University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Superintendent's leverage: a case study of strategies utilized by an urban school district superintendent to improve student achievement

(USC Thesis Other)

Superintendent's leverage: a case study of strategies utilized by an urban school district superintendent to improve student achievement

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

SUPERINTENDENT’S LEVERAGE:
A CASE STUDY OF STRATEGIES UTILIZED BY AN URBAN SCHOOL
DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
by
Roberto Salazar, Jr.

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2009
Copyright 2009 Roberto Salazar, Jr.

ii

DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my beloved wife, Leti, and my precious sons
Robert and Tomas. They have been my encouragement and motivation to fulfill this
enduring process of learning. Who better to serve as a role model for my sons and
loved ones than myself, Dad. Effort, hard work, dedication, discipline, and at times
sacrifice will lead to success: If I could do it, “Mijos,” you could too!
This dissertation is also dedicated to my parents Roberto and Linda who have
always been my inner strength and inspiration. Even though they are not with us in
flesh and blood, their love and blessings continue from the Heavens. I have always
strived to make them proud of me. The ladder of life is huge and we must continue
to work hard to climb higher and higher and reach goals we only imagined – my
parents taught me this. Every next generation must climb higher – “Mijos”
remember this.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to acknowledge and thank my family, friends, colleagues,
classmates, and teachers/professors for supporting, pushing, and believing in me.
Learning is a life-long process and through support and encouragement anything can
be accomplished. This process has been extremely challenging, but ALL who have
been around me have one way or another provided me with energy and drive to
march on. Thank you to ALL for being a part of my life – there is a reason, beyond
us, why we are connected and we must believe. FIGHT ON!

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION………………………………………………………………. ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………….…...... iii
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………... viii
LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………….……. xi
ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………. xii

CHAPTER 1……………………………………………...………….……… 1
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………….……….. 1
Statement of the Problem…………………………………….……… 10
Purpose of the Study…………………………………….…………... 12
Research Questions………………………………………………….. 13
Significance of the Study……………………………………………. 13
Limitations…………………………………………………………... 15
Delimitations…………………………………………….…………... 15
Assumptions…………………………………………………………. 16
Definitions of Terms………………………………………………… 17
Organization of the Study…………………………………………… 20

CHAPTER 2……………………..…………………………………………... 21
LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………. 21
Student Performance……………………………………………........ 21
Achievement Gap……………………………………………………. 22
Performance Implications…………………………………………… 24
Sense of Urgency……………………………………………………. 26
The Role of the Local System………………………………….……. 27
Professional Learning Community……………………….………….. 28
Accountability……………………………………………………….. 31
Coherent Practice……………………………………………………. 32
The Role of the System Leader……………………………………… 33
Instructional Leadership……………………………………………... 34
Transformational Change……………………………………………. 36
Chief Executive Officer……………………………………………... 37
Interactions and Relationships………………………………………. 38
Strategies System Leaders Utilize for Change and Improvement…… 39
Start-Up and Entry Plan……………………………………………... 40
Strategic Plan………………………………………………………… 41
Assessment…………………………………………………………... 42
Curriculum…………………………………………..………………. 43
Professional Development…………………………………………… 44
Human Resources and Human Capital Management………………... 45
Finance and Budget…………………………………..……………… 47
Communication……………………….……………………………... 48

v

Governance and Board Relations………………………………..…... 49
Labor Relations………………………………………..………….…. 50
Community and Family Engagement………………..………………. 51
Preparation of System Leaders…………………..…………………... 52
Superintendent’s Actions………………………..…………………... 53
Traditional and Non-Traditional Programs…………..……………… 54
Complex and Dynamic Role………………………..…………….…. 55
Stewards of the Discipline……………………..……………….……. 57
Conclusion…………………………………………………………….……... 58

CHAPTER 3…………………………………………………………….…… 60
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY……………………………………………. 60
The Sample…………………………………………..………………………. 63
Selected District…………………………………..……………….………… 64
East-Side Public School District………………………..…………… 64
District’s Participants………………………………..……….……………… 67
Superintendent…………………………………………..…………… 67
Key Player 1………………………………………..………………... 67
Key Player 2………………………………………………..………... 68
Other Key Players…………………………………..…….…………. 68
Instrumentation……………………………………...……………………….. 70
Frameworks for Instrument Design…………………..……………………… 70
Data Collection Instruments……………………………………..…………... 72
Instrument 1: The Superintendent Interview Guide…….…….……... 73
Instrument 2: Key Player Interview Guide……………….………..... 75
Instrument 3: Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guide……... 75
Data Collection………………………………………………………………. 77
Data Analysis………………………………………….……………..……… 80
Validity and Reliability……………………………………………… 82
Summary……………………………………………….…….……………… 82

CHAPTER 4………………………………………………….……………… 83
FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION…………….………………. 83
Introduction………………………………………………………………….. 83
Findings……………………………………………………………..……….. 85
District Background…………………………….…………………… 85
Background and Experience of Superintendent……….…………………….. 86
Traditional Educator………………………………….…….……….. 86
Background Conditions………………………………..………......... 88
Leadership…………………………………………….……………... 89
Superintendent’s Background………………….……………………. 90
The District at the Time the Superintendent Arrived………….……..……… 91
District Strengths………………………………….………….……... 91
District Challenges……………………………………….…….......... 93

vi

The Entry Plan…………………………….…………….…………... 94
Launching Strategies………………………………………………... 96
The House Model: Reform Strategies…………………..…………………... 97
Strategic Plan………………………….……………………….......... 100
Assessment……………………………………………….…….......... 104
Curriculum………………………….…………………….……......... 107
Professional Development………….…………………….……......... 110
Human Resource System and Human Capital Management………... 112
Finance and Budget……………………………..…………………… 116
Communication……………………………………….……………... 119
Governance and Board Relations……………….………….………... 123
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations…………………………. 126
Family and Community Engagement……………………………….. 129
Other House Elements: Additional Reform Strategies……….……... 132
Discussion…………………………………………………………………… 135
Authentic Leadership and Systematic Change……………………… 135
Strategic Planning for a Learning Organization………….…………. 140
Building Capacity and Changing the Culture towards a
Professional Learning Community…………………….……….........

142
Four Frames of Leadership…………………………….………......... 146
Summary…………………………………………………….………………. 150

CHAPTER 5…………………………………………………….……..…….. 151
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS…………….…….. 151
Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………… 152
Methodology……………………………………………….………………... 153
Sample………………………………………………………….......... 153
Data Collection and Analysis………………………………………... 155
Selected Findings……………………………………………………………. 157
Research Question 1: Ten Key Reform Strategies………………….. 157
Research Question 1a: Strengths and Challenges of the District……. 162
Research Question 1b: Other Reform Strategies………….………… 164
Research Question 1c: Relationship to the Previous
Background/Experience of Superintendent……………….…………

166
Conclusions……………………………………………….…….…………… 167
Implications for Practice………………………………………….…………. 171
School and District Administrators………………………………….. 171
Community Stakeholders and School Board Members……....……... 173
Policy Makers and Superintendent Preparation Programs…………... 173
Recommendations for Future Research……………………………………... 174

REFERENCES……………………………………………..…..…….……… 176

vii

APPENDIX A: Urban School Leadership Institute House Model…………. 191
APPENDIX B: USLI House Model Reform Strategy Definition Chart……. 192
APPENDIX C: Quality Rubrics – Strategic Plan…………………………… 194
Quality Rubric – Assessment………………………………………... 196
Quality Rubric – Curriculum………………………………………... 198
Quality Rubric – Professional Development………………………… 200
Quality Rubric – HR System and Human Capital Management…….. 202
Quality Rubric – Finance and Budget……………………………….. 204
Quality Rubric – Communication………………………………........ 206
Quality Rubric – Governance/Board Relations……………………… 208
Quality Rubric – Labor Relations/Negotiations……………………... 210
Quality Rubric – Family and Community Engagement……………... 212
Implementation Rubric (All Reform Strategies)…………………….. 214
APPENDIX D: Superintendent Interview Guide………...…………………. 215
APPENDIX E: Key Player Interview Guide………………………............... 217
APPENDIX F: Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guide…………... 218
APPENDIX G: Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes)... 219

viii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: ELA Proficiency Rates for Students in California’s Public Schools…..23
Table 2.2: Math Proficiency Rates for Students in California’s Public Schools….23
Table 2.3: NAEP Comparisons – White to African American and Latino Students
……………………………………………………………………………………..24
Table 3.1: Relationship of Research Questions to Data Collection Instruments…73
Table 3.2: Data Collection Activities……………………………………………..79
Table 4.1: District Characteristics………………………………………………...86
Table 4.2: Strengths in East-Side Public School District upon Arrival…………..91
Table 4.3: Challenges in East-Side Public School District upon Arrival………...93
Table 4.4: Rubric Ratings of House Model Reform Strategies…………………...99
Table 4.5: Overall Reform Strategies……………………………………………100
Table 4.6: Addressing Change in the Strategic Plan…………………………….100
Table 4.7: Strategic Plan Reform Strategy………………………………………102
Table 4.8: Strategic Plan Rating by Rubric Component………………………...103
Table 4.9: Addressing Change in Assessment…………………………………...104
Table 4.10: Assessment Reform Strategy………………………………………..105
Table 4.11: Assessment Rating by Rubric Component…………………...……..106

Table 4.12: Addressing Change in Curriculum…………………………………..107

Table 4.13: Curriculum Reform Strategy………………………………………...108
Table 4.14: Curriculum Rating by Rubric Component…………………………...109

Table 4.15: Addressing Change in Professional Development…………………..110

ix

Table 4.16: Professional Development Reform Strategy……………………...…110
Table 4.17: Professional Development Rating by Rubric Component…………..112

Table 4.18: Addressing Change in Human Resource System and Human Capital

Management….………………………………………………….…..112

Table 4.19: HR System and Human Capital Management Reform Strategy…….113

Table 4.20: HR System and Human Capital Management Rating by Rubric

Component…………………………….…………………………….115

Table 4.21: Addressing Change in Finance and Budget…………………………116

Table 4.22: Finance and Budget Reform Strategy………………………….……117

Table 4.23: Finance and Budget Rating by Rubric Component…………………118

Table 4.24: Addressing Change in Communication……………………………..119

Table 4.25: Communication Reform Strategy…………………………………...120

Table 4.26: Communications Rating by Rubric Component…………………….122

Table 4.27: Addressing Change in Governance and Board Relations………...…123
Table 4.28: Governance and Board Relations Reform Strategy…………………124

Table 4.29: Governance and Board Relations Rating by Rubric Component…...125

Table 4.30: Addressing Change in Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations...126
Table 4.31: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Reform Strategy……....126
Table 4.32: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Rating by Rubric

Component...................................................................................................128

Table 4.33: Addressing Change in Family and Community Engagement………129

x

Table 4.34: Family and Community Engagement Reform Strategy……………130
Table 4.35: Family and Community Engagement Rating by Rubric Component

…………………………………………………………………………………...131

Table 4.36: Other House Elements - Reform Strategies…...……...……………132

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: The House Model…………………….…………………………......…98
Figure 4.2: Authentic Leadership………………………………………………....137
Figure 4.3: Leadership’s Action Steps…………………………………...………..140
Figure 4.4: Professional Learning Community…………………………………...146
Figure 4.5: Four Frames of Leadership ………………………………………......147

xii

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to understand how a superintendent utilized
reform strategies to create systemic change throughout the district to positively affect
student achievement. Overall, this qualitative case study focused on the quality and
level of implementation of ten specific reform strategies by the superintendent in
order to create improvement in the district.
Change and improvement is multi-faceted in an organization, especially in a
large urban school district, due to the numerous dynamic forces and stakeholders
involved in the process. Leading systematic change and creating an organization in
which all stakeholders are accountable for both their individual and collective work
can be key to real improvement for teaching and learning. Strategic and purposeful
leadership utilizing calculated strategies can have promising impacts on student
achievement.
Analysis and results from the study indicated that the system leader (i.e.,
superintendent) utilized deliberate reform strategies which formulated a clear and
compelling vision and mission for the district’s work of educating students. This led
to a prevalent strategic plan which aligned the vision, goals, and resources of the
district to influence student achievement. The major strategies employed by the
superintendent were: 1) establishing open, trusting, and ongoing communication,
through various means, with all stakeholders to develop capital and allegiances; 2)
building leadership capacity, accountability, and professional development for
district staff; 3) aligning and centralizing all resources towards teaching and learning

xiii

and implementing a managed instructional program; and 4) reorganizing the district
administrative staff, including central district administrators and school-site
principals, to effectively having the “right” people in the “right” place doing the
“right” work.
The findings and conclusions from this study can provide useful information,
on a systems level, to both educators and non-educators aiming to create change and
improvement to positively affect students’ educational process.

1

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Education, in particular high student academic performance, can open doors
of opportunity and enrichment in employment, income, health, and overall socio-
economic success for both individuals and communities as a whole (Reed, 2003;
U.S. Department of Education, 2007a; Wirt, Choy, Rooney, Provasnik, Sen, &
Tobin, 2004). What is more, education and student performance is particularly
critical as our nation competes in a global economic community for social,
economic, and political resources, power, and status (Friedman, 2005). Thus,
students’ educational performance from local to national levels will affect the future
health of our nation through their achievements (EdSource, 2007; Reich, 1991). The
responsibility and challenge to ensure that all students achieve academically are
tremendous but obviously essential to the nation’s well-being (Salamon, 1991).
Key to the improvement of student performance at all levels is the
programmatic role of the school district. The school district acts as the overall
organizational unit whose leaders, such as the superintendent, establish a high-
functioning stewardship, systematic structures, and an acceptable culture for
learning, teaching, and performance not only from students but also from teachers
and administrators. Specifically, researchers DuFour and Eaker (1998) establish that
a systemic professional learning community (i.e., school district) engages all
stakeholders in “ongoing study and constant practice that characterize an
organization committed to continuous improvement” (p. xii). The focus is on high-

2

end student performance results. Moreover, the district leadership institutionalizes
and protects the core values, beliefs, norms, and expectations of the educational
process creating a framework and infrastructure for learning, teaching, performance,
and accountability (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman, 2006). Specifically, goal
setting, decision-making, and resource allocation should be in alignment with
teaching and learning from the top district level leadership down to the school-site
level teachers and administrators. “Learning depends on quality teaching, and
quality teaching is enabled by structures/opportunities established by larger district
system” (Hightower, 2002, p. 2).
Student academic performance has become the sole responsibility of the
school district as publicized and driven by state and federal accountability systems
(EdSource, 2004; O’Day, Bitter, Kirst, Camoy, Woody, Buttles, Fuller, & Ruenzel,
2004). Thus, it is imperative that the school district systematically as an entity take
action, generate the urgency, and communicate as one voice its mission and vision
for student learning, teaching, and accountability for the performance of students and
staff. Research has revealed that the school district must provide the appropriate
environment, leadership, and tools (i.e., knowledge, skills, and motivation) (Clark &
Estes, 2002) so the staff could precisely direct student performance (Datnow, 2005;
MacIver & Farley, 2003; Togneri & Anderson, 2003). The district’s strategic
guidance of collaborative professional development can serve as a vehicle for
communicating as well as instilling the appropriate knowledge, skills, and

3

motivation for staff. Such a vehicle creates a powerful network of professionals
focused as well as committed to student learning and performance (Elmore, 2003).
Furthermore, the school district must uniformly provide coherence in
practices and strategies to improve student performance. Therefore, a standards-
based curriculum for teachers to teach and students to learn is essential for improving
performance (Marzano, 2003). Teaching and learning must be based on formative
assessments of student performance to inform and guide student progress
(Ainsworth, 2007; Guskey, 2007; Stiggins, 2007). This can be done through the
redirection and intervention of instructional practices based on ongoing assessment
data (Chappuis, Stiggins, Arter, & Chappuis, 2005; Johnson, 2002; Schmoker, 1999).
In another coherent practice, the school district must build and nurture partnerships
with community and business organizations, political leaders, and institutions of
higher learning for support with human capital, intellectual capital, social capital,
and financial capital aligned to student performance (Marsh, 2002). Overall, the role
of the school district is to change and transform teaching and learning behaviors for
all staff and students alike creating an educational system built and navigated on
absolute performance by all involved.
For the school district to navigate and move in a prolific direction of student
performance, the system leader (i.e., the superintendent) must courageously take the
helm to lead, guide, inspire, and advocate a teaching-learning oriented agenda. The
superintendent is in a significantly instrumental role of authority in which he/she has
the opportunity to influence the work of the school district’s staff and ultimately

4

affect student performance (Johnson, 1996; Meier, Doerfler, Hawes, Hicklin, &
Rocha, 2006). Specifically, the superintendent’s focus is to lead teachers’ and
principals’ professional responsibility and accountability for student performance. It
takes many individuals working together in collaboration to systematically advance
the educational process for students, but it also takes a system leader such as the
superintendent to make a difference for the entire organization. The superintendent
must literally pull and push its resources together – align, protect, and advance the
school district’s priorities for positive student performance (Meier & O’Toole,
2003).
The superintendent’s role to improve student performance is that of creating
transformational change. First and foremost, the superintendent must define and
establish clear parameters for the work and expectations from all stakeholders
directly or indirectly affecting students’ learning (Brown & Peterkin, 1999).
Through the superintendent’s charge, district-wide attention should be centered on
uniform curricular implementation and differentiated instructional practices for
diverse learners. In addition, the superintendent’s drive should build relentless
capacity as well as fundamental ownership within all district stakeholders for high
achieving student performance. This drive should be supported in a clear structure
of incentives and rewards for success as well as sanctions for failures (Brown &
Peterkin, 1999; Waters, Marzano, & McNulty, 2003). Moreover, the superintendent
as the chief executive officer (CEO) has the multifaceted role to skillfully and

5

responsibly lead the district – support, drive, enrich, and champion district goals for
students’ progressive educational achievement (Walters & Marzano, 2006).
To continuously unpack the crucial role of the superintendent in student
performance, it could be contextually defined and understood by viewing it through
the leadership frames of structural, human resource, political, and symbolic as
articulated by researchers Bolman and Deal (2003). Under the structural frame, the
system leader must strive to understand the rules, roles, goals, mission, and overall
functional processes/structures of the organization and then be able to lead/transform
the organization to a higher level. From the human resource frame, the system
leader’s role is to craft positive, open, and honest relationships, communication,
motivation, and overall understanding the needs, including knowledge and skills, of
the people involved in the organization. Within the political frame, the system leader
concentrates on coalition building and empowerment given divergent interest groups
and competition for scarce resources. Lastly, in the symbolic frame, the system
leader’s role is to precisely direct the organization’s culture, values, beliefs, rituals,
and vision. For example, the Miami-Dade County Public School District in Florida
has posted the following on its Internet web site:
Vision: We are committed to provide educational excellence for all.
Mission: We provide the highest quality education so that all of our
students are empowered to lead productive and fulfilling lives as lifelong
learners and responsible citizens.
Core Values: Excellence – we pursue the highest standards in academic
achievement and organizational performance; Integrity – we build positive
relationships through honesty, respect and compassion, which enhance the
self-esteem, safety, and well-being of our students, families and staff;
Equity – we foster an environment that serves all students and aspires to
eliminate the achievement gap; Citizenship – we honor the diversity of our

6

community by working as a team to ensure the educational success of all
of our students and recognize that our obligations go beyond our
professional responsibilities to promote democratic principles. (Miami-
Dade County Public Schools, 2008)

The information listed above is a single example of a school district’s vision,
mission, values, beliefs, goals, expectations, and relationships which provide the
overall structure and parameters for the district’s work lead by the superintendent.
As superintendents embark on their vast journey to improve student
performance, clever and calculated strategies are critical for success. To begin, a
detailed and strategic road map will offer various initial startup strategies for system
leaders to address the awesome task of leading the entire organization (Watkins,
2003). These strategies are in the form of actual behaviors and actions as well as
tasks that must be done on day one on the job. By and large, an entry plan serving as
a blueprint is essential to establish the goals and objectives of the system leader as
well as guiding the action steps required to fulfilling the awesome task of
successfully leading. This roadmap and entry plan should be developed before
taking the helm of superintendent. Authors Neely, Berube, and Wilson (2002)
describe this process in the following straightforward steps: 1) prepare for the
position by learning all the important information about the district; 2) survey key
stakeholders in both the district and community; 3) gather as much information/data
as possible; 4) analyze and construe the information to increase the awareness about
the district as well as communicate this information to various stakeholders; and 5)
establish an action plan for improvement. The goal is to ascertain the strengths,

7

weaknesses, and critical issues brewing in both the district and community at large
and prepare to resourcefully tackle these issues.
Indispensable to the system leaders’ job is the strategic, positive and
supportive relationships (i.e., network) he/she builds with members of the district
staff (i.e., administrative staff, collective bargaining leadership, and the board of
education), community members (i.e., students, parents, and activists), media, and
political officials as well as business organizations (Meier & O’Toole, 2003). To do
this, the superintendent must ensure smooth operations of schools and district offices
serving and handling the needs of both the customers (i.e., students and parents) and
staff. Being publicly visible and visiting schools, speaking with staff and families
demonstrates genuine value for the stakeholders of the educational system and
ultimately builds constituency (Demmon-Berger, 2003).
As relationships are built by the superintendent, the focal point of the
interactions and dialogue should be on student learning and achievement: What are
students learning? What should they learn? How is the educational community
helping students improve in their academic performance (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, &
Many, 2006)? A highly qualified and skilled advisory council created by the
superintendent could advise and guide the work of education as well as on political
and organizational issues (Demmon-Berger, 2003).
The complexity of high stakes system leadership goes beyond knowledge
and skill to effectively and successfully lead an organization. In a public school
district, the superintendent must not only have the skills to advance student

8

performance but he/she needs to have the courage and passion to labor for the sake
of teaching and learning. The superintendent must grow into the role of system
leader and lead with soul (Bolman & Deal, 2002). Moreover, leading the
organization is an art form which would require both a personal and professional
treasure chest of tools to do the job. Therefore, a framework for superintendent
preparation and development is crucial to establish guidance for successful system
leadership. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching created such
a framework through the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED). This
framework is built on the following concepts to guide the preparation and training of
system leaders such as the superintendent:
• The scholarship of teaching
• The identification of a “signature pedagogy” to guide the work
• The creation of “laboratories of practice” in which future practitioners
experiment and undertake “best evidence analysis”
• New “capstone” experiences in which future practitioners can work together
to produce outstanding demonstrations of their proficiency (The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2007).
The goal is to create high functioning leaders through advanced professional,
intellectual, creative, and innovative educational processes.
Both traditional (i.e., university doctoral curriculum) and innovative non-
traditional (i.e., the Broad Superintendents Academy) leadership programs must
prepare individuals for the role of superintendent. These preparation programs must

9

give present and future superintendents opportunistic tools to allow them to
transform into dynamic roles of educational, political, and managerial leadership
(Johnson, 1996). Researchers Murphy and Vriesenga (2006) ask the critical guiding
question: “Where might we begin the work to deepen our understanding of the
education of school [and district] administrators and to strengthen the preparatory
programs that train future school [and district] leaders” (p. 189)? It is the continuous
goal of system leaders’ preparatory programs to develop the answer(s) to this
question.
Preparation programs such as the educational doctoral program at the Rossier
School of Education (RSOE) at the University of Southern California (USC) and the
Broad Superintendents Academy (TBA) are continuously reflecting and searching
for innovative ways to improve the quality of training for both current and future
system leaders (Dembo & Marsh, 2007; the Broad Foundation & the Thomas B.
Fordham Institute, 2003). These leaders must become what researchers Shulman,
Golde, Conklin Bueschel, and Garabedian (2006) refer to as “stewards of the
discipline.” These “stewards of the discipline” must be educated and prepared to
“entrust the vigor, quality, and integrity of the field [to]…creatively generate new
knowledge, critically conserve valuable and useful ideas, and responsibly transform
those understandings through writing, teaching, and application” (p. 27).
The system leader’s preparation must enable the superintendent to
contextually comprehend and effectively work with the current social, political, and
economic realities of the school district and community. By and large, the

10

superintendents’ preparation must allow him/her to: envision and improve student
learning, improve teachers’ pedagogy, connect to schools and families, communicate
effectively, research, analyze, and interpret data to make accurate decisions, build
high quality district staff and school teams, implement valuable professional
development, utilize leadership standards and enhance leadership role, build capacity
and accountability in self and others, gauge effectiveness, create partnerships with
institutions of higher learning, network with local, state, and federal political
officials (including union leaders), partake in the political policy-making process,
and overall master community, public, and human relations (including motivation
and persuasion) (Bjork, Kowalski, & Browne-Ferrigno, 2005). Ultimately, the
superintendent must be prepared to grow into a courageous strategic thinker who
directs change and expects and champions positive results (Eiter, 2002). The
superintendent must be prepared as the “steward” of the school district committed to
the integrity of his or her work to ultimately transform the district into a high
functioning knowledgeable organization (Golde, 2006). System leaders’ preparation
programs must educate, guide, and mentor superintendents with the know-how to
improve student performance as both skilled educators and learners (Dominguez,
Ivory, & McClellan, 2005; Walker, Golde, Jones, Conklin Bueschel, & Hutchings,
2008).
Statement of the Problem
As superintendents carry out their daily work of improving their respective
school district, decisions are made on an ongoing basis having short-term and long-

11

term ramifications. These decisions involve strategies for student learning which are
critical for not only student achievement but for the functional health of the district
as well as for the longevity of the superintendent’s tenure (Fuller, Campbell, Celio,
Harvey, Immerwahr, & Winger, 2003; Kerrins & Cushing, 2001). What needs to be
known is which reform strategies superintendents are utilizing from a district-wide
system level to improve student achievement. Moreover, to what degree and quality
are these strategies being implemented? What further needs to be known is the
relationship between the quality and implementation of these strategies to student
performance as well as to the contextual strengths and challenges of the district.
It is imperative that superintendents, along with their
leadership/administrative teams, precisely choose and implement district-wide
reform strategies to effectively and successfully improve student performance.
Especially as student achievement and state and federal accountability measures (i.e.,
No Child Left Behind Legislation of 2001) have become increasingly transparent in
the spotlight of the public (Hanushek & Raymond, 2004; Shaul & Ganson, 2005).
The Urban School Leadership Institute for Superintendents (USLI) (this is a
pseudonym and it used for confidentiality purposes), as a preparation program,
attempts to guide system leaders to gainfully take action in the process of enhancing
student performance (The Broad Foundation & the Thomas B. Fordham Institute,
2003). Specifically, USLI has developed the “House Model” as a conceptual
framework to guide and prepare system leaders for district-wide improvement
(Appendix A). This framework includes the following components (i.e., “rooms”)

12

for district-wide focus and leveraged improvement reform: 1) superintendent entry
plan, 2) theory of action/strategic plan and resource reallocation/data dashboard, 3)
instructional alignment, 4) operational excellence, 5) stakeholder connections and
satisfaction, and 6) increasing student achievement, closing the achievement gaps,
and improving college readiness (Takata, Marsh, & Castruita, 2007). What is not
known is how superintendents implement strategies and leverage the elements of
reform from the House Model for overall district-wide improvement and student
achievement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to develop a clearer understanding of how
superintendents are utilizing and implementing specific reform strategies throughout
their system leadership to ultimately improve student performance district-wide.
Specifically, this study will focus on superintendent’s utilization of ten key reform
strategies (including degree and quality of implementation) identified by the Urban
School Leadership Institute in their House Model’s framework for superintendent
leadership. These ten key reform strategies are: 1) strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3)
curriculum, 4) professional development, 5) human resource system and human
capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7) communications, 8) governance/board
relations, 9) labor relations/contract negotiations, and 10) family and community
engagement. Emphasis will be made on understanding how the key reform strategies
utilized by the superintendent were influenced by the strengths and challenges (i.e.,
context) of the respective school district. Also, an in-depth analysis will be given to

13

studying the reform strategies utilized by the superintendents in correspondence to
their professional preparation (including background and experience). Ultimately,
the purpose is to understand the impact of these key reform strategies on student
performance.
Research Questions
The following research questions guide this study:
1. How are the ten key reform strategies being used by the urban school
district superintendent in his or her respective district?
a. How does the quality and degree of implementation of ten reform
strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges in the district
when the superintendent took office?
b. What additional major reform strategies (if any) were used? How
do they correspond to the elements of the House Model?
c. How does the choice and implementation of the ten key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?
Significance of the Study
The significance of this study is to make a fundamental contribution to the
literature of educational system leaders’ (i.e., superintendents) in regards to
promising strategies utilized to improve student achievement on a district-wide level.
Moreover, the study will attempt to reveal the reform strategies used (including
degree and quality of implementation) by a USLI superintendent in his/her efforts to

14

improve and support student performance. These reform strategies could be utilized
by system leaders to continuously reform their respective school districts with the
goal of effectively improving educational experience and achievement for all
students. This is critical in the current realm of high-stakes accountability and low
student performance in urban school districts across the nation (The Global
Education Collaborative, 2007; Martinez & Klopott, 2005; Rothstein, 2004; U.S.
Department of Education, 2007b; U.S. Department of Education, 2007c).
This study is also significant to professional and academic preparation
programs for system leaders such as the Urban School Leadership Institute for
Superintendents and the University of Southern California. The lessons learned here
will assist in strategically reforming, planning, organizing, and executing
professional training programs in the charge to successfully prepare future school
district leaders. Particularly, this study will inform the Urban School Leadership
Institute, universities, and district leaders of specific change levers which support
and enhance district-wide leadership, performance, and improvement.
Also, this study will further researchers’ work to continue to develop
effective conceptual frameworks or models (i.e., USLI’s House Model) for
improving system-wide student achievement. Promising practices at the district-
level could be explored and documented by researchers. This could include
superintendent entry and actionable plans for district reform and systemic change
based on effective strategies with the sole purpose of improving student
performance.

