigan,
2011). Additional funding offered to schools from RTTT was intended to allow for the
RACE TO THE TOP 11

implementation of systemic reform. It is important to determine how RTTT funds were
allocated to schools and how funds were used to implement leadership strategies intended to
improve student achievement.
A detailed plan was developed by HIDOE to outline implementation of grant
requirements. The plan emphasized five key points to concentrate on improving student
achievement from early education through postsecondary education that focused on (U.S.
Department of Education, 2012):
1. Establishing high-quality college and career ready standards and assessments.
2. Improving longitudinal data collection and use.
3. Cultivating, rewarding, and leveraging effective teaching and leading.
4. Providing targeted support to struggling schools and students.
5. Aligning organizational functions to support reform outcomes.
An ambitious timeline for implementation was developed to guarantee education
excellence for all students in order to prepare them for life after graduation (Hawaii Race to the
Top Application, 2010). A comprehensive plan was created to include the establishment of two
Zones of School Innovation (ZSI) that addressed the lack of student success in schools not
performing well with assurances intended to reduce gaps in achievement. Targeted support for
struggling ZSI schools concentrated on reducing achievement gaps of economically
disadvantaged students in rural or remote areas that experienced difficulty recruiting and
retaining highly qualified teachers. By 2014, Hawaii was the only state to complete the
requirements of the grant on time as promised (Hawaii Department of Education, 2016).
RTTT reforms included a revised teacher evaluation system, the Educator Effectiveness
System (EES), included administrator observations, student feedback and professional
RACE TO THE TOP 12

development (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). Increased feedback was intended to guide
teaching and learning, with an ultimate impact on formative and summative assessments
administered to students. An additional incentive included increased pay for superior teacher
performance based upon EES performance and student achievement as evidenced by improved
performance on state standardized tests. Very few HIDOE schools were chosen to receive
supports from RTTT funds but all teachers were tasked with fulfilling grant expectations.
Increased compensation for those teachers in the ZSI were eligible for EES compensation if they
earned satisfactory ratings and a minimum of 21 hours of professional development. An
additional intervention in the ZSI included additional instructional support by offering extended
learning time for students.
Research indicates that a school principal’s leadership is a determining factor in school
effectiveness, second only to the role of a student’s classroom teacher (Gajda & Militello, 2008).
Similarly, a superintendent’s leadership skills are needed to guide the principal as they build
capacity related to educational planning and staff management. The principal is the driving
influence for important initiatives, professional development, teacher and student morale, student
achievement, and community outreach. Success of the principal is directly impacted by the
support and leadership direction of the CAS in each district. The success of the students in a
school is dependent upon on the principal as the critical force in creating and maintaining
educational excellence (Van Voorhis & Sheldon, 2004).
Educational leaders can have a dramatic impact upon a school community. Each
complex area has a unique culture and set of needs. A CAS brings their unique leadership style,
vision, goals and ideas to the district and the schools who they are charged with leading. Though
there are many types of schools with varying focus areas, and the role of the superintendent has
RACE TO THE TOP 13

some basic similarities from complex area to complex area, the reason that school leaders decide
to commit themselves to the profession and the local community that they serve is a personal
one. A successful reform strategy recommended by Sanders (2009) promotes collaboration
among students, families, communities, and school leaders as a valuable approach to improve
both school excellence and student success.
Loeb, Kalogrides, and Horng (2010) list an effective leader as one who is able to
influence student achievement. A complex area superintendent has the opportunity to do so by
supporting and guiding the school principal to accomplish this goal. Similarly, they must be able
to recruit, motivate, and retain quality teachers in combination with the development and
implementation of a clearly defined school vision and goals. An effective CAS and principal
must both be able to equitably allocate resources and manage the organizational structures to
support instruction and learning. An effective school leader fosters strong school culture and
develops initiatives that lead to meaningful relationships within the school and the local
community to provide optimal student support (Harris, 2007). Further conclusions reveal a
direct correlation between time spent by the leader on organization management tasks and
student outcomes (Loeb et al., 2010).
A key component to reform success is the ability to develop successful collaboration with
team members. The culture inherent within the complex areas and schools can play a pivotal
role in collaboration and ultimate team development. The key predictor of the success of a
program is the principal’s attitude toward that program (Goor & Schwenn, 1997). The attitude
of the educational leader can determine the culture of the school and ultimately whether or not
there is support for a particular program. This is especially true in the administration of special
programs, especially those that are restructuring (Goor & Schwenn, 1997).
RACE TO THE TOP 14

A dynamic leader possesses the ability to alter the world around us and foster hope that
the larger society can be reconstructed (Lambert et al., 2002). The ability to encourage others to
embrace all students and believe all students can learn and achieve success is vital. An
indication of strong district leadership is the ability to provide training and experience for
principals regarding the supervision of programs and instruction. The typical classroom teacher
generally lacks formal leadership training (Elmore, 2007). Willingness to embrace a
collaborative approach to solve problems and implement change is desired during a systemic
reform.
Opportunities should exist for teachers to exercise leadership skills that they may possess.
RTTT provided opportunities for teachers to improve existing skills and develop new ones by
exploring personal strengths and implementing a variety of supports within ZSI schools (Hawaii
Department of Education, 2014). Examples of opportunities might be leading meetings,
committees, fundraising, coaching, and more. Natural leaders may emerge when the opportunity
becomes available. There are those who have the ability to lead even though they may not have
formal leadership training. Possessing an innate ability to lead can be beneficial (Giles &
Hargreaves, 2006).
There are several skills that are vital to be an effective educational leader in education.
Some of these skills are noted by Goor and Schwenn (1997) as effective listening skills, good
problem solving, and one who builds trust. Goor and Schwenn (1997) list the steps to problem
solving as: (a) discussing and agreeing on the problem, (b) define the problem simply, (c)
explore solutions, (d) establish a timeline for the solution, and (e) seek input relating to successes
and failures. Problem solving skills are vital to the educational leader to enable them to resolve
issues quickly and move forward.
RACE TO THE TOP 15

Leadership continuity has a positive impact on student achievement, school success and
school effectiveness (Durow, 2004). Leadership retention can be affected by leadership stability,
job satisfaction and success. Administrators who experience success are not only connected
within their school community, but have also learned to build relationships and form beneficial
connections with the external community. Determining how to maintain leadership consistency
is an important task for each school and its community. A 2004 study conducted by Durow and
Brock revealed that high attrition rates of principals and the shortage of candidates to fill
vacancies make initiatives to improve principal retention increasingly important. The CAS plays
a pivotal role in the recruitment, retention, and development of school principals. The ability of
the CAS to do so is of great importance to all school systems because effective educational
leadership plays an important role in bringing about improvements and advances in all those
activities, institutions, and processes that foster the provision of education and student learning
(Chapman, 2005).
Principal attrition across the nation has been studied for many years. Gajda and Militello
(2008) describe national reports that indicate a great number of schools and districts are
experiencing a shortage of a qualified pool of superintendent and principal candidates. The
scarcity of candidates for leadership positions underscores the need to promote retention (Durow,
2004). Shortages impact schools in both public and private sectors as they struggle to retain
qualified leaders.
Improved student outcomes and overall school success are dependent upon strong
leadership with the school principal as the predominant focal point (Papa, 2007). The CAS in
Hawaii public schools plays a pivotal role in providing support and guidance that influences
retention of school leaders. Effective educational leadership is adversely affected when the
RACE TO THE TOP 16

superintendent is unable to remain in the position for a reasonable length of time. Lack of
leadership consistency may negatively impact reform, revise policies and current initiatives. A
disruption in leadership often inhibits school improvement, prevents sustained student outcomes
and encourages teachers to resist and ignore the leader’s efforts (Fink & Brayman, 2006). A
disruption in leadership may also interrupt basic operational functions. Some of these operations
include coordinating meetings, professional development, managing staff needs, approving
purchases, conducting teacher evaluations, and managing personnel issues. Leadership
continuity ensures that basic district and school operations run smoothly throughout the school
year.
School leaders play an important role in school reform and, ultimately, in improving
student outcomes (Papa, 2007). In a climate of augmented societal expectations for student
achievement, the issue of leadership continuity assumes greater importance (Durow, 2004). Role
change of local site management can affect accountability and alter relationships with the school
community. The changing role of the administrator involves new challenges and increased
responsibility that can contribute to the difficulty of the recruitment and retention of leaders
(Whitaker, 2003). A strong leader will implement an internal system and framework to ensure
accountability while reaching out to the local community to create relationships that benefit the
school, utilize resources, and promote positive student outcomes. Establishing effective
educational partnerships creates opportunities for meaningful interaction among all stakeholders
to best support students and school excellence (Sanders, 2009). Similarly, implementing
educational curriculum reform is a powerful strategy for both students and teachers (Anthony,
2008).
RACE TO THE TOP 17

The Complex Area Superintendent (CAS) and school principal in the state of Hawaii are
accountable for additional tasks and expectations that are added or revised each year in addition
to leading and managing the school. The State of Hawaii Department of Education (HIDOE)
previously implemented a statewide, comprehensive system of accountability that conformed to
the state (Act 238 Session Laws of Hawaii 2000) and federal (No Child Left Behind Act of
2001) legislation as well as the Board of Education accountability expectations and HIDOE State
Strategic Plan (Hamamoto, 2007). Three main goals that were outlined in former Superintendent
Hamamoto’s 2008-2011 HIDOE Strategic Plan that were required to be addressed by principals
were improving student achievement through standards-based education, providing
comprehensive support for all students, and continuously improving performance and quality.
The 2012-2018 HIDOE State Strategic Plan (Matayoshi, 2012) continues in the same spirit,
outlining three statewide overarching goals as student success, staff success, and successful
systems of support.
Educational goals incorporate specific strategies and targets that include promoting
academic excellence; promoting and rewarding excellent teaching; providing better data,
information, and tools at the classroom, school, and Complex Area levels; ensuring safe schools;
improving our communication internally and externally so that we can all work together in
support of student success. Strategies outlined in the plan illustrate how the department will
prepare students for success in college, careers, and citizenship in the 21st century by ensuring
statewide consistently high expectations for all students, teachers, leaders, and staff (Matayoshi,
2012).
Disruption in leadership mid-year may impact the fulfillment of the goals as outlined in
the Strategic Plan. Building strong partnerships may help to fulfill goals that leaders are tasked
RACE TO THE TOP 18

with. Van Voorhis and Sheldon (2004) list decades of studies that reveal the benefits of forming
strong educational partnerships. Benefits listed include improved student achievement, behavior,
retention, attendance and a reduction in dropout rates. The development and successful
implementation of strong schools is greatly affected by the leader at both the district and school
level. A longitudinal study revealed that strong leadership was the most significant predictor of
successful implementation of school reform not just for teachers, but also at the school level
(Van Voorhis & Sheldon, 2004).
School leaders who foster professional teamwork realize results that include improved
teaching, instruction, and professional relationships. Further, the leader who supports a school
learning community not only improves the school climate but also enhances students’ learning
opportunities. Members of a school learning community include not only educators and
students, but also parents and community partners (Epstein & Salinas, 2004). The school, and
ultimately the principal, led by the superintendent, is expected to showcase student achievement
by meeting rigorous standards and benchmarks to maintain status as a successful school.
Superintendent support, school learning communities and strong partnerships can provide
support for the principal in his or her quest to achieve academic excellence.
An effective accountability framework that clearly links authority and adequate resources
with responsibility was developed to improve educational outcomes in 2010 by the Hawaii
Department of Education. The HIDOE accountability framework was developed to ensure that
sufficient capacity exists to enable changes that can positively impact student learning; adequate
supplies and materials are available; and appropriate instructional strategies and sound classroom
assessment practices are known and skillfully delivered. The purpose of the HIDOE educational
accountability system is to ensure that schools are responsible for the achievement of students by
RACE TO THE TOP 19

ensuring that children meet the State’s proficiency standards in reading and mathematics. The
ultimate goal is to ensure all students are able to acquire the skills of a high school graduate and
achieve graduation.
Statement of the Problem
Complex area superintendents in Hawaii public schools are responsible for ensuring
principals are able to successfully lead the school to excellence. Fink and Brayman (2006)
revealed a nationwide shortage of qualified candidates for administration at all levels. Similar
analyses revealed a rapid turnover of educational leaders and a lack of candidates to fill
vacancies in Canada. Factors that contribute to the failure to attract and retain quality leaders
include increased job stress and instability, maintaining a balance between educational
management and instructional leadership, meeting the educational needs of a varied student
population including special education, limited funding, and pressure to improve student
achievement (Fink & Brayman, 2006). Strong leadership and leadership stability are key factors
to ensure continued operation of the school and school effectiveness (Supovitz, 2016).
Purpose of the Study
This study addresses the need to identify effective leadership practices implemented to
support school leadership in two schools in the Zone of Innovation (ZSI) and two schools outside
of the Zone. It seeks to determine if RTTT funds were utilized to develop distributed leadership
and partnerships that benefit the school. The purpose of this study will be to identify the
administrator’s motivation to develop principle strategies that result in beneficial community
partnerships. Relationships between school community members, the school principal, and his
or her connection to the local community will be examined.
RACE TO THE TOP 20

The effects on the school when the CAS has determined the needs, wants, and
expectations of the local community to develop distributed leadership strategies will be
reviewed. Further investigation will determine how both the CAS and the principal identify the
core values of the community as they relate to education, how values are understood, and what
strategies are implemented to form relationships based on what was learned. A review will be
conducted of current initiatives in leadership and staff development that shape students’
experiences and educational outcomes. Participants in this study include Complex Area
Superintendents (CAS) appointed to lead complex areas inside and outside of the Zones of
Innovation.
Research Questions
This study will attempt to identify some of the common instructional strategies,
programs, and human resource allocations in a sample of two schools in the Zones of Innovation
and two schools outside of the Zone with similar demographic characteristics.
The study will be framed by the following two research questions:
1. What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership strategies and/or leadership style
in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the zone?
2. What changes were observed in these leadership approaches when Race to the Top
funding ended?
Importance of the Study
This study addresses the need to identify effective leadership practices implemented to
support school leadership in ZSI and non-ZSI schools. It seeks to determine if RTTT funds were
utilized to develop distributed leadership and partnerships that benefit the school and student
outcomes. The importance of this study will be to identify the administrator’s motivation to
develop principle strategies that result in beneficial educational partnerships, specifically
RACE TO THE TOP 21

distributed leadership. Relationships between the CAS, school principal, and his or her
connection to the local community and its’ effect on student outcomes will be examined. The
effects on the school when leadership has determined the needs, wants, and expectations of the
school community to develop beneficial and useful partnerships will be reviewed.
Further investigation will determine how the leader identifies the core values of the
community as they relate to education, how core values are understood, and what strategies are
implemented to form relationships based on what was learned. A review will be conducted of
current initiatives in leadership and staff development that shape students’ experiences and
educational outcomes. Participants in this study include Complex Area Superintendents (CAS)
in charge of complex areas inside and outside of the zones of innovation.
An investigation completed by the Wallace Foundation (2016) found that a core set of
leadership functions are beneficial for a superintendent to carry out instructional leadership
reform. Core functions identified include setting goals, establishing standards, selecting staff,
supervising and evaluating staff, establishing an instructional and curricular focus, ensuring
consistency in curriculum an instruction, and monitoring curriculum and instruction (Wallace
Foundation, 2016). A review of Hawaii CAS core functions and their application during RTTT
implementation is beneficial to determine their affect on student growth and achievement in ZSI
and non-ZSI schools.
Research Design
Questions and issues raised in this study will be addressed using a mixed method design
incorporating qualitative methods. Interviews with complex area superintendents will be
conducted at each respective school chosen. Emphasis will review the effect that Race to the
Top had on leadership strategies and leadership styles in the Zone of Innovation and non-Zone
RACE TO THE TOP 22

schools with similar demographics to complete a match pair analysis. A comparison of complex
area superintendent (CAS) leadership approaches in Zone and non-Zone schools will be
conducted. Distributed leadership implementation during the period of RTTT until completion
in 2014 and current leadership styles will be compared inside and outside of the ZSI. Distributed
or shared leadership, resources, services, and extended learning time were used to improve
student achievement. It is essential to clearly identify what leadership strategies helped to
improve student outcomes and to determine if those strategies are still in use after RTTT funding
was over.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations applied to this study include that RTTT was implemented five years ago so
many respondents may experience a lapse in memory regarding important issues. Another
important factor is the relatively small sample size may not allow findings to be generalizable to
other school districts although some trends and similar best practices may be evident. ZSI
complex area superintendents are employed in a school district on another island but were not
selected for this study due to geographic location.
Delimitations applied to this study include that the sample size was limited to four
schools within two complex areas on a single island. Limited resources and geographic isolation
are considerable factors for conducting the research because the sample is constrained to the
island of Oahu within the state of Hawaii. A further limitation of the study is that the sample is
self-selected.
Assumptions
This study relied upon the honesty and accurate memories, perceptions and portrayal of
programs, expenditures, and other events by the complex area superintendents in the various
RACE TO THE TOP 23

interviews. Although effort will not be made to confirm the information related by the
interviewees using independent sources, the researcher anticipates obtaining data and receiving a
number of supporting documents that reflect the instructional strategies.
Definition of Terms
Complex Area Superintendent (CAS): The immediate supervisor of the school principal,
one who reports directly to the state superintendent. A leader in charge of driving
improvements and setting standards of excellence in the public school system, including
the areas of academics, operations, facilities, human resources, technology and more
(Hawaii Department of Education, 2016).
Educator Effectiveness System (EES): Hawaii’s comprehensive evaluation system for
teachers that sets clear expectations for effective teaching, provides educators with
quality feedback from administrators and support to improve their effectiveness with
students, and informs professional development (Hawaii Department of Education,
2016).
Race to the Top (RTTT): An initiative offering bold incentives to states interested in
implementing systemic reform to improve teaching and learning in public schools. Race
to the Top has created modification to our education system by raising standards and
aligning policies and structures to the goal of college and career readiness. Race to the
Top has helped drive states nationwide to Funding has encouraged schools to implement
higher standards, improve teacher effectiveness, use data effectively in the classroom,
and adopt new strategies to help schools requiring additional support (whitehouse.gov,
2016).
RACE TO THE TOP 24

Zones of School Innovation (ZSI): Schools designated as struggling schools in rural or
remote, hard to staff areas serving the largest population of native Hawaiian and
economically-disadvantaged students in the state (Hawaii Department of Education,
2014).
Organization of the Study
Chapter one introduces the study with an overview of public education reform. A review
of the literature in chapter two focuses on the history and present condition of systemic
educational reform in public schools. Chapter three will describe the qualitative design,
methodology, and analysis selected for this study. A report of findings from interviews
conducted at the district and school level will be detailed in chapter four. Discussions and
implications for best practice and suggestions for future research will be suggested in chapter
five.