15

The findings from this study will be significant to education policymakers
and legislators who strive to create policies and laws to advance system leadership
focused on producing and sustaining improved student performance. Such policies
could include superintendent training and certification programs. Also,
policymakers could revisit and revise district, state, and federal accountability
measures centered on supporting system leaders’ progressive work given the needs
of their specific district and community.
Limitations
The data for this study is based on a case study of one district and the
respective superintendent and staff collected during the month of August 2008. The
superintendent was purposefully selected by the staff from the Urban School
Leadership Institute. The interviews and observations collected reflect the
perceptions of the participants which may limit the generalizations to other districts
and superintendents. The validity of the data in this study is limited to the reliability
of the instruments used. The researcher is currently not in a superintendent position
and may have disadvantages in interpreting the qualitative data due to his lack of
experience in that role.
Delimitations
This is a qualitative case study exploring specific district-wide improvement
strategies utilized by an USLI-prepared superintendent chosen by the Urban School
Leadership Institute. Therefore, the data collected is delimited to the participants in
this study: one superintendent and his/her respective staff (two key players and

16

additional staff identified by the superintendent). The selection of superintendent
was limited to the following criteria:
1. The superintendent must be an USLI graduate.
2. Urban school district classified as A (i.e., nation-wide top 100 large size
districts in terms of student population) or B (i.e., next nation-wide 30 large
size districts in terms of student population) and demographics of low socio-
economic students:
3. Superintendent must have been in office for at least 2 years.
4. Superintendent was in office during the study.
5. District had either successful or unsuccessful quantitative results in student
achievement performance data.
Assumptions
It is assumed that the participants in this case study participated voluntarily
and in good faith by providing true and accurate responses in the interviews. Also,
all pertinent documents to the interviews were provided willingly by the participants
without any concealment of valuable information. Both USC professors for this
study, Dr. Marsh and Dr. Castruita, have absolute credibility with the Urban School
Leadership Institute as well as with the superintendents interviewed producing an
open and confidential environment for the data collection. All data and information
collected is valuable to discover revealing and useful findings.

17

Definition of Terms
For the purpose of this study, the following terms are operationally defined as
follows:
Accountability: A system of monitoring, reporting, and responding to student
achievement results that holds students, parents, teachers, and administrators
responsible for learning outcomes (American Institute for Research, 2003)
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): Federal indicator of annual progress
towards grade-level proficiency for all students required by the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001. NCLB requires that all students by sub-group (e.g., grade,
gender, English Learner status, special education, Title I/socio-economic status, and
ethnicity). Districts must make annual progress towards the goal of 100% student
proficient in English language arts and mathematics by 2014 (EdSource, 2005).
Assessment: Activities which enable districts to know whether students are
learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the standards). Common, regularly-
scheduled district-wide assessments should connect directly with standards,
curriculum, pacing guides, and professional development.
The Urban School Leadership Institute for Superintendents (USLI): A 10-
month executive management program designed to prepare both education career
based and non-education career based leaders to lead urban public school districts
Communications: Public relations or communications office staffed with
experts on dealing with the media to enable the district to communicate its vision to
the public or proactively build support.

18

Curriculum: The materials used to teach. Classroom materials—textbooks,
worksheets, pacing guides, etc.—should address the scope and sequence of the
district’s learning standards.
Data Dashboard: A collection of key indicators that can give the pulse of the
district. The actual indicators selected will depend on the district’s strategic plan.
Family and Community Engagement: All stakeholders/residents of a school
district’s jurisdiction. Districts should offer ways for the community/families to
interact and be involved with the district in support of students.
Finance and Budget: Financial management to ensure that the district’s
budget is balanced and sustainable. Budget should be closely aligned to instructional
priorities.
Governance/Board Relations: School district boards elected from the local
community to govern the district with the responsibility of setting policy.
Superintendents may be involved in developing policy but are mainly responsible for
executing it. Superintendent/board relations are critical for effective district
progress.
House Model: Conceptual framework developed by the Urban School
Leadership Institute of the reform model used in its superintendent
preparation/training program.
Human Resource System and Human Capital Management: Recruitment and
hiring processes as well as support and retention strategies for teachers and
principals with attractive compensation packages.

19

Instruction: The how of teaching – the way in which teachers deliver the
curriculum. Instructors adept at different instructional practices can engage their
students in deeper learning and differentiate their lessons to reach more students.
Labor Relations/Contract Negotiations: Relationships with certificated and
classified unions’ leadership and contract negotiation.
Learning: The process of acquiring new and lasting concepts, skills,
knowledge, behaviors, and mental representations as well as associations (Ormrod,
2006).
Professional Development: Any program or course intended to improve
teachers’ and principals’ effectiveness. It may center on content, instructional
techniques, leadership, or collaboration among teachers in the same grade-
level/subject matter.
Reform Strategies: Strategies used by superintendents/system leaders to
improve student performance. USLI has identified ten key change levers that are
worthy of study: curriculum, assessment, professional development, human resource
system and human capital management, finance and budget, communications,
governance/board relations, labor relations/contract negotiations, family and
community engagement, and strategic plan.
Strategic Plan: Defines the district’s mission, goals, and vision. It also
assigns performance indicators and work plans to each of the district’s primary goals
and serves as the guiding document for district decisions and priorities.

20

Superintendent: Chief administrator of a school district selected and
evaluated by the district’s board of education and responsible/accountable for all
school district’s operations and management.
Teaching: The systematic instructional practices carried out by teachers to
transfer the learning of concepts, skills and knowledge to students.
Theory of Action: Superintendent’s written theory of action of change for the
district to improve based on the district’s context and capacity as well as the
superintendent’s personal belief system.
Organization of the Study
Chapter 1 of the study includes: the introduction to the study, the statement
of the problem, the purpose and the research questions of the study, the significance
of the study, the limitations, delimitations, and assumptions of the study, and the
definitions of terms. Chapter 2 is a review of the relevant literature. Chapter 3
includes the research methodology used in the study, the research design, sampling
procedures, and the instrumentation, and sections on data collection, analysis and
summary. Chapter 4 presents the findings of the study along with an analysis and
discussion of the results. Chapter 5 includes a summary of the study, a summary of
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations for action and further research.

21

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Student Performance
As the new millennium moves forward, student performance within public
school education continues to be in disarray. This disarray even exists in the current
standards-based educational movement sustained by high-stakes accountability
measures led by the federal legislation No Child Left Behind of 2001 (NCLB)
(Hanushek & Raymond, 2004; Shaul & Ganson, 2005). NCLB requires that all
students in public schools be proficient in the academic content areas of English
language arts and mathematics by the year 2014 (Stecher, Hamilton, & Gonzalez,
2003). Considering that accountability for student achievement has become
increasingly transparent both at the school-site and district levels do to the reporting
of student assessment data (EdSource, 2004; O’Day, Bitter, Kirst, Camoy, Woody,
Buttles, Fuller, & Ruenzel, 2004; White, 2007), “progress has varied, and differences
persist among Hispanic, Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Native
Hawaiian, or Other Pacific Islander, and White students on key indicators of
educational performance” (KewalRamani, Gilbertson, Fox, & Provasnick, 2007, p.
iv). Moreover, variable student performance outcomes in public education continue
leading to concerns regarding social and economic implications for not only
individuals but for society as a whole (EdSource, 2007; Friedman, 2005; Reich,
1991).

22

Achievement Gap
Increasingly, research, student assessment data, and news headlines have
revealed how the educational achievement gap between students continues to grow
(California Department of Education, 2007; The Global Education Collaborative,
2007; Martinez & Klopott, 2005; Reed, 2003; Rothstein, 2004; Salamon, 1991).
California’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell declared in a
State of Education address:
Our across-the-board success has still failed to close an achievement gap that
threatens the future of our diverse state. Groups of California children who
have traditionally struggled…continue to trail behind their peers, and the gap
is not closing. …Too often, the struggles of the African American student,
the English learner, [and] the learning disabled student were hidden by
overall school achievement gains… Today we are holding ourselves
accountable for the results of all children. And when we see significant
groups of students failing far short of the goal proficiency that we hold for all
students we must act. (California Department of Education, 2007)

In regards to student performance on English language arts (ELA) across the
state of California (see Table 2.1), the following student assessment data (grades 2 –
11) for the 2006 California Standards Test (CST) came to light: 27.4% of Latino,
29% of African American, 60.3% of White, and 64.3% of Asians were proficient in
ELA (California Department of Education, 2007). In regards to mathematics (see
Table 2.2), 29.8% of Latinos, 24.9% of African American, 53% of White, and 66.9%
of Asians were proficient (California Department of Education, 2007). For students
identified as socio-economically disadvantaged, their proficiency rates in ELA were
even lower: 25.3% for Latino students and 22.9% for African American students. In
the category of mathematics for socio-economically disadvantaged students, similar

23

proficiency outcomes were revealed: 29.8% for Latino, 24.9% for African
American, 53% for White, and 66.9% for Asian (California Department of
Education, 2007).
Table 2.1: ELA Proficiency Rates for Students in California’s Public Schools
Student Sub-Group
ELA Proficiency
Percentages
Socio-Economically
Disadvantaged
NOT Socio-
Economically
Disadvantaged
Latino 27.4 25.3 39.9
African American 29.0 22.9 37.9
White 60.3 39.2 65.7
Asian 64.3 45.8 76.1

Table 2.2: Math Proficiency Rates for Students in California’s Public Schools
Student Sub-Group
MATH Proficiency
Percentages
Socio-Economically
Disadvantaged
NOT Socio-
Economically
Disadvantaged
Latino 29.8 28.1 35.5
African American 24.9 21.6 29.9
White 53.0 38.3 56.6
Asian 66.9 53.2 75.5

This data unquestionably presented the educational achievement gap between
the different groups of students in the state of California. Significantly, there was a
36.9% proficiency difference (i.e., gap) in the proficiency of English language arts
between Asian (highest performing) and Latino (lowest performing) students. In
mathematics there was a 42% proficiency difference (i.e., gap) between the lowest
(African American) and highest ethnic group (Asian). Clearly, the discrepancy in
academic proficiency created the achievement gap between different ethnic groups
and even more so for students considered socio-economically disadvantaged
(Williams, 2003).

24

According to a report published by the U.S. Department of Education
(2007d) based on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) (see
Table 2.3), across the nation in 2005 the following achievement gaps existed
amongst students: in the curricular area of reading, fourth grade African American
students scored 29 points lower than White students, and Latino students scored 26
points lower than White students. Eighth grade African American students scored 25
points lower than White students, and Latino students scored 27 points lower than
White students. In the curricular area of math: fourth grade African American
students scored 26 points lower than White students, and Latino students scored 20
points lower than White students. In the eighth grade, African American students
scored 34 points lower than White students, and Latino students scored 27 points
lower that White students.
Table 2.3: NAEP Comparisons – White to African American and Latino Students
Student
Ethnic-Group
4
th
Grade
Reading
4
th
Grade
Math
8
th
Grade
Reading
8
th
Grade
Math
African American 29 points lower 26 points lower 25 points lower 34 points
lower
Latino 26 points lower 20 points lower 27 points lower 27 points
lower

Performance Implications
In regards to high school graduation rates, the National Center for Education
Statistics published in The Conditions of Education 2007 report that California’s
average high school graduation rate was 73.9% compared to 57.4% for the
neighboring state of Nevada – a difference of 16.5%. On the east coast, the state of
New Jersey’s average high school graduation rate was 86.3% while across the

25

Hudson River the rate was 60.9% for the state of New York – a difference of 25.4%.
There was a difference of 30.2% between the state with the highest high school
graduation rates (Nebraska 87.6%) and the state with the lowest high school
graduation rate (Nevada 57.4%) (U.S. Department of Education, 2007b). Therefore,
throughout the nation from west coast to east coast a varied level of academic
student performance outcome was apparent.
As the nation’s student academic achievement data was disaggregated, it
became evident that student academic performance fluctuated from high to low
levels of proficiency. Consequently, the achievement gap within the different ethnic
groups in public schools was notable as other researchers have recognized (The
Global Education Collaborative, 2007; Martinez & Klopott, 2005; Rothstein, 2004;
U.S. Department of Education, 2007b, 2007c, 200d). Obviously, students’ lower
levels of academic performance has had negative implications on the educational
status of our citizenship, such as students becoming high school drop outs at
alarming rates (U.S. Department of Education, 2007b).
This information is startling especially when according to the U.S. Census
Bureau:
The nation’s Hispanic…population would triple over the next half century.
…Nearly 67 million people of Hispanic origin would be added to the nation’s
population between 2000 and 2050. Their numbers are projected to grow
from 35.6 million to 102.6 million, an increase of 188 percent. Their share of
the nation’s population would nearly double, from 12.6 percent to 24.4
percent. The Asian population is projected to grow 213 percent, from 10.7
million to 33.4 million. Their share of the nation’s population would double,
from 3.8 percent to 8 percent. The black population is projected to rise from
35.8 million to 61.4 million in 2050, an increase of about 26 million or 71
percent. (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004)

26

In comparison, the White population would increase to 210.3 million from 195.7
million leading to a 50.1% of the total population by 2050 (U.S. Census Bureau,
2004).
Sense of Urgency
According to researchers Karoly and Panis (2004) the future workforce will
require specialized skills and higher levels of educational attainment in order to
successfully compete in a global economy. But the current level of educational
achievement of our current students “does not necessarily equate with the skills that
workers need… Workers will increasingly be exposed to new technologies, new
management practices, and development and production” (Karoly & Panis, 2004, p.
47). Therefore, if the population demographics continues to change as projected and
the competing specialized demands for workers continue to revolutionize as well as
the achievement gap continues to grow, we could witness a nation in turmoil driven
by educational, economical, ethnic, and social stratification (Haller & Sharda, 2005;
Werfhorst, 2004).
As student achievement data is revealed, a sense of urgency to improve the
academic performance of students has emerged (Weiss, 2007). Across the nation,
educators, policy-makers, and business and community leaders share the common
concern of progressively educating our future citizenship – especially, when
education can open doors of opportunity in employment, income, health, and overall
socio-economic success (Wirt, Choy, Rooney, Provasnik, Sen, & Tobin, 2004).
According to Perie, Moran, and Lutkus (2005) the “citizens and leaders of the United

27

States have long valued education as a foundation for democracy, a resource for
economic prosperity, and a means of realizing personal goals and individual
potential” (p. iii). The current status of public education’s student performance has
created a viable concern and need to improve the achievement of students. Future
progress of not only individuals but of our nation relies on educational improvement.
Friedman (2005) argued that an educated future populace is vital to our nation’s
global power as a first-world status. Therefore, it is realistic to accept the
perspective that students’ educational performance from all levels affects the future
progress of our society (Reich, 1991; Salamon, 1991).
The Role of the Local System
Necessary to the improvement of student performance at all levels is the role
of the local school system (i.e., district). The school district is the overall
organizational unit which establishes the educational structures, procedures, equity,
expectations, and accountability for all stakeholders involved in the process – from
students to parents to teachers to administrators (Elmore, 2003). The local school
district is ultimately responsible as charged by state laws to educate it’s citizenship to
“help all students acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to participate in
cross-cultural interactions and in personal, social, and civic action that will help
make our nation more democratic and just” (Banks, 2000, pp. vii-viii).
Literature and researchers have asserted that schools/districts must create the
environment and school culture responsive to student learning, performance, and
achievement (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman, 2006; Eaker, DuFour, & DuFour,

28

2002; Elmore, 2006; Gay, 2000; Marzano, 2003; Stanford, 1999; Williams, 2003).
Therefore, the school district must develop and effectively establish systems,
structures, and processes oriented towards teaching and learning for all students.
According to the retired Superintendent of Seattle Schools, Major General John
Stanford, the district’s responsibility is to “reach and teach” every student (Stanford,
1999). Stanford suggested that the school district would be “victorious” in providing
an excellent public education if it focused on: 1) developing a shared vision,
common goals, and a strategic plan for achievement; 2) effectively targeting and
improving instructional practice in the classroom and engaging students; 3)
empowering, supporting, and developing the knowledge and skill of teachers to
teach; 4) holding students and district/school staff accountable for their actions and
outcomes; 5) developing partnerships with the community at large including parents,
media, business members, and political leaders; and 6) championing leadership,
courage, passion, and the “love” for children making a positive difference in the lives
of others.
Professional Learning Community
Researchers Ricard DuFour, Rebecca DuFour, Robert Eaker, and Thomas
Many (2006) have advanced the premise that it takes a “professional learning
community” (PLC) to successfully improve the learning and teaching conditions for
students. According to DuFour et al., the PLC acts as the framework and
organizational structure of the entire district. The PLC establishes the unconditional
commitment by all stakeholders to the collective mission for the educational process.

29

Here, one professional voice is heralded by all members of the district in regards to
the expectations, actions, and outcomes of the district’s work. Student achievement
is the ultimate goal of the PLC.
DuFour et al. advised that the initial step in the PLC process is creating a
guiding coalition or leadership team to build consensus amongst staff members
through open dialogue and cultivating a shared knowledge of the clear and
compelling purpose for learning, teaching, and achievement. The goal of the
development of shared knowledge is for staff “members of a learning community
[to] learn together… [through] data to help paint a picture of the school’s current
reality” (p. 16). According to the researchers, the school district’s mission or
purpose needs to be living and thriving in order to guide a course of action. In
addition, the mission will compel a collective responsibility and commitments by the
staff for the educational process of students. Total commitment by all staff members
to learning and teaching will create a school/district culture that is completely
focused on student needs and achievement (DuFour et. al, 2006; Eaker, DuFour, &
DuFour, 2002; Elmore, 2006). In addition, researcher Darling-Hammond (1996)
recommended that schools and districts be structured and transformed into genuine
“learning organizations” for students and staff in which teaching and learning is the
number one priority. Overall, the context of commitment to teaching and learning
establishes and guides the creation of the PLC.
Educational research has shown that in the process of creating an effective
and productive PLC and as Stanford (1999) advanced a victorious district, the

30

following “best practices” must be realized by the school/district community: 1)
creation, articulation, and living of a shared mission, vision and values for the
educational process; 2) collective inquiry by all to refocus, refine, and reallocate
human, intellectual, and financial resources in a continuously progressive
improvement course of action; 3) collaborative teams in which all members work on
supporting each other to accomplish the agreed upon goals for learning, teaching,
and achievement; 4) action orientation and experimentation in which PLC members
not only “think” and “try” but “do” – problem solve together and have courage to act
on innovative practices for advancement; 5) unconditional commitment to change
and continuous improvement of the educational experiences of all students and staff;
and 6) results orientation in which dialogue, decisions, and movement must be based
on assessment data and performance-driven results (DuFour et. al, 2006; DuFour &
Eaker, 1998; Hightower, 2002; Johnson, 2002; Marsh, 2002).
Researchers Childress, Elmore, and Grossman (2006) emphasized that for the
school district to successfully progress, the infrastructure of the organization must be
built upon a clear set of core values, beliefs, norms, and expectations for the
educational process. The orientation must be around students. The collective values
and beliefs of the stakeholders must drive the goals and work of the district.
Moreover, decision-making at both the school and district levels in regards to
teaching and learning must be reflective of student data and directly aligned to the
school’s vision and mission for student achievement. The guiding message from the
district would be that time and resources would be strategically allocated to

31

positively affect student learning and achievement. Overall, learning depends on
quality teaching which is enabled by structures established by the school and district
(Bernard, 2003; Elmore, 2006; Stanford, 1999).
Accountability
Researchers Carnoy and Loeb (2002) showed in a cross-state analysis, that
“students in high-accountability states averaged significantly greater gains on the
NAEP 8th-grade math test than students in states with little or no state measures to
improve student performance” (p. 305). Current educational accountability systems
for district performance, based on student performance, is driven by state and federal
measures (i.e., No Child Left Behind federal legislation) (EdSource, 2004; O’Day,
Bitter, Kirst, Camoy, Woody, Buttles, Fuller, & Ruenzel, 2004; Stecher, Hamilton,
& Gonzalez, 2003). EdSource (2004) reported that a “central assumption [of NCLB]
is that the key to achieving the desired level of performance for all students lies in
changing state policies, and through those policies changing the behavior of school
administrators, teachers, parents, and ultimately students” (p. 1). The implication,
from an accountability stance, is for the school district to systematically
communicate and take action on improving performance for student learning and
teaching. According to Elmore (2003), the accountability system should
simultaneously push and support educational organizations to improve.
Anderson (2003), in a review of literature, asserted that the school district’s
role as a proactive organization was to engage all stakeholders in a process of
“opportunities to further local district priorities for change and

32

improvement…reaffirming the influence of districts on educational change” (p. 4).
District actions and change should be focused on standards-based instructional
reforms, increasing demands for improved student performance, and data-driven
accountability systems (Anderson, 2003). Here, the district would create change
through: 1) leadership and goal setting for students, teachers, and administrators; 2)
train and build the capacity of staff on pedagogical expectations; 3) communicate
and network professional expertise; and 4) align resources to support district
priorities based on student achievement
Overall, researchers have revealed that the school district must provide the
appropriate environment (i.e., professional learning community), leadership
practices, and tools (i.e., knowledge, skills, and motivation) so that the staff could
precisely direct student performance (Bolman & Deal, 2003; Datnow, 2005; Dufour
et al., 2006; Clark & Estes, 2002, MacIver & Farley, 2003; Marzano, Waters, &
McNulty, 2005; Northouse, 2007; Togneri & Anderson, 2003). The district’s
strategic focus and direction for communication, collaboration, capacity-building,
and accountability can create a powerful network of professionals committed to
student learning and high achievement (Elmore, 2003, 2006).
Coherent Practice
As the organizational unit, the school district must uniformly provide
coherence in practices to direct student performance. Reeves (2000) asserted that for
schools and districts to progress, they must: 1) focus on academic achievement and
clearly communicate learning outcomes; 2) establish clear standards-based curricular

33

choices and instructional practices in reading, writing, and mathematics; 3) provide
for ongoing student assessment and monitoring; 4) and support struggling students
through multiple intervention opportunities. Further, Marzano (2003) stated that a
standards-based “guaranteed and viable curriculum” (p. 22) for teachers to teach and
students to learn is essential for improving academic achievement. Through targeted
curricular and instructional practices led by the district, students would be given the
“opportunity to learn” (Marzano, 2003, p. 22). Moreover, researchers Ainsworth
(2007) and Johnson (2002) shared the significance of formative assessments on
teaching and learning. As a district-wide practice, formative assessments inform and
guide student progress through the redirection and intervention through instructional
practices based on ongoing data.
According to researcher Gilbert (2002), “by following the state’s curriculum
and adopting existing state assessments as its own yardstick for quality, the district
promotes coherence among the demands placed on schools” (p. 1). Overall, the role
of the school district is to change and transform learning and teaching behaviors for
all students and staff alike creating an educational system built and navigated on
absolute performance.
The Role of the System Leader
The role of the system leader (i.e., the superintendent) can be considerably
significant to the advancement of district-wide student achievement. Researchers
have shown that visionary, authentic, and systemic leadership is instrumental in
improving performance of an organization (Bolman & Deal, 2003; Cambron-

34

McCabe, Cunningham, Harvey, & Koff, 2005; Palmer, 1992). In education, the role
of the superintendent is pivotal to affecting student performance (Petersen, 2002;
Waters & Marzano, 2006). Overall, the work of the superintendent is multi-faceted
in shaping educational outcomes for the entire district. Literature has revealed that
the superintendent’s work revolves around: 1) leadership and capacity-building; 2)
the culture and environment of the district; 3) the nature of the work in running a
public school district; and 4) the interactions and relationships with stakeholders in
an arena of governance and politics (Brown & Peterkin, 1999; Nestor-Baker & Hoy,
2001).
Instructional Leadership
In regards to leadership, Petersen (2002) concluded that there “exists a
significant relationship between the articulated instructional vision of the district
superintendent and the district’s ability to become academically successful” (p. 166).
Moreover, Petersen found that the superintendent had a central role in improving the
academic achievement of students through established key relationships with
instructional leaders such as principals and political leaders such as board members.
Petersen noted that superintendents had influential power through their vision and
leadership to: 1) guide district-wide adoption of curriculum and learning standards;
2) establish achievement goals and expectations; 3) create district policy and
organizational structures supporting instructional practices and planning; and 4)
evaluate and hold school/district staff accountable for supporting the district’s
educational vision.

35

Other researchers (Johnson, 1996; Meier, Doerfler, Hawes, Hicklin, &
Rocha, 2006) also established that the system leaders can be extremely significant in
advocating a learning and teaching oriented agenda through their instructional
leadership. According to Meier, Doerfler, Hawes, Hicklin, and Rocha (2006), the
instructional leader is in a significantly instrumental role of authority in which he/she
has the opportunity to affect the district’s directional work of the academic
instruction and student learning and ultimately performance. Led by the
superintendent’s articulated vision for academic achievement, the heart of the
district’s work must be on professional responsibility for student performance. The
superintendent’s role as the chief educator must establish the accountability for all
involved in the educational process of students from teachers and principals to
central staff and school board members. Working in collaboration towards the
articulated vision for student achievement, professional district experts can shape
instructional practices, create supports, institute interventions, and build the staff’s
capacity to systematically advance an academic standards-based learning
environment for all learners (Griffith, 2006; Meier et al., 2006; Stanton-Salazar,
2001). Overall, the superintendent’s instructional leadership makes the difference in
the entire organization by literally pulling and pushing resources together as well as
aligning, protecting, and advancing the school district’s priorities for positive student
performance (Meier & O’Toole, 2003).

36

Transformational Change
The superintendent’s role in improving student performance involves
transformational change and charge within the district’s culture and professional
environment. Primarily, the superintendent, through his leadership team, must
define and establish clear parameters for the work and expectations from the
educational programs and processes affecting student learning (Brown & Peterkin,
1999). Through the superintendent’s charge, the district’s culture and attention
should be centered on uniform curricular implementation and differentiated
instructional practices for diverse learners. Brown and Peterkin (1999) shared that
precedence should be given to knowledge and skill capacity-building for high
student achievement within an accountability structure of motivation. Moreover,
Brown and Peterkin stated that the superintendent’s role was to transform the district
through: 1) equity in the allocation of resources to schools taking into account
student physical, mental, social, economic, and educational needs; 2) explicit
accountability to produce improvement; 3) an incentive program to guide, motivate,
and reward success and sanctions for failure; 4) efficient and effective use of limited
resources; and 5) student academic excellence through learning standards, goals, and
assessments. Fittingly, the superintendent has the comprehensive role to skillfully
and responsibly create a district culture/environment which supports, drives,
enriches, and champions the district’s educational goals for student achievement
(Walters & Marzano, 2006).