RACE TO THE TOP 25

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Educational leadership is an ever-changing field. Additional demands have been placed
upon educational leaders with the implementation of RTTT in Hawaii public schools. Emerging
educational managerial styles in schools were revised to include shared leadership
responsibilities. Many leaders are implementing revised styles of leadership to incorporate
systems of distributed leadership, also considered collaborative leadership or adaptive leadership
to better manage schools during the implementation of RTTT. The development of these shared
forms of leadership should have a positive impact upon the school leader as well as teacher
morale and their sense of enthusiasm for their work.
Distributing leadership throughout the school community and empowering teachers has a
positive effect on both staff and students. The positive impact of distributed leadership can be
found in an association between a strong school culture and school improvement where teacher
collegiality and collaboration generated positive change (Harris, 2007). It has also been
determined that strong school cultures and improved teacher outlooks have a positive impact
upon student achievement. Hawaii’s plan to increase student achievement included improved
standards for students, an enhanced longitudinal data system, rewarding effective teaching and
leading, targeted support for struggling students and schools, and also aligning organizational
functions to support reform outcomes (Hawaii Department of Education, 2016).
Distributed Leadership, Teacher Enthusiasm, Morale
Race to the Top required collaboration among key stakeholders to plan, oversee and
communicate the reform agenda during year 1 of implementation (U.S. Department of
RACE TO THE TOP 26

Education, 2013). Implementation proved to be problematic due to difficulties experienced with
attempting to hire highly qualified individuals, causing hiring to commence at the end of the first
year. Transitions in leadership roles also posed some complications such as the election of a
governor in Hawaii and the revision of the Board of Education. Changes in the Board of
Education structure were significant because the structure changed from an elected Board of
Education to one that was appointed. Teacher contract delays also ensued, causing delays in
many projects, including the evaluation system for teachers known as EES. A new branch of
service with the State Department of Education, Data Governance, was created to implement and
manage the statewide longitudinal data system known as SLDS (U.S. Department of Education,
2012).
Definition of Distributed Leadership
Distributed leadership is synonymous with what is described as collaborative leadership
or a shared leadership responsibility of both formal leaders such as school administrators and
teacher leaders (Sheppard, Hurley, & Dibbon, 2010). Distributed leadership is further defined by
Sheppard, Hurley and Dibbon (2010, p. 2) as:
An approach in which there are two categories of leaders – formal leaders and informal
leaders. Teachers are viewed as partners, rather than as followers, and leadership is
defined through the interaction of leaders, constituents, and situation. Within this
approach both formal leaders and constituents have an important, yet distinct, leadership
role to play.
Distributed leadership can accommodate a wide variety of interpretations, most often
defined as shared, collaborative, participative, democratic, and facilitative leadership (Harris,
2007). Varied meanings make it difficult to precisely define distributed leadership and have
RACE TO THE TOP 27

resulted in conceptual ambiguity. The term distributed leadership has been used as a broad
concept for any type of leadership that is shared or dispersed in schools even though this may not
be what has been put into practice.
Building Capacity
Evidence reveals that distributed leadership can build teacher leadership capacity through
their engagement in school leadership while enhancing their morale and enthusiasm (Sheppard,
et al., 2010). Enhanced teacher morale, teachers’ increased leadership capacity and engagement
in school leadership has a definite positive impact on student and overall school performance. A
teacher leader is defined as a professional who works with their peers for the purpose of
improving teaching and learning (Patterson & Patterson, 2004).
The formal leader within this leadership framework recognizes that the ability of the
organization to learn is dependent on the capacity of the organization to facilitate collaboration
among individual learners. Individual learners within the framework are often teacher leaders
who assume distributed leadership responsibilities and learn from one another. Formal leaders
facilitate teacher leadership by being transformational and inclusive. They also provide
resources for teachers’ professional learning and engage them in school leadership through
collaboration with their colleagues, participating in shared decision-making, and through the
development of a shared vision and goals for their school (Sheppard, et al., 2010).
Additional evidence reveals that distributed leadership can have a positive effect on
student learning (Sheppard, et al., 2010). However, it is important to note that some researchers
suggest that distributed leadership can lead to negative results for teachers and schools as teacher
can become overstressed by their leadership responsibilities, and therefore, the benefits of
participation do not necessarily accrue to better teaching practice or school improvement.
RACE TO THE TOP 28

Sheppard, Hurley, and Dibbon (2010) conclude that a transformational and inclusive formal
leadership approach practiced by school administrators has a positive impact upon teacher
morale and enthusiasm. Distributed leadership is outlined as the demonstration of collaborative
efforts around the proposed reforms to share duties and responsibilities to improve student
outcomes and better prepare students for life beyond graduation (American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, 2009).
District and School Leadership
The most politically influential leader in the state of Hawaii is the state superintendent.
There are a number of state level superintendents who function in various roles within the
department. Each district is split into areas known as complex areas with a complex area
superintendent (CAS) charged with leading that complex to excellence. It is vital that a strong
leader exists at the district level to be able to lead the principal during reform and restructure.
This is especially true when revising their leadership role to include distributed leadership
(Hawaii Department of Education, 2016).
Importance of the Leadership Role
Although Hawaii has made great progress toward implementing systems to evaluate,
reward, and retain effective teachers and principals, more work needs to be done to ensure that
great teachers and leaders are in classrooms with the students who need them the most (Miller &
Hanna, 2014). Strong leadership will ensure that reforms are fully implemented and efforts
continue after RTTT has commenced. It is vital to understanding distributed leadership as an
existing approach that builds teacher leadership capacity through their engagement in school
leadership while enhancing their morale and enthusiasm, thereby challenging findings by some
RACE TO THE TOP 29

who have reported negative effects of distributed leadership upon teachers and their work
performance (Sheppard, Hurley, & Dibbon, 2010).
Reframing School Leadership and Management
Increased school productivity can be achieved with strong leadership and management.
Strong leadership can greatly impact a struggling school. Another study involving leadership
practice at Northwestern University examined distributed leadership (University, 2010). The
project, Distributed Leadership Studies developed a new framework for examining school
leadership and management practice (Spillane, 2009). The framework developed by Spillane
(2009) incorporates theoretical and empirical work from various fields, including distributed
cognition and socio-cultural activity theory. There are two core aspects involved within his
distributed leadership framework termed the principal plus and the practice aspects. Principal
plus aspect defined in the study acknowledges that multiple individuals are involved in leading
and managing schools. A second focus, the practice aspect, prioritizes the practice of leading
and managing and frames this practice as one that emerges from interactions among school
leaders and followers. Distributed leadership is not designed to guide leading and managing, it is
intended to assist researchers and practitioners who are diagnosing the practice of leading and
managing to aid with improvement.
A variety of stakeholders within the school community are charged with the
responsibility of leading and managing education in addition to the principal. Those responsible
in the practice of distributed leadership may include assistant principals, curriculum specialists,
mentor teachers, and department chairs (Spillane, 2009). The principal’s role continues to be
one of prominence within the distributed perspective although their prominence does differ
dependent upon the school, school subject, and activity. Possibilities abound for any individual
RACE TO THE TOP 30

to play a role in leading and managing within the distributed perspective but this is also
dependent upon the individual school, subject, or activity. It is important to consider strengths of
individuals when developing teams who take responsibility for leading and managing.
Distributed leadership is a perspective that frames practice as a product of interactions within
schools. The practice of leading and managing is shaped by ongoing interactions as leaders act
and staff members react (Patterson & Patterson, 2004).
Distributed Leadership as an Alternative Leadership Model
Distributed leadership is an alternative model being promoted as a way to harness energy,
motivation, and professional learning of teachers and school leaders to secure sustainable
innovation and improvement in hopes of enhancing student achievement (Hargreaves & Fink,
2008). They further share distributive leadership as operating as a network of strong cells
organized through cohesive diversity and emergent development rather than mechanical
alignment and predictable delivery. Human organizations are similar to a web that is
interconnected; each member plays a part and has an effect on the organization. Leadership is
already distributed across schools whether or not the formal leader has designated it to be so.
Success is dependent upon how it has been distributed and embraced by others.
Constructive design is the key to effective distributed leadership. According to
Hargreaves and Fink (2008) schools have many communities of practice and developing such
practice requires the formation of a community whose members can engage with one another and
thus acknowledge each other as participants. Management must be everywhere and, in a
network, responsibility for making decision and developing strategic initiatives has to be
distributed, so that responsibility can flow to whoever is best able to deal with the issue
(Sheppard, Hurley, & Dibbon (2010). Spillane (2009) states that management must potentially
RACE TO THE TOP 31

include anyone within the organization, teachers as leaders, principals and the administrative
staff, school superintendents, and appropriate role groups who support the school that may
include PTSA (Parent Teacher Student Association and the SCC (School Community Council).
You only have one study in this section?
Influence and Leadership Success
Leadership is largely affected by influence and persuasion. Hoy and Smith (2007) list ten
basic principles that affect leadership as attraction, reciprocity, colleagueship, commitment,
expertise, scarcity, trust, fairness, self-efficacy, and optimism. Hoy and Smith (2007) use these
principles to propose ten basic strategies for educational leaders to persuade and influence
students, teachers, and parents. They further recommend leaders to demonstrate their knowledge
in unobtrusive ways to garner influence but that the power of their influence is much greater if
their actions are trustworthy, fair, transparent, and underscore the optimism of the outcomes.
The principle of attraction is based upon the premise that individuals are attracted to
others who are similar (Hoy & Smith, 2007). Creating relationships with others is a simpler
strategy to develop when common interests are established using trust and goodwill (Patterson &
Patterson, 2004). Educational leaders will experience great influence by engaging in acts of
kindness, respecting colleagues and subordinates, treating others with dignity, celebrating others,
and by offering genuine support of creative and exceptional performance. Lambert (2002)
asserts that leaders must be careful to preserve their basic principles during the endeavor to build
common interests. Need citation.
Modeling desired behaviors can be a useful tool to elicit the same behaviors from
students, teachers, and parents (Fink & Brayman, 2006). The principle of reciprocity suggests
that others will feel obligated to respond similarly to how they have been treated. Hawaii’s
RACE TO THE TOP 32

Department of Education (2014) encouraged educational leaders should seek out and form
relationships with respected faculty members to solicit input and earn their support. Horizontal,
rather than vertical, influence of the educational leader can be gained when respected colleagues
are listened to and followed by the group within an organization. The principle of colleagueship
can assist the leader as an innovative program is initiated or by reducing resistance of the faculty.
Similarly, the principle of commitment outlines that individuals are motivated to act on the basis
of their public commitments (Hoy & Smith, 2007). Emphasis is placed upon staff members not
only liking the leader, but also upon the need to commit and identify with the leader’s vision and
goals. Commitment to a common goal enhances the performance of both students and staff
members.
Expertise must be consistently demonstrated by the leader for others to be influenced and
convinced of their ability. Hoy and Smith (2007) recommend leaders to establish their expertise
in context by solving problems and by applying skills and talents. Educational leaders will be
faced with the frequent responsibility of allocating scarce resources. As a result, they must be
able to deal constructively with the fact that scarcity exists and creates value. Limited resources
and information should be used honestly and strategically. Educational leaders will often have
inside information about resources and have the power to distribute them as they see fit. The
control of scarce commodities has the potential to influence others and a powerful role on
decisions that must be made honestly and with transparency (Hoy & Smith, 2007).
Trust is an indispensable aspect of leadership a fundamental quality that a successful
educational leader must possess and exhibit. Cooperation and collaboration is facilitated by trust
in leaders. Leaders who instill trust as a strategy in those who follow them foster influence and
responsibility. Fair treatment plays a large part in the work produced within an organization and
RACE TO THE TOP 33

is a critical factor of how workers feel about their job, organization and leader (Hoy & Smith,
2007). Hoy and Smith (2007) defined two aspects of fairness as distributive justice, the fairness
of who gets what, and procedural justice, the fairness of the mechanisms of distribution.
Involving teachers in decision-making that is in the best interest of the school benefits the leader,
treating those teachers with fairness empowers them and strengthens the relationship.
Confidence is an important quality for a leader to possess in order to demonstrate and
persuade others that success can be achieved. Self-efficacy, another principle outlined by Hoy
and Smith (2007) is a personal belief in one’s capacity to organize and execute actions required
to achieve specific goals. Leaders who display optimism communicate a sense of hope to
followers and the anticipation of positive outcomes, vital during periods of struggle. Optimism
is contagious, fostering change and opening up possibilities for others. The final principle listed
by Hoy and Smith (2007) states that leaders must exude an air of optimism, which is contagious
and moves seamlessly from leaders to followers. Embracing optimism in this manner inspires
both leaders and their followers to solve problems and make things happen.
Leadership Accountability
School leaders have a difficult task managing the educational programs in the current
system. A redesigned system of preparation for school leaders, according to Elmore (2007), will
better prepare administrators to succeed. Elmore (2007) lists four basic design principles to
accomplish how school leaders should be better prepared. School leaders are often unprepared
because they weren’t selected primarily for their knowledge of instructional practice, have
managed to bypass learning how to manage instruction as a result of their focus on different
aspects of the job, and have benefitted from doing other things rather than focusing on
RACE TO THE TOP 34

instructional practice (Loeb, Kalogrides, & Honrg, 2010). Elmore’s (2007) first principle is that
everything should be anchored in the instructional core of schooling.
Elmore’s second principle is that systemic problems require systemic solutions.
Problems that are widespread throughout an organizational system require broad, multi-
dimensional solutions. He recommends that districts implement their own training and
certification programs for the preparation and certification of administrators, either
independently or in conjunction with other districts. University educational administration
programs are not typically regulated by states, making it impossible for school systems to
effectively manage candidates for leadership positions, which in turn make recruitment difficult
(Hawaii Department of Education, 2016). Further recommendations include to halt preparation
programs at universities that are not meeting the needs of the schools, license state providers,
local districts, and universities with strong connects to practice to go into the business of training
future school leaders.
The third principle is that professions have practices but educational leadership is a
profession without a practice. Entry into most professions is quality controlled by limiting
access and to the knowledge base that represents their practice and by taking responsibility for
developing that knowledge base. Inability to control entry ensures that those with limited
professional knowledge will control the fate of the education practice.
Lastly, Elmore’s fourth principle is that powerful practices require strategies; a list is not
a strategy. Educational leader programs typically prescribe a program for candidates to complete
coursework, fulfill an internship, and enter the field as a qualified administrator. Strong
practices are developed from ordered, integrated frameworks that delineate what knowledge is
necessary for the job, where the locus of practice begins, what skills and knowledge are
RACE TO THE TOP 35

associated with that domain, and what it looks like when the work is being done well (Elmore,
2007). Future educational leaders and ultimately school systems will benefit from the revision
of education administration preparation programs, hiring practices, and the establishment of
strong leadership practices.
Comparison of Leadership in ZSI and non-ZSI Schools
Impact of School Leadership
Leadership is about energizing other people to make better decision and do better things,
it inspires more than empowers by engaging them as stakeholders (Hargreaves & Fink, 2008).
Distributed leadership can be crafted by leaders who can help design a culture in which
leadership is distributed in an emergent and benevolent way. Leadership developed in this
manner will encourage the community to engage in a robust dialogue, to make decisions based
on evidence and experience, and to determine the best path necessary to promote the goals of
student learning for all. Distributed leadership has the capability to create a professional network
of communication across traditional boundaries and harness the potential of those within the
existing school community.
Professional interaction is increased when teachers have the opportunity to share ideas,
plan collaboratively, and critique each other’s ideas. Excitement about teaching and learning
increases when professional interaction networks are created and these opportunities abound.
Schools are encouraged and enabled to share and transfer existing knowledge within a
professional network to foster student learning. Additional benefits shared by Hargreaves and
Fink (2008) include the stimulation of professional fulfillment and motivation gained from
interactions with colleagues, to capitalize on positive diversity, to provide opportunities for
lateral leadership, draw and develop evidence-informed, research-derived practices, promote and
RACE TO THE TOP 36

spread innovation, give teachers more voice in professional and school-based decision making,
and help personalize every school as a learning community that adopts emergent solutions for
their own needs. Successful networks have a clearly defined purpose in order to be effective
(Van Voorhis & Sheldon, 2004). Participation can be minimal and poor practices may occur in a
network that is not carefully planned and cultivated.
Distributing leadership responsibilities can help to create support necessary for the
administrator to remain in the profession (Spillane, 2009). Schools have developed co-
principalships or leadership teams to address the need for shared responsibilities and to reduce
the stress level of the administrator. Spillane (2009) states expanding the leadership
responsibilities of teachers might include duties such as curriculum development, instructional
supervision, setting performance criteria for teachers and students, course scheduling and
assignment, even hiring and dismissing personnel as well as a myriad of other duties (Jacobson,
2005). Distributing leadership in this broader based fashion will reduce the responsibilities of a
single individual by sharing duties with a collaborative group.
Importance of Study
Funds appropriated are ultimately to improve student achievement and prepare them to
become productive members of society. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
was crafted to stimulate the overall economy but focused on the inclusion of education reform as
well (ARRA, 2009). States were required to submit each year to reveal progress on goal
attainment as outlined in their applications by submitting Annual Performance Reports (APR).
The ultimate goal is to ensure students become college and career ready as a result of educational
programming crafted from state-developed standards. Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
have been implemented in Hawaii’s public schools, broad reform implemented by a variety of
RACE TO THE TOP 37

stakeholders hoping to realize success. It is important to conduct this study to determine what
strategies the CAS employed both inside and outside of ZSI and non-ZSI schools to determine
best practices for student success.
Community Partnerships
Positive outcomes are realized for schools and families with the development of effective
school, family, and community partnerships. RTTT The development of community
partnerships has the potential to positively impact student outcomes. Increasing opportunities
and encouraging involvement of parents and family members in the education of their children
can positively impact their attitude toward the school. Improved school climate and open school
cultures are results reported by schools that involve families and communities in educational
reform efforts (Van Voorhis & Sheldon, 2004).
Principals have the ability to strengthen family connections and solicit support from the
community that they serve by forming school learning communities and community
partnerships. Findings by Van Voorhis and Sheldon (2004) revealed partnering with parents and
communities improved student achievement, retention, and behavior. Results include increased
attendance and reduced dropout rates, as well as improved student access to physical and social
services. Developing partnerships focused on school improvement can be instrumental in
assisting parents to become involved at school and at home to best meet the needs of students.
Emphasis placed upon the development of a school learning community and community
partnerships focuses on student learning and success. Connecting the school goals with both
home and the community can result in more meaningful school subjects for students, a vital
component to improving student success. School learning communities place an increased focus
on student achievement that includes reading, writing, math, and planning for college while
RACE TO THE TOP 38

working with a variety of partners to increase learning opportunities and experiences for students
(Epstein & Salinas, 2004). A research-based framework developed by Epstein et al. (2002) lists
six types of involvement to focus a well-organized partnership on school improvement goals.
Involvement types are listed as parenting, communicating, volunteering, learning at home,
decision making, and collaborating with the community (Epstein et al., 2002). Well-organized
partnerships encourage input from all participants to ensure that challenges are addressed in
order for all stakeholders to assist in working toward promoting successes.
Effective Leadership
An effective school leader is one who cultivates and uses the principles of attraction,
reciprocity, colleagueship, commitment, expertise, scarcity, trust, fairness, self-efficacy, and
optimism to mobilize others to achieve shared goals (Hoy & Smith, 2007). The effective leader
must demonstrate their knowledge in unassuming ways to acquire influence, but the power of
this influence is dramatically increased if the leader is trustworthy, fair, and transparent and
shares common goals. Distributing leadership appropriately within the organization can be a
successful venture if the principles are applied, strategies are developed, and common goals are
defined.
Democratic Leadership
Distributed leadership continues to emerge as contemporary culture changes.
Standardization still persists but now includes more motivational initiatives, lateral strategies of
involving parents, and communities in education. Schools are embracing peer-driven, network-
based improvement initiatives with increased professional engagement that reveals evidence of
student achievement gains (Hargreaves & Fink, 2008). The distributed leadership dilemma is
often not about whether or not to implement but to determine what kind of distributed leadership
RACE TO THE TOP 39

is desired and what the education and social purposes are that it will best serve. Distributed
leadership is much more about democracy, rather than delivery.
Leadership Framework
Three different frames, theoretical, empirical, and normative, are applied simultaneously
but considered separately by Harris (2007) to understand distributed leadership. Appropriating
concepts from distributed cognition has developed the theoretical frame. According to Harris
(2007) distributed cognition reinforces the importance of context in thinking and acting.
Leadership activity is defined in the interaction of leaders, followers and their situation in the
execution of leadership tasks, implying a social distribution of leadership that is stretched over
several individuals and accomplished through the interaction of multiple leaders (Harris, 2007).
Two assumptions are made using this distributive perspective: first, that school leadership is best
understood by exploring leadership tasks; and second, that leadership practice is distributed over
leaders, followers, and the school situation (Harris, 2007).
The normative view illustrates how leadership is distributed in schools, how this form of
leadership is understood and how it might be further developed and implemented (Hartley,
2007). The reallocation of responsibility and authority in schools is happening more frequently
as schools restructure leadership and ultimately as the demands upon the educational leader are
too large. Many schools experiencing organizational restructuring are building capacity, creating
teams, and placing increased importance upon teachers as educational leaders (Harris, 2007).
Empirical Evidence
Empirical studies regarding distributed leadership vary in scope, focus, and nature
without concentrating precisely on this form of leadership activity. Specific studies that have
been completed are limited in number and have focused primarily on small school samples
RACE TO THE TOP 40

(Harris, 2007). One larger study revealed exceptional results by finding in 100 elementary that
responsibility for leadership functions was typically distributed across three to seven formally
designated leadership positions per elementary school. They concluded that those with no
formal leadership designations take responsibility for leadership activities and also that teachers
perform key leadership functions and routines (Harris, 2007). Further findings indicate that it is
not unusual in schools to share leading and the managing of activities (Giles & Hargreaves,
2006).
Teacher effectiveness and ultimately student engagement is positively influenced by
distributing a larger portion of leadership activity to teachers (Harris, 2007). Two thorough
studies conducted by Harris (2007) on the relationship between leadership and student-learning
outcomes revealed that teacher leadership has a significant effect on student engagement that far
outweighs principal leadership effects. An improving school is defined as one that employs
varied sources of leadership that is distributed or shared, one that continues to improve student
learning outcomes for all students over time (Harris, 2007). Research findings suggest that
teachers who have the opportunity to share good practice and learn together have an improved
opportunity to increase better quality teaching (Hawaii Department of Education, 2014). Results
also reveal that widely distributed school leadership has a greater influence on schools and
students although some specific forms of distribution are more effective than others (McCombs,
2003).
Stable and consistent leadership is needed in order for schools to maintain and improve
educational outcomes (Hulpia & Devos, 2009). Formal educational leaders will continue to have
great influence within schools but distributed leadership initiatives can be implemented to
facilitate more open and democratic decision-making processes (Harris, 2007). In order for this
RACE TO THE TOP 41

to happen successfully the leader must maintain their formal authority and accountability within
the school to ensure that a coherent vision is established and maintained (Sheppard, Hurley &
Dibbon, 2010). The principal must learn to develop, support, and manage a suitable form of
distributed leadership through the process of building supportive structures and an organizational
climate within the school community (Harris, 2007). Distributive leadership is not intended to
reduce the workload of the leader but is aimed to coordinate who performs the leadership
functions, to build leadership capacities in others, monitor leadership work, and provide
constructive feedback (Epstein & Salinas, 2004).
Distributed Leadership Criticism
Criticisms have been raised concerning distributed leadership and the difficulties that
hinder implementation. Major structural, cultural and micro-political barriers in schools are
included as barriers that may prevent success. School leaders may be uncomfortable
relinquishing or sharing traditional authority roles and find it difficult to accept sharing
responsibilities or changes in power structures. Relinquishing authority and sharing power may
not even be possible in some schools. Shared decision-making can lead to negative outcomes
resulting in dissatisfaction for both teachers and leaders due to the increased opportunity for
organizational conflict and the need for more complex communication (Hulpia & Devos, 2009).
Additional barriers to implementation arise when a leader is placed who prefers to complete all
tasks independently and not share them with others.
Teacher Supervision
Appropriate distribution of leadership functions to both the school leader and members of
the leadership team is important in order to experience success. Two core leadership functions,
the support and supervision of teachers, are concentrated on for the purpose of this study.
RACE TO THE TOP 42

Supportive leadership function consists of fostering and selecting a collective school vision, and
motivating and stimulating members of an organization (Hulpia & Devos, 2009). The
supervision of teachers is a leadership function that is related to instructional leadership, which
focuses on the role of the school leader in directing, controlling, and monitoring in schools.
Allowing teachers to participate in decision-making was believed to be another factor that
positively impacted school leader job satisfaction. However, Hulpia and Devos (2009) found
that the participation of teachers in school decision-making had no effect on the job satisfaction
of school leaders.
School leaders must be able to distribute leadership functions to others, as it is difficult to
effectively lead a school alone. Sheppard, Hurley and Dibbon (2010) state that leaders may
experience shared success if they are able to learn to cooperate with a leadership team and allow
teachers to participate in school decision-making. Additionally, the ability to embrace this
model and implement the necessary changes will allow for school leaders to achieve better job
satisfaction.
School Leader Job Satisfaction
Distributed leadership implies that school leaders will run a school together with multiple
leaders who comprise a leadership team. This form of leadership diverges from the traditional
view where one leader functions alone with the implication that school leaders should allow
teachers to participate in school decision-making (Hulpia & Devos, 2009). Hulpia and Devos
(2009) assessed how participative decision-making, the cooperation of the leadership team, and
the distribution of leadership functions affect job satisfaction of the school leader. Results from
this study revealed that the cooperation of the leadership team is the strongest predictor of school
leaders’ job satisfaction (McGuinn, 2012). Greater cooperation is achieved when a culture of
RACE TO THE TOP 43

trust is formed in an environment in which the leader has fostered clear expectations with shared
vision and goals.
School leader job satisfaction is related to many factors. Hulpia and Devos (2009)
focused on the cooperation of school leaders who distribute their leadership functions and work
as a whole school team. Cooperative leadership teams were characterized by group cohesion,
which includes openness of the team members, as well as mutual trust and communication
(Patterson & Patterson, 2004). Additional factors that characterized cooperative leadership
teams were a shared school vision and school goals and the absence of role ambiguity. Sanders
states that team members who share a common focus, vision and goals can find this to be a
source of satisfaction.
Distributing leadership functions and the workload of school leaders can reduce stress,
burnout, and dissatisfaction (Papa, 2007). Distribution of leadership responsibilities can enable
the administrator to focus on positive aspects of leading and better allocate time to complete
tasks that require their individual attention. Opportunities are available to reduce isolation and
enhance professional development, increase stimulation and enjoyment, and contribute to school
effectiveness and improvement.
School Leader Job Satisfaction Variables
Demographic variables and structural school variables were studied by Hulpia and Devos
(2009) and were determined to have an influence on job satisfaction. Demographical variables
that influence job satisfaction include age, gender, and years of job experience, tenure, and
seniority. It was determined that experienced leaders can be quite satisfied due to their ability to
complete what needs to be done. Conversely, this may also lead to dissatisfaction as the
experienced leader may become frustrated with the manner in which the system works and with
RACE TO THE TOP 44

the seeming ineptness of others. Experienced leaders may be less satisfied with their job due to
tiredness or higher stress levels (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2005).
Structural school variables include school size, the size of the leadership team, and the
school type. No significant relation between the size of the school and school leader job
satisfaction was found in this study (Hawaii Department of Education, 2014). Similarly, there
was no significant relationship found between the number of members in the leadership team and
the job satisfaction of the school leader. Team size was insignificant but the cooperation of the
leadership team was revealed as an important factor. School type was the single structural
school variable discovered in the study to be determined as a strong predictor of school leaders’
job satisfaction (Hulpia & Devos, 2009).
International Leadership Reform
Attracting and retaining quality school leaders poses an international challenge for
education. Many countries are experiencing difficulty obtaining and preserving administrators
for a multitude of reasons. Major educational reforms similar to those in the United States are
occurring in other nations such as Great Britain, New Zealand, Ireland, and Australia. A few
results shared reveal greater workload and stress, increased responsibilities, and new tensions
between leadership and management for the principal (Whitaker, 2003).
National reforms in Great Britain have forced revisions of the principal’s role. Decision-
making has been moved to allow local management of schools in the form of either site-based
management or another form of local governance not only in the United Kingdom, but also in
New Zealand, Australia and the United States. School leaders have embraced governance
revisions that allowed them to possess greater control over schools, especially in regards to
budget control and the option to hire teachers. Australian schools have moved to self-
RACE TO THE TOP 45

management, a system of decentralization to the school level of authority. Similar United States
reforms known as restructuring include the implementation of site-based management or
collaborative decision-making (Zaretsky, 2007). Reforms such as these are intended to include
more involvement from parents, staff and community members in efforts to improve teaching
and learning (Whitaker, 2003).
School-level decisions in the United States must include the input of school-based
councils or committees that include both community members and parents. Similar educational
decision-making requirements exist in Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand. Principals must
work closely with the community to determine how to best create programs that are appropriate
for their population. Implementation of site-based management reveals criticisms that must be
embraced. Principals often spend more time in both formal and informal meetings as well as in
the role of mediator.
Tension between management and leadership exists as demands are placed upon the
principal to focus on both professional matters and matters related to teaching and learning or to
focus primarily on the administrative workload (Zaretsky, 2007). An increase in management
needs forces the leader to devote less attention to the role of professional leader (Rhodes &
Brundrett, 2005). Attention must not only be focused on managing financial, site and personnel
responsibilities, but also be given to areas such as curriculum and instruction, forcing the leader
to be pulled in many directions (Weiss, 2014). Whitaker (2003) reported that similar reform
effects have been experienced in countries such as Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand during
implementation. Multi-faceted responsibilities and additional demands placed upon the principal
have increased the overall administrative workload exponentially in all countries studied.
RACE TO THE TOP 46

International Leadership Recruitment and Selection
Recruitment and retention of principals has been affected by educational reforms
implemented in some foreign countries. A study conducted by Whitaker (2003) revealed
multiple countries that face greater difficulty when recruiting new candidates as school leaders
and when retaining those who are already working in leadership positions. Moderate to severe
principal shortages are reported by Whitaker (2003) to occur in over half of the districts surveyed
both in other countries and in the United States. Searches for qualified candidates often prove
difficult. Ireland’s Primary Principals’ Network has reported that 67 percent of teachers will not
seek the principalship primarily due to salary and work conditions, excessive responsibility, lack
of both professional development, support, and role definition, stress and others (Whitaker,
2003). Negative factors reported by teachers in Australia included the negative effect the
principal’s position has on the family, time required to perform the job, and the impact of
societal problems on the position. Teachers in California surveyed also reported higher stress
levels and increased expectations, in addition to longer work days and years in the principal’s
position.
Transformation of the principal’s role includes additional responsibilities without similar
compensation that has contributed to the steady decline in those willing to pursue the position
(Chapman, 2005). Combs, Edmondson, & Jackson (2009) list findings comparable to these that
have been experienced in both the United States and other countries. Principals are expected to
not only manage the school, but also to also deal with discipline, parent issues, foster and nurture
community relationships, hire quality staff, evaluate teachers, and maintain the school physical
plant. Fulfilling managerial tasks such as these requires the already overloaded principal to
devote considerable time, paperwork, and financial resources without addressing student needs.
RACE TO THE TOP 47

High stakes testing, student achievement, and accreditation are additional issues that today’s
principal must face, requiring higher standards and accountability (Fink & Brayman, 2006).
International Shared Leadership
Distributed leadership is a concept that has been embraced in worldwide educational
reforms. Finland is an example of the effective practice of distributed leadership. Finland is the
world’s leader in student performance but little emphasis is placed upon individual testing or
high-stakes accountability. Focus is placed upon learning and defines the focus and the form of
systemic distributed leadership (Hargreaves & Fink, 2008). Finland’s education system is a
strong culture of trust, cooperation and responsibility in which learning and teaching are valued
throughout schools and society. Leaders and teachers enter the system as highly qualified
professionals with shared high status because there is widespread commitment and
responsibility.
Relationships of responsibility, cooperation and trust make Finland’s system of
distributed leadership in schools a successful one. A pattern of systemic leadership is evident in
Finland’s strong cultures of lateral and vertical teamwork, networking, participation, target-
setting, and self-evaluation (Hargreaves & Fink, 2008). Highly qualified professionals are drawn
to the field in Finland because the societal mission inspires them, the public regard for the
profession, and the supportive conditions of the occupation.
England is another example of an organization attempting school reform and shared
leadership. A large project, the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, is an improvement
model that promotes schools learning from other schools. In this project steps have been taken
to implement change. Steps include providing clear strategies for improvement and
transformation that have proven success among experienced administrators, making mentor
RACE TO THE TOP 48

schools available to lower performing schools, combining experts’ knowledge with less
successful colleagues in transparent processes of assistance and support, and emphasizing the
principles of bringing about school improvement using peer driven networks of lateral pressure
and support (Hargreaves & Fink, 2008). A professionally peer-driven strategy is designed to
enable the strong cultures assist the weak in cultures of committed and transparent improvement.
Improvement was found at two-thirds of the schools in two years at double the rate of the
national secondary school average using this model for change.
Building systemic leadership has proven successful in some schools in England
(Hargreaves, 2009). A unique leadership program, the National Leaders of Education Program,
was introduced in 2006 to assist struggling schools. Leadership succession was halted and
instead the principal and a highly trained support staff helped the school’s teachers and
administrators to make improvements together. The national leaders and their teams gradually
withdrew as capacity was built and the school improved. The program is now expanding as
significant achievement gains have been recorded in many schools that have participated
(Hargreaves, 2009). Similar leadership programs are experiencing positive outcomes in Ontario,
Canada.
It has been determined that leadership responsibility works best when it is spread out and
interconnected, rather than to be dependent upon a few individuals. According to Hargreaves
(2009) confident and secure leaders are required at the top. Top-down changes produce a line of
scarce successors. Networked change creates broad and rich cultures of distributed leadership
and succession from school community members underneath administration. Shared leadership
has been proven to have a positive impact not only internationally, but in the United States as
well.
RACE TO THE TOP 49

National Concern
Concerns have been raised for many years about education reform and the quality of
public schools within our nation. Public debate about school quality and educational reform has
been ongoing after the publication of A Nation at Risk during the Reagan Administration.
Continued publications, such as Tomorrow’s Teachers and Teachers for the 21
st
Century, have
been commissioned over the past twenty years that have addressed public concern over the
quality of schools (Jacobson, 2005). Similarly, Presidential administrations have made attempts
to focus on education during the previous three presidencies of Presidents Bush, Clinton, and
Bush, basing their reputations on the premise that they were “Education Governors” in their
home states. Federal legislation coined “No Child Left Behind” is primarily based upon
President Bush’s high stakes testing accountability policies that were implemented while he was
the Governor of Texas, an attempt to hold schools accountable.
Increased concern regarding administrator preparation has led to the formation of the
National Commission for the Advancement of Educational Leadership (NCAELP) in 2001
(Jacobson, 2005). Growing awareness has also led to the need for the development of
professional practice guidelines to strengthen the bond between school leadership and
improvements in student learning. Educational leaders who are better prepared will provide
improved support for student learning and ultimately positively impact student achievement as
well as high stakes testing results.
Leadership Supply and Demand
Student achievement and school effectiveness can be impacted by many factors.
Evidence reveals that school leaders, as well as a clearly defined vision, mission, and goals can
have an indirect impact (Jacobson, 2005). Greater emphasis has been placed upon the school
RACE TO THE TOP 50

leader and their preparation as a result of findings such as these. High quality school leadership
should have an impact upon how well a school performs and is especially crucial for those
schools who serve low socio-economic students who are at a greater risk for academic failure
(Jacobson, 2005). Perceptions that high quality educational leaders are in short supply continue
to increase as the need to fill school leader positions intensifies.
Educational leader shortages occur for a numerous reasons. According to Jacobsen
(2005) shortages may include a narrowing differential between teacher and administrator
salaries; increased work-related stress created by an expansion of role responsibilities; greater
public scrutiny of and for school and student performance and a seemingly endless stream of
legislative mandates that either go under funded or not funded at all (Levine & Levine, 2012).
Teachers are the primary source of possible aspiring school leaders but are often unwilling to
consider administration in light of increased responsibilities and pressures with little
compensation. Considerable numbers of administrators are retiring from the profession at this
time when less and less qualified candidates are available to fill the position. Teachers express
less interest in administration and are either unwilling or unable to apply during this time when
many employers express that those who are willing to apply are poorly prepared for the tasks and
responsibilities facing school leaders.
Necessary changes to current policies related to the recruitment and retention of high
quality school leaders must be made to avert the shortage. Jacobsen (2005) defines the current
leadership shortage as a shortage of individuals willing to undertake leadership preparation;
individuals who have prepared for leadership roles, but who are unwilling to apply for leadership
positions; and individuals who have prepared for leadership roles and are willing to apply for
vacant positions, but who are perceived to lack the skills necessary to be successful (Tanner,
RACE TO THE TOP 51

2013). Primary factors for the lack of high quality educational leaders are the lack of adequate
preparation and lack of those who are willing to take on the responsibility and enter the
profession rather than a lack of candidates for the job. Recommendations to reduce vacancies in
leadership positions include redefining leadership roles, identifying alternative candidate pools,
overhauling administrator preparation, and adjusting financial incentives and working conditions
(Jacobson, 2005).
Leadership Preparation Programs
Education reform, specifically education administration preparation, has been under close
examination for many years. A specific recommendation was made to reduce the number of
future administrators by better preparing them for service. Improved preparation programs
insure a wealth of highly qualified candidates who are ready to tackle the various challenges of
the leadership profession.
Entrance into the field can be problematic for potential candidates currently outside of the
teaching profession. Two major errors regarding licensure requirements shared by Jacobsen
(2005) are that incompetent individuals may be certified and competent individuals may be
rejected. Recent potential candidates for leadership positions from outside of the field of
education include retirees and those changing careers from areas such as business, law
enforcement and the military. Alternative routes to certification in some states and school
districts may be beneficial for individuals who have demonstrated leadership ability in previous
positions. New York is one state that has developed a program to address the need to fill
leadership positions with those from outside of the education profession who have not had
classroom experience.
RACE TO THE TOP 52