37

Chief Executive Officer
According to the Education Writers Association (2003), the role of the
superintendent has changed in regards to student performance and the overall success
of the school district. “Reform efforts that rely solely on the work of individual
teachers or even exemplary principals, however, are not enough” (Education Writers
Association, 2003, p. 2). The superintendent as the chief executive officer (CEO) of
the school district must work in full communication and collaboration with all
stakeholders, including the board of education, to effectively, efficiently, and
progressively run the district. The district’s daily operations must be systematically
established to drive the guiding vision for the district’s ultimate business – the
educational success of students (Ziebarth, 2002). The superintendent is at the helm
of the district steering and propelling the district in an ever-changing environment.
The expectations, culture, values, and integrity that is set forth by the top
district staff (i.e., the superintendent and his/her leadership team) is crucial to the
work and support that is done at the school-site level with teachers, students, and
parents (DuFour & Eaker, 1998). The priorities that are instituted at the district-level
in terms of resource alignment to teaching and learning based on data signifies what
is important and non-negotiable to the district and for overall student achievement.
Accordingly, the district staff should recognize the shared vision of the district’s
leadership and adhere to the charge of the chief executive officer. The effort to
change and improve learning opportunities for all students must be team-driven from

38

the superintendent to the principals to the teachers to the students and to parents (The
Education Writers Association, 2003; Johnson, 2002).
Interactions and Relationships
The role of the superintendent has evolved to include many responsibilities
and demands in the everyday course of the work. According to Fuller, Campbell,
Celio, Harvey, Immerwahr, & Winger (2003), the “superintendency is a public
management position in which political skill and calculation are as important as
expertise about instruction” (p. 57). As a public organization, both the school
district’s environment and dynamics of interactions amongst stakeholders are within
an arena of politics (Wirt & Kirst, 2005). Therefore, the superintendent’s position is
“more akin to a major public leadership position than it is to a simple school
management role…[thus,] all successful big-city superintendents are politicians,
whether they want to be or not” (Fuller et al., 2003, p. 76). In addition to effectively
managing the district (ensuring that the buildings, buses, books, and budgets are
functioning well), the superintendent must champion his/her work in connectedness,
communication, collaboration, community building, child advocacy, and curricular
implementation (Education Writers Association, 2003). Hence, the role of the
superintendent in leading the district is multi-faceted.
Bolman and Deal (2003) presented a distinctive perspective on viewing
system leaders’ leadership and roles within an organization. From Bolman and
Deal’s standpoint, the crucial role of the leader could be contextually defined and
understood by viewing it through the leadership lens of structural, human resource,

39

political, and symbolic. Under the structural lens, the system leader must strive to
understand the rules, roles, goals, mission, and overall functional processes of the
organization and then be able to transform the organization to a higher level. From
the human resource lens, the system leader’s role is to craft positive, open, and
honest relationships, communication, motivation, and overall understand the needs
of the people involved in the organization. Within the political lens, the system
leader concentrates on coalition building and empowerment of different stakeholders
and interest groups. Lastly, in the symbolic lens, the system leader’s role is to
precisely influence and direct the organization’s culture, values, beliefs, rituals, and
vision (Bolman & Deal, 2003).
Strategies System Leaders Utilize for Change and Improvement
As system leaders, superintendents utilize many strategies in their efforts to
positively change and improve the district’s performance. Therefore, purposeful and
planned strategies are necessary for success. According to Kerrins and Cushing
(2001), the “superintendency is a challenge and an opportunity” (p. 1), but avoiding
classic mistakes will contribute to either an overall success or failure. These
mistakes include but are not limited to: 1) not understanding the needs of the current
district – working from the mind-set of another or previous organization; 2) not
capitalizing on the district’s current work and/or efforts – assuming the work that
was done previously was not good enough; 3) making decisions without concrete or
multi-perspective information/data; 4) not demonstrating equity or fairness in
policies and practices; 5) not creating responsibility and/or accountability for others

40

to problem solve issues; and 6) demonstrating limited access, visibility, and
communication with stakeholders (Kerrins & Cushing, 2001). By in large, the
ultimate mistake by a system leader is working in the blind without a guiding plan
for the district’s course of action, communication, and accountability.
Start-Up and Entry Plan
To embark in the system leadership journey, Watkins (2003) suggested
creating a 90 day entry plan in which the system leader visits, observes, listens,
studies, interprets, and develops an understanding of the organizational culture,
stakeholder relationships, and functions of the organization. “The key is to engage in
careful diagnosis and then adapt some general principals” for the organization
(Watkins, 2003, p. 12). The goal is to develop a detailed entry plan as a start-up
strategy for leading the organization. According to Watkins, the plan is based on
specific behaviors, actions, and tasks by the system leader: 1) break away from the
previous organization and preparing to lead in the new organization; 2) accelerate the
learning and understanding of the new organization; 3) work with key district leaders
to analyze and problem-solve situations; 4) produce early wins and build credibility
with staff; 5) develop open and productive relationships with key stakeholders; 6)
plant seeds within the organization to bring alignment of resources and systems in
the future; 7) build and restructure the core leadership team to have the right people
for the right positions; 8) create supportive alliances by putting people on your side;
and 9) seek advise in making decisions and judgment calls.

41

Fundamentally, the entry plan serves as a blueprint to establish the goals and
objectives of the system leader and to guide his/her actions. Neely, Berube, and
Wilson (2002) corroborated the information from above by sharing that the entry
plan process include the following action steps by the superintendent: 1) prepare for
the position by learning all the significant district information; 2) gather information
from key stakeholders both inside and outside district; 3) analyze, interpret, and
communicate information and data; and 4) establish a guiding and actionable
strategic plan for performance and improvement.
Strategic Plan
Researchers and practitioners have shown that the basis to improvement and
success of an organization (i.e., district) is the strategic planning process and
ultimately the strategic plan (Cook, 2000; Reeves, 2002; Stanford, 1999; Stollar,
Poth, Curtis, & Cohen, 2006). According to Cook (2000), “strategic planning is the
means by which community continuously creates artifactual systems toward
extraordinary purpose… [The] concentration of all efforts, resources, activities, and
energies toward a single goal” (p. 47). Furthermore, Cook shared that:
The whole purpose of planning is to make decisions about the future before
the future either forces the decisions or renders any decisions irrelevant; and
to create action, not activity…. The essence of a strategic plan is the
identification of specific desired results, to which all the effort and activity
of the organization will be dedicated. And the success of any plan is
determined only by the results it produces. (p. 53)

For a strategic plan to be comprehensive, it must clearly include the
following essential elements: 1) the guiding vision for the district’s work; 2) the
unchanging values and belief system establishing the parameters and priorities for

42

the district; 3) the genuine mission of the district instituting its identity, purpose, and
commitments; 4) specific measureable goals, objectives, and strategies creating an
action plan with clear tasks, responsibilities and timelines for all involved; and 5) a
precise monitoring and evaluation system to create accountability and performance
indicators towards the expected and desired outcomes/results (Cook, 2000; Reeves,
2002; Stollar, Poth, Curtis, & Cohen, 2006).
Assessment
As the strategic plan is a living document changing as performance and
outcomes are rendered, specific and evident data gauges the effectiveness of the
plan. Therefore, precise assessments and/or data gathering tools are essential for the
information and decision-making process. Chappuis and Chappuis (2007) stated that
assessment is an informative strategy utilized to gauge and monitor the level of
proficiency and/or performance of any one particular set of knowledge or skills over
a period of time.
Research literature has shown that student assessment activities have the
potential to inform districts on whether performance outcomes are being met by both
district staff and students in regards to teaching and learning (Chappuis, Stiggins,
Arter, & Chappuis, 2005; Earl, & Torrance, 2000; Guskey, 2007; Hamilton, 2003;
Popham, 2008). According to Chappuis et al. (2005), district-wide assessment
policies, systems, and practices can be utilized as improvement reform strategies by
establishing: 1) clear expectations for program goals based on academic content
standards, 2) systematic levels of proficiency, 3) explicit data revealing performance

43

levels, and 4) progressive accountability outcomes for monitoring, support, and
intervention. Therefore, assessment as a tool for improvement can promote both
educator and district accountability for the achievement of students (Barton,
2007/2008; Stecher, Hamilton, & Gonzalez, 2003; Earl & Torrance, 2000).
Comprehensive district-wide assessment strategies include: 1) summative
assessments which gather information about student achievement after the learning
has occurred; 2) periodic grade-level and curricular-specific formative assessments
(e.g., benchmark assessments) for information on the learning and progress taking
place at any one time; 3) a data management and information system for the analysis
and reporting of data; and 4) the allocation of resources to support an assessment
infrastructure, practices, and development of staff (Ainsworth, 2007; Anderson &
Krathwohlm 2001; Gallagher & Ratzlaff, 2007; Guskey, 2007; White, 2007).
Curriculum
Researchers have established that as common, regularly-scheduled district-
wide assessments are realized to guide academic performance, there should be a
direct connection to curriculum (McGehee & Griffith, 2001; Reeves, 2001; Reeves,
2005). Specifically, the district’s adopted and implemented curriculum in all
academic areas (i.e., reading/language arts, mathematics, science, history/social
studies, and health) must be based on content learning standards and state curricular
frameworks as a means to advance the appropriate and expected learning (Carr &
Harris, 2001; Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission,

44

2007). Here, the district curriculum must contain all of the essential knowledge and
skills students need to master the state and district learning standards.
In addition, the instruction of the adopted curriculum should be guided by
pacing plans in all content areas (giving students the opportunity to learn) and
aligned to formative assessments for monitoring and intervention in student learning
(Wiliam, 2007). Other researchers have recognized that an appropriate curriculum
should include the following elements: 1) equal access to learning standards for all
students including students with learning disabilities, limited English proficiency,
and/or from low socio-economic-status; 2) sufficiency and appropriateness of
curricular/grade-level materials for all students including those with different
learning needs or challenges; and 3) teachers’ implementation fidelity of the
curriculum supported by district professional development (Gandara, Rumberger,
Maxwell-Jolly, & Callahan, 2003; Gay, 2000; MacIver & Farley, 2003; Marzano,
2003).
Professional Development
Professional development (PD) is the next logical progression to creating an
alignment within the strategic plan for district improvement. The district’s
instructional staff is vital to directly and positively affect student learning.
Therefore, they must be given the “right” tools to be exemplary “craftsman” in their
practice.
Butler (1992) stated that effective professional development programs
purposely attend to the concept of learning as a product, process, and function.

45

“Using knowledge about how learning is produced (function) and about what
happens when people learn (process), participants in effective programs develop new
knowledge and skills as teachers and administrators (product)” (p. 1). The intention
is to affect, direct, change, and enlighten staff’s learning and consequently their
behavior. Professional development must be based on a performance and data driven
plan with the aim to construct the learner’s knowledge and skill and affect their
motivation (Clark & Estes, 2002).
Researchers and literature have revealed that for the PD plan to be effective,
it must include the following elements: 1) alignment to the district’s strategic plan
and identified goals (short-term and long-term); 2) current research-based strategies
for improved student achievement and focus on standards-based content knowledge;
3) a needs assessment process to identify professional knowledge/skill gaps and an
evaluation system to monitor and improve teacher effectiveness, setting high
standards, and promoting continuous learning and leadership; and 4) the district’s
culture, organizational structures, policies, and resources support the implementation
and goals of the PD plan (Darling-Hammond, 1999; Eaker, DuFour, & DuFour,
2002; Guskey, 2000; Hassel, 1999; Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001; National
Center for Research on Teacher Learning).
Human Resources and Human Capital Management
Researchers have shown that high teacher and principal quality as well as
leadership have a positive impact on student achievement (Browne-Ferrigno &
Shoho, 2002; Elmore, 2003; MacIver & Farley, 2003; Nye, Konstantopoulos, &

46

Hedges, 2004; Schulueter & Walker, 2008). Therefore, the recruitment, selection,
and development of quality staff could be rewarding for a school district. Hence, a
well designed human resources and human capital management system (HR) would
be instrumental in the progress and success of a district (Webb & Norton, 2009).
Well designed human resource systems and structures would include: 1) an
attractive recruitment process with appealing compensation and incentive packages;
2) an efficient selection and hiring process based on an evaluative analysis of district
needs; 3) tactful placement procedures for positioning the right staff in the right
context; 4) supportive retention strategies to keep talent in the district; 5) targeted
professional development to enhance staff’s knowledge and skill in support of
student learning; and 6) clear, consistent, equitable, fair, and non-discriminatory
practices and policies (Elmore, 2000, 2003; Hanushek, Kain, & Rivkin, 2004;
Hanushek & Rivkin, 2007; MacIver & Farley, 2003).
The key for HR is selecting and maintaining the best educators for the district
from the teachers to principals to central staff (Blackmore, Thomson, & Barty,
2006). Researcher Jim Collins (2001) stated that a crucial strategy to a successful
organization is “getting the right people on the bus (and the wrong people off the
bus)” (p. 63). The idea is selecting the “right” quality candidates with the “right”
skills and knowledge as well as passion and vision for teaching, learning, and
leadership to be part of the organization.

47

Finance and Budget
Optimal financial management is vital to not only the success but the survival
of the district. The financial and budgetary actions of the district’s leadership align,
support, and advance the district’s programmatic goals and instructional priorities
(Burke, 2004; Davies & Hentschke, 2002; EdSource, 2006).
Literature on school/district finance has established that the following
elements must be present to have efficient and effective budgetary outcomes in the
educational process: 1) the district’s strategic plan for both staff and student
performance is the basis for budget planning and resource allocation; 2) the budget is
aligned to the district’s mission, goals, priorities, and operational activities; 3) the
district’s budgetary process is timely and forecasts for future activities; 4) the
budgetary process is participatory and includes various stakeholders in the decision-
making processes; 5) effective budget and financial safeguards ensure that the
district’s resources are managed properly; 6) communication and procedures for the
budgetary process is standardized and inclusive of schools, central staff, and board
members (Consortium for Policy Research in Education, 2007; EdSource, 2007b;
Odden, 1998; Pan, Rudo, Schneider, & Smith-Hansen, 2003).
Odden and Picus (2008) asserted that the school district must organize its
finances and budgets to translate resources and “inputs” into student learning
“outputs.” The key issue is the “distribution and use of money for the purpose of
providing educational services and producing student achievement” (p. 1). School
districts must “ensure that they can adequately meet the [community’s] productivity

48

expectations and [the state and federal] accountability requirements…to prepare
students for work in the knowledge- and information-based global economy” (p. 1).
Communication
Researchers have shown that progressive school districts utilized the strategy
of communication to positively showcase their district and develop fruitful public
relations (Carlsmith & Railsback, 2001; National School Public Relations
Association, 2002). Therefore, communication is indispensable to the
superintendent’s work to charge the district’s vision and goals; network and build
relationships; and influence performance outcomes (Meier & O’Toole, 2003).
Literature has revealed that a district’s communication plan have the
following particulars to be effective: 1) be aligned to the district’s strategic plan and
openly promote the district’s vision, mission, and goals; 2) communications are
disseminated though various media and comprehensible to the community’s diverse
language needs; 3) advances students’, schools’, and staff’s “great stories” and
district employees publicly convey the district’s message and initiatives; and 4)
communications create partnerships with stakeholders through the involvement and
engagement in discourse (Carlsmith & Railsback, 2001; Cicchelli, Marcus, &
Weiner, 2002; National School Public Relations Association, 2002; Shatkin &
Gershberg, 2007).
Through communication, the district ensures smooth operations in servicing
and handling the needs of both the customers (i.e., students and parents) and staff.
System leaders’ publicly communicating and visiting with schools, staff, and

49

families demonstrates genuine value for the stakeholders of the educational system
and ultimately builds constituency (Demmon-Berger, 2003). Further, the focal point
of communication should be on student learning and achievement: What are
students learning? What should students be learning? How will the educational
community know that students have learned? How is the educational community
helping, supporting, intervening in students’ academic performance for improved
outcomes? (DuFour, DuFour, Eaker, & Many, 2006).
Governance and Board Relations
The school board of education (either appointed by the state or elected by the
community’s constituency) is the governing body of the district responsible for
setting the policies and direction for the district’s operation. The superintendent is
responsible for executing board policies and moving the district in the direction of
the board and re-direct the board if need be based on student learning. Moreover, the
board is charged with the representation and defending of the “educational values
and priorities of the members of their communities, including students, school
system employees, parents, business leaders, civic leaders and taxpayers” (Ziebarth,
2002, p. 1). Thus, school boards working in conjunction with superintendents have
critical roles in improving student achievement (Ziebarth, 2002).
Literature has shown that with the leadership of the superintendent, the board
of education (as a governing body) should successfully: 1) ensure that the district’s
vision, mission, values, and priorities focus on the achievement and needs of
students; 2) establish measurable and achievable goals to improve teaching and

50

learning; 3) establish policies and organizational structures to empower district staff
to accomplish the district’s goals; 4) efficiently allocate budgets and resources
towards fulfilling the district’s vision; 5) create structures which facilitate the use of
data and information to monitor/evaluate programs’ and staff’s effectiveness; and 6)
communicate openly with the community on district policies, educational programs,
and on the district’s finances (California School Boards Association, 2007; Elmore,
2000; Petersen & Short, 2001; National School Boards Foundation, 2001; Ziebarth,
2002).
Labor Relations
Research has shown that developing positive, open, honest, and trusting
relationships can be instrumental in moving an organization forward (Covey, 1989,
1991; Robbins, & Alvy, 2003; Young, 2004). Therefore, establishing and nurturing
productive relationships between system leaders and employees (i.e., labor) can be
very beneficial to the progress of the organization (Cambron-McCade, Cunningham,
Harvey, & Koff, 2005). In a public school district setting, the superintendent
interacts and negotiates with labor unions through the collective bargaining process
(Moe, 2001).
Success in working with the union’s membership involves continuous
investments in developing trusting and productive relationships and understanding
the priorities of others (Covey, 1989, 1991). Literature has revealed that the
following ingredients must exist in constructive and favorable labor relations: 1)
both district and union leadership have trusting relationships, credibility, and

51

exemplify ethical conduct; 2) district and union leadership are continuously trained
on productive bargaining and negotiation principles; 3) all district staff and union
membership are informed of proposals, planning, updates, and modifications to
negotiations and the collective bargaining agreement ; 4) collective bargaining goals
and outcomes are developed in relation to the district’s strategic plan, educational
mission, core values, financial resources, community support, and student
achievement; and 5) a fair and equitable distribution of compensation packages,
evaluations, assignments, health plan, staff development, schedules, and retirement
(Cambron-McCade et al., 2005; Hannaway & Rotherham, 2006; Hess & Loup, 2008;
Hess & West, 2006; Hewitt, 2007; Ingram & Snider, 2008; McFadden & Delapp,
2007; Moe, 2001).
Community and Family Engagement
Fiore (2006) stated that “having positive, productive relationships with a
school’s publics requires, first and foremost, the school leaders understand who the
public are…”(p. 97). In general, all residents of a school district’s surrounding
community can be considered its stakeholders and/or public. Literature dealing with
community and family engagement has established that districts should offer
numerous opportunities for the community and families to interact with the district
and develop a positive partnership in the education of students (Epstein & Sanders,
2006; Ingram, Wolfe, & Lieberman, 2007; Lunenburg & Irby, 2002; Warner, 2002).
In regards to positive relationships and open communication, it is important that the
district receive feedback from the community and families on the district’s

52

performance. Overall, increasing community and/or public satisfaction can lead to
greater support for district sponsored or initiated activities such as bond measures
(Henderson & Mapp, 2002).
Researchers have revealed that the following district actions and conditions
can lead to improved community and family relations leading to improved student
achievement: 1) the district provides ongoing parent trainings and has a referral
system for parent needs and for recruiting volunteers; 2) school/district staff are
trained on working with parents in a mutually responsible partnership; 3) written and
oral communication is in a language and/or format that parents can understand; 4)
schools/district support parents with strategies to use at home to improve students’
academic success; 5) parents and community are encouraged to participate in the
schools’/district’s governance and advisory councils; and 6) the district proactively
seeks out community organizations and/or institutions for networking and
partnerships (Epstein & Sanders, 2006; Fiore, 2006; Henderson & Mapp, 2002;
Ingram, Wolfe, & Lieberman, 2007; Lunenburg & Irby, 2002; Warner, 2002).
Preparation of System Leaders
Effective and strategic utilization of the reform strategies (e.g., strategic plan,
assessment, curriculum, professional development, human resources, finance and
budget, communication, governance and board relations, labor relations, and
community engagement) can increase a system leader’s success in advancing their
work with the educational community. In addition to passion, courage, and inner
drive, system leaders must have the knowledge and skill to lead their organizations

53

(Bolman & Deal, 2002; Clark & Estes, 2002). As Lafee (2004) revealed, system
leaders (e.g., superintendents) must be “great achievers” on a mission to implement
change, improve progress, transform an organization, and achieve higher results. To
successfully accomplish change and obtain positive results, superintendents must
have a myriad of tools, tricks, and thoughts to accomplish their work. Successfully
leading the district is an art form which would require a treasure chest of tools to do
the job.
Superintendent’s Actions
Stanford (1999) shared that superintendents, through their leadership, should
create, inspire, and drive the following conditions: 1) a common vision and an
action plan for the district’s work; 2) focus on student learning and teacher
instruction; 3) goal-oriented achievement system based on accountability; 4) create
school-conditions which are welcoming and engaging to students; 5) facilitate
change and empower others to be leaders; and 6) create professional capital through
partnerships. The creation of such a progressive environment takes much leadership,
knowledge, skill, and motivation. Hence, researchers and literature have established
that the preparation and development of system leaders is crucial to their overall
success (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2007; Dembo &
Marsh, 2007; the Broad Foundation & the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2003;
Murphy and Vriesenga, 2006; Shulman, Golde, Conklin Bueschel & Garabedian,
2006; Walker, Golde, Jones, Conklin Bueschel, & Hutchings, 2008).

54

Traditional and Non-Traditional Programs
Both traditional (university-based) and non-traditional (non-university-based)
preparation programs can enhance the knowledge and skill of acting and/or
perspective educational leaders creating the opportunities and habits of mind to be
critical thinkers and problem solvers (Walker et al., 2008). As a traditional
university-based preparation program for systems leaders, the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching (2007) created a framework to develop and
prepare superintendents through the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate
(CPED). The CPED is a conglomerate of universities throughout the nation which
have committed to the “redesign and transform doctoral education for the advanced
preparation of school practitioners and … academic leaders” (The Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2007, p. 1). The CPED’s philosophy
is rooted in the following ideologies: the rigorous study of teaching and learning;
creating professional learning environments as “laboratories of practice” in which
student practitioners undertake their studies; and “capstone” projects in which
student practitioners work in teams to produce demonstrations of their newly
acquired knowledge and skill (The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching, 2007). The CPED’s goal is to create high functioning leaders through
advanced professional, intellectual, creative, and innovative educational processes
for students and practitioners alike.
According to Dembo and Marsh (2007), the preparation and development of
effective educational leaders is of utmost importance for urban education. In another

55

traditional university setting, the Rossier School of Education (RSOE) at the
University of Southern California (USC) has developed an education doctoral
(Ed.D.) program focused on preparing students and practitioners of education as
system leaders in urban settings. USC’s Ed.D. program was founded on the four
basic principles of leadership, accountability, diversity, and learning. Students work
in cohorts in a three-year program to develop both their knowledge base as education
scholars and skill as problem solvers. The overall goal of the program is to create
highly skilled and knowledgeable leaders with numerous tools, tricks, and thoughts
to tackle the challenges of public education (Dembo & Marsh, 2007).
Non-traditional (non-university-based) superintendent preparation programs
have taken to the calling to train system leaders for the task of running public school
districts throughout the nation. Two such organizations are the Broad Academy for
Superintendents and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. According to these non-
traditional organizations, their premise is to train superintendents to be great leaders
leading great school systems. Candidates for system leadership positions are
recruited from both career educators (i.e., school district staff) and non-career
educators (i.e., military and business leaders) with proven track records (The Broad
Academy for Superintendents and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, 2003).
Complex and Dynamic Role
Ultimately, traditional and non-traditional leadership programs must prepare
individuals for the role of superintendent. The role and the job of the
superintendency is amazingly complex (Demmon-Berger, 2003; Fuller et at., 2003)

56

resulting in superintendents leaving the profession at higher rates (Hoyle, Bjork,
Collier, & Glass, 2005; National Council of Professors of Educational
Administration, 2007). According to the National Council of Professors of
Educational Administration, “twenty-first superintendents must have the skills to
augment instructional methods, in addition to interpret assessment data as well as
explain their district’s achievement level” (p. 2). Therefore, preparation programs
must give present and future superintendents the opportunistic tools, tricks, and
thoughts to allow them to allow them to navigate the complex and dynamic roles of
educational, political, and managerial leadership (Johnson, 1996).
Researchers Hoyle, Bjork, Collier, and Glass (2005) shared that
superintendent preparation programs (both traditional and non-traditional) should
prepare educational leaders to successfully deal with the increasing accountability
measures established by state and federal guidelines; progressively attend to the
changing demographic trends and student diversity; and effectively meeting the
needs of challenging students with specific needs such as special education, poverty,
or English learners. Hoyle et al. also shared that superintendent’s preparation
include training on productively working, changing, and transforming the district’s
organizational culture into a high performing visionary culture of leadership,
ownership, empowerment, community, and equity. Within the leader’s training, the
following crucial concentrations must be emphasized: 1) positively working with the
board of education through shared governance; 2) effective and transparent
communication to build positive relations, including community relations; 3)

57

strategic and efficient management of the district’s resources and operations; 4)
adopting and implementing quality curriculum and instructional practices which lead
to improved student learning; 5) systemic management of human resources to
increase the quality of district staff affecting students’ lives through ethics and
values; and 6) leadership performance assessments for continuous reflection,
improvement, and accountability (Hoyle et al., 2005).
Stewards of the Discipline
Preparation programs such as the Ed.D. Program at USC and the Broad
Academy for Superintendents and the Thomas B. Fordham Institute are continuously
searching for innovative ways to improve the quality of training for system leaders
(Dembo & Marsh, 2007; the Broad Foundation & the Thomas B. Fordham Institute,
2003). The preparation must transform system leaders into “stewards of the
discipline” as referred by Shulman, Golde, Conklin Bueschel, and Garabedian
(2006). As “stewards” of education, these system leaders are responsible for the
integrity of the educational process for students and the community as a whole.
As literature and researchers have shared, the superintendent’s preparation
and background must guide him or her to perform their job competently within the
context of the district’s social, political, and economic realities (Dominguez, Ivory,
& McClellan, 2005; Cambron-McCade et al., 2005; Metzger, 2003). The
superintendent must be equipped to be what Eiter (2002) calls a courageous strategic
thinker facilitating change to achieve booming results. Overall, superintendents’
preparation should allow him or her to: envision high student learning; advance the

58

art of teaching through professional development; demonstrate connectedness to the
community; communicate well; perform data analyze and interpret results; build a
high-performing teams at both the school and district levels; foster leadership and
build capacity for the district’s staff; monitor effectiveness of staff and programs to
create accountability; and establish and maintain trusting relationships with the
various stakeholders (Bjork, Kowalski, & Browne-Ferrigno, 2005; Cambron-
McCade et al., 2005; Dominguez, Ivory, & McClellan, 2005Hoyle et al., 2005;
Walker, Golde, Jones, Conklin Bueschel, & Hutchings, 2008).
Conclusion
The review of literature revealed explicit strategies, practices, and
connections to the monumental work of system leaders charged with the
improvement of student achievement. In addition, the literature reviewed the
concerning status of student performance throughout the nation – students are not
performing at high levels and the achievement gap is increasing. Significantly,
superintendents are in positions of authority to create change and lead a more
optimistic future for student learning.
The focus of this study was on developing an understanding of how
superintendents were utilizing and implementing specific reform strategies
throughout their system leadership to ultimately improve student performance. The
literature revealed that visionary, authentic, and systematic leadership was an
exemplary practice by superintendents to successfully move their districts to
progressive levels. Within the leadership, specific reform strategies were key to a

59

district’s work in the educational process. These strategies were, but not limited to:
1) strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3) curriculum, 4) professional development, 5)
human resource system and human capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7)
communications, 8) governance/board relations, 9) labor relations/contract
negotiations, and 10) family and community engagement.
Thus, the review of literature contributed to the understanding of how in
addition to the system leaders’ leadership, knowledge, skill, motivation, and
preparation, the role of the school district was extremely significant in establishing
and advancing the district’s organizational culture with common goals and priorities
for teaching and learning. Considering the importance of quality education for our
nation’s citizenship, superintendent preparation is critical for success on many levels
– especially when system leaders “can change the trajectory of children’s lives, alter
the behavior of organizations, and expand the possibilities of whole communities”
(Houston, 2001, p. 1).