Leadership Candidates
Male candidates, leaving female candidates and minorities to be an underrepresented
group, have historically staffed leadership positions. Recent trends reveal that these groups are
now becoming more attracted to school leadership (Jacobson, 2005). Men generally enter the
field of school leadership as a secondary principal, 79%, while women represent a majority of
elementary school leaders, 55% (Jacobson, 2005). Secondary school leaders are often viewed as
those who are better prepared for higher leadership roles like that of the school superintendent
which may contribute to an overwhelming number of men as superintendents 87% (Jacobson,
2005).
Perceptions exist that barriers in the form of racial and gender prejudices have prevented
women and minorities from entering the position of superintendent. However, major strides
have been taken in this area as the number of women and minorities who enter this field has
nearly doubled in recent years (Jacobson, 2005). An increase in the numbers of candidates who
are willing to enter the field may add a fresh dimension to school cultures and the potential
benefits of shared leadership.
Changes continue to be made in the way schools are managed and organized, placing
additional pressure and responsibility on the administrator. Site-based governance places
increased demand on the principal to be skilled at managerial, instructional, and political
leadership (Jacobson, 2005). Smaller schools are viewed as the optimal configuration to offer
students and communities increased benefits. Additional demands placed upon the administrator
include high stakes testing and fiscal constraints. Lack of interest in administration is the result
of a multitude of reasons, some of which may include a shortage of qualified teachers, budget
cuts, overcrowding, governmental mandates that may seem unnecessary, difficulty working with
RACE TO THE TOP 53

impoverished children, an unsupportive external environment, and the lack of respect for the
profession itself (Jacobson, 2005).
Many who enter the principal position are experienced educators who have been in the
profession for most of their career. Educators who are experienced may be better suited for the
profession but will not realize much enhancement in pay if they are already earning at the higher
end of the educators’ pay scale. Qualified candidates who are willing to enter the profession
later in their career do have a wealth of education experience but do not remain in the position
long before retirement due to age. Additional reasons cited by principals for their exit is that
they have lost much of their independence and are frustrated by the demands and pressures of the
job that are placed upon them. Reasons such as these also contribute to a lack of qualified
applicants who are willing to enter the profession.
A survey conducted by Gajda and Militello (2008) revealed that there is an imbalance
between the number of those who apply for administrator positions and those who have earned
licenses to do so. Nearly two times as many educators possess administrator licenses when
compared to the total number of positions available. Twice as many educators eligible should
create a surplus of applicants to fill principal positions but their data confirms that nearly half of
educators who are eligible to do so choose not to. Survey participants who do apply for positions
cite a desire for an increase in responsibility and career challenges, a desire to impact more
students, and that doing so is the next logical step in their career path. Familial responsibilities
are cited as the reason given for reduced female entry into the position when compared to males
who enter the field earlier in their career.
RACE TO THE TOP 54

Leadership Retention
Retention of the school leader in their current position is a critical issue after the decision
has been made to enter the profession (Fauske & Ogawa, 1987, Fink & Brayman, 2006).
Considerable monetary compensation does exist after a move from the classroom to a leadership
position, but only after a period of time and further career advancement (Jacobson, 2005).
Candidates for administrative position are primarily from the ranks of teachers. Increased
compensation, both pecuniary and non-pecuniary, may help to attract those to apply who are
potential candidates (Elmore, 2007). Salary adjustment that is commensurate with the
responsibilities of the position may attract candidates. Widening the gap between teacher and
administrator salaries may help to strengthen the pool of qualified applicants. Possible
expansion of the potential pool of candidates should be reviewed by policy makers to determine
whether there are underutilized resources within the teaching ranks and to begin to look
externally for applicants (Jacobson, 2005).
Attracting and retaining high quality school leaders continues to be a difficult task for
schools. Data reveals that there has been a surplus of available administrators over the past
fifteen years (Jacobson, 2005). However, schools and districts have continued to experience
difficulties locating highly qualified school leaders in spite of the surplus available (Chapman,
2005). Many factors have contributed to the perception that there is a leadership shortage
(Hulpia & Devos, 2009). Some of the factors shared by Jacobsen (2005) include concerns about
compensation, career paths that exclude non-teachers, job-related stressors, gate keeping biases
that may restrict women and minorities from participating in greater numbers, and deficiencies in
preparation. Jacobsen (2005) recommends adjusting financial incentives to adequately
compensate individuals for the responsibilities of the position, provide sufficient support,
RACE TO THE TOP 55

reorganize leadership to encourage greater faculty collaboration and distribution of authority, and
refocus leadership preparation to attract a stronger pool of candidates for the profession
(Spillane, 2015).
Compensatory Recommendations
Adequate compensation may provide relief in terms of recruitment and retention of the
administrator. Administrative responsibility has increased without comparable salary and
incentive progression. Whitaker (2003) notes that efforts should be made to reexamine the role
of the principal, provide on-going support and mentoring in combination with an increase in
salary and incentives. Incentives beyond a salary increase may include housing, signing
bonuses, tax credits, and sabbatical leaves. Further efforts may include fostering partnerships
with universities to develop qualified school leaders while encouraging existing teachers and
assistant principals to enter the position.
Provisions were made to link compensation with performance through RTTT in Hawaii.
Hawaii’s Department of Education, 2014, revealed the Educator Effectiveness System (EES)
incorporates the professional practice and contribution to student learning to a teacher’s
effectiveness and rating. New teachers are required to undergo a rigorous probationary period as
well. Hawaii’s Strategic Plan was allowed time to implement this new plan of accountability
over the first three years of RTTT. Additional EES components included guided classroom
observations using the classroom observation guide, student feedback via surveys administered,
a core professionalism component, student growth percentiles and student learning objectives
(American Institutes for Research, 2014).
RACE TO THE TOP 56

Sustainable Improvement
Sustainable school improvement is greatly affected by leadership succession.
Mismanagement of leadership succession can derail the chances for successful long-term
improvement in schools. Development in leadership stability will help to limit the number of
leadership successions and reduce the number of disruptions. Doing so will help to improve
sustainability.
Effective leadership succession is challenging but possible as the ultimate goal. Lasting
improvement rarely exists without leadership stability or successful succession (Hargreaves,
2009). The successor is often a first-time leader, which can be highly stressful and emotional. A
first-time leader may find a coach or a mentor to be useful and supportive (Giles & Hargreaves,
2006). Leadership succession can be enhanced by distributing leadership within and across
schools rather than concentrating it in the principal’s office; by providing coaching support for
new leaders; by strengthening leadership stability in successful conditions; and by developing
networks to connect schools across distributes to provide leadership assistance and support
(Hargreaves, 2009).
Professional Networks and School Improvement
An educational organization, the Connecticut Superintendents Network, has designed a
community of practice among educational leaders that is committed to better instruction. The
network also operates around a model of professional accountability (Elmore, 2007). Leaders
who are committed to sustained instructional improvements embrace this model of practice.
Professionals in the network are accountable to each other for their work, the quality of their
observations, analysis, advice, and consequences of work completed while working to improve
their own practice (Elmore, 2007). Clearly defined standards of practice for educational leaders
RACE TO THE TOP 57

who provide instructional leadership must be firmly grounded in instructional practice in order to
be effective (Giles & Hargreaves, 2006).
Clearly defined procedures provide a predictable structure by defining roles and
responsibilities in discussions, providing group norms, and by ensuring work is focused in a
productive manner (Elmore, 2007). Procedures are a central and powerful way to structure the
work of instructional improvement and eliminate confusion while separating the person from the
practice at hand (Epstein & Salinas, 2004; Spillane, 2015). It is essential for the educational
leader to feel secure and speak candidly in their environment for the professional network to
operate effectively. Confidentiality provides the necessary support for this work while focusing
on the development of a body of professional practice that models what instructional leadership
looks like.
Principal Recruitment and Retention
Retaining school leaders in the principal’s position has become a difficult task (Papa,
2007). School leaders have a large impact on school effectiveness and student achievement,
following just after the influence of the classroom teacher. Rhodes and Brundrett (2005) state
that it is not only beneficial to obtain quality school leaders, but vital to retain them in the
position as well. Greater numbers of principals are leaving the profession according to national
reports, leaving a shortage of qualified candidates to fill their place. The need to fill principal
positions will grow 20% over the next five years while conservative estimates reveal that
approximately 40% of principals will retire during this decade (Gajda & Militello, 2008).
Widespread efforts to recruit and retain principals are being made throughout the
profession with minimal effects. Efforts must be made to retain principals but the focus should
be to retain those who are highly qualified. Hulpia and Devos (2009) reveal that an exit from the
RACE TO THE TOP 58

profession occurs for a multitude of reasons, some of which include retirement, stress in the
position, low salary when compared to the responsibilities of the job, complexity of duties, and
the amount of time needed to fulfill the duties. Many professionals, including teachers and other
school-level employees such as vice-principals, school social workers, school psychologists,
curriculum specialists, speech-language pathologists, and more obtain an administrative
credential but do not continue on to obtain an administrative position.
Principal Burnout
Retention of school principals is an ongoing problem that is related to job satisfaction,
stress levels, and burnout. Burnout, defined by Combs, Edmonson and Jackson (2009), is an
extreme form of job stress that can result in a decline in physical and mental health. Burnout
may ultimately lead to an exit from the profession. Several factors, lack of student achievement,
financial constraints, student discipline, and more contribute to stress and ultimately burnout
experienced by administrators. Other factors such as gender, age, tenure, and experience levels
have been examined to determine their influence on administrator burnout.
Combs, Edmonson, and Jackson (2009) studied elementary school principals to
determine the relationship gender, age and years of experience has on administrator burnout.
Study participants were primarily female and were randomly selected from a sample of 4,206
elementary principals. Results revealed that the age of the principal, the years of experience in
the position, and gender were not connected to administrator burnout. Consideration was given
to the general morale of the administrator as it related to their leadership role, feelings of being
burned out, and aspiration to continue as an administrator (Hulpia & Devos, 2009).
Specific tasks required of administrators contribute to levels of stress. Tasks that present
the largest challenge for administrators include accountability for student achievement and
RACE TO THE TOP 59

relationships with parents. Accountability for student achievement continues to be a pressure
that is consistently cited by administrators regardless of levels of burnout. Relationships with
parents can be stressful for a variety of reasons that may include efforts to involve parents who
are not invested in their child or education and parents who do not parent their children. Combs,
Edmondson, and Jackson (2009) list additional challenges revealed by principals that contribute
to burnout to include motivating teachers, managing curriculum, training, special programs and
classroom monitoring. Administration, when implemented well, is a multi-faceted position that
requires a variety of skills and techniques that can stress an individual enough so that they may
not want to continue in the position, (Epstein & Salinas, 2004). Citation?
Although a smaller number of principals reported burn out in this study, those that did so
had lower levels of morale related to their work. The stages of burnout include emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and decreased personal accomplishment (Combs, Edmonson, &
Jackson, 2009). Principals who experience higher levels of burnout are those who have less
career satisfaction and general deterioration in morale. Balancing multiple responsibilities and
motivating teachers for improvement are factors that are most frequently noted by principals
within this study as those that lead to high levels of burnout. Principals who are expected to
perform tasks that exceed their ability and do not have the resources necessary to function are
those who experience burnout. Retention of school leaders may improve with enhanced stress
management and better prediction of burnout in order to prevent it from reaching an
overwhelming level (Weiss, 2014).
Reduced Leadership Tenure
Findings reveal that principals remain in leadership positions for a relatively short time
before retiring. Reduced tenure in the position lends to increased administrator turnover that can
RACE TO THE TOP 60

produce movement within the field as administrators search for increased compensation. Some
reports reveal that there isn’t a crisis in the number of administrators that are available to fill
positions, but there is a shortage in the number of candidates who are highly qualified. For
example, the New York State Education Department commissioned two studies that revealed the
difficulties schools are experiencing attracting educational leaders even though there is a
substantial oversupply of certified individuals (Jacobson, 2005). Findings such as these lend
support to the premise that there is a shortage of those who are willing to apply and those who
are adequately prepared for the administration positions revealing a shortage of willing
candidates who are highly qualified.
A study conducted by Gajda and Militello (2008) reveal that over half, 62%, of the
survey participants reported spending less than five years in their positions while nearly half,
41%, reported remaining in their positions for less than three years. A limited number of
participants, 16%, reported spending more than ten years in the principal’s position. An
increased rate of attrition from the principalship is reportedly higher than in prior years.
Reduced time spent in the position intensifies the phenomenon of the principalship’s revolving
door, contributing to the difficulty of finding and retaining high quality replacements.
Chapman (2005) lists recommendations that include recruiting educators to enter into the
field of leadership earlier in their career. A younger candidate pool will ensure that additional
years will be spent in the position before retirement age is reached. In addition, those who enter
the profession earlier in their career will experience a greater pay increase if they transfer into
administration before realizing their earning potential. Clear focus on the role of the
administrator as the instructional leader during the recruitment process is also recommended
(Fink & Brayman, 2006). Assurance that focus will not only be given to the principal as
RACE TO THE TOP 61

manager, but also to the practice of teaching and learning will inspire some educators to make
the leap to administration. Creative recruitment efforts that targets younger candidates will assist
in providing directional help in resolving the problem of finding and retaining quality
administrators (Chapman, 2005).
Leadership as Social Validation
Successful leaders are those who interact with and utilize the knowledge and skills of the
group, (Epstein & Salinas, 2004). Leaders must work to fit into the cohesive work group of the
school while maintaining the need to remain different and distinct so as to contribute creatively
to the growth and development of the group. The power of influence is not only instrumental for
a school leader, but it is also reciprocal.
Leadership change can be a difficult time for principals, teachers, students, and district
personnel (Fink & Brayman, 2006). Fauske and Ogawa (1987) state that apprehension and fear
of the unknown may initially exist after the appointment of a new principal. All stakeholders
hold high expectations of the school leader when this occurs and are more likely to do so when
the turnover rate is high as the leader is transferred from one assignment to another (Sheppard,
Hurley, & Dibbon, 2010). A new leader builds relationships with the school community in the
beginning of the assignment that will shape their interaction into a dependable and expected
pattern. Established patterns and interactions will be used to judge the legitimacy of current
events and future actions as well as determine the future influence the leader will have on others
(Hart, 1994). If all this info is from Hart, add another citation at the beginning.
Immediate demands and the need for resolution exist as soon as an administrator new to
the position is placed (Hargreaves, 2009). Demands can be overwhelming and detract from the
immediate development of teaching and learning and developing a strong educational system.
RACE TO THE TOP 62

Administrators may face demands that include the need to schedule classes, budget for and
implement extra-curricular activities, and resolve concerns as they arise. Pressures such as these
may force the new leader to discard prescribed skills and knowledge to quickly resolve issues as
they arise and make connections with the school community. Understanding one’s own core
values, beliefs and goals are vital to the new leader to enable them to effectively face challenges
while making realistic and suitable decisions (Hulpia & Devos, 2009). Additionally, it is
important to examine and consider the history of events prior to placement, as each new
leadership appointment is unique to the principal who is placed.
Professional Socialization
Professional socialization is the process in which an individual acquires the ability,
knowledge and character necessary to be a member of their profession. A school administrator
begins the process of professional socialization upon entrance to teaching, as they progress
through an administrative training preparation program, and finally upon placement in an
administrative assignment (Hart, 1991). School leadership is interactive by nature as the school
leader enters and immediately strives to fit in, adapt, and secure acceptance, fulfilling a universal
human need to fit in (Hart, 1994).
Organizational Socialization
Developing relationships with subordinates plays an important role on their success as an
administrator cannot function as a soloist. Evidence reveals that both the leader and subordinate
are able to influence one another. Actions of subordinates do cause leaders to perceive them in a
specific manner and act accordingly (Hart, 1994). One popular model of leadership shared by
Hart (1994) is the cultural and symbolic leadership model. Groups are dependent upon the
leader in this model and follow their direction in an almost mystical fashion. Socialization
RACE TO THE TOP 63

occurs as soon as the administrator enters the school or social setting. Social roles are rapidly
determined by new administrators to afford them the ability to possess authority and support in
their new school setting. Adjustments must be constantly made during the process of
socialization as the principal adapts to the new expectations of the school and towards its’
common needs and goals.
Organizational socialization is a powerful form of adult socialization that occurs when
professionals move from one role to another within or between organizations (Hart, 1991). An
example of this in administration is when the principal enters a new school. Socialization of this
nature is so powerful due to the need to fit into the immediate work environment that it will often
overwhelm the effects of professional socialization. Organizational socialization differs from
professional socialization as it teaches an administrator the knowledge, values, and behaviors
that are necessary to fulfill a specific role within a particular organization (Hart, 1994). Stronger
organizational norms quickly replace those that were learned during professional socialization as
social and personal reinforcement are experienced in an organization for fulfillment of
immediate expectations. Schools remain somewhat static and often retain most of the staff as
principals come and go which forces the new leader to conform to the organization that they
enter. New administrators must be integrated into the school group and have much to achieve in
order to have an impact upon those who they will lead.
Leadership Succession
Changes in leadership can be positive and sustainable if careful attention is paid to
leadership succession. Five obstacles stand in the way of effective leadership succession
according to (Hargreaves, 2009). The five obstacles include poorly planned succession, badly
managed succession transitions; succession that is often on the wrong frequency, succession
RACE TO THE TOP 64

planning that has failed to consider the emotional aspects, and succession that is not treated as a
systemic problem. Hargreaves (2009) reveals succession planning is usually a reactive event
rather than a pro-active process when the school leader leaves the organization. Many principals
leave or are transferred before their work is done and initiatives are embraced by the staff.
Leadership is not just about an individual leader; it is a system that affects many aspects within
the school. Leadership must be connected throughout the system to be effective.
Leadership succession in schools can have a profound impact upon the school and the
students that it serves. Special consideration and planning should be spent on the planning and
replacement of school leaders to avert a leadership crisis (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2005). Sparse
research information regarding leadership succession and succession planning is available in
educational literature. Little attention is often given to leadership succession and succession
planning for continuity in schools. Succession has the potential to reinforce the sense of distance
between teachers and the principal (Fauske & Ogawa, 1987). Careful planning and open
communication may help to bridge this gap while helping to ease the successor into the
organization.
School size is a condition identified by Rhodes and Brundrett (2005) that affects
leadership succession and succession planning because there is less opportunity for leadership
development through work shadowing. Building a pool of possible successors within the school
makes succession planning impossible when staff turnover is high and there are limited
development opportunities. However, some positive aspects involved with smaller school size is
that the staff is required to work together in teams and staff members address a wider variety of
roles than they would in a larger setting (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2005). An internal pool of
potential successors enables greater internal movement flexibility between jobs and enhances the
RACE TO THE TOP 65