60

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter describes the research design, sample, instrumentation, and
methodology for the data collection and analysis carried out in this research project.
The purpose of this study is to develop a clearer understanding of the strengths and
challenges faced by an urban school district superintendent and the specific reform
strategies utilized and implemented to ultimately improve student performance
district-wide. The purpose also includes understanding the role of the
superintendent’s professional background and experiences in junction to the reform
strategies used.
Specifically, this study focuses on superintendent’s utilization of ten key
reform strategies (including quality and degree of implementation) identified by the
Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) as guiding principles and framework for
district success. The USLI framework is known as the House Model (Appendix A)
for superintendent leadership. The ten key reform strategies identified are: 1)
strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3) curriculum, 4) professional development, 5) human
resource system and human capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7)
communications, 8) governance/board relations, 9) labor relations/contract
negotiations, and 10) family and community engagement. A definition of each key
reform strategy and its relation of the USLI House Model are found in Appendix B.
The findings from this research project will suggest fundamentally useful strategies
that may inform the work of superintendents as well as superintendent preparation

61

programs such as the Urban School Leadership Institute for district success through
the improvement of the student performance.
This research study is a component of a larger research project which
examined reform strategies employed by superintendents of large urban school
districts to positively impact student achievement. The focus of this study is
narrowed to an analytical case study methodology of an urban school district
superintendent. This study will investigate the following research question and four
related sub-questions:
1. How are the ten key reform strategies being used by the urban school district
superintendent in his or her respective district?
a. How does the quality and degree of implementation of ten key reform
strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges in the district
when the superintendent took office?
b. What additional major reform strategies (if any) were used? How do
they correspond to the elements of the House Model?
c. How does the choice and implementation of the ten key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?
The purpose of this study suggests that a multi-method qualitative
methodology within a case study format be utilized to investigate the research
questions. Here, the goal is to obtain both rich descriptions and grounded
explanations of the actions and processes within a specific context. In this case study

62

the focus is to understand the quality and degree of reform strategies implemented by
an urban school district superintendent and the subsequent impact on student
achievement in his/her district. Therefore, strategic interviews were chosen as the
main data collection tool for obtaining rich detailed information. Patton (2002)
asserts that a “common qualitative sampling strategy [is] studying a relatively small
number of special cases that are successful at something [or not] and therefore a
good source of lessons learned” (p. 7). In addition, “qualitative methods facilitate
the study of issues in depth and in detail” (Patton, 2002, p. 14) in a holistic and
contextual setting.
Detailed quality information will be gained by conducting in-depth
observations, strategic interviews, and a thorough analysis of the data collected.
Promising practices could be discovered for other practitioners, policy makers,
educators, and researchers to utilize. The unit of analysis in this case study is one
urban school district along with the respective superintendent and key staff members.
The research questions, data collection procedures, and instruments for data
analysis will be completely standardized, codified, and used systematically within
the case study. The Urban School Leadership Institute developed the research-based
conceptual framework, the House Model, which serves as the analytical foundation
for this study. The House Model was the subject of a previous study by Takata,
Marsh, and Castruita (2007), The Broad Superintendents Academy Qualitative
Project Final Report (Phase I). In Phase I, completed in 2006, the researchers
investigated two USLI trained superintendents and their respective school districts to

63

understand the reform strategies implemented to improve student achievement
(Takata, Marsh, & Castruita, 2007). Also, “the project team sought to clarify the
ways in which the USLI program helped to prepare the superintendents for their
leadership positions” (p. 1).
Phase II is conducted under this research study as a continuance of the
previous USLI Phase I research project. Phase I established the preliminary research
methodology and findings as well as the analytical and conceptual foundation for the
continuation of the research in Phase II. Phase II establishes a working partnership
with USLI and therefore will focus on the ten key actionable theory reform strategies
identified by USLI at the district level to improve student achievement. The
information and data that will be collected from the district and individual interviews
is true and precise, but fictitious names will be assigned to the districts and
participants to protect issues of confidentiality. USC’s Institutionalized Review
Board (IRB) guidelines and procedures will be followed to the fullest extent to
protect confidentiality of the participants as well as the integrity of this research
project.
The Sample
The sampling for this case study was purposefully selected by the staff from
the Urban School Leadership Institute in collaboration with the University of
Southern California’s (USC) professors David D. Marsh, Ph.D. and Rudy Castruita,
Ed.D. to generate a set of findings that will specifically lead to improvements in
superintendents’ preparation programs as well as support superintendents’ work in

64

improving student achievement. Superintendents and their respective school districts
were identified and selected based on the following criteria:
1. The superintendent must be a USLI graduate.
2. The school district must be identified from the largest 130 urban districts in
the United States.
3. The superintendent must have been in office for at least 2 years.
4. Superintendent is in office during the study.
The districts’ student achievement data in the areas of English language arts and
mathematics for elementary, middle, and high school students will be quantitatively
analyzed but will not be a sampling criterion.
The participants in the study will include the superintendent, two key players,
and reform strategy-specific key players identified by the superintendent to be
interviewed on the ten key reform strategies. All participants in the study are
volunteers and will be informed of the researchers’ efforts to protect and honor
issues of confidentiality. No real names will be used in the study.
Selected District
East-Side Public School District
East-Side Public School District, pseudonym, (EPSD) is an urban district
located in the east coast of the United States. EPSD serves a diverse-student
population of over 21,000 within the following schools: three early childhood
schools, fourteen elementary schools, seven pre-kindergarten through eighth grade
schools, six middle schools, and two high schools. The community of EPSD is made

65

up of people from 50 different countries speaking a total of 37 different languages.
EPSD employs approximately 4,500 professional and support staff members.
EPSD’s mission is to provide excellent educational experiences and services
to inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve and to care. EPSD has outlined
a strategic plan with top priorities focused on: 1) creating excellence in academics,
athletics, and the arts; and 2) offering instructional programs that are challenging and
rigorous. The central administration has set learning goals and expectations for all
students to meet and has developed programs and initiatives for assistance and
support of students’ attainment of proficiency. Examples of these programs are the
Reading First/Reading Recovery initiatives that focus on early literacy development,
the Full Option Science System (FOSS) for a hands-on approach to science
education, and the incorporation of technology into every aspect of the instructional
program. Student computers and teacher work-stations have been installed in every
classroom giving all students and staff access to computer assisted presentations,
Internet and e-mail.
EPSD has emphasized creating district-wide championship teams focused on
athletics. The focus is on building relationships and character development for all
grades through sports instruction. This has resulted in EPSD’s schools winning
county and/or state championships in baseball, soccer, track, and football. EPSD has
also focused on creating arts-rich school cultures providing students instruction in
music, visual arts, theater and dance. This has resulted in the EPSD winning state
championships in music competitions.

66

Another of EPSD’s priority is to increase student performance on state tests.
A strategy used by EPSD is to align curriculum, instructional strategies and
professional development to state assessments. Through its strategic plan, EPSD has
implemented district-wide academic benchmarking for student outcomes as well as
formative assessments to guide instructional modifications and interventions for
students meeting of standards. This has resulted in many of EPSD’s schools meeting
their Adequate Yearly Progress as mandated by the federal legislation No Child Left
Behind.
EPSD’s final priorities emphasize school safety, discipline, and
district/school culture. Strategies implemented include a truancy patrol, community
liaisons, school uniforms, respectful treatment of all people, district-wide pledge of
ethics, and creating a professional learning community. Here, a pledge is taken
every morning by students as well as staff at every meeting which includes the
following commitments: 1) treating others with respect, 2) acknowledging that the
school community is a “special place”, 3) listen and communicate respectfully with
others, 4) dress appropriately, 5) inspire the best in self and others, 6) care about
others, and 7) be a life-long learner. In addition, EPSD strategizes to increases
student and staff morale by acknowledging and celebrating school/district
achievements and efforts at board meetings.

67

District’s Participants
Superintendent
Superintendent Anthony Perez, a pseudonym, was born and raised in the
community of EPSD as well as a product of ESPD schools. Superintendent Perez
earned both bachelor’s and master’s degrees from major universities in the United
States. The superintendent served in EPSD as a teacher, supervisor and then director
of curriculum and instruction, assistant superintendent of schools, and ultimately
superintendent of schools in 2005. Superintendent Perez created a strategic plan
which clearly established and set forth the district’s mission, vision, and priorities.
Superintendent Perez instituted successful town hall forums in which parents
and community members can converse with the superintendent regarding EPSD’s
progress and initiatives. The superintendent is also a 2006 graduate of the Urban
School Leadership Institute (USLI). USLI is a 10-month program consisting of
learning modules around the country including lectures, classes and seminars to lead
the district.
Key Player 1
Key Player 1 had the unique title of Assistant Board Secretary which is
equivalent to the position of a chief operating officer for the district. For simplistic
terms, the term Chief Operating Officer (COO) will be used to refer to the Assistant
Board Secretary. The COO’s responsibilities included overseeing all day-to-day
business operations for the district. The COO began his work with the East-Side
Public Schools in 2001.

68

Key Player 2
Key Player 2 had the unique title of Assistant Superintendent for Teaching
and Learning which is equivalent to the title of chief academic officer (CAO) for a
school district. The Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning
responsibilities included overseeing the entire district’s academic programs for all
students. The Assistant Superintendent rose through the ranks in EPSD as a
traditional educator beginning her career in the district as a teacher.
Other Key Players
The superintendent identified and provided access to additional participants
to be interviewed by the research team in regards to the ten key reform strategies.
These reform strategy-specific players were considered to have expert knowledge
and would be able to provide in-depth information in relation to the reform
strategies. The following individuals were identified by the superintendent to
participate in semi-structured group interviews relating to their area of expertise:
Strategic Plan Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant Superintendent for
Human Resources, Assistant Board Secretary (Chief Operating Officer), Assistant
Superintendent for Teaching and Learning (Chief Academic Officer), and School
Business Administrator (Chief Financial Officer).
Assessment Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant Superintendent for
Teaching and Learning and Director of Research, Evaluation, and Assessment.

69

Curriculum Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant Superintendent for Schools,
Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning (Chief Academic Officer), and
Supervisor of Science Programs.
Professional Development Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant
Superintendent for Schools, Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning
(Chief Academic Officer), and Staff Development Coordinator.
Human Resources Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant Superintendent for
Human Resources, Supervisor of Compensation and Benefits, and Supervisor of
Recruitment and Hiring.
Finance and Budget Reform Strategy-Specific Players: School Business
Administrator (Chief Financial Officer) and District Finance Comptroller.
Communication Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Assistant Board Secretary (Chief
Operating Officer) and Public Information Associate.
Governance and Board Relations Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Board of
Education President, Board of Education Vice-President, and two additional Board
Members.
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Reform Strategy-Specific Players:
Board of Education Vice-President, President of EPSD Labor Union, and School
Business Administrator (Chief Financial Officer).
Family and Community Engagement Reform Strategy-Specific Players: Board of
Education President, two additional Board Members, and Assistant Superintendent
for Family and Community Outreach.

70

Instrumentation
The instrumentation for this study was developed by a twelve-member
research team in collaboration with staff from the Urban School Leadership Institute.
The team members were ten doctoral students in the Ed.D. Program at the University
of Southern California led by professors, David D. Marsh, Ph.D. and Rudy Castruita,
Ed.D. The research staff from the Urban School Leadership Institute was led by
Jennifer Welsh Takata, Ed.D. The research team met during the spring semester of
2008 to develop the instrumentation. This study utilized the work from the Phase I
study by Takata, Marsh, and Castruita (2007) as a guide and foundation for this
study, Phase II. Therefore, the USLI House Model from Phase I served as the main
conceptual framework to develop the work for this study.
During the instrumentation development process, each of the ten doctoral
students was assigned one of the ten reform strategies identified by the Urban School
Leadership Institute from the House Model to research. The doctoral students
created rubrics on the quality and degree of district-wide implementation of the lever
to improve student achievement. After the review of literature and collaborative
discussions, the research team focused on two conceptual frameworks (described in
more detail below) and three data collection/analysis instruments for the study. The
instruments were reworked before the actual data collection took place.
Frameworks for Instrument Design
Conceptual Framework A: Conceptual Framework A serves as the basis for
this study. This framework is based on the House Model (Appendix A) developed

71

by the Urban School Leadership Institute as a guide for the preparation and actions
of a superintendent for district success. The staff from the Urban School Leadership
Institute created the House Model from a review of literature and research-based best
practices. The House Model framework includes the following components (i.e.,
“rooms”) for district-wide focus and leveraged improvement reform:
1. Superintendent entry plan
2. Theory of action/strategic plan and resource reallocation/data dashboard
3. Instructional alignment
4. Operational excellence
5. Stakeholder connections and satisfaction
6. Increasing student achievement, closing the achievement gaps, and
improving college readiness (Takata, Marsh, & Castruita, 2007).
Incorporated into the House Model’s “rooms” are specific strategic actions and/or
reform strategies for a superintendent’s focus to systematically change and improve
the district. The ten key reform strategies focused in this study were derived from
Conceptual Framework A.
Conceptual Framework B: Conceptual Framework B is based on ten key
reform strategies within the House Model identified by the Urban School Leadership
Institute for overall improvement in district and student performance. As identified
earlier, these key reform strategies are: 1) strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3)
curriculum, 4) professional development, 5) human resource system and human
capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7) communications, 8) governance/board

72

relations, 9) labor relations/contract negotiations, and 10) family and community
engagement. Conceptual Framework B was developed by the research team of the
ten USC doctoral students under the direction of professors Dr. Marsh and Dr.
Castruita. The team was responsible for researching and reviewing the pertinent
literature specific to the assigned reform strategy. Each team member created a pair
of rubrics exemplifying both the quality and degree (i.e., extent) of implementation
for each reform strategy from a district level. The ten rubrics for the ten key reform
strategies can be found in Appendix C.
Data Collection Instruments
The data collection instrumentation for this study was created through the
utilization and development of conceptual frameworks A and B. The instruments
include the following: The Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix D), Key
Player Interview Guide (Appendix E), and the Reform Strategy-Specific Interview
Guide (Appendix F). Both the Superintendent and Key Player Interview Guides
focused on the context of the school district during the superintendents’ tenure. This
included the district’s strengths and challenges as well as strategies and/or reform
strategies the superintendent used to improve student performance. Superintendent
Interview Guide also included questions on the superintendent’s professional and
personal background as well as experiences in preparation for the superintendency.
Both interview guides grew out of the previous research from the Phase I Urban
School Leadership Institute report. The Reform Strategy-Specific Interview Guide
focused on key reform strategies utilized by the school district staff to improve

73

student performance. All the instrumentation provided a systematic structure and
process for the collection and organization of the qualitative data for this study.
Table 3.1 demonstrates the relationship between the research questions and
the data collection instruments. For example, the Superintendent Interview Guide
includes the following questions: Describe the overall status of the district when you
assumed your position as Superintendent? Considering the context of the district
when you arrived, what strategies did you use to improve the overall condition of the
district? These questions seek information and understanding on the contextual
status (i.e., strengths and challenges) of the school district as the superintendent took
charge as well as on the key reform strategies utilized by the superintendent to
improve student performance district-wide.
Table 3.1: Relationship of Research Questions to Data Collection Instruments

RQ:
10 Key
Strategies
RQa:
Factors
Context
RQb:
Additional
Strategies
RQc:
Background/
Experiences
Superintendent
Interview Guide

X X X X
Key Player
Interview Guide

X X X
Specific Dimension
of Reform Interview
Guide

X X X

Instrument 1: The Superintendent Interview Guide
The Superintendent Interview Guide from the Phase I study was reworked by
the research team to reflect the purpose and research questions for this study. The
revised Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix D) provided a script for the

74

interviewer as well as probing open-ended questions for the data collection process.
The format for the superintendent’s interview was conducted in two phases: one 60-
minute interview on day one for questions 1 and 2 below and an additional 60-
minute interview on day two for questions 3 and 4. The following are the questions
from the Superintendent Interview Guide:
1) Describe the overall status of the district when you assumed your position
as Superintendent? What were the major strengths of the district? What
were the major challenges facing the district? What was the overall
academic profile of the district?
2) Considering the context of the district when you arrived, what strategies
did you use to improve the overall condition of the district? What
specific strategies did you employ to improve student achievement within
your district? Who within the district was involved in selecting those
strategies? How would you describe the level of implementation you
have achieved within your district for each of the reform strategies you
used?
3) Please describe key aspects of your previous background/experience that
played a role in your preparation for effective educational leadership.
How did that preparation help you to select and implement appropriate
reform strategies designed to improve student achievement?
4) On a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high), please rate the extent to which your
background influenced the manner in which you implemented each

75

change lever. (Reform strategies: Strategic Plan, Assessment, Curriculum,
Professional Development, HR System and Human Capital Management,
Finance and Budget, Communications, Governance and Board Relations,
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations, and Family and Community
Engagement).
Instrument 2: Key Player Interview Guide
The Key Player Interview Guide (Appendix E) reflects the questions 1 and 2
from the Superintendent Interview Guide from above with the omission of questions
3 and 4. The interview questions were worded to derive information on the key
player’s perspective on the superintendent’s actions to improve student performance
in relation to the research questions for the study. For example, question number 2
reads: Considering the context of the district, what process did the Superintendent
use to determine key strategies to improve student achievement? What specific
strategies did the Superintendent employ to improve student achievement within the
district? What was your involvement in selecting and/or implementing those
strategies? How would you describe the level of implementation achieved within
your district for each of the reform strategies used? The Key Player Interview Guide
was constructed by the research team to provide for 60-minute interviews.
Instrument 3: Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guide
The Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guide (Appendix F) was a
result of the collaborative work of the research team to collect data on the ten key
reform strategies identified by USLI as a focus for this study. The Specific

76

Dimension of Reform Interview Guide is reflective of the extensive research
conducted by each of the research team members on each of the key reform
strategies. This research led to the development of ten strategy-specific rubrics for
the measurement and analysis of the quality and extent of implementation of each
lever within a school district for improvement of student performance. These rubrics
are the basis for the guiding and probing questions for the reform strategy-specific
interviews. Each quality rubric and for specific reform strategies as well as the
implementation rubric can be found in Appendix C.
The Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guide was created to conduct
semi-structured group interviews of key participants having specific knowledge of
each of the ten key reform strategies identified in this study. The aim was to
interview each strategy-specific group for approximately 60-minutes with open-
ended questions. The interviewers utilized information from the key strategy-
specific rubrics to probe the interviews regarding the reform strategies in relation to
the superintendents’ actions to improve student performance. The Specific
Dimension of Reform Interview Guide questions include:
1) What is your district currently doing with regard to the identified reform
strategy? What has been the superintendent’s specific strategies?
2) Is your current reform strategy at all linked to improving student
achievement—please explain?

77

3) What has been your success in getting your current reform actually
implemented in this district and what challenges do you now face in this
regard?
4) How does your current effort differ from what you were doing 3 or 4
years ago?
5) For your approach 3 or 4 years ago, to what extent was that approach
fully implemented and what challenges did you face then?
Data Collection
The data collection process was facilitated and realized by the joint efforts
between USC’s Dr. Marsh and Dr. Castruita and the Urban School Leadership
Institute. USLI provided the initial access to the school districts identified for this
study. Dr. Castruita communicated with the superintendents via email and telephone
calls to establish commitment to the study and set the stage for the data collection
process. An initial letter was mailed to the superintendents by the USC professors
regarding background information for the study and USC’s Institutional Review
Board (IRB) process. A second letter was mailed to the superintendents regarding
specific information for the study including the dates for the on-site data collections
visits. The data collection was carried out in a two-day on-site visitation with all the
participants during the month of August 2008.
The site visit was be conducted by a four member research team composed of
USC professor Dr. Castruita and three doctoral students. Prior to the on-site
visitations, the participating superintendent received documentation describing the

78

study including requests for the identification of 2 to 4 key staff members who had
knowledge about each of the reform strategies as participants for the data collection
interviews. Participants were asked to bring a few key documents related to the
interview topic. The interview questions were based on the interview guides
developed specifically for this study from the research questions. These interview
questions sought information on the strengths, challenges, and strategies the
superintendent used as he/she entered the school district to improve student
performance – what strategies were used to make change happen. The interview
questions were also based on the ten key reform strategies. All participants were
asked for permission to digitally record the interviews and for extensive field notes
to be taken by the research team.
Day-One of the on-site data collection process included individual one-hour
semi-structured interviews with the superintendent as well as two separate interviews
with two different key players who truly understood the overall focus of the district.
The superintendent’s interview focused on the strengths, challenges and overall
reform strategies that the superintendent had undertaken in the district. The key
players’ interviews gave each participant a chance to frame the strength and
challenges of the district in distinct ways to add real insight to how the reform
developed. The interviews were conducted at the district’s offices. The
Superintendent and Key Player Interview Guides were utilized for these interviews.
In addition, Day-One included one-hour small group interviews with key
staff members on specific key reform strategies. These small group interviews

79

included between 2 and 4 people from the district who gave the best information on
the approaches to specific reform strategies. The Specific Dimension of Reform
Interview Guide was used in these interviews. The research team met at the end of
Day-One to consolidate and identify missing information as well as raise new
questions that sought to be answered on Day-Two.
Day-Two included additional one-hour small group interviews with other key
staff members on the remaining specific key reform strategies. An exit interview
was held with the superintendent on Day-Two for up to one-hour to revisit the
overall reform strategies implemented and to clarify any missing information for the
researchers’ understanding. In addition, the superintendent’s background and
experience was explored and how this related to his work in his current position.
Table 3.2 below demonstrates the two day on-site plan for the interviews and data
collection process.
Table 3.2: Data Collection Activities

Morning of
Day One
Afternoon of
Day One
Morning of
Day Two
Afternoon of
Day Two
Superintendent
Interview
X

X
Key Player Interview X

Specific Dimension
of Reform Interview
X X

Prior and during all the data collection interviews, all the participants were
assured of full confidentiality. Assurances were made by the research team that no
real names would used in the report based on the USC’s Institutional Review Board

80

(IRB) protocol. Also, as the interviews were digitally recorded for accuracy, the
recordings were used only by the research team. To protect and ensure
confidentiality, the recordings were keyed and not labeled with the participants’ real
names. Both the recordings and detailed field notes were handled only by the
research team to ensure confidentiality of the interviews and notes. Before the data
collection procedures, the participants were given a full description of the study as
well as their rights to consent or reject (at any time) their participation in the study.
This process was very critical to protect the people involved due to the district’s
hierarchical structure of organization.
The research team followed USC’s strict guidelines of the IRB process which
was begun in April of 2008. USC’s IRB committee oversees all research projects
conducted by USC students and staff. Research proposals are review by the IRB
committee to ensure that all of the participant’s rights are protected and strict ethical
standards are upheld. The research team submitted one IRB proposal for the ten
related studies conducted by each doctoral student, including this study. This was
possible due to the research team’s collaborative work and use of common data
collection instruments as well as methodologies. The IRB committee indicated that
this study did not require formal IRB approval which led the research team to
establish contact with the research sites and prepare for the data collection process.
Data Analysis
The purpose of this study was to analyze the influence of ten key reform
strategies used by an urban school district superintendent to improve student

81

performance as well as understand the relationship between the strategies selected by
the superintendent and his/her personal/professional background and experiences.
The data analysis procedure was begun on the same days of the on-site data
collection. Soon after the on-site interviews of the superintendent, key players, and
reform strategy-specific key players were conducted, the research team met to
debrief, consolidate information, share notes, identify missing information, and
summarize findings. Initial ratings were made utilizing the interview guides and
rubrics developed for this study. In terms of preliminary data analysis, the “big
picture” began to emerge. An Excel spreadsheet was used to record data regarding
rubric scores for both the quality and level of implementation for each of the ten key
reform strategies utilized by the superintendent. This spreadsheet allowed for the
data to be color coded and effectively organized.
During the Summer Seminar in 2008, the ten doctoral students met with USC
professors Dr. Marsh and Dr. Castruita to analyze the data for the ten different
school district visitations conducted by the professors and doctoral students. The
doctoral students analyzed the data by listening to the interview recordings and
taking extensive notes framed by the research questions. The data was synthesized
and the initial ratings were refined. The qualitative data was coded, categorized into
themes, and ratings were assigned. A collaborative group analysis was done by the
research team on how USLI superintendents implemented key reform strategies to
improve student performance district-wide. This data analysis work lead to the

82

identification of preliminary findings for this study. A final report of findings was
created and presented to the Urban School Leadership Institute.
Validity and Reliability
Validity for the study was improved through the data collection from multiple
sources. Triangulation of data, a process in which the researchers utilized evidence
from multiple sources to make connections, improved the internal validity of the
findings. Patton (2002) states that “triangulation strengthens a study by combining
methods…using several kinds of methods or data” (p. 247). The generalizability of
findings is limited to the participating districts in this study. However, the findings
may serve to inform others of “promising practices” that have been successful in
these specific school districts.
Summary
Chapter Three contained information regarding the specific case study
research methodology utilized in this research project. This included specifics on the
research design, sampling, instrumentation, data collection procedures, and data
analysis. The superintendent and their respective staff participated willingly in this
study. Access to school district staff and documents were obtained with consent
from the superintendent and no action was taken without his/her full authorization.
All processes and procedures for the data collection were clearly communicated to
the superintendent before the on-site visits. Results and findings from the data
analysis are presented in Chapter 4.

83

CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS, ANALYSIS, AND DISCUSSION
Introduction
This chapter presented the findings from a case study of one school district
superintendent’s efforts to leverage systematic change to improve the quality of
education experiences for students. One district was selected as the unit of analysis
for an in-depth study. Case study methodology was utilized to support the data
collection process. In this chapter, following the findings section is the discussion
section.
The overall purpose of the study was to develop a better understanding of
how superintendents are utilizing and implementing specific reform strategies
throughout their leadership to improve student performance. This study focused on
the superintendent’s utilization and implementation of 10 key reform strategies
identified by the Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) in their House Model’s
framework for superintendent leadership. These 10 key reform strategies were: 1)
strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3) curriculum, 4) professional development, 5) human
resource system and human capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7)
communications, 8) governance and board relations, 9) labor relations and contract
negotiation, and 10) family and community engagement.
Specifically, an emphasis in the study was on understanding how the key
reform strategies utilized by the superintendent were influenced by the conditions in
the school district (i.e., strengths and challenges) prior to his appointment by the

84

board of education and to the superintendent’s professional preparation (including
background and experience). Each reform strategy was measured to determine the
degree of quality of the reform effort and the level of implementation both prior to
and after the arrival of the superintendent.
The findings of the study were organized around the following overarching
research question: How are the ten key reform strategies being used by large urban
school district superintendents to improve student achievement in his or her
respective district? Three guiding sub-questions focused the study creating the
following section sub-headings: a) how does the quality and implementation of ten
key reform strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district when
the superintendent took office?; b) what additional reform strategies (if any) were
used?; and c) how does the choice and implementation of the ten key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the superintendent?
Five instruments, described in detail in Chapter 3, were used in the data
collection process: 1) Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix D); 2) Key Player
Interview Guide (Appendix E); 3) Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide
(Appendix F); 4) Quality Rubric (Appendix C); and 5) Implementation Rubric
(Appendix C). The data collected in the study consisted of interviews with key
district leaders, district documents, artifacts, and student achievement quantitative
reports from the Urban School Leadership Institute. Through the process of
triangulation, the data was interpreted and analyzed using multiple sources of
information, including the literature-based quality rubrics in Appendix D, to support

85

and increase the reliability and validity of the findings (Patton, 2002). Collaborative
data analysis work sessions with ten other members of the USC research team were
utilized to further develop the interpretation and analysis of data.
Findings
District Background
The East-Side Public School District (EPSD) is a large urban public district
located in the east coast of the United States. EPSD has a diverse student population
of over 21,000 students in grades pre-K through 12. The diversity of EPSD is
reflective of the city and community. EPSD’s host city is the state’s fourth largest
city and home to people from varied ethnic cultures, languages, and socio-economic
status. The district’s student demographics are composed of approximately: 64%
Latino, 25% African American, 10% White, and 2% Asian/Pacific Islander. Also,
15% of the student body is designated as English learners, 18% are classified as
students with disabilities, and 77% of the student population is designated as low
income economic status receiving free and reduced school lunch (FRSL).
The community of EPSD is composed of people from 50 different countries
speaking a total of 37 different languages. EPSD has the following schools within
the district: three early childhood schools, fourteen elementary schools, seven pre-
kindergarten through eighth grade schools, six middle schools, and two high schools.
EPSD employs approximately 4,500 professional and support staff members and has
a 2008-2009 proposed budget of over $385 million.