possibilities for succession planning. Formation of teams within schools fosters the beginning of
distributed leadership within the school.
Patterns of succession in schools can offer either continuity or discontinuity with current
improvement efforts and initiatives within a school (Rhodes & Brundrett, 2005). Perceptions of
school leaders in regards to succession planning affects how the leader themselves prepare for
their exit from the school. Actively planning for leadership succession, while difficult, can be
instrumental in building staff confidence, ensuring continuity of improvement efforts within the
school, and developing the existing talent pool of staff members that may be an appropriate
successor.
According to Hart (1991) studies reveal that leadership change is as high as 7%-10% per
year, while others reveal that a leader changes assignment six to eight times in their career.
Changes in leadership can be highly disruptive within a school and can have an impact upon
school performance. Hart states that leader succession is a disruptive event that changes the line
of communication, realigns relationships of power, affects decision-making, and generally
disturbs the equilibrium of normal activities. Recommendations to ease the transition and aid in
the succession of the newly appointed administrator shared by are additional time for the
administrator to visit their new school that include carefully planned preparatory visits to the new
placement, an introduction course, arrangement for the departing administrator to create
comprehensive written reports for their successor, and the assignment of a veteran mentor. The
assignment of a mentor has great influence on the new administrator both formally and
informally.
Advantages exist from succession styles as the new leader takes over. Two succession
styles are the formal assignment of a mentor and informal socialization. Formally assigning a
RACE TO THE TOP 66

mentor ensures that the new leader will continue with the existing order. Informal socialization
can lead to amplified creativity and innovation but, according to Hart (1991), more extreme
responses are produced in either the area of custodial orientation, a continuation of the existing
order, or in the area of innovative direction. Another important aspect during succession is for
the new administrator to master specific knowledge content that is either in an established or
flexible order, known as random socialization. Hart (1991) lists serial socialization as a final
tactic that employs social forces to manipulate socialization outcomes when the new principal
takes over. A principal who follows the path of the previous leader during succession may
experience serial socialization.
Stages of Socialization
Succession can be shaped and the outcome can be affected by the stages that the leader
moves through as they adjust to their new position. Several stages of socialization according to
Hart (1991) exist during succession beginning with the encounter stage that requires much
learning of the new leader dependent upon three factors. Factors include the amount of change
between the new and old position, the carry-over that involves others, and any expectations, both
positive and negative, that are unmet. New leaders must anticipate and confront these factors in
order to embrace their role and execute any necessary changes. Adjusting and fitting into the
school culture is the next stage the leader must navigate by reaching and maintaining an
understanding of their new role.
Stability emerges during the third and final stage when a balance between both superiors
and subordinates is simultaneously managed as the leader has settled in. Successful transition is
finalized during this last in two steps as educational leadership and professional actualization
(Hart, 1994). An administrator has become an educational leader when they are able to make
RACE TO THE TOP 67

advancement towards career and professional growth not only for themselves, but for teachers as
well, while working to achieve positive school outcomes. Professional actualization is achieved
when the leader is able to transform their personal vision and goals to be collegial, rather than
maintaining those that are not embraced by the school faculty. Leaders who are established and
integrated are able to determine what the best action is for their school without worries about
perception or clinging to a prior vision that might have been established upon entry to the
position.
Conclusion
With the push for education systems reform in progress throughout the Department of
Education in Hawaii, this review of the literature attempts to identify and link various leadership
strategies presented in the latest research with effective resource allocation methods to identify
complex areas and schools investment in terms of student performance and increased learning.
The current demand for increased student achievement and eventual graduation, the effective use
of leadership strategies and efficient use of resources to reform instruction is more valuable than
ever, particularly for low-performing schools in complex areas not meeting expectations. As a
result, this study seeks to better understand the unique challenges facing complex areas,
specifically studying complex area superintendent leadership (CAS) strategies. Further
examination will determine how strategies relate to the task of monitoring and supporting public
schools, specifically principals, to ensure measured progress in student achievement is attained
every year.

RACE TO THE TOP 68

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
This chapter presents an overview of how the study will be conducted, including a brief
review of the purpose of the study and the research questions, how the sample complex areas and
schools will be selected, the instruments that will be used and how data will be collected and
analyzed. Individual research questions, prospective samples, instruments used in data collection
and the planned data analysis of the study are detailed as well. The study focuses on significant
Hawaii Department of Education policy implications at the state, district and school level to
implement system education reform to improve student success. Emphasis is placed upon three
complex area superintendents (CAS) in two complex areas, one complex located inside the Zone
of Innovation and one outside of the Zone. Three superintendents will be studied due to the
replacement of one superintendent during the RTTT grant period. Careful attention is given to
superintendent leadership and related principal leadership strategies at four elementary schools
within the two complex areas that were selected.
In addition, focus is special attention is given to educational systems to determine the
affects of Race to the Top funding on resource allocation and student achievement in both Zone
and non-Zone schools. Best practices detailing the effective allocation of resources to schools
and district to best support improved student academic outcomes will be pursued to provide
potential new knowledge to policy makers and practitioners.
Additional focus will investigate how the CAS in Hawaii is responsible for driving
improvements and setting standards of excellence in the public school system. Hawaii’s public
school system is a unique and isolated educational setting. CAS responsibilities are multi-
RACE TO THE TOP 69

faceted, including academics, operations, facilities, human resources, technology and more. This
group of leaders charged with leading schools is comprised of the state superintendent, fifteen
complex area superintendents, and numerous principals.
This study also investigates leadership strategies used in complex areas and schools that
are exhibiting improvement in student achievement by utilizing their resources. Current
literature available on utilizing leadership strategies is extensive and a large amount is based on
best practices. Complex area superintendents (CAS) should employ best practices found in the
literature to aid in leadership strategies revision to support principals and schools.
Superintendents are faced with the task of monitoring and supporting public schools, specifically
principals, to ensure measured progress in student achievement is attained every year. As
previously stated, although the principal is the educational leader of the school, charged with
leading and managing the school community in its quest for success, the CAS has a duty to
ensure this occurs.
Methodology
An investigation will be completed to explore how the Hawaii Department of Education
implemented system reform to fulfill RTTT grant requirements. The intent of RTTT’s
educational reform was to transform schools by increasing educational standards while
simultaneously aligning policies and structures to correspond with college and career readiness.
A general qualitative approach will be implemented for the purpose of this investigation. Further
examination of CAS leadership strategies and support provided to principals and teachers will be
reviewed. A determination of related themes will be investigated in order to compile the data
into groups of information and reveal possible findings (Creswell, 2003, 2007).
RACE TO THE TOP 70

This qualitative study will utilize a multiple methods research design supplemented by
both interviews and field observations that will include complex area superintendents, school
administrators and teachers to explore the manner in which Race to the Top reform impacted
leadership style and strategies. A review of possible leadership approach revisions as a result of
RTTT will be conducted. Superintendents, principals and other instructional leaders typically
are responsible for determining the school’s instructional focus and working with staff to achieve
the educational goals established. Examining complex areas and individual schools will supply
information about how resources were directly used improve student outcomes.
The researcher will search for consistent phrases, expressions and ideas common among
participants to be interviewed. Observation will be conducted to reveal related themes within the
participants, complex areas and school settings. This study will explore how input from the
CAS, school level leaders, and teachers was solicited and then included in educational reform
and leadership style revision.
Interview and Observation
Conducting an interview and performing observations will allow the researcher to plan
the design of the study. Interviews will be conducted based on previously developed qualitative
research questions developed around a theme. Interviews, according to Patton (2002), are
conducted based on the belief that meaningful and knowable stories are revealed by those who
are interviewed. Patton (2002) also indicates that the evaluator must learn how to listen when
knowledgeable people are talking. Transcribing the interview material for analysis will allow the
researcher to carefully review and categorize information collected. The researcher will then be
able to analyze the data collected to determine the purpose and the appropriate method of
analysis.
RACE TO THE TOP 71

The researcher will establish rapport with the interview candidate during the onset of the
interview. A determination about whether or not to record the interview or the observation will
be made prior to sitting down with the participant. Full disclosure will be made about any
recording to ensure that the participant was aware of its' purpose and how it would be utilized. It
is important for the researcher to encourage the participant to be actively involved in the
interview as soon as the researcher began to conduct the session and to establish a good rhythm
throughout the interview.
Factual, simpler questions will be asked initially, prior to the questions that deal with
more controversial matters. Doing so may allow the researcher to experience greater success as
a result and put the participant at ease when rapport was established. Fact-based questions will
be strategically inserted throughout the interview. The researcher's inquiry will follow a specific
chronology, basing questions about the present prior to questions that involve previous events or
the future. Final interview questions will be those that allow the participant to provide any
additional insight of their own on the topic and include their personal impressions of the
interview itself. Interviews questions will be carefully worded and arranged using the
standardized open-ended approach described by Patton (2002).
The qualitative research interview and observation are necessary tools used to answer
questions and to determine meanings of essential themes in the life of the participant. The main
goal of the interview is to determine the meaning of what the participant will share with the
researcher. The qualitative research interview will seek not only the meaning to the participant,
but will also attempt to discover factual information to help answer the research questions. An
interview can be a beneficial tool used to obtain the story surrounding a participant’s
experiences, (Patton, 2002). It is hoped the interview process will aid the researcher in pursuing
RACE TO THE TOP 72

more comprehensive information about the research topic. Interviews will be designed to be
available as a useful tool for the researcher to follow-up with certain participants if further
investigation was necessary.
Observation will be used as a data collection approach in which the researcher will be
able to view the environment of study. The researcher will be able to view participants in natural
settings and also in social situations for a specific period of time. Observations will be
conducted as a participant observer and as a non-participant with limited interaction with those
who are observed.
To be better understand the decisions and strategies used by schools, the study set out to
answer these two research questions:
Research Questions
1. What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership strategies and/or leadership style
in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the zone?
2. What changes were observed in these leadership approaches when Race to the Top
funding ended?
Purposeful Sample and Population
This study will use a purposive sample to select a population of interest within two
district complex areas and four elementary schools. Two of the elementary schools are schools
within the Zone of Innovation (ZSI) that received RTTT grant monies to implement reform.
Two of the elementary schools with similar demographics are outside of the zone. A comparison
of a complex area and the CAS who leads the complex inside of the Zone and an area outside of
the Zone will be included. Four elementary schools will be selected according to the percentage
of students participating in the free and reduced lunch program as well as the percentage of
RACE TO THE TOP 73

Native Hawaiian students attending the school as reported by HIDOE. This study focused on the
range of successes that each school experienced with RTTT funding inside of the Zone or with
current and often limited funding outside of the Zone. All four schools served students in grades
kindergarten through sixth grade in the public sector of education in Hawaii.
Identifying Complex Areas and Schools
Complex areas and elementary schools were identified using the HIDOE report revealing
the RTTT grant recipients in the Zones of Intervention (ZSI). Complex areas and elementary
schools outside of the Zone were selected based upon the enrollment of students with similar
demographics. Two different complex areas were selected due to their similarities in student
population however this study focused on their similarities and differences in areas such as;
leadership strategies, support offered for school leaders, resource allocation, professional
development for administrators and teachers, and the effect on student achievement.
Data Analysis
Data will be analyzed immediately following each CAS and principal interview.
Information gathered from the school site visits will be applied to an individual case study that
thoroughly describes the district and corresponding schools. An additional interview with an
educational leader will be requested if it is determined that any information was missing or
further clarification is necessary (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992).
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Glesne and Peshkin (1992) state that establishing trustworthiness and considering study
limitations are major factors in accurately reflecting the integrity of the researcher's study. They
further state that use of triangulation also contributes to the trustworthiness of the study findings.
RACE TO THE TOP 74

A revision of the research questions might be warranted if the researcher determines that his/her
results are not going to be possible in any fashion or if is determined that the questions
developed are not answerable (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher must realize the need to revise
his/her guiding questions if necessary as the study evolves and data themes emerge (Merriam,
2009). All participants will be informed that an observation will be conducted. Field notes will
be taken during all observations. Notes will be transcribed into a legible format after the
observations are completed.
Interviews will be conducted at both the district and school level. Each interview
location will be predetermined by the interviewee to accommodate participant needs and for
convenience. Participant convenience and level of comfort will be a consideration for
conducting the interviews in locations requested and at the time each will be performed. Careful
management of the interview process is necessary regardless of which interview strategy is used
according to Patton (2002).
Ethics
It is the researcher’s responsibility to take precautionary measures to employ ethical
behavior at all times and to ensure validity. Careful consideration will be given to ensure the
researcher did no harm, protected privacy and anonymity, maintained confidentiality, obtained
consent, established rapport and was not intrusive. Internal validity addresses the accuracy of the
data by utilizing participant involvement and implementing triangulation (Creswell, 2007).
External validity addresses the areas of reliability and generalization. He further states that the
focus of qualitative research is designed to develop distinct impressions and understandings of
events, not to generalize the findings. Creswell (2007) reveals that replication of a study is more
likely to be successful when protocols are understandable and researcher biases are clearly
RACE TO THE TOP 75

stated.
Summary
This chapter described the methodology that will be utilized to conduct this study and
assist in answering the two research questions. Information provided described the population
and sample, how schools were identified, instrumentation and data collection tools, and a data
analysis protocol. Data discovered in this study may have important results that affect
educational policy to further address the allocation of resources to improve student performance
and reduce the achievement gap. The following chapter will address the findings from the site
visits and how those findings relate to the research questions.

RACE TO THE TOP 76

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Introduction
The study was conducted to explore the impact Race to the Top (RttT) had on leadership
styles and strategies in the Hawaii Department of Education. It further examines how funding
and resources were allocated during and after RttT. Attention was given to the sustainability of
programs, funding, and initiatives designed by the state of Hawaii in response to RttT federal
mandates. In this chapter, the findings that emerged from interviews are presented and organized
according to the relevant aspects of the conceptual framework. Two research questions were
used as a framework for conducting interviews to identify findings in this study.
This chapter presents findings obtained through interviews with complex area
superintendents, school principals, and case studies of four sample elementary schools on the
island of Oahu. One complex area included two Zone of School Innovation (ZSI) schools and
the other area included two non-Zone of School Innovation (non-ZSI) schools. The study sought
to determine if Race to the Top funds were utilized to develop distributed leadership and
partnerships that benefitted the complex area and schools. The purpose of this study was to
identify the administrators’ motivation to develop strategies that complied with RttT federal
mandates. Relationships between complex area superintendents, school community members
and staff, school principals, and the principals’ connection to the local school community were
examined. The two research questions are as follows:
1. What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership strategies and/or leadership style
in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the zone?
RACE TO THE TOP 77

2. What changes were observed in these leadership approaches when Race to the Top
funding ended?
To help understand the findings presented in this chapter, an overview of the case study
schools and a basic structure of the Hawaii Department of Education is provided. Pseudonyms
were used for all interview participants to ensure anonymity and to protect the identity of all
study participants, including all four case study schools and the two complex areas. Data used
for case study school selection was accessed from public documents published by the Hawaii
Department of Education.
Summary of Case Study Schools’ Characteristics and Performance
Sampling Criteria
Complex areas and elementary schools were identified using the Hawaii Department of
Education report revealing the RttT grant recipients in the Zones of Intervention (ZSI). Complex
areas and elementary schools outside of the Zone were selected based upon the enrollment of
students with similar demographics. Two different complex areas were selected due to their
similarities in student population. It is important to note that focus was placed upon on complex
area and school similarities and differences in areas such as; leadership strategies, support
offered for school leaders, resource allocation, professional development for administrators and
teachers, and the effect on student achievement. Permission was granted from the Hawaii DOE
for access to specific complex areas, the complex area superintendents, and four specific case
study schools inside and outside of the Zones of School Intervention.
Case Study School Characteristics
This section includes demographic information for the study participants and their
schools, and is summarized in Table 1. All schools analyzed were Title 1, non-charter public
RACE TO THE TOP 78

schools within two Hawaii Department of Education complex area school districts with similar
student demographics. The four case study schools were selected based upon similar school
structures. Schools selected had demographics that included students enrolled in kindergarten
through sixth grade, a large number of Native Hawaiian students, and students eligible for Title 1
funding. Geographic location was a major consideration for determining accessibility and
selecting case study schools. Two elementary schools selected were within the same Zone of
School Innovation complex and two elementary case study schools selected were within the
same non-Zone of School Innovation complex in order to allow for comparisons between
schools both inside the Zones of School Innovation and Non-Zone schools. Specifically, two
elementary case study schools, Akau School and Hema School, were both located in the Hibiscus
Complex outside of the Zone. Makai School and Moana School were elementary schools
selected from the Plumeria Complex Zones of School Innovation.
The four case study schools selected had a large population of students eligible for Title I
services, identified as students eligible for free and reduced lunch, at least 76% or more students
enrolled were eligible as summarized in Table 1. For instance, Title I student enrollment within
the Zone of School Innovation included students at Makai School and Moana School. Makai
School contained 82% Title I eligible students. Moana School contained 76% Title I eligible
students. Akau School and Hema School were schools outside of the Zone. Akau School Title I
eligible students consisted of 83% of the student population. Lastly, Hema School contained
78% Title I eligible students.
Hawaii public schools also received Title III funding based on students eligible as
English Language Learners (ELL). Zone schools in the Plumeria Complex received Title III
funding based on enrollment of 5% or more ELL eligible students. For example, 5% of students
RACE TO THE TOP 79

enrolled in Makai School were eligible for Title III services. Similarly, 8% of students enrolled
at Moana School were eligible for Title III services. Information for Title III enrollment was not
reported at either Akau School or Hema School. Specifically, Title III data was not reported for
Non-Zone schools in the Hibiscus Complex. Further discussion with principals at Non-Zone
schools confirmed that ELL enrollment at Akau School and Hema School to be less than 5% of
the total student population.
The schools studied were rural schools that included 59% or more Native Hawaiian
students and at least 8% or more students who were determined as eligible for special education
services. Students enrolled in Plumeria Complex outside of the designated Zone at Akau School
were identified as 84% Native Hawaiian, while 61% of students were identified as Native
Hawaiian at Hema School. Students enrolled in Hibiscus Complex inside of the designated Zone
at Moana School were identified as 59% Native Hawaiian. Students at Makai School, also
within the Zone, were identified as 60% Native Hawaiian. Students eligible for special
education services at Akau School outside of the Zone consisted of 12% of the student
population with 13% of students eligible at Hema School also outside of the Zone. Students
eligible for special education services at Makai School inside of the Zone accounted for 12% of
the student population with 8% students eligible at Moana School also inside of the Zone.
Careful consideration was devoted to the selection of schools that were eventually
selected based upon similar student demographics and geographic location. The smallest school
selected for participation was Akau School in the Hibiscus Complex with just 246 students
enrolled. The largest student population was Moana School in the Plumeria Complex with over
900 students. Total student enrollment at Hema School in the Hibiscus Complex was close to
500 students. Makai School in the Plumeria Complex had a total of 582 students. All schools
RACE TO THE TOP 80