86

Table 4.1: District Characteristics
District
Size
%
White
%
Black
%
Hispanic
%
Other
%
Free and Reduced
School Lunch

21,101

9.8

24.7

63.8

1.8

77
Large urban public district
Over 21,000 students in grades pre-K through 12
Diverse ethnic cultures, languages, and socio-economic status

Background and Experience of Superintendent
Traditional Educator
One of the research sub-questions asked: “How does the choice and
implementation of the ten key reform strategies correspond to the previous
background/experiences of the superintendent?” Superintendent Anthony Perez was
a traditional educator with a professional career evolving in the field of education.
To begin, Superintendent Perez began his career with EPSD in 1991 as a social
studies teacher. He ascended through the ranks in EPSD as a traditional educator. In
addition to his teaching career, Superintendent Perez served EPSD in the following
roles: Supervisor of Social Studies Programs, Director of Curriculum and
Instruction, and Assistant Superintendent of Schools in 2002. In May 2005, Mr.
Perez was appointed as Acting (i.e., interim) Superintendent of Schools by the Board
of Education. In June 2006, Mr. Perez was appointed as the Superintendent of
EPSD – the position he currently holds.
Superintendent Perez is a product of the East-Side Public School District. He
was born to immigrant Puerto Rican parents and raised in the community of EPSD

87

and attended ESPD schools. Mr. Perez graduated from the local high school in 1987
with academic and athletic honors – he was a baseball player in the position of
pitcher. Superintendent Perez earned a Bachelor’s degree from Yale University and
a Master’s degree from Columbia University. According to Superintendent Perez,
“Yale framed what rigor and expectations around student work should be and I
brought that context into my teaching.”
Superintendent Perez was a 2006 Urban School Leadership Foundation
graduate and was recognized as County Superintendent of the Year. He was selected
as a member of the Daring Dozen Educational Leaders throughout the United States
by the George Lucas Educational Foundation.
At the time that Mr. Perez was chosen as Superintendent of Schools, the
Board of Education was concerned that the overall performance and accountability
for student achievement was not the main focus of teaching and learning at EPSD.
Teachers and administrators were “tenured” in their positions for many years without
the responsibility for student learning and achievement. External politics of the city
and the state also played roles in the district. The former Superintendent of EPSD
was the son of the Mayor and had strong connections with state political power
brokers.
Through his positions in EPSD, especially in the position of Director of
Curriculum and Instruction, Superintendent Perez established strong ties with
members of the Board of Education. In the course of working together, they
identified goals and actions for improvement in the district for student progress.

88

These included establishing systems and structures for the performance and
accountability of the instructional staff, strategically implementing a managed
curriculum for student learning, and placing district leaders in the “right place” to
effectuate change.
Background Conditions
Superintendent Perez’s previous experiences as a traditional educator in the
district, his education at leading universities, and his personal connection to the
community of his childhood, created the background conditions and vacuum which
led to his professional goals for the district and his strategic choice and
implementation of key reform strategies. His experience as a teacher and his
education at Columbia University gave Superintendent Perez the curricular
knowledge base which proved to be a strength as an instructional leader in terms of
curriculum and assessment. Superintendent Perez’s experience as a Director of
Curriculum and Instruction solidified his previous strengths but also gave him the
experience of developing skills in professional development and working with
budgets. Superintendent Perez’s direct ties with the community through his
upbringing and education facilitated strong family and community engagement. His
parents and friends still live in the community of EPSD. Mr. Perez was personally
connected to EPSD and wanted to see it improve. Superintendent Perez stated in an
interview:
When I was doing my student-teaching… I knew I wanted to get into
management. So in ’91 I became a teacher and I used to go to grad school
with the larger hope of eventually becoming a superintendent of schools…
The idea of managing an organization, preferably the ESPD since it was my

89

home-district… inspired me. So I started to prepare myself – some of it was
through graduate school at Columbia… and most of it was reading different
leadership books and biographies from leaders… and applying it to my work.

Superintendent Perez’s education at Yale University gave him skills in conflict
resolution which later became an advantage in his work with the reform strategies of
governance and Board relationships, labor relations and contract negotiations, and
communication.
Leadership
Superintendent Perez was a great aficionado of literature on leadership and
personal growth. To develop his leadership background and knowledge, the
Superintendent focused on literature which dealt with leadership. Some literature
which influenced his thinking was from Stephen Covey (author of Seven Habits of
Highly Effective People), Roberto Goizueta (former Chief Executive Officer from
the Coca Cola Company), John Wooden (college basketball coach), Rudy Giuliani
(former Mayor New York), Bill Gates (founder of Microsoft) and Jim Collins
(author of Good to Great). According to Superintendent Perez:
Roberto Goizueta, the former CEO of Coca Cola, summed his management
style down to three particular principles which I use to this day…which is
why effective school-based leadership and the focus on the principalship was
so important to me so early on… Three fundamental approaches to leadership
style… one is the CEO had to set the course – the holder of the vision and the
mission… The second piece was you have to watch the bottom line… How
do you take revenue and focus it in your programmatic elements that get
student achievement? But the piece that ties back to leadership is the third
variable… delegate. The crucial piece … is that your people are the most
important part of your organization.

His many professional readings enhanced his background which led to developing
ideal leadership qualities and team effectiveness models.

90

Superintendent’s Background
Anthony Perez had previous experiences and background with each of the ten
key reform strategies before he became superintendent. As a traditional educator
working in EPSD, the Mr. Perez developed firsthand knowledge and experiences
with reform strategies as curriculum, assessment, professional development, and
school/district finance and budgets. This gave the Superintendent background
strength and guidance allowing him to utilize the reform strategies to create change
and bring focused improvement to the district. According to an interview with the
Assistant Superintendent for Teaching and Learning:
When the Superintendent…was Director of Curriculum and Instruction, from
that point to the present, he was making tremendous changes in the district.
His primary strength is in leadership: his ability to motivate his staff, his
ability to ensure that we all have the sense of urgency with regard to where
we need to be, how it is we need to be able to help our children to give them
the best opportunity possible.

In the reform strategies in which the Mr. Perez had the less experience (i.e.,
human resource system, governance and Board relations, labor relations, and family
and community engagement), he made great strides and use of these reform strategies
to move the district ahead. He strategically built relationships with key district
stakeholders to create capital and leverage for his reform efforts. According to
Superintendent Perez, “You want your team to support you… figuring out
teamwork…to build a nestling professional learning community….”

91

The District at the Time the Superintendent Arrived
The district had various degrees of strengths and challenges at the time the
Superintendent took office. The data collection process revealed the strengths and
challenges of EPSD during this time.
District Strengths
Table 4.2: Strengths in East-Side Public School District upon Arrival

According to interviews with key district players, EPSD experienced a
building boom during the Superintendent’s entry. The state provided EPSD with
additional funding for the construction of new schools through a state initiative
which was a result of a court case stipulating that urban districts required additional
state funding for school construction to relieve overcrowding. Superintendent Perez
capitalized on the state’s additional funding for both the construction of new schools
and to revitalize existing facilities creating modernized state-of-the-art “buildings.”
Utilizing the reform strategies of finance and budget, community engagement, and
board relations, the Superintendent pushed and championed new schools focused on
student progress and success.
Yet, another strength of EPSD was the talented and diverse pool of teachers,
administrators, and district staff. EPSD’s close proximity to Ivy League and major
Strengths: East-Side Public School District
• Additional state funding for the construction of new schools
• Talented pool of teachers, administrators, and district staff educated at surrounding
universities
• Professional development provided to teachers by District
• Pockets of academic progress throughout EPS
• Board of Education wanted greater gains in student achievement
• Diversity of district staff

92

universities on the east-coast of the United States such as Columbia, New York
University, Princeton, Harvard, and Yale provided the district with well-educated
staff. Again, Superintendent Perez took advantage of the well-educated staff through
the human resources reform strategy and discovered talented people to lead the
district. According to an interview with the Assistant Board Secretary:
We believe we have a great talent pool of individuals. Typically as an urban
school district you have new energetic teachers that come through the ranks –
obviously there are a number of schools/universities in the area that provide
talent to EPSD… Our diversity is our strength.

In addition, professional development and training had been an ongoing
practice at EPSD when Superintendent Perez entered the district. The
Superintendent took the reform strategy of professional development and made it
better. Working with this core leadership team, Superintendent Perez strategically
aligned the district’s professional development plan and implementation to the new
curriculum, best instructional practices, and effective leadership. In an interview,
Superintendent Perez stated:
There were a lot of structures in place around staff development that I wasn’t
completely excited about. They had a whole staff development division, lot
of people, replacement teachers, a whole lot of resources built into it, but my
fundamental belief around that piece of the organization is that it is an
important piece of the organization but the way it was structured was an
additional silo to the organization… They spend a whole lot of time pulling
people out of classrooms to train them. …Here is the balance… you want
staff development and you want to train teachers and you want to be training
all the time to get them to be better. So how do you invest in people,
minimize the time you get them away from the most important function of
the organization which is teacher student connection in the classroom…
Little by little I broke it down…

93

EPSD was experiencing pockets of academic progress. According to an
interview with the Superintendent, students at the kindergarten through grade 5 were
making academic gains in mathematics. Students enrolled in gifted programs at
individual schools were also demonstrating academic achievement. Members of the
Board of Education (several of them were parents whose children attended EPSD)
had developed a sense of change and wanted district-wide improvement in the
academic achievement of students. Superintendent Perez capitalized on the board
relations reform strategy to join the Board’s sense of urgency for change and drive
student achievement for all students not just a select group of “gifted” students.
District Challenges
Table 4.3: Challenges in East-Side Public School District upon Arrival

EPSD was also facing many challenges at the time Superintendent Perez took
office. According to an interview with the Assistant Board Secretary:
Obviously the school district needed to put itself in a position where it started
to show real gains. For the longest time the perception was…no real
performance or achievement in the classroom. …Frustration that existed on
part of Board members or people in the community… The classroom did not
necessarily see the level of support that needed to take place from central
administration with teachers… The challenge was…to undertake large scale
performance achievement in the classroom…

Challenges: East-Side Public School District
• Extremely political city and state power brokers with direct influence and connections in
EPSD
• No established and clear direction for the District’s work
• District staff and schools worked in isolation
• District culture of low expectations for teaching and learning
• Low student academic performance – especially in grades 6-12
• Decentralized decision-making to school-sites with no accountability
• Decentralized curriculum – individual schools used different curriculum
• Tenure of principals and vice-principals as administrators resisting change at school-sites

94

The district was caught in a very highly politicized environment in which political
power brokers at both the city and state levels influenced decisions at EPSD. The
outgoing Superintendent was the son of the long standing mayor of the city who also
had strong ties with the state government. Overall, the district’s culture was driven
by internal and external politics which were not focused on student outcomes. This
created an overall culture of low expectations for teaching and learning district-wide.
Moreover, there existed no clear direction for the educational process of students.
Students, especially in grades 6-12, were demonstrating low academic performance.
Yet another challenge was that the district staff, offices, and schools worked
in isolation with a lack of communication and knowledge of each other’s work.
They “worked in silos.” District-wide decision-making, including the curriculum
and instructional practices at schools, was decentralized with the authority given to
school-sites. Moreover, no accountability for the performance of students, teachers,
and principals existed. Principals and teachers were tenured in their jobs and could
not be changed or removed for the improved staffing of schools. The Assistant
Superintendent for Teaching and Learning stated in an interview:
Prior to 2005…whether it was our divisions, whether it was our schools, we
all very much worked in silos. The communication was very poor. Every
school had their own definition of what excellence looked like. Every school
had determined what their particular goals were for achievement…we
weren’t all on the same page…

The Entry Plan
Facing the strengths and challenges of the district, the Superintendent created
an “entry plan” to acquire a deeper understanding of the district’s internal and

95

external workings from the perspective of the Superintendent’s chair. Through the
Entry Plan, the Superintendent established his visionary belief that the EPSD will be
“one of the best school districts in the State…[and would] accomplish this greatness
by providing excellent educational experiences and services to every student in order
to inspire them to think, to learn, to achieve and to care.”
The Entry Plan focused on the following action elements: 1) governance
team; 2) organizational capacity and alignment; 3) student achievement; 4)
community and public relations; and 5) operation and finance. Through specific
activities, Superintendent Perez utilized the above elements to create “launching
strategies” for change and reform in the district. Under the governance team
element, the Superintendent’s objective was on building a “positive, productive and
trusting working relationship with individual Board members and the Board as a
whole.” Under the second element of organizational capacity and alignment,
Superintendent Perez focused on the following objective: “establish a strong and
appropriately focused District executive team.” The objectives for the student
achievement element were:
1. Analyze patterns in student achievement data and the gap in advancement
between various student populations in order to determine an appropriate
course of action for teaching and learning.
2. Raise expectations for all students.
3. Establish internal and external monitoring and evaluation designs for an
instructional support and intervention system.

The fourth action element of community and public relations centered on the
following objectives:

96

1. Establish positive working relationships with civic leadership, community
leadership and other community agencies.
2. Establish the role of each employee union/association as advisor and
partner to Superintendent.
3. Increase opportunities to promote the District program with the
community and enhance advocacy for the District’s needs and mission.
4. Ensure ongoing, clear, and consistent communication with all
stakeholders.
5. Establish a positive working relationship with representatives of the
media.
6. Facilitate understanding and widespread ownership for the District’s
vision, mission and the Keys to Excellence Strategic Plan.

The final action element of the Entry Plan focused on the following objective:
“Understand the current strategies, strengths and opportunities for improvement in
the District’s operation and finance.”
Launching Strategies
As a traditional educator with time invested in the district, Superintendent
Perez clearly understood the strengths and the challenges of the district. Once he
became Superintendent, he had clear goals and strategies for improving student
performance. Superintendent Perez utilized the Entry Plan as a basis for his work to
change the district leading to systematic next steps for strategic reform and
performance.
From the data collection, Superintendent Perez utilized all of the 10 key
reform strategies to effectuate change in EPSD. The district did not have a clearly
articulated vision and mission, much less a strategic plan, the Superintendent
established a core leadership team to develop and implement a strategic plan for
student achievement. The strategic plan served as the blueprint for implementing
and reinforcing the nine other reform strategies. Superintendent Perez secured

97

control of the budget and aligned resources to curriculum, assessment, human
resources, professional development, and communication with the strategic plan. He
established strong and trusting board relations with board members to champion the
agenda for teaching and learning. The Assistant Superintendent for Human
Resources stated in an interview that the Superintendent was:
A visionary leader, he always knew where it is we needed to be. He knew
the importance of establishing the necessary relationships with the various
stakeholders in order for us to be able to ultimately achieve our goals. He
worked very closely with all the supervisors, with all his staff - so it was very
clear to us…

Superintendent Perez cultivated positive relationships with stakeholders based on
open communication, honesty, trust, and student focused.
The House Model: Reform Strategies
The overarching research question for the case study focused on the
development, quality, and implementation of 10 specific key reform strategies by the
USLI superintendent to improve student achievement district-wide. These 10 key
reform strategies as identified by the Urban School Leadership Institute were: 1)
strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3) curriculum, 4) professional development, 5) human
resource system and human capital management, 6) finance and budget, 7)
communications, 8) governance and board relations, 9) labor relations and contract
negotiation, and 10) family and community engagement. Figure 4.1 below
illustrated USLI’s House Model for district improvement through the utilization of
specific reform strategies.

98

The House Model served as the conceptual framework for the study.
Interview data and district documents offered a greater perspective (in addition to the
10 specific reform strategies) on superintendent strategies to change and improve the
district.
Figure 4.1: The House Model

For illustrative purposes, the House Model is divided into several
components (e.g., several rooms, a foundation, and a roof). Each component
identifies specific reform strategies. The foundational of the House Model refers to
the system leader’s entry plan into the new superintendency position. This includes:
1) the superintendent’s initial contract with the board of education; 2) a 90- or 100-
day entry plan; and 3) specific actions and/or behaviors by the superintendent

99

entering into the position. The rooms of the house are divided into three areas of
focus: 1) instructional alignment, 2) operational excellence, and 3) stakeholder
management. The roof establishes systemic goals such as: 1) increasing student
achievement, 2) closing the achievement gap, and 3) improving college readiness for
all students. The House Model was developed by the Urban School Leadership
Institute through both a review of literature and “best-practices” advanced by
practitioners and system leaders in the field of education.
The following section provided information and data acquired through
interviews and review of district documents for the 10 reform strategies focused in
this study. Rubric scores (See Table 4.4) were based on the Quality Rubrics
(Appendix C) and the Level of Implementation Rubric (Appendix C).
Table 4.4: Rubric Ratings of House Model Reform Strategies
House Elements
Previous
Quality

Current
Quality

Level of
Implementation

Strategic Planning 1 4.7 4
Assessment 1 5 4
Curriculum 1 4.4 3
Professional Development 2 4 3
HR System and Human Capital Management 1.4 5 3
Finance and Budget 1 4 3
Communication 1 4.2 5
Governance and Board Relations 1 5 5
Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations 3 4 5
Family and Community Engagement 1 5 5

Superintendent Perez utilized a multi-strategy approach to improve student
performance at East-Side Public School District. Table 4.5 below highlights the
overall reform strategies utilized by the Superintendent to improve the district. The

100

Superintendent was able to strategically implement the 10 key reform strategies at a
high quality level to ultimately create change in the district and in due course
improve both district performance and student achievement.
Table 4.5: Overall Reform Strategies
Strategies
1. Development of the Keys for Excellence Strategic Plan focused on the student achievement and
changing of the district’s culture by establishing a common vision, mission, and the core beliefs.
2. Establishment of the Theory of Action Plan focused on managed curriculum and instruction and
effective leadership.
3. Reorganized/restructured upper management by creating positions for assistant superintendents of
human resources, family and community outreach, and teaching and learning. Superintendent’s cabinet
reorganized to a select leadership core team.
4. Secured control of schools/district budgets to centralize expenditure of resources in alignment with the
strategic plan.
5. Development of district-wide assessment and data collection system including benchmark assessments
in literacy and math.
6. Building capacity of core leadership team through professional readings and TBA case study analysis.
7. Professional development plan for administrators and teachers to build human capacity and professional
culture of learners.
8. Established an open communication plan through various media with key stakeholders leading the
charge.
9. Changed the district’s culture by building positive relationships with Board members, labor union
president, community stakeholders, and district staff.

Strategic Plan
Table 4.6: Addressing Change in the Strategic Plan
Strengths Challenges
• Stakeholders voiced the need for change in
the district and refocus the function and
organization of the district towards student
learning
• Key district staff and Board members were
advocates and supported creating a district-
wide strategic plan
• No strategic plan in place prior to current
superintendent
• The district had no common vision, mission,
and goals for the work of the district
• The focus of the district was not student-
centered on teaching and learning
Strategies
• Current superintendent established the Keys to Excellence Strategic Plan
• Strategic plan based on core beliefs reflected in the district’s common vision and mission for student
achievement
• Strategic plan was driven by five key priorities focused on improving the overall function and
performance of the district
• Strategic plan incorporated both a theory of action and action plan to improve the district
• Strategic plan communicated to district stakeholders to create a common voice and course of action

101

The Superintendent’s leadership team established the Keys to Excellence
Strategic Plan. EPSD did not have a strategic plan before Superintendent Perez.
The previous Superintendent simply allowed the district to run itself without any real
direction, accountability, and student achievement expectations. Superintendent
Perez shared that under the previous Superintendent, EPSD had a “culture of low
expectations for kids…[and it was] an organization of entitlement.” According to an
interview with the Assistant Board Secretary:
The organization did not necessarily have the ability to create a dialogue
internally as to what was right and what was wrong – everything was pretty
much top-down… It was very difficult for people who were in the higher
levels of leadership.

Table 4.7 below demonstrates the strategies and actions steps taken by the
Superintendent to create and implement a strategic plan in EPSD. The crucial step
was the identification of key leadership team members charged with the development
of the plan.

102

Table 4.7: Strategic Plan Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the
Difference Between
Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Strategic Plan 1 5 From no prior plan to
a current strategic
plan focused on
student achievement.
• Identified key leadership team
members for the strategic plan
development
• Established a common vision and
mission
• Identified the core beliefs to drive
the strategic plan
• The Keys for Excellence Strategic
Plan focused on student
achievement and changing of the
District’s culture
• Established 5 key priorities as
basis for strategic plan
• Theory of Action based on
managed instruction and effective
leadership
• Action Plan established
measurable outcomes for all goals
and objectives
• Constant communication to all
stakeholders through publications,
oral presentations, meetings,
district’s web-site, and video
releases

Under Superintendent Perez, the current strategic plan is driven by five
guiding priorities focused on student achievement and overall changing of the
district’s culture to a performance-based, data-driven, and accountable organization.
The strategic plan established a common vision and mission along with core beliefs
and values for the district.
East-Side Public School District’s vision was to be one of the best school
systems in the state. EPSD’s mission was to provide excellent educational
experiences and services to inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve and to
care. This was based on the core beliefs of: 1) teamwork and collaboration; 2) a
continuous process of improvement focused on goals; 3) high expectations; 4)

103

reflective practice; 5) on-going monitoring and assessment; and that 6) all students
will learn. EPSD’s five priorities focused on advancing systematic district-wide
initiatives to guide all of the district’s operational decisions and actions. The five
priorities were: 1) creating excellence in academics, athletics, and the arts; 2)
increase student performance on state tests; 3) improve school safety and discipline;
4) construct new schools and modernize existing schools; and 5) change the district’s
culture and increase morale.

Table 4.8: Strategic Plan Rating by Rubric Component
Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
4.7
Level of
Implementation
Vision
1 5

4
Mission
1 5
Objectives (goals)
1 5
Strategies
1 5
Action Plan
1 5
Theory of Action
1 5
Data Dashboard
1 3

The data collection interviews with key district leaders revealed the degree of
quality for the development and level of implementation for the strategic plan as a
reform strategy by Superintendent Perez compared to the previous Superintendent
(see Table 4.8). Utilizing the Strategic Plan Rubric (Appendix C) as a reference,
EPSD moved from the lowest quality level of one to the highest level of five on the

104

rubric with a level of implementation of 4 (level of implementation ratings range
from a lowest level of 1 to the highest level of 5). Superintendent Perez stated that:
Most of the direction he [previous Superintendent] did not define. He
allowed his subordinates to define or he allowed the State to define… No real
direction… The superintendence wasn’t really clear and he really did not
have high expectations for our kids.

Under Superintendent Perez’s leadership, EPSD established a well-articulated vision,
a compelling mission, clear goals and priorities, commitment to specific
improvement strategies, and an overall plan of action for the district’s improvement.
According to an interview with a panel of key district leaders on the strategic plan:
The plan was developed to support the instructional priorities, the five
priorities for our district. …It was developed…after hours and hours of
work…devoted as a leadership team to the various case studies we were
reviewing. And from reading those case studies what emerged was a number
of indicators that we felt needed to be instituted in order for our district to
move ahead. …The strategic plan is a document of what we are doing
successfully as well as the areas we need to improve on…it truly is a work in
progress.

Assessment
Table 4.9: Addressing Change in Assessment
Strengths Challenges
• District staff utilized state summative
assessments as means to measure progress
• No assessment structures and systems in place
• All student data was based on summative
measures
Strategies
• Development of district-wide benchmark assessments
• Implementation of online assessment system for reporting and monitoring of student data
• Data analysis teams at both school- and district-levels

The second priority outlined in the Keys to Excellence Strategic Plan focused
on increasing student performance on state tests. This priority not only focused on
the reform strategy of assessment, but it also incorporated and created an alignment

105

within the reform strategies of curriculum, instruction, and professional
development. The district’s curricular formative assessments were aligned to the
state’s summative assessments. EPSD implemented district-wide academic
benchmarking for student outcomes in literacy and mathematics to guide
instructional modifications and interventions. EPSD developed the district-wide
online assessment system (MAP - Measures of Academic Progress) to monitor,
intervene, and support student progress through data analysis of state and district
assessments. This resulted in many of EPSD’s schools meeting both their state
performance growth targets and the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) proficiency
targets as mandated by the federal legislation of No Child Left Behind.
Table 4.10: Assessment Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Assessment 1 5 Prior no district-wide
assessment structures to
current systematic assessment
structures driven by data
reporting and analysis for
intervention of student and
staff needs.
• Development of district-wide
benchmark and formative
assessments aligned to
curriculum and standards
• Implementation of online
assessment system for
reporting and monitoring of
student formative and
summative data – MAP
(Measurement of Academic
Progress)
• Instituted accountability and
performance measures for
teaching and learning for all
teachers and administrators
based on student assessment
data
• Created district and school-
site assessment/data teams to
train, guide, and support
schools.

106

Utilizing the Quality Rubric for Assessment (Appendix C) as a reference
tool, EPSD moved from the lowest quality level of one to the highest level of five on
the reform strategy of assessment with an implementation level of 4 (see Table 4.11).
EPSD moved from virtually no district-wide assessment practices to establishing
assessment practices which developed and aligned state tests with district bench-
mark curricular assessments, a data management and reporting system, professional
development, and district resources. According to an interview with a panel of key
district leaders on assessment:
We have introduced additional assessments we use throughout the year. We
have benchmark assessments that are aligned to our curriculum that basically
benchmark how the students are performing throughout the year at different
points. We also use the MAP which is a computerized measure of academic
performance assessment that is used three times a year, once in October,
January, and then again in May/June so you could really see how the children
have been growing through the year. Using these types of assessments we
are able to tweak what happens in the classrooms and really be able to target
the individual needs of the individual students instead of waiting to the end of
the year when ultimately another school year has gone by and the children
who need the most help are left behind.

Table 4.11: Assessment Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Summative Assessments
1 5

4
Formative Assessments
1 5
Data Management,
Information, and Reporting
System
1 5
Analysis, Interpretation, and
Utilization of Assessment
Data
1 5
Professional Development
1 5
Fiscal Support and
Resources
1 5

107

Curriculum
Table 4.12: Addressing Change in Curriculum
Strengths Challenges
• Individual schools were proactive in choosing
their own curricular program for
implementation
• No managed instruction district-wide
• Individual schools used their own
curriculum
Strategies
• Curriculum centralized at district-level and aligned to state learning standards
• Curricular/instructional pacing plans established
• Training on curricular programs
• School-site instructional coaches for instructional support

Under priority one for improvement in the strategic plan, the Superintendent
focused on creating academic excellence throughout the district. To build
excellence, Superintendent Perez implemented the reform strategy of curriculum and
managed instruction focused on centralized curricular programs for all students. The
district administration set learning goals and expectations for all students and
instituted programs for academic proficiency. Examples of these programs were 1)
Open Court Reading Program for all kindergarten through grade eight students and
the Reading First initiative focused on early literacy development; 2) Full Option
Science System (FOSS) for a hands-on approach to science education; 3) project and
thematic-based learning and writing tasks for grades sixth through eighth; 4) Algebra
to all eighth grade students; 5) smaller learning communities initiative in secondary
education; and 6) incorporation of technology into every aspect of the instructional
program. According to an interview with a panel of key district leaders on
curriculum:

108

Now we focus on strategies, best practices, intervention for students – that is
what our curriculum guides center on. …The philosophy is begin with the
end in mind.…Teaching to deepen the understanding for children. …The
curriculum is changing - we are moving more into managed instruction.
Pacing guides and sequencing has been put into place in the different subject
areas including science.…Managed instruction really becoming the norm
where as teachers can look at something and see what activities should be
taught to convey certain ideas, certain benchmarks and so on.

Table 4.13: Curriculum Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Curriculum 1 4 Implementation of centralized
managed instruction and
curricular programs for all
district schools.
• Curriculum centralized to
district-level
• All schools in district
utilize the same
curriculum – Open Court
Reading Program for
grades K-8, Reading First
Initiatives for early
childhood literacy.
• Science curriculum and
instruction implemented
district-wide (Full Option
Science System - FOSS)
• Created
curricular/instructional
pacing plans for language
arts and math
• Implemented district-wide
science curriculum and
instruction
• Trained all teachers and
administrators on
curricular/instructional
implementation
• District provides
monitoring support
through training and data
analysis.
• Instructional coaches work
at every school to support
and guide curricular
implementation.

109

Comparing the work of the district under the previous Superintendent to the
current Superintendent on the Quality Rubric for Curriculum (Appendix C), the level
of quality for the reform strategy of curriculum improved from the lowest level of
one to a higher rating level of four with a level of implementation rating of 3 (see
Table 4.13). EPSD adopted district-wide curriculum aligned to State’s core
curriculum content standards. Pacing plans were created to guide curricular
implementation as well as monitor and support instructional practices. Students
across the district were given access and opportunity to rigorous standards-based
curricular learning experiences (e.g., ensuring all students took Algebra in eighth
grade).

Table 4.14: Curriculum Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
4.4
Level of
Implementation
Alignment to Learning
Standards and Assessments
1 5
3
Equal Access to Learning
Standards
1 5
Fidelity in Implementation
1 5
Sufficiency of and
Appropriateness of Materials
1 4
Clear and Regular Procedures
to Review and Update the
Curriculum
1 3

110

Professional Development
Table 4.15: Addressing Change in Professional Development
Strengths Challenges
• Professional development (PD) designed and
executed at the district-level
• District staff were accustomed to ongoing
training
• Teachers pulled out from regular
classroom assignment for training
• PD plan not aligned to
curricular/instructional programs utilized
at schools
• PD implementation at individual schools
varied
Strategies
• Align professional development plan to strategic plan
• School-site instructional coaches as master teachers and trainers
• Common district-wide professional development schedules

As the focus of East-Side Public School District transitioned into teaching
and learning with student achievement at the core, the reform strategy of
professional development was instrumental to changing the practice and overall
performance of EPSD’s staff.

Table 4.16: Professional Development Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Professional
Development
2 4 Transitioned professional
development provided by
central office to a site-based
professional development
model guided by managed
instruction, curricular
implementation, and data
driven.
• PD aligned to strategic
plan and implemented at
all school-sites
• Trained school-site
instructional coaches as
master teachers and best
practices
• Developed common
district-wide PD
schedules and
curriculum plans
• Build capacity of
principals as
instructional leaders

111

The district’s professional development plan was centralized and focused on
curriculum and standards-based “best practices” for student learning. Overall,
resources were utilized by EPSD to align professional development to the strategic
plan and positively effectuate educational leadership across the district. During an
interview, Superintendent Perez stated:
My fundamental belief around…staff development…is how do you invest in
people yet minimize the time you get them away from the most important
function of the organization which is student-teacher connection in the
classroom.

Instructional coaches were trained at the district level and placed at individual
school-sites to enhance teachers’ pedagogy and support principals as instructional
leaders. The focus of the Superintendent was to build the professional capacity of all
EPSD team members in direct connection to students.
With the strategic plan as a guide for restructuring the district, the
Superintendent’s core leadership team established the performance expectations of
“effective leadership.” Through the reform strategy of professional development, all
district administrators and teachers were trained to monitor their performance in
relation to teaching and student achievement. Leadership cohorts/teams were formed
at the central office and utilized professional literature and case studies from TBA to
increase their knowledge and skill. The new knowledge was also shared with
school-site principals and vice principals to develop the professional capacity of all
district leadership.

112

Table 4.17: Professional Development Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
2
Current Quality
4
Level of
Implementation
Designing Professional
Development
3 5
3
Implementing Professional
Development
3 5
Evaluating and Improving
Professional Development
1 3
Sharing Professional
Development Learning
1 3

Referring to Table 4.17: Professional Development Rating by Rubric
Component, EPSD improved in the professional development reform strategy from a
quality rating score of two under the previous superintendent to a rating of score of
four under the leadership of Superintendent Perez. The implementation level was at
a score of 3 due to the factor of time. EPSD needs more time to fully implement it’s
professional development plan and reach all instructional and support staff,
especially at the middle and high school levels. The knowledge and skills of all staff
was an evolving work in progress.
Human Resource System and Human Capital Management

Table 4.18: Addressing Change in Human Resource System and Human Capital
Management

Strengths Challenges
• Competitive salaries and benefits for district
employees
• Many district certificated employees educated
in prestigious universities in close proximity
to district
• No HR assistant superintendent
• No efficient system, structure, organization, or
personnel management in HR office
• School-site and central district administrators
tenured and maintained placement in
assignments without accountability for work
Strategies
• Established position of HR assistant superintendent
• Restructured HR department
• HR aligned to strategic plan and district’s core beliefs
• Accountability structures and movement for School-site and central district administrators
• Employee recruitment, retention, attendance incentives

113

Superintendent Perez walked into a “top-down” district working in “silos.”
The previous superintendent controlled the district from the “superintendent’s office”
without any real structures and systems guiding the actions of the district. Individual
schools and district offices worked within their own confined space without any real
communication or collaboration with each other. The district’s human resources
(HR) office was not an exception to the “silos” work. According to an interview
with the Assistant Superintendent for HR, “there was no rhyme or reason in HR –
procedures were non-existent…it was really hard to keep up and manage HR.”
In addition, the previous superintendent did not make changes in school
principals or assistant principals. School and district administrators simply stayed in
their job for a long time without any real accountability or transparency for their
performance or results.
Table 4.19: HR System and Human Capital Management Reform Strategy

House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
HR System
and
Human
Capital
Manage-
ment
1 5 No prior HR procedures or
structures for personnel
management to the
creation of a HR Assistant
Superintendent position
charged with the task of
reorganization of HR
department.
HR assistant superintendent
charged with organization
and restructuring the HR
department
Development of new district
organizational chart
HR focused on customer
service-oriented activities
aligned to strategic plan
HR department prioritized
hiring “high quality” staff in
accordance to the EPSD core
beliefs
HR assisted principals with
the releasing of not “highly
qualified” staff
New incentive structures: 1)
tuition reimbursement for
new qualified teachers, and 2)
attendance bonuses for staff

114

The first and most crucial strategy employed by the Superintendent was to
create a focused, loyal, and results-oriented leadership team at the district office who
shared a common vision for teaching and learning. The Assistant Superintendent for
Human Resources stated in an interview:
When Superintendent Perez came on board and we started with the strategic
planning, we also started looking at strategic planning for HR…at that time
we did a whole restructuring. The first thing he did when he came into the
district as acting superintendent was look at HR and he felt if he had a strong
HR department then he could make the district… hire the right people, recruit
the right people and eventually it would show in the district. His first
reorganization was in HR. …He and I researched…what was best for HR
and we came up with an organization chart for HR…

Through the reform strategy of human resources and human capital management,
the Superintendent reorganized the central district’s organizational structure and
created assistant superintendent positions charged with leadership focused on student
achievement. The assistant superintendent positions were in: 1) human resources, 2)
family and community outreach, and 3) teaching and learning as well as an assistant
superintendent level position for the assistant board secretary/business administrator.
The leadership core team was comprised of key staff aligned to the
Superintendent’s visionary goals for performance and accountability.
Superintendent Perez stated that a leader must:
Find all the tricks… to motivate people…hold them accountable…
…Sometimes it is being their friend because that is what motivates that
person… Sometimes it’s a good swift kick…because that’s what motivates
that person… If you are going to be a leader and a manager and if it’s really
about leading, then you have to figure out how to influence that person…
I’ve been switching most of the principals… My cabinet level assistant
superintendents have been grossly changed over the years.

115

The Superintendent revamped and assembled his core leadership team for effective
leadership. These events led to the improvement of human resources in EPSD.
With the establishment of the Assistant Superintendent of HR, EPSD worked
towards having “highly qualified” teachers and administrators at all district levels.
District staff were trained and charged with the needs of schools and communities.
As human resources and human capital management was restructured,
Superintendent Perez changed and reorganized the district’s elementary (K-5) and
middle school (6-8) schools’ configuration structures to K-8 schools. Through open
and ongoing communication in the form of “town hall meetings” with the
community at large, “round table” discussions with district staff, and information via
publications and the Internet, the transition to the K-8 schools was straightforward.
The Board of Education supported the Superintendent in the movement and
placement of principals/vice principals in schools based on a “best fit” for the school
and community.
Table 4.20: HR System and Human Capital Management Rating by Rubric
Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1.4
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Recruitment, Selection and
Placement of New
Administrators
1 5

3
Recruitment of Highly
Qualified Teachers
1 5
Teacher Support and
Development
1 5
Salaries, Wages and Benefits
3 5
Use of Incentives
1 5

116

In respect to the Quality Rubric for Human Resources and Human Capital
Management (Appendix C), Superintendent Perez through his leadership received
the highest rating score of five (see Table 4.20). Superintendent Perez focused on
the selection and placement of the “right” administrators in key positions throughout
the district to create change and ultimately achieve the district’s goals for
performance, accountability, and achievement. Superintendent Perez selected the
“right” quality team-members with the right skills and knowledge as well as both
professional and personal integrity, passion, courage, and vision for leadership.
From the data collection and analysis, Superintendent Perez was very skilled at
identifying the “right” people and moving them into the “right” positions within the
organization to create change for improved performance.

Finance and Budget
Table 4.21: Addressing Change in Finance and Budget

Strengths Challenges
• District had additional funding granted under a
state-wide court order
• Budget practices decentralized to individual
school-sites and district offices
• No systematic budget planning and
development
Strategies
• Finance/budget practices and resources aligned to strategic plan in support of teaching and learning
• Team approach to designing and reviewing of budgets and expenditures
• Superintendent involved in budget development process

Under Superintendent Perez’s leadership, EPSD linked the district’s budget
and funding priorities to the strategic plan. The Superintendent used the reform
strategy of finance and budget for fiscal support of the district’s goals and priorities
for student achievement.

117

Table 4.22: Finance and Budget Reform Strategy

House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the
Difference Between Pre
and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Finance
and
Budget
1 4 Created finance/budget
practices and resources
aligned to strategic
plan. Superintendent
and district
administrators
involved in budget
process to provide
support to school-sites.
Finance/budget practices and
resources aligned to strategic
plan
Team approach to designing
and review of budgets and
expenditures
Superintendent and district
administrators involved in
budget development process
and provide support to
individual school-sites and
offices
Funds and resources targeted
to support teaching and
learning practices
Superintendent involvement
at state-level to lobby for
allocation of funds/resources
to the district

The Superintendent and his core leadership team took centralized control of
the district’s budget to re-direct funding for district-wide curricular/ instructional
programs, professional development, and construction of schools in alignment with
students’ learning needs. In an interview, Superintendent Perez stated:
I discovered early on…in the budgeting process…if I could control the
money I could control the programmatic introductions or materials…so I
tried to centralize…a common curriculum. I took control of the budgeting
program…and I captured the direction of the instructional program.

In contrast to the previous superintendent’s involvement in the budget process and
fiscal actions of both the district and individual school-sites, Superintendent Perez
was directly involved in the budgeting process, including lobbying the state for
additional allocations of funds for EPSD. Even before he became superintendent,
Mr. Perez was proactively making changes utilizing the finance and budget reform

118

strategy in his former positions to improve the district. According to an interview
with the School Business Administrator:
As Director of Curriculum and Instruction, … Mr. Perez was really involved
in the designing the budget methodologies for the schools, there was a lot of
interviewing with the principals … He just has a flavor on the curriculum
side particularly of what’s needed in the building and what’s not needed in
the building… When we would strike this dollar amounts for schools, Mr.
Perez was basically the guy from the curriculum side that did it…

The fourth priority of the Keys to Excellence Strategic Plan focused on
construction of new schools and/or modernization of existing school facilities.
EPSD is home of one the nation’s largest high school with over 5,000 students. The
reform strategy of finance and budget was utilized by Superintendent Perez to
construct new schools and create state-of-the-art smaller academies throughout the
district to relieve the overcrowded secondary schools. Since 2005, EPSD
constructed 10 new schools, including one new high school. According to an
interview with the Labor Union President, “Our staff is very fortunate that they work
in such wonderful buildings – for the most part, our buildings are well-maintained,
they are beautiful, they are state-of-the-art.”

Table 4.23: Finance and Budget Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
4
Level of
Implementation
Strategic Budget Planning
1 5

3 Organizational Culture
1 3
Operational Procedures
1 5

119

According to the Quality Rubric for Finance and Budget (Appendix C),
EPSD progressed to a rating score of four under Superintendent Perez’s leadership in
comparison to a score of one under the previous Superintendent. According to an
interview with a panel of key district leaders on finance and budget:
The Superintendent is highly involved…he just doesn’t say do it, he rolls his
sleeves up and he’s sitting there on the back of an envelope writing numbers
down – he’s good…he challenges us…he is to the penny… The other
Superintendent I could kind of tell him this is what we are going to do and he
just say yeah whatever… [The current Superintendent] has face to face
meetings with the principals and departments were they have to present their
budgets to the cabinet and their plan…

Communication

Table 4.24: Addressing Change in Communication

Strengths Challenges
• District stakeholders willing to communicate
and work with superintendent
• Fragmented top-down communication
system
• Limited or broken lines of communication
between community, stakeholders, and
district
Strategies
• Established position of communications coordinator at each school-site
• Created various forms of communication media, including Interned-based
• Utilized open meetings and forums to communicate with all stakeholders

Fundamental to all of Superintendent Perez’s work was communication. He
had open, ongoing, honest, inviting, service-oriented, and clearly transparent
communication with all stakeholders. Superintendent Perez positively
communicated with and engaged both district staff and the community through
weekly school visitations, town hall meetings, public forums, round-table
discussions, Internet blogs, email newsletters, video productions, and ongoing

120

publications. Superintendent Perez was instrumental in creating the district’s
“brand” and logo of think, learn, achieve, and care to establish the message and
course of the district’s actions.
Table 4.25: Communication Reform Strategy

House Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the
Difference Between
Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Communication 1 4 Fragmented top-down
communications to an
established open
communication plan
through various media.
• District’s vision,
mission, and core
beliefs constantly
communicated to staff
and community
• School-site
communication
coordinator to disperse
information to
community
• Ongoing letters and
publications to
parents/community
including web-site
communication and
telephone hot-line
• Reporting of videos and
news reports to
highlight
accomplishments
• Connect-Ed system for
telephone and email
immediate
communication
• Open forums and town
hall meetings

The fifth priority of EPSD’s strategic plan was to change the culture of the
district and increase the morale of both staff and students. The reform strategy of
communication was utilized by the senior district staff by focusing on fostering open
and positive relationships amongst staff and students. The goal was to create a
district/school culture which emphasized respectful treatment of all people, a district-
wide pledge of ethics, and ultimately creating a professional learning community.

121

The district’s core leadership team infused the “team members” approach
with all district staff in the pursuit of creating shared ownership and responsibility
for the improvement and success of student learning. All district schools were
required to have a “communications coordinator” to disperse important information
to community and submit positive school-site stories to the district for publication in
the district’s bi-weekly newsletters. According to an interview with a panel of
district leaders on communication:
We gather information from all the different schools – teacher submitted –
and it highlights student achievement and even staff achievement… We
highlight those things by sending them out to everybody… The idea is to
highlight the students and staff achieving excellence in our schools.

All district staff was challenged to uphold the principles of “love, a laser-like
focus on teaching and learning, and leadership” in their professional endeavors to
strive for the betterment of students’ educational experiences. District-wide, staff
and students were asked to take a “pledge of ethics” every morning and at every
meeting to the following commitments: 1) treating others with respect, 2)
acknowledging that the school community is a “special place,” 3) listen and
communicate respectfully with others, 4) dress appropriately, 5) inspire the best in
self and others, 6) care about others, and 7) be a life-long learner.
In addition, the Superintendent strategized to increase student and staff
morale by communicating, acknowledging, and celebrating school/district
achievements and efforts. Students and district staff were recognized and honored at
monthly Board meetings through awards for their excellence in achievement in

122

accordance to the strategic plan. Students and staff with excellent achievements on
district goals were acknowledged in the following district publications: Stars of
Excellence for Outstanding Team Members, Excellence News, Focus (focused on
teaching and learning accomplishments in the district), and Board Briefs (a Board of
Education publication). Again, this exemplified continuous communication and
engagement with both parents and community. According to an interview with a
panel of key district leaders on communication:
Our communications are intended to speak to our mission and our vision of
what we would like to do with our strategic plan. Anything we communicate
has those things at the center of it, letters to staff [and to] parents about any
number of activities, programs which are all focused on student achievement
and becoming one of the best school systems in the state. It is a fairly
consistent thread, as they say in communications, when you are staying on
message - our message of providing excellent educational experiences and
service.

Table 4.26: Communications Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
4.2
Level of
Implementation
Communications Plan
1 5

5
Communications Office
1 5
Communication of District
Vision to the Community
1 3
Build Support for District
Initiatives
3 5
Two-way Communications
with Community
1 3

Referring to the Quality Rubric for Communications (Appendix C), EPSD
improved from a quality level of one with the previous superintendent to a quality
level of four under Superintendent Perez’s leadership. This was done by creating
and aligning the district’s communication plan with the strategic plan as well as

123

openly and continuously communicating with all the district’s stakeholders (i.e.,
students, parents, teachers, administrators, classified staff, board members, and
community/business members). According to the Assistant Board Secretary:
Today we have a greater amount of contact with our customers – parents,
community, and students. We get out our word about what we are doing on a
more consistent basis and communicate in a lot more ways than we did in the
past, in a more efficient way and a more clear way than we did before.

Governance and Board Relations
Table 4.27: Addressing Change in Governance and Board Relations
Strengths Challenges
• Board and community wanted reform in
district
• Board and Superintendent committed to
student achievement
• City and state politics influenced Board
direction
• District actions reflected political influence
with no sustained direction for district’s
progress for teaching and learning
• Board directly involved in day to day
operations of the district
Strategies
• Restructured superintendent and Board relationship towards a trusting working relationship
• Superintendent-Board governance by policy – clearly defined roles of Board and superintendent
• Established accountability for teachers and principals to improve student performance
• Established leadership expectations for district administrators

Superintendent Perez established a strong, cohesive, and respectful working
relationship with the Board of Education. The crucial reform strategy of governance
and board relations was implemented by the Superintendent through open, honest,
transparent, and collaborative communication with the Board. A Board member
stated in an interview: “We’ve been able to build a family atmosphere among the
Board and the administration – we know we’re in this together... Through
relationships, we are getting better at assessing our employees and how they can
better serve our children.” A different Board member stated: “The Superintendent
respects…and we are able to communicate with him very well…as a team we work

124

well together.” The Superintendent-Board relationship was very strong to the point
that the Board protected and shielded the Superintendent from outside political
forces so he could focus on student achievement and continue with goals for the
progress of the district. In an interview referencing to the Superintendent, a Board
member stated, “You can’t beat a winner, the kid doesn’t loose, he continues to stay
focused, he continues to show results, and he is a winner.”
Table 4.28: Governance and Board Relations Reform Strategy

House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Governance
and
Board
Relations
1 5 Prior Board of Education
involved in daily operations of
district. City and state politics
influenced district course.
• Superintendent established
trusting relationship with
Board members
• Superintendent and Board
governance by policy to
create systemic reform in
District
• Board and Superintendent
committed to student
achievement
• Created accountability for
teachers and principals to
improve student performance

The Board of Education shared a common vision, mission, values, and
priorities on student achievement with Superintendent Perez. Together, they set the
direction for improvement for the district. Superintendent Perez stated:
An early conversation I had with the board members… was that if we are
going to make strong instructional gains… we needed strong leadership in the
district across all levels and in particular at the principalship. I needed them
to be a little more hands-off and more supportive of whom we appointed to
certain positions. I built alliances with the main power-brokers…so there is
some capital that I’ve gained over time…and I’m using it…I’ve learned to
work with the Board and build relationships.

125

In collaboration with the Board, Superintendent Perez also secured control of
schools’ and district’s budgets to centralize the expenditure of resources in alignment
with the strategic plan. Through the Theory of Action, “managed instruction” was
implemented in which the curricular program in all of the district’s schools was
centralized and followed the adopted curriculum of Open Court Reading for grades
K-8. Implementing the reform strategy of governance and board relations
facilitated the implementation of the reform strategies of finance and budget and
curriculum.
Table 4.29: Governance and Board Relations Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Setting the Direction for the
Community’s Schools
1 5
5
Establishing an Effective and
Efficient Structure for the
District
1 5
Providing Support and
Resources
1 5
Ensuring Accountability to
the Public
1 5
Actions as Community
Leaders
1 5

On the Quality Rubric for Governance and Board Relations (Appendix C),
Superintendent received the highest rating score of five in contrast to a score of one
for the previous Superintendent. The relationships that Superintendent Perez
cultivated and nurtured with members of the Board of Education led to the highest
level of implementation, 5, on the rubric ratings. A board member stated:
Perez is creating a culture here and it resonates into the Board. I see the
attitude change in the culture of the employees… A lot of people’s lives have
changed, people think in a different way when they come to work now, kids

126

have a different attitude when they go to school, parents have different
expectation, and we are feeding that…

Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
Table 4.30: Addressing Change in Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
Strengths Challenges
• Labor relations functional and positive
between superintendent and union leaders
• Ensure all district’s employees prioritized
fidelity in teaching and learning for all
students
Strategies
• Strengthened superintendent and labor relationship – created fairness and equity for district
employees
• Maintained open communication with labor union president
• Focused and prioritized district’s work on overall student progress
• Created a professional district culture built on collaboration and responsibility

As Superintendent Perez sought to change and reform the district so as to
champion student achievement, he purposefully fostered positive labor relations with
the district’s labor union. Under the reform strategy of labor relations, the
Superintendent purposefully focused not only on salaries but also focused on
improving working conditions, relationships, and leadership.
Table 4.31: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the
Difference Between Pre
and Post
Implementation
Strategies / Action Steps
Labor
Relations
and
Contract
Negotiations

3 4 Labor relations
progressed from a
working system to a
collaborative and
cohesive relationship
focused on student
progress.
• Established open
communication/relationship
with labor union president
• Created a professional,
people-oriented, transparent
climate
• Monetary incentive program
to increase staff attendance
• Emphasized leadership,
responsibility, and
accountability on behalf of
students

127

Superintendent Perez established a productive working relationship with the
labor Union President who represented all classified and certificated employees in
the district. According to an interview with a panel of key district leaders on labor
relations in reference to Superintendent’s Perez leadership:
The climate and atmosphere has changed…it is important that our employees
are happy… They are a key component in the education of our children…
Communication is what makes everything work…and not taking for granted
the relationship… Knowing that every decision has a consequence, thinking
that through and bringing everyone to the table and always having that
person’s opinion or that person’s benefit in your mind is very important…

Working in partnership, the Superintendent and union president created a
“comfortable,” professional, people- and service-oriented climate in the district. The
joint focus was on building the knowledge, skills, motivation, and leadership within
the district’s work force for the benefit of the students and progress. According to a
Board member in a labor relations panel interview, “the Superintendent’s vision
emphasis is on leadership and having leadership held accountable …eventually to
create a culture in each building.”
A monetary incentive program was established in the collective bargaining
contract to increase staff attendance and commitment to the educational process by
all staff. For example in the collective bargaining contract between the district and
the union, an attendance incentive compensation clause states:
Employees who are absent zero (0) days in a school year will receive
compensation in the amount of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00)

All employees who are absent from one (1) to three (3) days will receive
three hundred dollars ($300.00) as compensation.

128

Thus, staff was rewarded for their perfect or near perfect everyday connection to
students. According to the Union President, teachers’ attendance “correlates with
student performance” and the goal was to get people to work everyday.
Superintendent Perez’s relationship charge with the union leadership emphasized
collective leadership, responsibility, and accountability on behalf of students.
Table 4.32: Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
3
Current Quality
4
Level of
Implementation
Relationships,
Communications and Trust
3 5
5
Negotiation Principles and
Objectives
3 5
Strategies for Negotiation
3 3
Fair and Equitable Outcomes
3 3

On the Quality Rubric for Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations
(Appendix C), the Superintendent received a rating score of four compared to a
rating score of three for the previous Superintendent. Also, an implementation level
rating of 5 was assigned to the Superintendent’s actions in regards to the labor
relations and contract negotiations reform strategy. Building open and collaborative
communication improved the relationship between the union membership and the
Superintendent from a “working” stage to a proactive and positive alliance focused
on students. According to the Union President:
At EPSD, we have a very unique relationship…we have a very collaborative
relationship. …Rather than have members worry about their salaries or
benefits, they want to go about their business of attending to their positions as
teachers… So we ratify negotiations fairly quickly…by in large, we always
come to an agreement.

129

In regards to labor relations, Superintendent Perez has established the importance
that employees “be happy,” therefore, the Board and district administration “work
for the employees – they are a key component in the education of the children.”
Family and Community Engagement
Table 4.33: Addressing Change in Family and Community Engagement
Strengths Challenges
• Community involved in the district’s politics
and operations
• Limited communication and engagement
with the community at large
• Relationship between district and
community based on political instead of
educational precedence
Strategies
• Created the position of assistant superintendent for family and community outreach
• Sustained the parent liaison positions at every school
• Established open lines of communication and support for community needs
• Superintendent held ongoing public forums and town hall meetings
• District built alliances with community organizations

Superintendent Perez utilized the reform strategy of family and community
engagement to continuously address the priorities and goals of the strategic plan.
The third priority outlined in the strategic plan emphasized school safety and student
discipline which was tactically connected with the reform strategy of family and
community engagement. According to an interview with a Board member:
We are addressing the needs of the community - the parents, the students -
therefore making it an environment or culture that these kids can come
and…not have the fear…there’s the safety. We have to develop all that in
order for them to come and be able to learn… You have to inform the
parents, you have to make sure we know what the kids’ needs are and by
being involved in the community and knowing exactly what we can give
back to the community it allows the children to achieve, to come in and get
an education and learn.

130

EPSD also implemented the district-wide use of school uniforms for all students
creating a district culture where the role and discipline of the student is significant in
the educational process.

Table 4.34: Family and Community Engagement Reform Strategy
House
Element
Reform
Strategy
Quality
Pre
Quality
Post
Essence of the Difference
Between Pre and Post
Implementation
Action Steps
Family
and
Community
Engagement

1 5 Creation of assistant
superintendent for family and
community outreach.
Instituted public forums and
publications to increase
communication.
• Parent liaison position at
every school for support of
community needs
• Created alliances with
parents and community civic
organizations
• Superintendent highly visible
in community/public
• Parents/students surveys,
telephone hotline, and email
accessibility

Through the reorganization of the district’s top administrators, the
Superintendent created the position of Assistant Superintendent of Family and
Community Outreach. This Assistant Superintendent was charged with the
coordinated training, parenting classes, support, brokering of information, and
alliances between the district and the community at large. The district-community
alliances ranged from civic and business partnerships (e.g., Rotary Club) to religious
and community grass-roots groups (e.g., Guardian Angels, Boys and Girls Scouts,
and Community Food-Bank). In addition, EPSD has established after-school “safe-
haven” programs to assist students with homework and provide structured
recreational activities for students.