maintained a similar organizational structure, allowing for a matched comparison to be made.
Daily attendance rates were high at all schools studied.
Table 1: Demographic School Data from Case Study Schools
School
Name
Zone
Description
Complex
Area
(District)
Total
Student
Enrollment
Native
Hawaiian
Population
%
Title I
/Free
and/or
Reduced
Lunch
Eligibility
%
Special
Education
Eligibility
%
Title
III/
ELL
%
Daily
Attendance
Rate
Akau non-ZSI Hibiscus
Complex
246 84% 83% 12% No
data
92%
Hema non-ZSI Hibiscus
Complex
505 61% 78% 13% No
data
93%
Makai ZSI Plumeria
Complex
582 60% 82% 12% 5% 90%
Moana ZSI Plumeria
Complex
906 59% 76% 8% 8% 99%
Source: Hawaii Department of Education (2013 -2014)
Organizational Structure of the Hawaii DOE
The Hawaii Department of Education is a large, single, statewide school district that is
separated into seven smaller school districts, primarily divided by specific island region based on
geographic boundaries. The seven school districts in the state of Hawaii are spread across the six
unique Hawaiian Islands. Each of the seven school districts are separated into fifteen smaller
complex areas that are led by Complex Area Superintendents. A Complex Area Superintendent,
known as a CAS, is responsible for supervising and managing two and sometimes three high
school complexes. All complex areas are comprised of a high school and the neighborhood
schools below them that feed students into the next level based on geographic boundary areas.
Feeder schools include middle or intermediate schools and elementary schools.
Both complex areas studied were led by a Complex Area Superintendent, or CAS, who
reports to the Hawaii DOE Superintendent of Schools at the state level. Each of the four selected
case study schools had a traditional, hierarchical structure in which teachers reported to a
principal and a principal reported directly to the Complex Area Superintendent, CAS, as their
RACE TO THE TOP 81

supervisor. Specifically, study participants included two principals inside the Zone of Innovation
(referred to as Respondent P1 & Respondent P2), two principals outside of the Zone of
Innovation, (referred to as Respondent P3 & Respondent P4), a complex area superintendent
inside the Zone of Innovation (referred to as Respondent C1) and one outside of the Zone of
Innovation (referred to as Respondent C2). The following section will describe findings that
emerged from interviews conducted. Further findings from interviews conducted are presented
to reveal the impact Race to the Top had upon school leaders at both the district and the school
level. Findings will explore superintendent leadership, principal leadership, and funding options
related to Race to the Top in Hawaii public schools.
Findings for Research Question 1
Research question 1 asked, “What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership
strategies and/or leadership style in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the
zone?” Findings revealed three over-arching themes that included superintendent leadership,
principal leadership, reform strategies and funding options made available during Race to the
Top. Perceptions of school leaders differed from what occurred at the state, complex, and school
levels. Challenges and successes experienced by educational leaders during RttT were explored
by focusing on leadership strategies.
Leadership Strategies
As RttT was implemented, school leaders inside of the Zone were asked to meet prior to
the allocation of RttT funds to develop expenditure plan guidelines. Respondent P2, a school
level principal, was selected as the Race to the Top Project Manager by the CAS to lead reforms
for a term of two years. His/her responsibility was to facilitate weekly meetings to develop the
plan, “Race to the Top; Significant, Substantial, and Fair.” The meetings took place in 2010 to
RACE TO THE TOP 82

plan for implementation during the 2011-2012 school year (Hawaii DOE Complex Area Zone of
Innovation Plan, Version 1, 2010).
Complex Area Superintendent
Leadership challenges became evident at the onset of Race to the Top. Zone
Respondents P1 and P2 expected CAS leadership and state level leadership to collaborate with
them consistently. They reported needing leadership to communicate and provide guidance,
funds, and training regarding implementation of Race to the Top mandates but this did not occur.
They further stated that support offered came in the form of consultants who were brought in
from outside of the state. Mainland consultants, although knowledgeable about the school
reform efforts imbedded in the RttT plan, did not possess an understanding of the existing
culture, or an awareness of the specific needs of teachers and school leaders in Hawaii. Zone
Respondents P1 and P2 stated that support from outside consultants was not sustainable or
appropriate as a result.
Neither principal nor the CAS outside of the Zone participated in any preparation for
RttT funding and initiative implementation. Non-Zone Respondents P3 and P4 reported that
leadership practices did not change during the RttT implementation, reporting a lack of CAS
support. Non-Zone Respondent P3 stated, “Principals had to develop their own professional
development to train teachers and staff regarding implementation of Race initiatives, there was a
lack of system of support, no real leadership was built in.” Non-Zone Respondent P4 revealed,
“Changes were implemented without any funding for us, we did have extra curriculum and some
training but we were expected to do all of it with little or no direction.”
Schools were tasked with making sense of new standards, moving towards common core
implementation and state standardization. All principals reported CAS’ exhibition of initial
RACE TO THE TOP 83

excitement from Respondent C1 and Respondent C2 about common core and new rigorous
standards during leadership meetings but excitement seemed to quickly wane after funding
realities took hold and an overall lack of support became evident from the State Superintendent
and the state leadership team.
Immediate challenges realized by Respondent C1 and echoed by Respondent P1 and
Respondent P2 were a lack of qualified candidates to fill teaching positions and implement
initiatives, specifically hiring additional personnel who were capable of offering quality
instruction during extended learning time (ELT). Hiring and retaining qualified teachers,
educational assistants and substitute teachers was a challenge, even with added incentives made
available through RttT. Interview data illustrate that CAS’ and principals faced many challenges
during Race to the Top.
Principal Leadership and Challenges
A total of nine public schools are located in the Zone of School Innovation examined in
this study. The principals from all nine, including those from elementary, middle, and high
schools, met weekly as the Zone implementation task force prior to disbursement of funds. The
purpose of the task force was to determine a plan of action, how to spend funds once disbursed,
and to develop a system of support for implementation of the RttT reforms. Efforts were made
by school principals to determine how educational reform strategies would best be implemented
in the Zone to improve student achievement.
Goals were set by the RttT Zone implementation task force to best to prepare for
upcoming staff development, implementation of common core, development of differentiated
student learning opportunities, and K-12 articulation. This undertaking was reported by
Respondents P1 and P2, both Zone implementation task force members, as a significant
RACE TO THE TOP 84

endeavor due to the large number of Race mandates placed upon Zone schools from the federal
level.
Zone principals were committed to the development of an RttT implementation plan to
prepare for changes and implement best practices. Respondent P1 reported that school leaders
were excited by the discussion of changes to come and what additional funds could mean for the
future of their schools. Additionally, it was hoped that RttT mandates would benefit students in
terms of increasing student learner outcomes and improving graduation rates. Plans were put
into place and fervor built for the future of education inside the Zone. Anticipation built for
school leaders regarding the possible impact upcoming reform strategies and funding options
could have upon student outcomes.
Reform Strategies and Funding Options
Principals reported an expectation to fulfill RttT federal mandates but reported they were
not supported in determining how to best comply. Respondent P2 reported feelings of being
alone when aligning curriculum and implementing common core, stating, “Collaboration with
CAS leadership should have happened but it didn’t, we had to just figure this out on our own and
do what was directed from the top.” Respondent P1 reported, “Neither State Superintendent or
CAS leadership were there, they didn’t take the time to develop the bigger picture for staff or for
us as leaders, we were forced to find a way to sell this to our staff, we had to just do without
extra planning time, we had no choice.”
Respondent P1 and Respondent P2 reported the hope was for Respondent C1 to provide
direction about how to build and sustain culture from implementing RttT initiatives. Both Zone
principals indicated they believed nothing new was learned during RttT. Respondent P2 stated,
RACE TO THE TOP 85

“We tried to do the things Race forced us to do, leadership development wasn’t really funded or
built in as a result.”
Academic coaches were put into place at schools with the creation of additional teaching
positions, however Respondent P1 and Respondent P2 stated that little thought was given to how
to best select appropriate personnel for coaching positions. Further discussion revealed that
principals believed the CAS spent limited time preparing to implement this RttT mandate.
Principals were forced to locate and hire their own academic coaches to fill positions, often
forced to remove highly qualified teachers out of the classroom to do so, leaving a vacancy
impossible to fill with a capable individual. Unplanned vacancies placed additional stressors
upon principals and school staff, reducing quality planning time and collaboration opportunities
for teachers.
Race to the Top Funding Provisions
Provisions set for in Race to the Top are summarized in table 2. Deliverables and
planned resources include extending the school year and the school day for students in ZSI
schools as well as placing emphasis upon teacher pay for performance and evaluation. Special
attention was devoted to increasing human resources with the creation of a personnel
development office and importance placed upon obtaining highly qualified candidates to fill
vacant teaching and clerical positions. Further provision focus was placed upon the
standardizing education by adopting the common core and aligning educational standards state
wide. The development of the Instructional and Coaching Academy, as well as a Leadership
Academy, was developed to ensure a structured organization was in place. Development of such
organizations was done so to provide assurances to improve the effectiveness and coordination
of instruction.
RACE TO THE TOP 86

Table 2: Race to the Top Funding Provisions
Source: Plumeria Complex Area Zone of Innovation, 2010

Extended
School Year and
School Day
The goal of this project is to extend the learning time and opportunities for students,
teachers, and staff.
• Additional student instructional and teacher professional development days
• Differentiated student learning opportunities
• K-12 articulation and planning
• Complex grade level and common content area articulation and planning
• Parent-teacher relationship building opportunities
• Staff relationship-building professional development

Teacher
Performance
Contract and
Evaluation
For “Schools in the Zones of Innovation, during the two-year modeling period, the
emphasis on student learning results will be phased in – with 35% based on student
growth in SY2011-12 and 40% based on student growth in SY2012-13.” (Hawaii’s RTTT
– Phase 2 Application, page 117)

Recommendations on broad concepts of what should and should not be included in the
contract and evaluation, with “Significant, Substantial, and Fair” as the guiding principles
were established by the workgroup.
• School, Team, Department, and Grade-level Indicators
• Individual Teacher Indicators

Human
Resource
Office
Schools are the interactive hub of the community with specific goals, and a myriad of
supports to insure the success of each child…that can only be achieved with quality
interactions by highly trained, highly effective, and highly motivated people who CARE.
• Human Resource Office to further develop highly effective employees
• Personnel Development Office
• Teacher Recruitment and Retention of “quality” employees
• Induction and Mentoring Program

Curriculum,
Instruction, and
Assessment
Office
This project proposal centers on the development of an Instructional and Coaching
Academy, as well as a Leadership Academy, through a structured organization that
promotes both a horizontal and vertical alignment of focus and support to improving the
effectiveness and coordination of instruction.
• Clear primary targets for the entire complex area, and secondary targets for
individual schools
• Complex wide and School-level curriculum, instructional, and data initiatives
• School-level Academic and Data Coaches
• Professional Development with follow-up coaching and articulation
• New teacher induction and mentoring program
• Community Outreach

Highly Qualified
Teacher
Modify the current teacher hiring process and timelines to allow the Plumeria Complex
School an opportunity to hire Highly Qualified Teachers.
• All probationary teachers placed back into their positions upon successful
evaluation
• All applicants will be PRAXIS complete
• Geographic preferences by island only
• Differentiated salary for Highly and Non-Highly Qualified Teachers
• Non-Highly Qualified teachers have two years to become Highly Qualified

Community
Support
The goal is to provide a “one stop” center for social and medical resources and supports
for families. The schools to be utilized as a natural “hubs of the community” to not only
provide education and educational supports, but to also centralize social and medical
services.
RACE TO THE TOP 87

Race to the Top Mandates
Major revisions reported by both CAS’ and all four principals included the
implementation of common core and the alignment of curriculum across the state. Additional
revisions included the formation of Academic Review Teams, Comprehensive Student Support
Systems, Extended Learning Time, the Educator Effectiveness System in combination with
Danielson, Formative Instruction and Data Teams, Teacher Leader Work Groups, Induction and
Mentoring, professional development, meetings, monitoring, professional development, SGP,
Student Learning Objectives, School Quality Surveys, Tripod Student Surveys, and the
formation of Zones of School Innovation (ZSI) (Hawaii Race to the Top, 2010).
Respondents P1 and P2 both expressed hope that RttT revisions would be equalizing for
Hawaii schools. Non-Zone Respondent C2 reported an expectation that common core would
equalize education for all students across the nation, particularly for military impacted students
in Hawaii public schools who are required to transition in and out of educational systems.
Further discussion with Respondent C1 and Respondent C2 led to the realization that support for
district leadership was not offered from the state or federal level for either district
superintendent. Similar experiences were reported by principals regarding their own experience
with a lack of support from Complex Area Superintendent leadership.
Community of Support
Special attention was given to developing and maintaining a community of support to
address a wide range of needs beyond education related to students and parents within the Zone.
Zone Respondent C1 revealed that communities of support were developed across the complex
area in the Zone by creating a hub of social services, health care, and related services for
families. Respondent P1 and Respondent P2 shared that the goal was to provide a “one stop”
RACE TO THE TOP 88

center for resources and supports for families. Implementation of such a system was hoped to
lend itself to increased student attendance and engagement, ultimately improving student
learning and increasing graduation rates throughout the Zone by keeping students in school.
Zone Respondent C1 stated, “Students who are sick miss a great deal of school, we need them in
school where learning takes place. Parents may pick them up for an appointment which forces
them to miss hours of instruction and they sometimes don’t come back for days.”
Extended Learning Time
Extended learning time (ELT) was an initiative mandated by RttT. School leaders were
required to develop and implement programs to provide additional learning opportunities for
students after the traditional school day with the hope of improving student learning, test scores
and overall attendance rates. Student ELT attendance was mandatory during the first year of
implementation but a lack of RttT funding didn’t allow for mandatory attendance to continue
during the second year. Non-Zone Respondent C2 shared that ELT might have gained additional
student interest if schools were allowed the flexibility to have input regarding offerings to
develop programs appropriate for their specific population.
Reform Strategies
Major revisions reported by both CAS’ and all four principals included the
implementation of common core and the alignment of curriculum across the state. Additional
revisions included the formation of Academic Review Teams, Comprehensive Student Support
Systems, Extended Learning Time, the Educator Effectiveness System in combination with
Danielson, Formative Instruction and Data Teams, Teacher Leader Work Groups, Induction and
Mentoring, professional development, meetings, monitoring, professional development, SGP,
Student Learning Objectives, School Quality Surveys, Tripod Student Surveys, and the
RACE TO THE TOP 89

formation of Zones of School Innovation (ZSI) (Hawaii Race to the Top, 2010). Respondents P1
and P2 both expressed hope was that RttT revisions would be equalizing for Hawaii schools.
Non-Zone Respondent C2 reported an expectation that Common Core would equalize education
for all students across the nation, particularly for military impacted students in Hawaii public
schools who are required to transition in and out of educational systems. Further discussion with
Respondent C1 and Respondent C2 led to the realization that support for district leadership was
not offered from the state or federal level for either CAS. Principals reported similar experiences
during interviews regarding personal experience with CAS leadership.
Educator Effectiveness System
All four principals interviewed reported no distributed leadership and no comprehensive
training during Race to the Top implementation. Respondent P1 and Respondent P2, principals
inside the Zone of School Innovation, reported that training for the new teacher evaluation
system titled the Educator Effectiveness System (EES) was provided on a large scale in the form
of district level workshops without the option of any support or input regarding how training
would be offered (Education, U.S.D., 2010). Both Zone and non-Zone principals reported that
staff training included many large group seminars and PowerPoint presentations without
opportunity for input from leadership or teachers although the intent of EES was to be proactive
and supportive.
All four principal respondents stated that they it would have been preferential to be
trained from a leadership perspective regarding EES and Danielson as well as the flexibility to be
able to select the time frame that training was offered for staff. This major RttT revision tasked
principals to develop a creative solution to implement EES and provide supports for teacher
compliance. Respondents P3 and P4 reported that many teachers felt alienated but were
RACE TO THE TOP 90

compelled to participate in a new system that was mandatory without explanation. Additionally,
all four principals shared that teachers reported an overall lack of support and feelings of fear and
confusion during EES implementation.
CAS’ beliefs regarding EES implementation as an educational reform strategy varied
from positive to negative responses both inside and outside of the Zone. Respondent C2 shared
that an internal component of EES was the Danielson observation method, reporting this to be an
evaluation system that gave teachers credit for their hard work and effort. Respondent C2 stated,
“EES and Danielson created a rubric to improve teaching and was equalizing for all teachers, it
allowed teachers to be recognized for their excellence and provided a way for leaders to support
them if needed.” Respondent C1 had a different perspective, stating, “EES forced leaders to
move quickly to make it through so that they could provide information to the rest of the system,
this system was over managed like we were watched by Big Brother, there was no autonomy.”
Respondent C1 believed that EES training wasn’t for the benefit of leaders, teachers or students,
believing it was a piloted revision of a new personnel system for the state.
Race to the Top Funding Realities
Resource teacher positions at the district level were believed by all principals to have
been created to support schools during RttT but a visible presence from the CAS during reform
was not evident. Principals at all schools reported the need to encourage staff to embrace new
programs, all done independently without support from their leadership. Additional planning
time was necessary but not available, teachers would have benefited from extra time to learn new
requirements and curriculum. Principals stated that they would have had greater success in
developing an understanding of the bigger picture with support from CAS leadership and
training themselves. Respondent P3 stated, “We just did what we had to without much direction
RACE TO THE TOP 91

from leadership, we just knew we had to move forward and do our best regardless of the support
because it was a mandate.”
Reality began to sink in when the funding was released in a centralized manner and not to
the schools directly. Respondents P1 and P2 reported that hopes for change were not realized
during RttT in the beginning phase, Respondent P1 stating, “Funding dropped [became
available] but no specific earmark was made for us to spend funds as recommended, we had no
autonomy for spending and the funds took over a year to even be released.” Additional funding
was made available to schools in the form of additional teacher and educational assistant
positions, professional development, and academic coaches. Extended learning time required
teachers in the Zone to work additional hours while earning compensation under a renegotiated
supplemental contract with the teacher’s union, the Hawaii State Teacher’s Association (HSTA).
Zone implementation of the RttT reforms was non-negotiable for everyone involved, including
staff and students during the first year. Student participation was optional during the second year
because the same amount of funding was not adequate for mandatory attendance.
Principals and Complex Area Superintendents reported a lack of transparency being
evident statewide regarding funding due to misperceptions, a lack of trust, and a scarcity of
resources. All leaders, to include both principals and the CAS, outside of the Zone held a
common belief that a large amount of money was made available to all schools inside of the
Zone and to the district, to spend in any way that they saw fit. However, in reality no
discretionary funds were made available for school leaders to spend in ways that were desired as
they also originally believed would be the case. Although a plan for implementation of RttT was
initially followed, interview data revealed that the plan was not sustainable as described below.
RACE TO THE TOP 92

RttT funding did provide for additional curriculum, personnel, educational services and
an extension of the school year and the school day for both staff and students. Both CAS’ from
inside and outside of the Zone reported that Race monies were distributed to the Zone but that
they were not able to make a determination about how funds were spent. Respondent C2
revealed possessing an initial belief that Race funding, when released by the federal government,
would arrive with the flexibility for districts to spend in a manner in which they chose to best
support student learning and growth.
Schools outside of the Zone were required to implement the same RttT based initiatives
in a creative manner, without additional funding or support from leadership. Respondents P3
and P4 stated that they often heard about what they had to do from interacting with colleagues,
learning about requirements before a conversation with the CAS occurred. For example,
Respondent C2 stated, “We were in it before we realized how many requirements there were
from a bureaucratic perspective, by then we had to just comply, it didn’t matter if we felt valued
or respected.”
Further discussion revealed that Respondent C1 inside the Zone was able to choose how
to determine how to spend funds independently during the second year of implementation.
Respondent P1 and Respondent P2 were unaware that Respondent C1 had the power to
determine how funds were spent. Respondent C1 shared, “During year 2 of the Race I was able
to repurpose the money to use it for things we really needed in the Zone. I did this knowing
where we were headed as a complex and what we expected our students to know as lifelong
learners, I focused on that.”
RACE TO THE TOP 93

Lack of Sustainability
All respondents interviewed inside and outside of the Zone addressed an overall lack of
sustainability. Zone Respondent P1 reported that programs did not last during the second year
due to a lack of funding, stating, “The following year we had the funding for the same level of
intervention for extended school day so we had to change what we did at our school.” Zone
Respondent C2 also revealed a lack of program sustainability post Race to the Top. Respondent
C2 stated, “Continuing professional development without funding was hard, we had to do our
own training because support from Race ended.” Respondent P2 stated, “Funding ended so
programs did too. No real sustainability existed, the enrichment was gone when the Race
ended.” Respondent P2 also shared, “Programs died after RttT.”
Similarly, Non-Zone Respondent 3 stated, “I think that's part of the problem with Race to
the Top. When the funding source went away, a lot of positions left with it, a lot of supports in
the school left with it. Now the school is back to square one struggling.” Respondent C1
revealed a lack of sustainability post Race outside of the Zone, disclosing, “Funding was rough
after RttT, we had to continue efforts with a reduced number of personnel which just wasn’t
possible.” Respondents concurred on a lack of sustainability after Race ended.
Complex superintendents missed an opportunity to build strong relationships, mentor
principals and build capacity within their districts during RttT. Education reforms mandated by
RttT did require the CAS to ensure implementation occurred. Similarly, school principals were
expected to implement reforms and develop programs in their schools to improve student
outcomes. RttT intent was to standardize education to ensure equal learning opportunities
existed for all students both inside and outside of the Zone. Reform strategies mandated by Race
placed many demands upon leadership, creating a culture that felt forced to comply in an
RACE TO THE TOP 94

educational system that lacked support needed. Complex superintendents and principals agreed
that in their view the Hawaii Department of Education could have been more prepared to
successfully implement and sustain reforms mandated by Race to the Top.
The findings for research question one demonstrate that there were three over-arching
themes, which were as follows: leadership, reform strategies, and funding options. Leadership
challenges were a prevalent issue at the onset and throughout implementation of RttT. The
impact of mainland consultants was not a successful a model of support as initially hoped due to
the lack of cultural awareness. Both Zone and Non-Zone principals and CAS’ reported
difficulties procuring qualified candidates to fill a wide range of vacancies. Zone leaders made
grand attempts to develop communities of support to address the needs of students and the
school community. All respondents disclosed feelings of frustration due to a lack of leadership
support during Race to the Top. But in reality, the majority of time was spent complying with
the requirements of EES. Findings for research question two are detailed in the following
section.
Findings for Research Question 2
Research question 2 asked “What changes were observed in these leadership approaches
when Race to the Top funding ended?” Findings revealed two over-arching themes that included
a lack of a consistent leadership approach in place and how to determine best practices to utilize
funding and implement required initiatives. Principals reported that there was very little support
from state or district leadership during Race to the Top. “The CAS was not around, training was
non-existent for us. We had to do what we could to get by.” Similarly, the CAS’, Respondents
C1 and C2 from inside and outside of the Zone, reported that there was no direction from state
RACE TO THE TOP 95

leadership or the superintendent, they simply had to comply with the mandates of RttT and figure
it out on their own in ways that worked for their schools.
Inconsistent Leadership Approaches
Respondents reported a lack of consistency in leadership approaches at all levels within
the DOE. A broad expanse of leadership roles and responsibilities are in place within the
hierarchy of the educational system. In spite of this expanse, respondents P1, P2, P3, and P4
reported a lack of consistency and a lack of transparency not only within their own districts and
complexes, but also from Zone to non-Zone schools. Respondent P3 stated, “Guidance and
leadership direction during RttT didn’t exist, we weren’t even sure that leadership at the top
really bought into the Race themselves.” Respondents P1 and P2 made similar statements
regarding a lack of leadership direction and support.
CAS leadership inside and outside of the Zones had varied perspectives on RttT.
Respondent C1 revealed frustration regarding RttT bureaucratic regulations and the large amount
of challenges that followed implementation. Respondent C1 approached implementation
autocratically, ensuring to comply with mandates but attempting to manipulate the system in
favor of Zone schools, stating, “I creatively repurposed funds during year 2 of the Race, I learned
how to revise the system to work for the special needs of our district in spite of what state
leadership wanted.” Conversely, Respondent C2 responded positively, sharing that RttT
provided a framework for equalizing the system for both students and teachers. Further
discussion led to the statement that, “Schools made a commitment to work together, school
cultures were built and internal leadership grew out of necessity, we learned to trust and value
one another.”
RACE TO THE TOP 96

Implementation of Required Initiatives
Disagreement regarding implementation of programs existed between state leadership
district leadership and school principals. Respondent C1 reported, “Leaders had to just move
quickly and do what was required, we had to just make it through the race and not question why
we did what we did.” Respondents P1 and P2 shared that they had to move quickly to provide
data for the rest of the ‘system’ for the Department of Education as a whole. Respondent P1
stated, “We made good recommendations, we met as a task force and developed a strong plan.
We knew what was expected to implement our plan but when the Race started our
recommendations weren’t considered. The larger system didn’t embrace what we had done, we
became unimportant.”
Culture of Distrust
Zone principals reported feelings of ‘Big Brother’ and no autonomy, wanting their input
to be valued and respected during RttT as they were the implementers, the producers.
Respondent P2 shared, “Collaboration didn’t happen because compliance dictated what we
needed to accomplish, we didn’t have support, we were just expected to comply.” It became
necessary to instruct teachers what to do in a similar manner due to time constraints for
implementation and compliance with all mandates.
Respondents P3 and P4 revealed that funds were never disbursed to their schools even
though the same mandates were placed upon them. They further revealed the belief that
principals and CAS’ in the Zone were given a large amount of money to do with as they pleased.
Statements such as these indicate the level of distrust and misunderstanding of Race funding
availability. Respondents P1 and P2 have not yet realized to this day that the Complex Area
RACE TO THE TOP 97

Superintendent had the flexibility to determine how funds were spent during the second year of
RttT implementation.
District leadership outside of the Zone had to creatively implement mandates without
funding. Respondent C2 reported that schools learned to apply for grants and imaginatively used
existing funds to create programs to improve student learning. However, although existing funds
were used, Respondent C2 stated, “Funding was rough, the Zones got all the money, we had to
implement the same changes, address the same mandates. Everything was based on data, gains
needed to be realized so the pressure was on.” Respondent C2 continued, contradicting earlier
statements made by stating, “It really wasn’t fair, it created disparity between Zone schools and
non-Zone schools, we would meet together at our leadership meetings. We all had to work
together and we all knew that all the money was being funneled to the Zone, it was never
mentioned but we knew it was happening.” Statements such as these clearly illustrate a lack of
distrust between leaders in different districts and with the state and federal levels, revealing the
lack of transparency evident during RttT.
Respondent C1 reported feelings of distrust when funds were not disbursed during the
first year of implementation, “Funds weren’t released so we weren’t able to pay for what we
wanted, this took a toll on leadership and I never got an answer about why we had to wait.”
Respondent C1 continued, although this statement contradicts the previous assertion, which may
be a direct reflection of how much confusion was experienced by leaders during the Race.
Respondent C1 further stated, “Then I wasn’t able to spend funds in a way I planned when they
were released a year later. It was a good thing I had my own plan for spending in place so I
knew what to do to best support my schools.” Respondents also noted they wished more best
practices had been outlined by the Hawaii Department of Education.
RACE TO THE TOP 98

Best Practices to Utilize Funding
Educational leaders, to include all principals and CAS’, agreed that best practices were
those that increased student gains and built strong relationships in schools. Positive student
gains were evidence of excellent teachers and programs. Principals listed best practices as those
that were developed based upon student need so that they continue to be applied long term.
Examples provided by principals included conducting needs assessments and reviewing data
collected to determine areas of student strength and weakness. Doing so allowed principals to
utilize funding to develop an expenditure plan to target specific student need. Respondent P1
and Respondent P2 reported using funds to develop and execute targeted reading and math
programs for students who needed to catch up.
Race to the Top Sustainability
Educational reforms, while initially exciting and invigorating, must be sustainable over
time. Changes implemented based upon funds available are often difficult to sustain after
funding is terminated. Respondent P2 stated, “Funding ended when the Race went away so most
of the programs went with it, there was no real sustainability and enrichment was gone, we had
to figure out our own ways to keep things that worked.” Consultants from mainland were hired
who were unaware of how the local educational system works. Not only was this unhelpful, but
it often created distrust with teachers who were already tasked with additional mandates.
Respondent P1 shared, “No mechanism was put into place for access to decide which consultant
or firms could be brought in, our input wasn’t valued or respected. Using outside consultants
would have been more successful if our input was considered so the services we were using were
a good match for our school culture.” Respondent P2 agreed by stating, “We didn’t have an
opportunity to collaborate to either choose supports or at least have involvement that would
RACE TO THE TOP 99

really help our school, trust is important and input should be valued but we were forced into a
one size fits all system.” Interview data revealed that the leadership team of nine principals did
not have any power to select or recommend which consultants were hired. Due to this exclusion,
principal leaders may have unintentionally formed a bias regarding the role of consultants in
their schools.
Zone schools applied for grants and creatively used Title 1 funds to implement programs
that were working to improve student achievement after RttT ended. Respondent P2 reported,
“We got creative to keep the things that worked or that were already working, we found ways to
keep programs going.” For example, Respondent P2 shared that non-classroom teachers were
rescheduled to provide additional coverage for classroom teachers. This practice allowed
classroom teachers the time needed to collaborate and meet as a data team. Other respondents
examined the expertise of non-classroom teachers. Doing so allowed them to provide additional
instruction in their area of expertise to free up classroom teachers. Respondent P2 continued,
“Race funding was gone but we found ways to fund the really important stuff and still do.”
Similarly, Respondent P1 stated, “Programs died after RttT, no real leadership was built in as a
result, and the only thing that stayed was that teachers made connections with leadership after we
went through the Race together. Teachers realized how important it was to work together to
support our students.”
All respondents reported learning to be creative regarding staffing and the maintenance
of effective programs. Respondents P1, P2, P3 and P4 all reported the maintenance of an extra
position currently used to provide an academic coach as a support position in schools to aid
teachers. Principals at all schools reported the academic coach position as the only RttT position
RACE TO THE TOP 100

still in existence, sharing that no other staff position made available during Race was sustainable
after funding ended.
Ensuring consistent support from state leadership for both the CAS and the principal may
have had positive influence on education reform in schools. An overall lack of leadership
consistency contributed to a culture of distrust and potentially impacted sustainability of reform
initiatives. Consistency in the development of best practices and allowing principals to have
some input related to funding may have been beneficial.
Principals reported insufficient support from state and district leadership that led to
feelings of isolation and often frustration. Allowing school leaders input regarding the funding
of programs designed to fulfill federally mandated initiatives might have led to positive results.
A lack of transparency and poor communication did not foster flexibility related to program
development, possibly preventing best practices to emerge.
Summary
Chapter 4 presented the results of the study through answering two posed research
questions. The following offers a summary of findings for the preliminary analysis and research
questions. Focus was placed upon interview data collected and how those findings linked to the
two research questions posed in the study. Information on the case study school sites and an
overview of the structure of Hawaii’s Department of Education were revealed. The purpose of
this qualitative study was to determine administrators’ perceptions, experiences, and attitudes
relating to Race to the Top. Results revealed practices that led to the implementation of RttT at
the complex and school level to support student achievement. This study was an initial
investigation to be used as a guideline for further examination into the development and benefits
of Race to the Top.
RACE TO THE TOP 101

Data for research question one, regarding the impact of RttT on leadership strategies and
styles both inside and outside of the Zone reveal little or no impact on leadership within a
divergent educational system. The hope was that RttT would reform and ultimately equalize
Hawaii’s educational system and breathe life into it in such an impactful way that student
performance increased, ultimately increasing student graduation rates. District and school level
leaders revealed that the necessary HIDOE services and supports for effective implementation
and sustainability did not occur. A common realization shared by administrators was that the
Department of Education was simply not ready to successfully implement the reforms mandated
by Race to the Top.
Data for research question two addressed changes in leadership approaches when Race to
the Top funding ended, illustrating how there was little or no impact upon approaches.
Principals and CAS’ all concurred that distributed leadership was not an approach that was
fostered by RttT. Mandates placed upon school leaders during RttT primarily created a culture
of stress and distrust, however, there were some positives revealed. Positive changes found
included increased collaboration within schools as well as the creative use of funds and existing
positions in schools. Statewide educational reform was hoped to equalize the educational system
in a sustainable manner but this simply did not happen.
Findings revealed a lack of autonomy for money and a lack of deliverables during Race
to the Top. Further, complex area superintendents and school principals were not trained in
distributed leadership and money was not given directly to the schools. A lack of
communication and misperception existed, with school leaders holding a sincere belief of the
presence of false information shared with them during the Race, specifically related to the
RACE TO THE TOP 102

distribution and availability of funds. Chapter five will provide conclusions, limitations, and
recommendations for future research.

RACE TO THE TOP 103

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Introduction
The Hawaii Department of Education leadership team is responsible for supporting
strategies for school improvement and setting standards of excellence in the state’s public school
system. Many states saw Race to the Top (RttT) as a method of driving educational change
system-wide. As a result, Hawaii’s educational leaders sought to reform public education by
applying for and receiving a grant from the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top
program (2010). Federal funding was made available through the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).
Hawaii’s leaders embraced the intent of RttT’s educational reform to transform schools
by increasing educational standards while simultaneously aligning policies and structures to
correspond with college and career readiness. Hawaii was one of 12 states awarded a four-year
RttT reform grant in August 2010 (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). The state received a
total of $75 million over five years. Educational leaders in Hawaii agreed upon the need for
large-scale reform that was intended to improve student achievement. The RttT grant also
focused on helping education systems to better prepare students for post-secondary education or
the workforce after high school.
In a sample of two case study schools in the Zones of School Innovation and two case
study schools outside of the Zone with similar demographics, this study examined some of the
common instructional strategies, programs, and human resource allocations across schools that
resulted from the implementation of RttT. The study also looked at the how Hawaii’s
educational leaders complied with RttT requirements, the impact requirements had upon student
RACE TO THE TOP 104

outcomes, and how educational leaders developed sustainable programs as a result. The purpose
of this study was to examine leadership strategies inside and outside of the Zone as they related
to implementing education reform. This qualitative case study examined two research questions.
1. What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership strategies and/or leadership style
in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the zone?
2. What changes were observed in these leadership approaches when Race to the Top
funding ended?
Data were gathered from documents and interviews to address the two research
questions. Documents were collected from case study schools and Hawaii Department of
Education publically accessible databases. Six individuals were interviewed for the study.
Interview respondents included significant stakeholders from the Hawaii Department of
Education including complex area superintendents and principals from two complex district
areas. A complex area superintendent and two principals were selected from each complex
district area. Pseudonyms were used for all participating members, case study schools, and
complex district areas. A codebook was used to analyze data after the researcher transcribed
interviews. An open code system was used to organize raw data. Previously obtained
documents were examined to verify and reinforce specific axial codes. Finally, raw data was
reviewed a second time to confirm coding and establish the rate of recurrence and ensure the
intensity of specific themes once axial codes were determined. A checklist was utilized to
determine participant response to clearly reveal themes and patterns of responses for the purpose
of analyzing the interview data. This chapter provides the conclusions, limitations, and
recommendations for future research.
RACE TO THE TOP 105

Research question 1 asked, “What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership
strategies and/or leadership style in the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the
zone?” Data revealed RttT had very little influence on leadership strategies and styles for either
of the complex area superintendents interviewed. The intent of the Race was to reform Hawaii’s
educational system and sustain reforms that were successful. The Department was not able to
provide the support necessary to implement or sustain the reforms as originally planned.
Complex area superintendents and principals were not given the time necessary or the support
needed to provide training for staff to properly implement mandates and changes.
Administrators reported feeling forced into compliance without training for themselves, finding
it impossible to properly train their staff and leaving nowhere to turn for support.
Research question 2 asked, “What changes were observed in these leadership approaches
when Race to the Top funding ended?” Interviews revealed leadership approaches remained
unchanged when RttT ended. Many reported not reaping the benefits of funding that was
initially expected during the Race. Those who did experience access to the funding revealed that
it didn’t have the impact initially expected. Long lasting changes were not sustainable because
many changes made required additional funding to continue. Schools made attempts to sustain
the few programs that did not require additional staffing or funding when RttT ended. CAS’ and
principals reported that reforms were not sustainable after funding ended. Principals stated
continued attempts are made to apply for incentive grants and to creatively spend current funds
to maintain programs experiencing success. Most mandates that were implemented during the
Race no longer have a presence in public schools. This chapter provides the conclusions,
limitations, and recommendations for future research.
RACE TO THE TOP 106