131

Other actions implemented by Superintendent Perez included the creation of
school-based community liaisons working in partnership with the schools and
community. Also, an automated communication system (Connect-Ed) was
implemented to notify staff and/or parents of emergencies or simply to quickly
deliver general messages in mass communication. The strategies of “town hall”
meetings, and district telephone “hot-line” were utilized by Superintendent Perez and
EPSD to continuously communicate and engage with both parents and community.
Table 4.35: Family and Community Engagement Rating by Rubric Component

Rubric Components
Previous Quality
1
Current Quality
5
Level of
Implementation
Parenting
1 5
5
Communication
1 5
Volunteerism
1 5
Learning at Home
1 5
Decision Making
1 5
Collaboration with the
Community
1 5

On the Quality Rubric for Family and Community Engagement (Appendix
C), Superintendent Perez received the highest rating score of five compared to a one
for the previous Superintendent as well as a rating score of 5 for the level of
implementation for the reform strategy of family and community engagement.
According to an interview with a Board Member:
He [the Superintendent] has made some bold movements, he brought new
positions like Mr. Ds [Assistant Superintendent of Family and Community
Outreach]… which was necessary…so people could see that community is
important. We have supported him because his vision is our vision in getting
this district in the right path and we have seen the results.

132

Other House Elements: Additional Reform Strategies
In additional to the 10 key reform strategies, Superintendent Perez relied on
additional reform strategies to drive change in the district and deliver improved
performance affecting student achievement.

Table 4.36: Other House Elements - Reform Strategies
Other Reform
Strategies
Strategies / Action Steps
Leadership Team
Effectiveness
• Professional readings and USLI case study analysis.
Instruction
• Instructional practices aligned to curriculum implementation and guided
by professional development. Instruction is supported by instructional
coaches and monitored by trained administrators.
Resource Alignment
• District aligned all its resources and budget to the strategic plan
focusing on student achievement.
Focus on Lowest
Performers
• Assessment system focused on identifying students not meeting
benchmarks in literacy and math. Academic after-school intervention
was provided to address students’ learning needs.
Program Effectiveness
• District’s priorities were to create effective instructional, curricular,
professional development, and leadership programs focused on student
achievement.
Student Support Services
• District-wide implementation of athletics, arts, and music programs for
all students with the focus on character-building, creativity, and
sportsmanship.
Performance
Management Systems /
Accountability Plan
• Established high expectations for all teachers and administrators driven
by data and student achievement. Staff were supported through
professional development and held accountable for student progress.

The reform strategy of leadership team effectiveness was key to the
Superintendent’s work. As Mr. Perez entered his new position of superintendent, he
found himself working with a large cabinet of district-level administrators who
mostly worked in “silos” and went on their business in their own way without a clear
direction. Open communication, trusting loyalty, and alignment of efforts towards a
common vision/purpose did not exist amongst district administrators. After reading

133

the book Good to Great by Jim Collins, Superintendent Perez decided he needed the
“right people on the bus and in their right seats.” Therefore, he reorganized and
transitioned his large cabinet to a select core leadership team whom he identified to
have strengths and loyalty to his needs.
Superintendent Perez strived to drive change and enhance the knowledge,
skill, and leadership of the district’s core leadership team through professional
literature readings and USLI case study analysis. Superintendent Perez continuously
brought professional reading material to the leadership team and not only challenged
them to learning it but would expect the core leadership to be reflective and enhance
their knowledge and skill.
Superintendent Perez also utilized the reform strategy of instruction to create
improvement. Through the course of aligning curriculum and professional
development for teachers and principals, the instruction piece was integrated by the
core leadership team. School-site administrators, teachers, and instructional coaches
were trained at the district-level on “best instructional practices” to improve
teaching. Therefore, an alignment was created between curricular programs (e.g.,
Open Court Reading), instruction, and professional development. This also led to
the alignment of resources in which the Superintendent ensured that district’s
finances and budgets were in support of the teaching and learning priorities as well
as directly improving student achievement all within the strategic plan.
Strategically, the Superintendent led the core leadership team to also focus on
lowest performers throughout the district. The assessment system and data

134

collection system established by EPSD allowed for immediate identification and
targeted intervention of students not performing at benchmark in literacy and math.
Students were tutored in after-school intervention programs or assisted in the
Reading First Initiative to improve in their academic attainments. These reform
strategies led to the reform strategy of program effectiveness. Superintendent Perez
clearly created and delineated strategies to increase program effectiveness in
curriculum, assessment, instruction, professional development, and leadership which
were driven by the Keys for Excellence Strategic Plan.
Superintendent Perez’s focus for district action and work was student-
centered. He employed the reform strategy of student support services to advance
the first priority of the strategic plan. An awarded baseball player himself,
Superintendent Perez drove the district-wide implementation of excellence in
athletic, arts, and music programs for all students. EPSD emphasized creating
district-wide championship teams focused on athletics. The focus was on building
relationships and character development for all grades through sports instruction.
Developmental sports clinics were established district-wide. The result was EPSD’s
schools winning county and/or state championships in baseball, soccer, track, rugby,
and football. EPSD also focused on creating an arts-rich school culture which
provided students with instruction in music, visual arts, theater and dance. This
resulted in EPSD winning state championships in music competitions.
Overall, Superintendent Perez brought the reform strategy of performance
management and accountability to EPSD. By building relationships through open,

135

ongoing, and transparent communication, the Superintendent established high
expectations for all teachers and administrators. These expectations were driven by
performance data for both students and staff. District staff was held accountable for
the learning and achievement of students but just as well were supported through
professional development and resources.
Discussion
The findings presented in this study were developed and presented by
reviewing the data collected in the context of the conceptual framework of the House
Model (Appendix A) and the reform strategies quality rubrics. The purpose of this
section was to understand the findings of this study and provide meaning to the
reform strategies implemented by the Superintendent.
Authentic Leadership and Systematic Change
Parker J. Palmer (1992) shared that the power of authentic leadership is found
within the human heart in a constantly moving inner journey. Superintendent Perez
was a constantly moving authentic educator with a passion for leadership. He
understood the intricacy of leadership to envision, motivate, direct, develop, be
effective, and enrich lives. Through his leadership, Superintendent Perez progressed
to improve his district by driving change and creating systems to affect the quality of
the educational programs for students.
Leading the charge for change, Superintendent Perez was instrumental in
creating the vision, mission, core values, and priorities for strategic improvement in
EPSD. His simple vision of transforming EPSD into one of the best school systems

136

in the state proved to be powerful in energizing and focusing the educational
community on progress. Superintendent Perez was able to lead the board of
education, district/school administrators, and teachers towards developing a common
purpose in the schooling of students. DuFour et al. (2006) shared that a district that
functions as a professional learning community creates a “clear and compelling
purpose” in which the focus and commitment by the entire district is on the learning
of every student. Superintendent Perez exemplified the charge for a “clear and
compelling purpose” through the institution of EPSD’s mission to provide excellent
educational experiences and services to inspire every student to think, to learn, to
achieve and to care.
Superintendent Perez’s authentic leadership was the pinnacle to the
foundation of his: 1) core values of commitment, teamwork, communication,
responsibility, and respect; 2) passion for education; 3) courage to change and
improve; and 4) vision of a high performing district (see Figure 4.2).

137

Figure 4.2: Authentic Leadership

Authentic and systemic leadership was the fundamental dynamic to all of the reform
strategies Superintendent Perez utilized to drive systematic change in the East-
Side Public School District. The Superintendent proved true leadership abilities to
create change and charge all stakeholders with the achievement of students. Mr.
Perez demonstrated that “leadership is about creating a vision with others, designing
an organization to achieve that vision, and then thinking and interacting with others
to make it happen” (Cambron-McCabe, Cunningham, Harvey, & Koff, 2005, p. 50).
According to Belasco and Stayer (1993) a leader must prepare themselves for
the leadership journey. Leadership is a dynamic process that is ever-changing and
consuming. A person has to wholeheartedly desire to be a leader and mold oneself
as a leader. Northouse (2007) stated that “leadership is a process whereby an
individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3).
Through his different roles as a traditional educator, Superintendent Perez was
L

Vision
Courage
Passion
Core Values

138

committed to learning, building relationships, encouraging others, influencing his
community, and standing strong as a leader. He was a leader who created systemic
change by developing systems focused on teaching and learning through curriculum,
instruction, assessment, leadership, and accountability for the educational process.
Tactfully, Superintendent Perez built relationships to capitalize and bring
higher levels of productivity and performance district-wide. His systematic
leadership approach to the reform strategy of human resources and human capital
management was monumental in creating change in the district by choosing the
“right” people to do the “right” job. Jim Collins (2001) stated that a crucial strategy
to success is “getting the right people on the bus (and the wrong people off the bus)”
(p. 63) – a strategy that Superintendent Perez utilized effectively. He reorganized the
district’s central administration as well school-level principals to place the “right”
people in the “right” place creating the change needed in curricular implementation,
instructional leadership, human resources, finance and budget alignment, and
community engagement. Northouse (2007), shared that management focuses on
“planning, organizing, staffing, and controlling…, creating order and stability,
whereas leadership is about adaptation and constructive change” (p. 13). From the
findings, Superintendent Perez was both a manager and leader continuously
capitalizing on the reform strategies of human resources, labor relations,
governance and board relations, and strategic planning to deal with the
organizational issues of planning, staffing, and bringing order to a district in need of
improvement. Mr. Perez did as Cambron-McCabe et al. (2005) advised: “Reshape

139

governance and union-management relations so that the entire district focuses on
learning” (p. 14). Through his courageous leadership actions of revamping the top
district administration and creating a core leadership team loyal to him, Mr. Perez
entrusted key “captains” within the organization with the responsibility of leading
the district. Through his leadership, Superintendent Perez was “simultaneously an
educator, manager, budget-maker, public servant, politician, community leader, and
local preacher” (Cambron-McCabe et. al., 2005, p. 15). Superintendent Perez’s
leadership included the purposive action steps of: 1) rigorous learning through his
own education and readings, 2) professional focus on goals for the district’s
improvement, 3) results and data-driven based on students’ assessment, 4) active
reflection and ongoing communication with district stakeholders, and 5) establishing
the course for collective action by the district’s staff (see Figure 4.3). These action
steps aided Superintendent Perez’s charge for the district’s reform and improvement
to higher levels of progress. Figure 4.3 illustrates the action steps the superintendent
took to make his leadership effective. The purposeful action steps of rigorous
learning, goal-orientation, results driven, communication, and action orientation
enhanced Superintendent Perez’s leadership. These five action steps flowed into one
another to create a multifaceted and dynamic leadership style.

140

Figure 4.3: Leadership’s Action Steps

Strategic Planning for a Learning Organization
Under Superintendent Perez’s leadership, student achievement was the
ultimate goal for district-wide improvement. This was done through strategic
planning, alignment of resources, and leading the school community towards
progressive levels. Hence, a specific and well designed strategic plan embodied by
the collective whole of the school community was the underlying element for the
solution plan to achievement.
In order to effectively implement change and improvement, Superintendent
Perez and his leadership team led the development of a straightforward and
calculated strategic plan to serve as the guide for the entire school community. The

Collective
Action

Active
Reflection
and Dialogue

Results & Data
Driven

Focused
On
Goals

Rigorous
Learning

Superintendent
Leadership

141

strategic plan reflected both educational and leadership “best practices” focused on
the specific needs of the district. Overall, Superintendent Perez’s goal was to make
EPSD an effective professional “learning organization” positively impacting both the
academic and social learning of the students and staff alike. Mr. Perez’s work was
reflective of Senge’s (2000) assertion that in “learning organizations” stakeholders
continuously learn, plan, and achieve together by enhancing their collective capacity
in search of better results. Accordingly, EPSD’s strategic plan was driven by the
district’s commitment on the following priorities:
1. Creating excellence in academics, athletics, and the arts
2. Increase student performance on state tests
3. Improve school safety and discipline
4. Construct new schools and modernize existing schools
5. Change the district’s culture and increase morale
These collective priorities generated the drive, mindset, and the overall framework
for the strategic planning efforts by the district staff. Richard DuFour, Rebecca
DuFour, Robert Eaker, and Thomas Many (2006) stated that the initial step in the
improvement process is creating a guiding coalition to build consensus amongst staff
members on the district’s priorities for success through open dialogue and the
cultivation of a shared knowledge for learning and teaching. Superintendent Perez
was successful in the strategic planning process and progress of a learning
organization at EPSD.

142

Building Capacity and Changing the Culture towards a Professional Learning
Community
As change and improvement was demanded from EPSD by community and
district stakeholders, Superintendent Perez found himself involved in getting the
school community to “change the culture” from what they were used to doing (or
not) with the previous administration. Changing the culture was the fifth priority in
EPSD’s strategic plan. Superintendent Perez’s changes involved setting
organizational, functional and accountability systems for teachers and administrators
based on student performance. The mission was to progressively drive the school
community to higher levels of expectations, rigorous work, and student achievement.
The reform strategies of curriculum, assessment, and professional development were
exploited by Superintendent Perez to build instructional capacity and to drive change
within the school community. According to Ramaley (2002) the work of a “learning
organization” involves all teachers, administrators, parents, and students. In East-
Side Public Schools, the change process entailed constructing within the entire
organization and specifically with all its stakeholders a shared vision, mission, core
values, expectations, and goals; new knowledge; collective reflection; continuous
information and communication; collaboration and creativity; competence and
shared responsibility; and empowerment through “dispersed power and leadership”
(Ramaley, 2002, p. 64).
Superintendent Perez was superb in his leadership but also in changing the
culture of the district. He focused on the initial actions for improvement by creating

143

a simple but clever vision for EPSD. Superintendent Perez created the powerful
image of where EPSD should be in regards to the performance of teaching and
learning. McCabe et al. (2005) stated that the superintendent must create a visionary
image for the district they are leading. In turn, the image defines both the work that
must occur and the roles of stakeholders to accomplish the work. “Your image of
the organization you are leading profoundly influences how you understand your
role…[in] turning your district into a ‘learning organization’…focused on learning”
(McCabe et al, 2005, p. 18).
As the “learning organization” was evolving under Superintendent Perez’s
leadership, so were the professional capacity, knowledge, and skills of the district’s
stakeholders. Superintendent Perez and his core leadership team focused on
improving the teachers’ instructional practice and student learning/achievement
goals. Clark and Estes (2002) stated that “knowledge and skill enhancement are
required [to improve] job performance” (p. 58). Through the reform strategy of
professional development and managed instruction, the Superintendent changed
teaching and learning in EPSD. Improvement in the district required a “change in
beliefs, norms, and values about what is possible to achieve as well as the actual
practices that are designed to bring achievement” (Elmore, 2002, p. 18).
As Superintendent Perez led systemic change, commitment to teaching and
learning by the instructional and leadership staff created a district culture focused on
quality educational experiences for students. This change in district culture is
reflective of what DuFour and Eaker (1998) refer to as a “professional learning

144

community” (PLC). The PLC is needed if the district is to continuously move to
higher levels of productivity – leaving behind mediocrity and conformity for an idle
educational process (DuFour et al., 2006; DuFour & Eaker, 1998; Eaker et al., 2002).
EPSD progressed in the direction of becoming a “professional learning community.”
Superintendent Perez established an energetic force of beliefs, work ethic, and
accomplishments by modeling and injecting passion, courage, and vision to all
stakeholders. Darling-Hammond (1996) shared that schools and districts be
restructured as learning organizations to better serve the needs of students and staff
towards a greater educational achievement. Superintendent Perez exemplified this
calling as he not only restructured the central district administration but the entire
district into a two-tier schooling configuration: primary schools for grades
kindergarten through eight and secondary schools with grades nine through twelve.
In reflection of systemic change and the creation of structures and capacities,
Superintendent Perez’s work towards a “professional learning community” (see
Figure 4.4) was evident by the following actions:
1. Creation, articulation, and living of a shared vision, mission, and values
for the educational process.
2. Collective inquiry by all to refocus, refine, and reallocate human,
intellectual, and financial resources in a continuously progressive
improvement course of action.

145

3. Collaborative teams in which all members worked on supporting each
other to accomplish the agreed upon goals for learning, teaching, and
achievement.
4. Action orientation and experimentation in which PLC members not only
“think” and “try” but “do” – problem solve together and have the courage
to act on innovative practices for advancement.
5. Continuous improvement in which there is unconditional commitment to
constantly improving the educational experiences for all, including
change.
6. Results orientation in which dialogue, decisions, and movement was
based on assessment data and performance-driven (DuFour & Eaker,
1998).
Superintendent Perez’s leadership actions clearly demonstrated his relentless efforts
to re-create the East-Side Public School District into an effective and productive
professional learning community. Figure 4.4 demonstrates that a professional
learning community has the following elements interacting and flowing into one
another: shared vision and mission; collective values and goals; focus on teaching
and learning; collaborative teams; inquiry and continuous improvement; and action
and results oriented.

146

Figure 4.4: Professional Learning Community

Four Frames of Leadership
To further identify Superintendent Perez’s leadership, it is useful to utilize
the four frames framework conceptualized by researchers Bolman and Deal (2003).
Bolman and Deal have categorized leadership into the four frames of structural,
human resource, political, and symbolic. Figure 4.5 gives a visual representation of
interaction of the four frames of leadership.

Action and
Results
Oriented

Inquiry for
Continuous
Improvement

Collaborative
and
Supportive
Teams

Culture
focused on
Teaching and
Learning

Collective
Values and
Goals

Compelling
and Clear
Mission

Shared
Vision

Professional
Learning
Community

147

Figure 4.5: Four Frames of Leadership

Source: Bolman and Deal (2003)
The first frame, structural, deals with an organization’s “structural” rules of
operation, personnel roles, overall functions, and the goals and mission of the
organization. In order to be effective under the structural frame, a leader must strive
to understand and navigate the rules, roles, goals, mission, and overall functional
processes/structures of the organization. Bolman and Deal state that “roles are
clearly defined…[and] team members work together…for a successful outcome…
Structural
Leadership
Human
Resources
Leadership
Political
Leadership

Symbolic
Leadership
Four
Frames of
Leadership
Organizational roles,
functions, goals, and
mission
Coalition building,
bargaining, and
negotiation
Relationships,
communication,
and motivation
Culture, beliefs,
values, and
vision

148

Building a cohesive team is critical” (p. 94). Superintendent Perez employed the
structural frame to redefine the roles and functions of the district’s teachers,
principals, and central-district administrators. The roles and functions changed from
a “mediocre” and “silo” expectations of work and performance under the previous
superintendent to a goals-oriented, data-driven, performance-focused, results-
targeted, high expectation, and transparent accountability environment under
Superintendent Perez’s leadership. The ultimate charge was on instructional
leadership focused on teaching and learning.
Bolman’s and Deal’s next leadership frame, human resource, involves
relationships, communication, motivation, and overall the needs of people involved.
Bolman and Deal have stated that the “human resource frame centers on how
characteristics of organizations and people shape what they do for one another” (p.
111). Through the human resource frame, leaders strive to move people to a higher
level of being, “self-actualization” (p. 117). Superintendent Perez operated under the
human resource frame to build relationships which he capitalized to “shape” the
district leadership. Consequently, Superintendent Perez and the district’s leadership
team created the motivational energy to drive change within EPSD. Superintendent
Perez strived to communicate and understand his stakeholders to encourage and
guide them to an environment focused on student learning.
The third frame of Bolman’s and Deal’s leadership is the political frame.
Here, the concentration is on coalition building, divergent interest groups, scarcity in
resources, empowerment, power differences, conflict, competition, bargaining, and

149

negotiation. According to Bolman and Deal, through the political frame, “politics is
simply the realistic process of making decisions and allocating resources in a context
of scarcity and divergent interests” (p. 181). In other words, people are always
seeking to acquire what is in their or in their group’s best interest. Superintendent
Perez was very “political.” Through his leadership, Superintendent Perez built
strong coalitions with various district stakeholders such as, the Board of Education,
the labor union president, teaching staff, and community members/leaders.
Superintendent Perez empowered people to create change, improve in their work
performance with students, and create a “legacy” in the district.
Bolman’s and Deal’s last frame of leadership is the symbolic frame. This
frame deals with an organization’s culture, beliefs, stories, values, symbols, rituals,
and vision. Bolman and Deal state that the symbolic frame “focuses on how humans
make sense of the messy, ambiguous world in which they live. Meaning, belief, and
faith are its central concerns. Meaning is not given to us; we have to create it” (p.
240). Superintendent Perez was a master at creating “meaning” for EPSD. He was
the “holder of the vision.” He established the district’s core values and priorities
which guided the work of the district. Superintendent Perez charged the district’s
stakeholders to have a “laser-like focus” on teaching and learning.
Bolman’s and Deal’s four leadership frames mentioned above are all needed
in a harmonious interaction in order to have a leadership that is balanced,
encompassing, astute, progressive, and successful. This is what Superintendent

150

Perez strived for in his leadership journey through his professional career as a
traditional educator.
Summary
This chapter reviewed the findings based on the data collected in the case
study. A detailed analysis and discussion of how those findings related to the
research questions and their connections to the literature reviewed in Chapter 2 was
presented. This chapter examined the level and quality of implementation of the
reform strategies selected by the superintendent to improve student performance.
The findings in this study were based on several data sources strengthening the
validity of the findings. The summary, conclusions, and implications of this study are
presented in Chapter 5.

151

CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS
Today’s system leaders in public education are confronted with increasingly
complex challenges from accountability measures for student achievement to a
unionized labor force with their own agendas to external political influences to a
diverse student body with varying academic and social needs. Fuller et al. (2003)
has referred to the superintendent’s work environment created by these complex
challenges as an “impossible job.”
System leaders’ (i.e., superintendent) work is monumental in creating change,
transforming, and leading a school district to successful productivity. The multi-
faceted complexities of the work have created a learning curve to better understand
what system leaders do to reform an entire organization and focus it on positive
learning outcomes. Consequently, a system leader’s preparation, background, and
experiences are critical in his or her knowledge, skill, and motivation to move a
system forward. The “right” tools (including human resources) will provide the
“right” leverage to the system leader to lead. There is much to be learned.
Contextually, school systems throughout the nation are reflective of their host
communities including local politics, socio-economic status, resources, educational
levels, ethnic and cultural backgrounds, and language differences. This presents
specific strengths and challenges for each particular school district in regards to the
reform efforts sought out and implemented by the system leaders. Therefore,
effective system leaders strategically work in the context of the school district to

152

produce improved outcomes in not only the eyes of the community, but also to
satisfy state and federal accountability expectations. Overall, research and literature
has revealed that system leaders can create “victory in schools” (Stanford, 1999) by
having a positive effect on the quality of educational experiences given to students.
Thus, it is important to understand what makes superintendents effective in their
quest to create systemic and systematic change for teaching and learning.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to develop a clearer understanding of how
urban school district superintendents were utilizing and implementing specific
reform strategies throughout their system leadership to ultimately improve student
performance. Specifically, this study focused on one urban school district
superintendent’s utilization of ten key reform strategies (including degree and quality
of implementation) identified by the Urban School Leadership Institute (USLI) in
their House Model’s framework for superintendent leadership. These ten key reform
strategies were: 1) strategic plan, 2) assessment, 3) curriculum, 4) professional
development, 5) human resource system and human capital management, 6) finance
and budget, 7) communications, 8) governance/board relations, 9) labor
relations/contract negotiations, and 10) family and community engagement. This
study, Phase II, further developed a Phase I study by Takata, Marsh, and Castruita
(2007) which reviewed and compared superintendents’ efforts to change a school
district in support of student achievement.

153

The emphasis of this study was on understanding how the key reform
strategies utilized by one system leader were influenced by the strengths and
challenges (i.e., context) of the school district at the time of his appointment to the
superintendency. In addition, an in-depth analysis was performed to studying the
reform strategies utilized by the superintendent in correspondence to his professional
preparation (including background and experience). The following research question
and accompanying sub-questions guided the development of the study:
1. How are the ten key reform strategies being used by the urban school
district superintendents in his or her respective district?
a. How does the quality and degree of implementation of the ten
reform strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges in the
district when the superintendent took office?
b. What additional major reform strategies (if any) were used? How
do they correspond to the elements of the House Model?
c. How does the choice and implementation of the ten key reform
strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of
the superintendent?
Methodology
The purpose of this study suggested that a multi-method qualitative
methodology within a case study format be utilized to investigate the research
questions. The goal was to obtain rich descriptions and grounded explanations for
the actions and processes within a specific context. In this case study the focus was

154

to understand the quality and degree of reform strategies implemented by an urban
school district superintendent impacting the quality of the educational program
offered to students. Therefore, strategic interviews were chosen as the main data
collection tool for obtaining rich detailed information. Patton (2002) asserted that a
qualitative in-depth analysis of a case study can provide rich information from a
holistic and contextual setting.
Case study methodology facilitated the investigation of the reform strategies
utilized by the superintendent by expelling detailed experiences of key district
players in their work and role in the school district. In addition, the case study
methodology allowed the research team to explore data and findings in greater detail
as they became evident. Through the data collection and analysis processes,
qualitative data was obtained in regards to the effectiveness of each reform strategy
utilized by the superintendent through his tenure in the district. The unit of analysis
is this study was one urban school district, the superintendent, and relevant district
key players.
Sample
In order to investigate the ten specific reform strategies for district change as
advanced by the House Model, one urban school district superintendent was
purposefully selected. Information was sought out in regards to the superintendent’s
utilization of the reform strategies to give him leverage in his efforts to improve
student achievement. Specifically, the data collection process presented detailed
information on how the superintendent’s background and experiences prior to his

155

superintendency created the capital and leverage to effectuate specific strategies.
Moreover, interviews for the study were obtained from the superintendent, two
district key players, and numerous reform strategy-specific district leaders. These
reform strategy-specific district leaders included: assistant superintendents,
executive district staff, district-level administrators, and members from the board of
education.
Data Collection and Analysis
The data for the study was collected during the month of August 2008. The
Urban School Leadership Institute developed the House Model (Appendix A)
utilized in this study as the conceptual framework guiding the reform strategies
studied. The House Model is a comprehensive visual representation of targeted
reform strategies advanced by the USLI as a means for training of current or future
superintendents. The House Model is composed of several sections which include a
foundation, rooms, and a roof. Within each of these sections, various reform
strategies have been categorized and established. For the purpose of this study, only
ten specific strategies were targeted.
The data collection and analysis processes were supported by the
development of five instruments: 1) Superintendent Interview Guide (Appendix D);
2) Key Player Interview Guide (Appendix E); 3) Specific Dimensions of Reform
Interview Guide (Appendix F); 4) Quality Rubrics and Implementation Rubric
(Appendix C). The three interview guides (Superintendent, Key player, and Specific
Dimensions of Reform) served the following functions: 1) guide for the interview

156

process and protocol; 2) interview questions sought information in regards to the
study’s research questions; 3) established the process for recording and coding the
interview data; and 4) guided the identification of district documents in support of
the data/information gathering process.
The Quality Rubric measured the level of quality of specific components for
each of the ten key reform strategies through a 5 point Likert scale with a level 5
indicating high, 3 for moderate, and 1 for low. The Assessment Quality Rubric, for
example, included the following components: 1) summative assessments; 2)
formative assessments; 3) data management, information, and reporting
system/technology; 4) analysis, interpretation, and utilization of assessment data; 5)
professional development; and 5) fiscal support and resources.
The Implementation Rubric measured the level of implementation of each of
the ten reform strategies utilizing a 5 point Likert scale with a level 5 indicating high,
3 for moderate, and 1 for low. The level of implementation was in reference to the
following criteria: 1) the external challenges to full implementation; 2) the extent
that each component of the reform strategy was fully implemented in practice; 3) the
level of shared understanding, values, and expectations leading to reflection and
continuous improvement; and 4) the sustainability of staff and fiscal resources
towards the regularization of the reform strategy.
These data collection tools, numerous interviews, and review of district
documents supported the triangulation of data from multiple sources increasing the
validity of the study.