Discussion of Findings
The study was designed to investigate the implementation of Hawaii’s Race to the Top,
the effect it had upon educational leaders, and the sustainability of system-wide education
reforms. It also sought to identify effective leadership practices implemented by complex area
superintendents that were intended to support school leadership in ZSI and non-ZSI schools.
The two research questions and related reflexive codes in the following section were discussed in
a progressive order. Findings revealed three over-arching themes that included superintendent
leadership, principal leadership, reform strategies and funding options made available during
Race to the Top. Study limitations are followed by implications for future research in the
conclusion of this chapter.
Leadership Strategies
It is essential to clearly identify what leadership strategies helped to improve student
outcomes and to determine if those strategies are still in use after Race to the Top funding ended.
The current demand for increased student achievement and eventual graduation, the effective use
of leadership strategies and efficient use of resources to reform instruction is more valuable than
ever, particularly for low-performing schools in complex areas not meeting expectations.
Successful leaders are those who interact with and utilize the knowledge and skills of the group,
(Epstein & Salinas, 2004). Sincere attempts were made by administrators to implement system-
wide educational reforms in answer to Race to the Top mandates.
Leadership challenges became evident at the onset of Race to the Top. Zone
Respondents P1 and P2 expected CAS leadership and state level leadership to collaborate with
them consistently. Both respondents reported that their need for leadership to communicate and
RACE TO THE TOP 107

provide guidance, funds, and training regarding implementation of Race to the Top mandates
was never realized.
Scarcity of Resources
Respondents quickly revealed a lack of autonomy for expenditure of funds and a lack of
deliverables. Neither district nor school leaders received training during Race to the Top.
Training would have been beneficial to better prepare leaders to implement educational reforms
and develop steps to provide clear direction for school staff. Funds were not released directly to
schools to support required initiatives. An overall lack of communication and missed perception
made collaboration and equitable distribution of resources difficult. However, all educational
leaders held a sincere commitment to improving programs in the face of sweeping reforms in
spite of the scarcity of resources.
Inconsistent Leadership Approaches
Consistent, strong leadership is vital and must be connected throughout the system to be
effective. Change can be a challenging time for principals, teachers, students, and district
personnel (Fink & Brayman, 2006). Respondents reported a lack of consistency in leadership
approaches at all levels within the DOE. Lack of leadership consistency was an obstacle for
implementation of reforms during Race to the Top, contributing to a culture of distrust and
potentially impacting sustainability of reform initiatives. Consistency in the development of best
practices and allowing principals to have some input related to funding was found to have been
beneficial.
Schools were tasked with making sense of new standards, moving towards common core
implementation and state standardization. All principals reported CAS’ exhibition of initial
excitement from Respondent C1 and Respondent C2 about Common Core and new rigorous
RACE TO THE TOP 108

standards during leadership meetings but excitement seemed to quickly wane after funding
realities took hold and an overall lack of support became evident from the State Superintendent
and the state leadership team.
Sustainability
Educational reforms should be sustainable to positively impact student outcomes long
term. Reforms may seem initially exciting and invigorating, but they must be sustainable over
time to have a lasting effect. Changes that are implemented based upon funds available are often
difficult to sustain after funding is terminated. Creative methods must be developed to sustain
educational reforms in the absence of previously existing funds.
Mainland consultants were hired by the Hawaii Department of Education as support in
schools during RttT. Mainland consultants, although knowledgeable about the school reform
efforts imbedded in the RttT plan, did not possess an understanding of the existing culture or an
awareness of the specific needs of teachers and school leaders in Hawaii. Support from
mainland consultants was not financially sustainable after RttT ended.
Support for Funding
Principals reported insufficient support from state and district leadership that led to
feelings of isolation and often frustration. Allowing school leaders input regarding the funding
of programs designed to fulfill federally mandated initiatives might have led to positive results.
A lack of transparency and poor communication did not foster flexibility related to program
development, possibly preventing best practices to emerge.
Anticipation of funding possibilities led to feelings of hope and enthusiasm within the
Hawaii Department of Education until reality began to sink in. School leaders were disappointed
with the realization that funding was released in a centralized manner and not to the schools
RACE TO THE TOP 109

directly. Lack of sustainability related to the maintenance of educational reforms became
realized when RttT funding didn’t continue when the grant ended. Educational leaders realized
it was impossible to maintain most programs without funding. An overall lack of sustainability
led to additional pressures and expectations placed upon educational leaders to continue efforts
to maintain and continue to improve positive student outcomes. Inside of the Zone, principals
were asked to provide a ZSI proposal that included financial guidelines for the zone (see Table
2). Principals outside of the Zone participated in any preparation for RttT funding and initiative
implementation.
Limitations
The first limitation of the research was in regard to the study participants. The
participants in the study were employees of the Hawaii Department of Education and the
researcher was an insider within the same system. Although this allowed the researcher to gain
entry, it may have had an impact on respondent participation. Second, the study was limited to
complex area superintendents and principals who voluntarily agreed to participate. The results
may have been different if the researcher was able to conduct interviews with additional
participants. Lastly, there was a limited amount of time to conduct interviews due to complex
area superintendent and principal availability. Future studies should employ the use of a broader
scope of interview participants to gain a better understanding of school leaders’ perceptions of
Race to the Top implementation and sustainability. The following section will address
recommendations for future research.
Recommendations for Future Research
There are three areas recommended for future research as a result of this study. The first
area for future study is based on role the researcher played and the limitations of the study. The
RACE TO THE TOP 110

second area for future research is related to the geographical location of the study. Lastly, the
availability of respondents would be less restrictive if time constraints were relaxed to increase
respondent accessibility in the future.
Initially, it would be helpful to have a researcher conduct interviews who was not an
employee of the Hawaii Department of Education in an attempt to address some of the
limitations of the study. Despite promises of confidentially pledged by the researcher,
respondents may have felt uncomfortable about granting interview requests to an HIDOE insider.
The researcher provided assurances for all respondents that included guaranteed anonymity,
interview request protocols and a certified information sheet. Respondents may have had strong
opinions relating to Race to the Top issues that they were not comfortable revealing to this
researcher as an insider. Issues such as these could be addressed if a researcher from outside of
the Hawaii Department of Education conducted the study.
An additional recommendation for future research addressed the second study limitation
of limited geographic location. Including a broader sample of participants in future research is
recommended. Lastly, the final recommendation is related to the condensed amount of time that
was available to conduct interviews due administrator availability. The researcher was expected
to conduct interviews in a timely manner considering the availability of both the complex area
superintendents and principals. All participants requested to be interviewed during the time
period when school was not actively in session, placing additional constraints upon interview
options available to the researcher. It may be interesting to include quantitative research
methods in order to better measure the sustainability of educational reforms that were
implemented during Race to the Top.
RACE TO THE TOP 111

Conclusion
The aim of this qualitative study was to identify effective leadership practices
implemented to support school leadership in two schools in the Zone of Innovation (ZSI) and
two schools outside of the Zone. Additional investigation was conducted to identify leadership
practices and strategies employed at the complex area district level. The study sought to
determine if Race to the Top funds were utilized to develop distributed leadership and
partnerships that benefitted the school and improved student outcomes. Participants in this study
included Complex Area Superintendents (CAS’) appointed to lead complex areas inside and
outside of the Zones of Innovation and principals working in schools within the districts. The
effects on school leadership when the CAS has determined the needs, wants, and expectations of
the school community to develop leadership strategies were reviewed. A review of Race to the
Top initiatives was conducted to determine if they were instrumental in shaping student
educational outcomes.

RACE TO THE TOP 112

References
Anthony, L. W. L. (2008). Teacher concerns about curriculum reform: the case of project
learning. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 17(1), 75-97.
Bordage, G., & Harris, I. (2011). Making a difference in curriculum reform and decision‐making
processes. Medical education, 45(1), 87-94.
Chapman, J. D. (2005). Recruitment, retention, and development of school principals. The
International Institute for Educational Planning and The International Academy of
Education. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001409/140987e.pdf
Combs, J., Edmonson, S. L., & Jackson, S. H. (2009). Burnout among elementary school
principals. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 5(4), 10-15.
Department of Education, State of Hawaii. (2014). Improving Hawaii's educator effectiveness
system SY 14-15. [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from:
http://hawaiipublicschools.org/TeachingandLearning/Educator Effectiveness.
Durow, W. P., Brock, Barbara L. (2004). The retention and attrition of Catholic school
principals. Catholic Education: A Journal of Inquiry and Practice, 8(2), 194-207.
Elmore, R. (2007). Professional networks and school improvement. School Administrator, 64(4),
20-24.
Epstein, J. L., & Salinas, K. C. (2004). Partnering with families and communities. Educational
Leadership, 61(8), 12-18.
Epstein, J. L., Sanders, M. G., Simon, B. S., Salinas, K. C., Jansorn, N. R., & Van Voorhis, F. L.
(2002). School, family, and community partnerships: your handbook for action.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
RACE TO THE TOP 113

Fauske, J. R., & Ogawa, R. T. (1987). Detachment, fear, and expectation: a faculty's response to
the impending succession of its principal. Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(2),
23-44.
Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School leadership succession and the challenges of change.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 62-89.
Gajda, R., & Militello, M. (2008). Recruiting and retaining school principals: what we can learn
from practicing administrators. AASA Journal of Scholarship & Practice, 5(2), 14-20.
Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: an introduction. New York,
NY: Pearson.
Giles, C. & Hargreaves, A. (2006). The sustainability of innovative schools as learning
organizations and professional learning communities during standardized reform.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 124-156.
Hamamoto, P. (2007). Strategic Plan, Hawaii Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/Advancing%20Education/Strategi
cPlan.pdf
Hargreaves, A. (2009). Leadership succession and sustainable improvement. School
Administrator, 66(11), 10-15.
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2008). Distributed leadership: democracy or delivery? Journal of
Educational Administration, 46(2), 229-240.
Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: conceptual confusion and empirical reticence.
International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(3), 315-325.
Hart, A. W. (1991). Leader succession and socialization: a synthesis. Review of Educational
Research, 61(4), 451-474.
RACE TO THE TOP 114

Hart, A. W. (1994). Leadership as social validation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April, 1994.
Hartley, D. (2007). The emergency of distributed leadership in education: why now? British
Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 202-214.
Howell, W. G. (2015). Results of President Obama's race to the top. Education Next, 15(4), 58.
Hoy, W. K., & Smith, P. A. (2007). Influence: A key to successful leadership. International
Journal of Educational Management, 21(2), 158-167.
Hulpia, H., & Devos, G. (2009). Exploring the link between distributed leadership and job
satisfaction of school leaders. Educational Studies, 35(2), 153-171.
Jacobson, S. L. (2005). The recruitment and retention of school leaders: understanding
administrator supply and demand. International Handbook of Educational Policy, New
York, NY: Springer Publishing.
Lambert, L. (2002). A framework for shared leadership. Beyond Instructional Leadership 59(8),
37-40.
Lambert, L., Walker, D., Zimmerman, D.P., Cooper, J., Lambert, M.D., Gardner, M.E., & Szabo,
M. (2002). The Constructivist Leader, New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Levine, M. & Levin, A. (2012). Education deformed: no child left behind and the race to the top.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 82(1), 104-113.
Loeb, S., Kalogrides, D., & Horng, E. (2010). Principal preferences and the uneven distribution
of principals across schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 32(2), 205-229.
Matayoshi, K. (2012). Strategic Plan, Hawaii Department of Education. Retrieved from
https://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/DOE%20Forms/Advancing%20Education/Strategi
cPlan.pdf
RACE TO THE TOP 115

McCombs, B.L. (2003). A framework for the redesign of k-12 education in the context of
current educational reform. Theory Into Practice, 42(2), 93-101.
McGuinn, P. (2012). Stimulating reform: Race to the top, competitive grants and the Obama
education agenda. Educational Policy, 26(1), 136-159.
doi:10.1177/0895904811425911McNeil, M. (2011). Economic stimulus; "more to do, but
less capacity to do it: States' progress in implementing the recovery act education
reforms". Education Week, 30(21)
Newby, C. R., & Hayden, H. (2004). Focusing on the image of the principal. Principals'
Leadership Network. Retrieved from https://www.brown.edu/academics/education-
alliance/sites/brown.edu.academics.education-alliance/files/publications/focus_prncpl.pdf
Odden, A. R. (2009). 10 strategies for doubling student performance. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Odden, A. R., Archibald, S. J., Fermanich, M., & Gallagher, H. A. (2002). A cost framework for
professional development. Journal of Education Finance, 28(1), 51-74.
Odden, A. R., Archibald, S. J., Fermanich, M., & Gross, B. (2003). Defining school-level
expenditures that reflect educational strategies. Journal of Education Finance, 28(3),
323-356.
Odden, A. R., Monk, D., Nakib, Y., & Picus, L. (1995). The story of the education dollar: no
academy awards and no fiscal smoking guns. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(2), 161-168.
Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2008). School finance: a policy perspective (4th ed.). New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Papa, F., Jr. (2007). Why do principals change schools? A multivariate analysis of principal
retention. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(3), 267-290.
Patterson, J., & Patterson, J. (2004). Sharing the lead, teacher leaders can play a vital role in
creating a resilient school culture. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 74-78.
RACE TO THE TOP 116

Paulson, J.M., Johansson, O., Moos, L., Nihlfors, & Risku, M. (2014). Superintendent leadership
under shifting government regimes. International Journal of Educational Management,
28(7), 812-822.
Rhodes, C., & Brundrett, M. (2005). Leadership succession in schools: a cause for concern.
Management in Education, 19(5), 15-18.
Sanders, M. (2009). Collaborating for change: how an urban school district and a community-
based organization support and sustain school, family, and community partnerships.
Teachers College Record, 111(7), 1693-1712.
Sheppard, B., Hurley, N., & Dibbon, D. (2010). Distributed Leadership, Teacher Morale, and
Teacher Enthusiasm: Unravelling the Leadership Pathways to School Success. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association
Denver, CO, May, 2010.
Spillane, J. P. (2009). Managing to lead: reframing school leadership and management. Phi Delta
Kappan, 91(3), 70-73.
Spillane, J.P. (2015). Managing instructional quality & leading instructional improvement:
engaging with the essence of school improvement. The Distributed Leadership Study.
Retrieved from http://www.distributedleadership.org/assets/ael-paper_in-press.pdf
Strategic Management of Human Capital (2009). Taking human capital seriously: talented
teachers in every classroom,talented principals in every school. Consortium for Policy
Research in Education. Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved from www.smhc-cpre.org/resources
Tanner, D. (2013). Race to the top and leave the children behind. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
45(1), 4-15.
RACE TO THE TOP 117

Van Voorhis, F., & Sheldon, S. (2004). Principals' roles in the development of US programs of
school, family, and community partnerships. International Journal of Educational
Research, 41(1), 55-70.
Weiss, E. (2014). Mismatches in race to the top limit education improvement. The Education
Digest, 79(5), 60-65. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/docview/1470794003?accountid=14749
Whitaker, K. S. (2003). Principal role changes and influence on principal recruitment and
selection: an international perspective. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(1), 37-
54.
Zaretsky, L. (2007). A transdisciplinary team approach to achieving moral agency across regular
and special education in k-12 schools. Journal of Education Administration, 45(4), 496-
513.

RACE TO THE TOP 118

APPENDIX A
Teacher Interview Data Collection Protocol
Introduction
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have allowed
for me to interview you to answer my questions. I want to provide you with an overview of my
study and answer any questions you might have about participating before we begin the
interview. I am currently enrolled as a doctoral student in the University of Southern California
(USC) Rossier School of Education and I am working on my dissertation. The primary purpose
of this study is to identify effective leadership practices implemented to support school
leadership in two complex areas, one area included two ZSI schools and another area included
two non-ZSI schools. This study will attempt to determine if RTTT funds were utilized to
develop distributed leadership and partnerships that benefit the school. This study could benefit
district leadership by identifying the administrator’s motivation to develop principle strategies
that result in beneficial community partnerships. Relationships between school community
members, the school principal, and his or her connection to the local community will be
examined.
I want to assure you that I am here solely as a researcher today and not as a member of
the Department. What this means is that the nature of my questions are not evaluative. I will not
be making any judgments on how you are performing as an educator. All data collection will be
anonymous and I will use pseudonyms in my report so that no schools or sites are identifiable.
I would like to go over the informed consent document at this time. I will be recording
our conversation on a phone app recorder if you agree. I will only be using the recording to
make sure I capture your words and not my interpretation of your words. If don’t feel
RACE TO THE TOP 119

comfortable with recording the interview I will take notes by hand. Do I have your permission to
audio record the interview? I would also like to have the recording transcribed by a professional
transcription service. If you don’t feel comfortable with a professional service I will transcribe
the interview by hand. All audio recordings will be destroyed once transcribed. Do I have your
permission to use a professional transcription service? I would like to have your permission to
begin the interview.
Interview Questions
1. What impact did Race to the Top have on leadership strategies and/or leadership style in
the zones of school innovation and schools outside of the zone?
a. What pressures existed for both ZSI and non-ZSI leadership?
i. How did you respond to the pressures?
b. How did you prepare for Race to the Top funds to be spent at schools?
c. How did you determine where and how funds would be spent?
d. Did you have autonomy regarding funds distribution and did that extend to the
schools?
e. How did you prepare leadership at the school level to implement reform?
2. What changes were observed in these leadership approaches when Race to the Top
funding ended?
3. Are programs that were developed and implemented ongoing after the RTTT funds were
depleted?
4. How are programs funded or support if they have continued after funding was depleted?
5. What leadership revisions were implemented in the school(s) as a result of RTTT? Could
you tell me more about that?
RACE TO THE TOP 120

6. What role did the administrators (CAS, principal, vice-principal) play in implementing
these programs?
7. How, if at all, were you trained to assist with or handle implementation? Could you walk
me through that?
8. What were some of the leadership reforms implemented during RTTT? Could you give
me an example?
9. What happened to the RTTT reform when RTTT funding ended? Could you tell me
more?
10. How did non-ZSI schools implement reforms without RTTT ZSI funds? Could you give
me an example?
Closing
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today. I really appreciate
your time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is very helpful for this
study. If I find myself with a follow-up question, may I contact you, and if so, is the use of email
okay? Again, thank you for your participation in this study.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The conceptual framework for this study was based on the examination of school leadership and management practices related to multiple individuals involved in leading and managing Hawaii public schools during educational reforms. The study identifies effective leadership practices implemented to support school leadership in complex areas and schools inside and outside the Zone of School Innovation (ZSI). A complex area is a smaller section within a school district in the Hawaii Department of Education. There are seven larger school districts divided into fifteen smaller complex areas. Zones of School Innovation (ZSI) were established to target support for struggling schools in rural or remote, hard-to-staff areas serving the largest population of native Hawaiian and economically-disadvantaged students in the state. The purpose of this study was to determine if Race to the Top funds were utilized to develop leadership partnerships that benefitted the complex area and schools inside and outside of the Zone of School Innovation. Also, this study sought to determine the administrators’ motivation to develop strategies that complied with RttT federal mandates. Methods used in this study were interviews that were conducted with complex area superintendents and principals. Schools in the study were selected based on similar demographics including the total population, geographic location, the number of Title I and the number of Native Hawaiian students. Data collection and analysis followed the open coding method. Findings from this study revealed a lack of autonomy for money and a lack of deliverables during Race to the Top. Further, complex area superintendents and school principals were not trained in distributed leadership and money was not given directly to the schools. The study reveals an overall lack of sustainability of RttT educational reforms.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Hawai'i State Teachers’ Association and Race to the Top: HSTA’S role in the RTTT grant

PDF

Exploratory study on Race to the Top schools and the impact a school principal has on a school’s academic performance

PDF

An exploratory study of professional development to improve student reading: a case study in Oahu Hawaii

PDF

A qualitative study on Hawaii's use of Race to the Top funding on extended learning time in a Zone of School Innovation

PDF

The obscurity inside the margins: the preparation, recruitment, and retention of women of color superintendents

PDF

Building leadership capacity to support principal succession

PDF

Personnel resource allocation in a Hawaii school complex

PDF

A case study of an evidence-based approach to resource allocation at a school for at-risk and incarcerated students in Hawaii

PDF

Factors that facilitate or hinder staff performance during management turnover

PDF

The impact of principal leadership and model schools on state‐wide school reform: case studies of four Oregon elementary model schools

PDF

Promising practices: developing principal leadership succession

PDF

Addressing the principal shortage: women teachers

PDF

The superintendency in a California school district: preparation, recruitment, and career longevity

PDF

Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals

PDF

Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools

PDF

Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students

PDF

High-performing school district superintendents: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

Principal leadership succession: developing the next generation of leaders

PDF

Perception of the preparation, recruitment, and retention of California school district superintendents

PDF

Teacher perception of the implementation of the educator effectiveness system

Asset Metadata

Creator Shinno, Kimberly A. Ivey (author)

Core Title Race to the Top funding: allocation, accountability and distributed leadership

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 06/19/2017

Defense Date 04/13/2017

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag educational reform,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,principals,Race to the Top,superintendents

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence O. (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member), Green, Alan G. (committee member)

Creator Email kimberlyivey@hawaii.rr.com,shinno@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-384779

Unique identifier UC11257919

Identifier etd-ShinnoKimb-5415.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-384779 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ShinnoKimb-5415.pdf

Dmrecord 384779

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Shinno, Kimberly A. Ivey

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