157

Selected Findings
The data collection process revealed several key findings summarized in this
section. The findings are presented in relation to the research questions and are
related to the instrumentation and primary sources of data collected.
Research Question 1: Ten Key Reform Strategies
Research question 1 asked “How are the ten key reform strategies being used
by large urban school superintendents to improve student achievement in his or her
respective district?” The following section summarizes the findings for each of the
ten key reform strategies. The primary sources of data collected were from
interviews and district documentation through the use of the Superintendent
Interview Guide, the Key Player Interview Guide, and the Specific Dimension of
Reform Interview Guide.
The strategic plan was Superintendent Perez’s most significant reform
strategy. Through the leadership of Mr. Perez, East-Side Public School District
established the Keys to Excellence Strategic Plan. The plan was driven by five
guiding priorities focused on student achievement and overall changing of the
district’s culture to a performance-based, data-driven, and accountable organization.
The five priorities were: 1) creating excellence in academics, athletics, and the arts;
2) increase student performance on state tests; 3) improve school safety and
discipline; 4) construct new schools and modernize existing schools; and 5) change
the district’s culture and increase morale. The strategic plan established a common
vision and mission along with core beliefs and values for the district. East-Side

158

Public School District’s vision was to be one of the best school systems in the state –
this set the overarching goals for the district. Superintendent Perez used the
compelling and visionary initiatives of the strategic plan to offer hope and drive
change for the district. Through buy-in from various stakeholders, including board
members, the strategic plan became the basis of all the work at EPSD.
The first and second priorities outlined in the Keys to Excellence Strategic
Plan focused on academic excellence and increasing student performance on state
tests. These priorities focused simultaneously on the reform strategies of
curriculum, assessment, and professional development. As a traditional educator,
Superintendent Perez led the alignment of resources to create an assessment structure
in which the district’s curricular formative assessments were aligned to the state’s
summative assessments. Through curricular alignment, EPSD implemented district-
wide benchmarking for literacy and mathematics to guide instructional modifications
and interventions. Under the assessment reform strategy, EPSD developed the
online assessment system to monitor student progress through data analysis.
Under the curriculum reform strategy, Superintendent Perez changed the
district’s curricular focus to managed instruction in which all schools across the
district utilized the same curricular/instructional programs for all students. The
district administration established academic learning goals per grade-level and
adopted curricular programs to support proficiency. Such programs were Open Court
Reading, early literacy initiatives, science education, writing tasks, and eighth grade
Algebra. The adopted district-wide curriculum was aligned to the state’s core

159

curriculum content standards. Pacing plans were created by the district to guide
curricular implementation as well as monitor and support instructional practices.
Students across the district were given access and opportunity to the same rigorous
standards-based curricular learning experiences.
As the focus of EPSD transitioned into teaching and learning with student
achievement at the core, the reform strategy of professional development was
instrumental to changing the practice and overall performance of EPSD’s staff. The
district’s professional development plan was centralized and focused on curriculum
and standards-based “best practices” for student learning. Instructional coaches were
trained at the district level and placed at individual school-sites to enhance teachers’
pedagogy and support principals as instructional leaders. Through professional
development, the focus of Superintendent Perez was to build the professional
capacity of the entire district’s staff in direct connection to students.
To transform the district into a performance-driven culture focused on
providing quality educational experiences for students, Superintendent Perez utilized
the reform strategy of human resource system and human capital management. He
created a focused, loyal, and results-oriented leadership team at the district office
who shared a common vision for teaching and learning. The Superintendent
reorganized the central district’s organizational structure and created assistant
superintendent positions charged with leadership focused on student achievement.
With the establishment of the assistant superintendent of human resources, EPSD
moved towards having a district culture composed of “highly qualified” teachers and

160

administrators. The Superintendent prioritized the selection and placement of the
“right” administrators in key positions throughout the district to create change and
ultimately achieve the district’s goals for performance, accountability, and
achievement.
Superintendent Perez purposefully utilized the reform strategy of finance and
budget to initiate and sustain change within the district. Using the strategic plan as
the basis for all of EPSD’s work, funding priorities were clearly established. Fiscal
support was aligned with the district’s goals for student achievement. The
Superintendent and his core leadership team took centralized control of the district’s
budget to re-direct funding for district-wide curricular/instructional programs,
professional development, and construction of schools in alignment with students’
needs. Superintendent Perez was directly involved in the budgeting process.
Indispensable to all of Superintendent Perez’s work was the reform strategy
of communication. He positively communicated with and engaged district staff, the
Board of Education, and the community. Superintendent Perez established open and
ongoing communication with all stakeholders through weekly school visitations,
town hall meetings, public forums, round-table discussions, Internet blogs, email
newsletters, video productions, and ongoing publications. Also, Superintendent
Perez required that all schools have a “communications coordinator” to disperse
important information to the community and submit positive school-site stories to the
district for publication in the district’s bi-weekly newsletters.

161

Superintendent Perez was successful in establishing a strong and respectful
relationship with the Board of Education. The critical reform strategy of governance
and board relations was implemented by the Mr. Perez through honest, transparent,
and collaborative communication with the board. The superintendent-board
relationship was very cohesive to the point that the Board protected and shielded the
Superintendent from outside political forces so he could focus on student progress
and achievement. Working as a team, the Board and the Superintendent established
the direction for improvement for the district and secured control of schools’ and
district’s budgets to centralize funding and resources in alignment with the strategic
plan.
Superintendent Perez also fostered positive labor relations with the district’s
labor union. Under the reform strategy of labor relations, the Superintendent
purposefully focused not only on salaries but also focused on improving working
conditions, relationships, and leadership within the district’s staff. In a partnership,
the Superintendent and union president created a professional climate of respect in
the district. The joint focus was on building the knowledge, skills, motivation, and
leadership within the district’s work force for the benefit of the students.
Superintendent Perez also utilized the reform strategy of family and
community engagement to continuously advance the priorities and goals of EPSD.
Mr. Perez created the position of assistant superintendent of family and community
outreach. This assistant superintendent was charged with the coordinated training
and support of the community and families. In addition, the implementation of

162

school-based community liaisons working in partnership with the schools and
community was a significant strategy employed by EPSD to continuously
communicate and support both parents and the community.
Research Question 1a: Strengths and Challenges of the District
Research question 1a asked “How does the quality and implementation of the
ten key reform strategies correspond to the strengths and challenges of the district
when the superintendent took office?” The data collection revealed that East-Side
Public School District had varying degrees of strengths and challenges during the
time the current superintendent was appointed.
EPSD was experiencing a building boom with additional funding from the
state for the construction of new schools. Superintendent Perez capitalized on the
additional state funding by leading the construction of modernized state-of-the-art
“buildings.” He employed the reform strategies of communication, finance and
budget, community engagement, and board relations to push and champion for new
schools focused on student needs. Mr. Perez created change in the district’s
organizational culture by reconfiguring the district to a K-8 and high school district.
Thus, the new schools built reflected this educational structure.
Another strength of EPSD was the talented pool of teachers, administrators,
and district staff from neighboring major universities. Superintendent Perez took
advantage of the well-educated staff through the human resources reform strategy
and recognized talented people to lead the district. He tapped traditional educators

163

throughout the district who he had identified over the years as talented, skilled, and
passionate leaders to serve in key positions.
Also, professional development and training had been an ongoing practice at
EPSD. Superintendent Perez took the reform strategy of professional development
onto higher quality and implementation levels and refocused towards a centralized
approach to a managed instructional program. Mr. Perez and his core leadership
team strategically aligned the district’s professional development to the new adopted
curriculum, best instructional practices, and effective leadership.
EPSD was also facing many challenges at the time Superintendent Perez took
office. The district was caught in a very highly politicized environment in which
political power brokers at both the city and state levels influenced decisions at
EPSD. Mr. Perez utilized the reform strategies of communication and community
and family engagement to build open and strong relationships and muster support
for his programs.
Another challenge was that central offices and individual schools worked in
isolation from each other with a lack of communication. District-wide decision-
making, including the curriculum and instructional practices at schools, was
decentralized with the authority given to school-sites. Superintendent Perez utilized
the strategic plan as the basis to create alignment within in the district’s resources,
finances, curriculum, professional development, human resources, and
communication all focused on creating quality educational opportunities for
students. This led to the improvement of ongoing and transparent communication

164

within district between stakeholders. As a result, decision-making and the
management of both school-sites’ and district’s resources was centralized under the
authority of the superintendent.
As a traditional educator with his entire career in the district and having
served in various roles from teacher to assistant superintendent, Superintendent Perez
clearly understood the strengths and challenges of the district. Once he became
Superintendent, he had clear goals and strategies for improving student performance
beginning with strengthening the quality of curricular/instructional programs offered
to students. Mr. Perez was truly thoughtful, reflective and strategic. He transformed
the district by creating “capital” with key stakeholders through constructive and
congenial relationships in which he got people to buy-in into his direction and plan
for the district. It began with the Superintendent’s establishment of the core
leadership team to champion and lead the work on behalf of student achievement.
Mr. Perez utilized all of the ten key reform strategies to effectuate change in EPSD.
The data collection process was supported by the Superintendent, Key Player,
and Specific Dimension of Reform Interview Guides. Also, the strategy-specific
Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics assisted in the data collection as well
as in the analysis and interpretation of the findings.
Research Question 1b: Other Reform Strategies
Research question 1b asked “What additional reform strategies (if any) were
used? How do they correspond to the elements of the House Model?” In additional
to the ten key reform strategies, Superintendent Perez relied on additional reform

165

strategies to drive change in the district. His focus for district action and work was
student-centered.
The reform strategy of leadership team effectiveness was key to the
Superintendent’s work. Mr. Perez reorganized and transitioned the large central
district cabinet he inherited into a select core leadership team whom he developed
(through professional literature readings and case study analysis) and charged with
being effective in changing the district. He found the “right” people to place in the
“right” positions to lead the district.
Superintendent Perez also utilized the reform strategy of instruction to
improve the quality of the educational programs at EPSD. Through the course of
aligning curriculum and professional development for teachers and principals, the
instructional piece was integrated by the core leadership team. This led to the
rearrangement of resources to ensure that the district’s finances and budgets
supported the teaching and learning priorities. Consequently, this led Mr. Perez to
implement the reform strategies of student support services and focusing on the
lowest performers. The assessment and data collection system established by EPSD
allowed for immediate identification and intervention on low performing students.
This led to the reform strategy of program effectiveness. Superintendent Perez
clearly set direction and expectation to increase the program quality and
effectiveness in curriculum, assessment, instruction, professional development, and
leadership.

166

Ultimately, Superintendent Perez brought the reform strategy of performance
management and accountability to EPSD. Mr. Perez established high expectations
for all teachers and administrators. These expectations were driven by results-
oriented, performance data indicators. District staff was held accountable for
learning and achievement outcomes of students.
The data collection process was supported by the Superintendent, Key Player,
and Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guides. Also, the strategy-specific
Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics assisted in the data collection as well
as in the analysis and interpretation of the findings.
Research Question 1c: Relationship to the Previous Background/Experience of
Superintendent
Research question 1c asked “How does the choice and implementation of the
ten key reform strategies correspond to the previous background/experiences of the
superintendent?” Superintendent Perez’s previous experience as a traditional
educator in the district (serving in the roles of social studies teacher, supervisor of
social studies, director of curriculum and instruction, and assistant superintendent of
schools) created the background which led to his strategic choice and
implementation of key reform strategies throughout the district.
Mr. Perez’s experience as a teacher and his education at Columbia University
gave Superintendent Perez the curricular knowledge base which proved to be one of
his strengths as an instructional leader in terms of curriculum and assessment. In
addition, Mr. Perez’s experience as director of curriculum and instruction gave him

167

the experience of developing skills in professional development and working with
district budgets and finance. Superintendent Perez’s direct ties with the community
through his upbringing and education facilitated strong family and community
engagement. Also, Mr. Perez’s education at Yale University gave him skills in
conflict resolution which later helped him with reform strategies of governance and
board relationships, labor relations, and communication. Superintendent Perez
was a great aficionado of literature on leadership – his professional readings
enhanced his knowledge base of leadership and team effectiveness.
The data collection process was supported by the Superintendent Interview
Guide. Also, the strategy-specific Quality and Level of Implementation Rubrics
assisted in the data collection as well as in the analysis and interpretation of the
findings.
Conclusions
The data collection process revealed the following conclusions in regards to
the system leader (i.e., superintendent) and the reform strategies utilized to improve
performance outcomes for both students and staff. The data supported the goals and
priorities of the district’s strategic plan for not only creating excellent academic
programs and increasing student performance on achievement assessments but also
transforming the district’s culture to increase morale and focus on teaching and
learning. The Superintendent modeled and charged the district’s stakeholders (i.e.,
teachers, principals, central administrators, and board members) with the core values

168

and beliefs of teamwork and collaboration; high expectations; goal-oriented
continuous improvement and reflective practice; and that all students will learn.
The core values and beliefs established the parameters and guiding
expectations for the work of educating students at EPSD. In turn, these supported
the district’s vision and mission to provide excellent educational experiences and
services and to inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve and to care. As a
whole, the strategic plan created the commitment and ownership by the staff for the
quality educational programs and outcomes from the district. These factors led to
the effective and logical alignment of district resources and finances to support
success in teaching and learning. As student learning outcomes became transparent
based on assessment data and reorganizational changes were made with district staff,
the accountability for the educational process became straightforward. The
Superintendent supported by the board of education, held district staff accountable
for progressive performance and increasing student achievement outcomes.
Purposefully, the district staff was supported in their endeavors to improve through
professional development, empowerment, resources, and assistance from the
district’s central staff.
The following are examples of actions and/or strategies carried out by
Superintendent Perez which seem “promising” in the quest to improve the district
positively affecting student achievement:
1. Creation of a core leadership team espousing a common voice and passion
for the educational process of students.

169

2. Designing and implementing a strategic plan as the guide for all the district’s
work.
3. Adopting a managed curricular/instructional program creating coherence in
the standards-based educational programs presented to students district-wide.
4. Developing an assessment system to monitor, report, analyze, and intervene
with students’ academic progress based on benchmark formative
assessments.
5. Aligning curriculum, assessment, instruction, professional development, and
resources to support the strategic plan for progress.
6. Developing the capacity and leadership of staff through knowledge, skill, and
motivation on desired practices and outcomes.
7. Establishing, nurturing, and maintaining positive/supportive relationships
(and communication) with various stakeholders including but not limited to
school-site staff, labor union leaders, board of education president and
members, community and business leaders, local and state politicians,
parents, and students.
8. Reorganizing district staff to get the “right” people in the “right” positions
based on the needs of specific schools and/or communities.
Key strategies that made Superintendent Perez uniquely successful in his
leadership were both communication and relationships. Mr. Perez’s was a passionate
people’s person with a tremendous amount of “hope” and drive for success. He
believed in team work and having the “right” players on his team. He inspired the

170

belief that success was realistic and through people’s empowerment it would be
achieved. Superintendent Perez’s unique personal blend of vision, passion, courage,
intellect, reflection, and humility served as strengths in his leadership. The
Superintendent spoke of leaving a “legacy” in the district in which students and the
community benefited. Mr. Perez created leverage for his “plan” to improve the
district through building relationships with first and foremost the board of education,
teachers and administrators, and the community (including parents and students). He
built capital.
In reflection of the Implementation Rubric from the data collection process,
time will tell if full implementation of specific reform strategies will be sustained or
even achieved, especially in the overall transformation of the district.
Superintendent Perez was strategic in his efforts to influence the quality of the
educational opportunities and experiences for students in his home district, EPSD.
Since Mr. Perez became superintendent, EPSD has demonstrated improvement in
student achievement as measured by standardized state assessments and under the
federal law of NCLB. EPSD has outperformed other school districts in the state in
increasing student achievement and proficiency in reading and mathematics. Also,
in a review of state data, EPSD has shown great improvement in reducing the
academic achievement gap between African American and Latino students in
comparison to White students.

171

Superintendent Perez has demonstrated a promising relationship between the
quality and implementation of key reform strategies and student achievement. With
the multi-faceted integration of numerous reform strategies such as, strategic
planning, leadership team effectiveness, instruction and program effectiveness,
curriculum, assessment, and student support services focusing on low performers, the
Superintendent has led the improvement for results-oriented performance and
accountability for students, teachers, and administrators throughout the district.
Implications for Practice
As system leadership becomes increasingly complex and multi-faceted, it is
critical that superintendents have the tools, thoughts, and strategies to transform and
sustain a district focused on high student achievement. Student achievement is what
ultimately counts in not only accountability measures but for society as a whole. The
findings and conclusions from this study can provide “promising practices” and
direction for educational leaders, policy makers, and anyone interested in making a
positive difference in public education. The implications listed below are organized
by specific stakeholder groups.
School and District Administrators
School and district administrators can benefit from:
1. Developing and implementing a strategic plan for district improvement
focused on student achievement results. The strategic plan should be both a
guiding and “living” document that establishes the parameters and
expectations for all of the district’s work and is revisited, reflected, and

172

revamped as goals are achieved and needs change. The strategic plan should
create an alignment of resources towards the goals and priorities of the
district.
2. Identifying key staff members to place in leadership roles and develop their
capacity. In turn these “captains” lead sections of the organization in the
direction established by the strategic plan. The captains are loyal to their
leadership and common cause of improving educational opportunities and
experiences for all students.
3. Utilizing performance data from both students and staff as a basis for
decision-making, support, intervention, and change. Change is inevitable and
change based on accurate and biased-free information/data can be extremely
efficient and effective in the improvement process. Also, performance data
can lead to accountability for outcomes. Data can give a clear picture of
achievement and/or performance thus; data can instigate change and
progress.
4. Aligning all professional development, curriculum, instruction, assessment,
and leadership in support of the district’s strategic plan for student
achievement. The goal is to develop the capacity of the teachers and
principals towards teaching and learning. The orientation is on students with
continuous improvement and results-driven.

173

Community Stakeholders and School Board Members
Community stakeholders and board members can benefit from:
1. Targeted and progressive training on reform strategies to develop the
knowledge-base needed to be an effective leader for the district. Through
knowledge, board members and community activists can support district
leadership in their quest to improve the quality of educational experiences for
students.
2. Developing open, honest, and ongoing communication between the
community stakeholders, board members, and district staff. Working in trust,
these stakeholders can problem solve together to benefit student outcomes
not political agendas.
3. Continuing to build positive relationships between the community, the board
of education and the superintendent. The team effort on student achievement
creates a “professional learning community” focused on the needs of students
to get them to higher levels of productivity.
Policy Makers and Superintendent Preparation Programs
Policy makers and superintendent preparation programs can benefit from:
1. Creating preparation programs emphasizing a practical, research-based
curriculum and “promising practices” supported by system leader and/or
superintendency professional standards.
2. Creating a professional network of system leaders from various societal
sectors such as, business, community, politics, religious, university, military,

174

and superintendency to establish mentoring opportunities, supportive
connections, and different perspectives outside of education.
Recommendations for Future Research
Recommendations for future research materialized from the data collection
and analysis for the study. The recommendations are:
1. This study focused on ten key strategies advanced by Urban School
Leadership Institute. It is suggested that research be continued on studying in
detail other reform strategies utilized by system leaders to create systemic
change benefiting student achievement, particularly in large urban school
settings.
2. Research should be continued on the ten key strategies focused in this study
so as to revise and “fine tune” the Quality and Level of Implementation
Rubrics utilized in the methodology. It is suggested that these measurement
tools be utilized with other districts to better understand practicability for
“promising practices.”
3. A quantitative study of student achievement data over a “considerable”
period of time should be completed during the tenure of the system leader.
The goal is establish a clear relationship between the full implementation and
sustainability of specific reform strategies and student achievement results.
4. This study was one of ten research projects in a thematic dissertation process
that utilized common data collection tools and analysis processes. Greater
insight of the ten key reform strategies in relation to their district’s context

175

could be achieved through a meta-analysis of the findings from the ten
different districts.
5. Through continuous research on “promising” practices and strategies for
reform from school systems throughout the nation, universal themes could
emerge to guide system leaders’ (i.e., superintendent) preparation programs
(both university based and non-university based). This information could
guide current practitioners in their never-ending work to improve the quality
of the educational opportunities and experiences for students.

176

REFERENCES

Ainsworth, L. (2007). Common formative assessments: The centerpiece of an
integrated standards-based assessment system. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of
the curve: The power of assessment to transform teaching and learning
(pp.79-101). Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

American Institute for Research. (2003). California's public schools accountability
act (PSAA): Evaluation findings and implications [Report]. Palo Alto, CA:
American Institutes for Research.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. New
York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Anderson, S. E. (2003). The school district role in educational change: A review of
the literature. International Centre for Educational Change, Ontario Institute
for Studies in Education.

Banks, J. A. (2000). Series forwarded. In G. Gay, Culturally responsive teaching:
Theory, research, and practice (pp. vii-ix). New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.

Barton, P. E. (2007, December / 2008, January). The right way to measure growth.
Educational Leadership, 65(4), 70-73.

Belasco, J., & Stayer, R. (1993). Flight of the buffalo: Soaring to excellence,
learning to let employees lead (pp. 16-23). New York: Warner Books.

Bernard, B. (2003). Turnaround teachers and schools. In B. Williams (Ed.), Closing
the achievement gap: A vision for changing beliefs and practices (pp. 115-
137). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Bjork, L. G., Kowalski, T. J., & Browne-Ferrigno, T. (2005). Learning theory and
research: A framework for changing superintendent preparation and
development. In L. Bjork & T. Kowalski (Eds.), The contemporary
superintendent: Preparation, practice and development (pp. 71-106).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Blackmore, J., Thomson, P., & Barty, K. (2006). Principal selection:
Homosociability, the search for security and the production of normalized
principal identities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership,
34, 297-317.

177

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2002). Leading soul and spirit. The School Administrator
(AASA), Web Edition, 1-10.

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2003). Third Edition. Reframing organizations: Artistry,
choice, and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

The Broad Foundation. (2008). The Broad Superintendents Academy qualitative
project: Phase II. Los Angeles, CA: J. Takata Welsh.

The Broad Foundation & the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. (2003). Better leaders
for America's schools: A manifesto. Los Angeles, CA: The Broad
Foundation.

The Broad Superintendents Academy. (2008). Broad framework for district success.
Los Angeles, CA: J. Takata Welsh.

Brown, O. S., & Peterkin, R. S. (1999). Transforming public schools: An integrated
strategy for improving student academic performance through district wide
resource equity, leadership accountability, and program efficiency. Equity
and Excellence in Education, 32(3), 37-52.

Browne-Ferrigno, T. & Shoho, A. (2002). An exploratory analysis of leadership
preparation selection criteria. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
University Council for Educational Administration. Pittsburgh, PA: UCEA.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED472145)

Burke, J. C. (2004). Achieving accountability in higher education: Balancing public,
academic, and market demands. In J.C. Burke (Ed.). The Many Faces of
Accountability. (pp. 1-24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Butler, J. (1992). Staff development. School improvement research series, 12.
Retrieved November 23, 2007 from
http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/6/cu12.html

California Department of Education. (2007). Achievement gap fact sheet. Retrieved
December 19, 2007, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/in/se/agfactsheet.asp

California School Boards Association (2007). School board leadership: The role and
function of California’s school boards. West Sacramento CA: California
School Boards Association.

178

Cambron-McCade, N., Cunningham, L. L., Harvey, J., & Koff, R. H. (2005). The
superintendent’s fieldbook: A guide for leaders of learning. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.

Carlsmith, L., & Railsback, J. (2001). The power of public relations in schools. By
request. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. (2007). Carnegie
project on the education doctorate. Retrieved on April 3, 2008 from
http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/dynamic/publications/elibrary_pdf_639.pdf

Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. (2002). Does external accountability affect student
outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 24(4), 305-331.

Carr, J. F., & Harris, D. E. (2001). Succeeding with standards: Linking curriculum,
assessment, and action planning. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Chappuis, S., Stiggins, R. J., Arter, J., & Chappuis, J. (2005). Assessment for
learning: An action guide for school leaders. Portland, OR: Educational
Testing Service.

Childress, S., Elmore, R. F., & Grossman, A. (2006, November). How to manage
urban school districts. Harvard Business Review, 1-14.

Cicchelli, T., Marcus, S., & Weiner, M. (2002, August). Superintendents’ dialogue in
a professional development model. Education and Urban Society, 34(4), 415-
421.

Clark, D. & Estes, F. (2002). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the
right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

Consortium for Policy Research in Education. (2007). School Finance Redesign
Reports. Retrieved October 4, 2007, from
http://cpre.wceruw.org/finance/reports.php

Cook, W. J. (2000). Strategic planning for America’s schools. Westport, CT:
Quorum Books.

Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people: Powerful lessons in
personal change. New York, NY: Fireside

Covey, S. R. (1991). Principle-centered leadership. New York, NY: Fireside.

179

Curriculum Development and Supplemental Materials Commission. (2007).
Reading/language arts framework for California public schools:
Kindergarten through grade twelve. Sacramento, CA: California
Department of Education.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1996). What matters most: A competent teacher for every
child. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(3), 193-200.

Darling-Hammond, L., (1999, December). Teacher quality and student achievement:
A review of state policy evidence. Center for the Study of Teaching and
Policy. Retrieved on December 14, 2008 from
http://depts.washington.edu/ctpmail/PDFs/LDH_1999.pdf

Datnow, A. (2005). The sustainability of comprehensive school reform in changing
district and state contexts. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 121-
153.

Davies, B. & Hentschke, G. (2002). Changing resource and organizational patterns:
The challenge of resourcing education in the 21
st
century. Journal of
Educational Change, 3(2), 135-159.

Dembo, M. H., & Marsh, D. D. (2007). Developing a new Ed.D. program in the
Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. Los
Angeles, CA: USC.

Demmon-Berger, D. (2003). The superintendent’s first day in the office. Lanham,
MD: Scarecrow Education.

Dominguez, R., Ivory, G., & McClellan, R. (2005). Mentoring superintendent
leadership: Insights on mentoring and communication from the UCEA
Voices data. UCEA conference proceedings for convention. University
Council for Educational Administration, Nashville, TN: UCEA.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learning by doing: A
handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN:
Solution Tree.

DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best
practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: Solution
Tree.

180

Eaker, R., DuFour, R., & DuFour, R., (2002). Getting started: Reculturing schools to
become professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National
Educational Service.

Earl, L., & Torrance, N. (2000). Embedding accountability and improvement into
large-scale assessment: What difference does it make? Peabody Journal of
Education, 75(4), 114–141.

EdSource. (2004). No child left behind in California? The impact of the federal
NCLB act so far. Palo Alto, CA, EdSource.

EdSource (2005a). Holding school districts accountable. Retrieved February 25,
2008, from http://www.edsource.org

EdSource. (2005b). Understanding school district budgets. Mountain View, CA:
EdSource.

EdSource. (2006). Similar students, different results: Why do some schools do
better? Mountain View, CA: EdSource.

EdSource. (2007a). A California Education Policy Convening: Getting from facts to
policy. Mountain View, CA: EdSource.

EdSource. (2007b). Keeping California school districts fiscally healthy. Mountain
View, CA: EdSource.

Education Writers Association (2003). Effective superintendents, effective boards:
Finding the right fit. Washington, DC: Education Writers Association.

Eiter, M. (2002). Best practices in leadership development: Lessons from the best
business schools and corporate universities. In M. Tucker & J. Codding
(Eds.), The principal challenge: Leading and managing schools in an era of
accountability (pp. 99-122). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. The Albert
Shanker Institute: Washington, DC. Retrieved on December 15, 2008 from
http://www.shankerinstitute.org/Downloads/building.pdf.

Elmore, R. F. (2003). Knowing the right thing to do: School improvement and
performance-based accountability [Electronic Version].CPRE:NGA Center
for Best Practices. www.nga.org/cda/files/0803KNOWING.PDF

Elmore, R. F. (2006). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practices, and
performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

181

Epstein, J., & Sanders, M. G. (2006). Prospects for change: Preparing educators for
school, family, and community partnerships. Peabody Journal of Education.
81(2), 81-120.

Fiore, D. J. (2006). School-community relations (2
nd
ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on
Education.

Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the 21
st
century. New
York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

Fuller, H. L., Campbell, C., Celio, M. B., Harvey, J., Immerwahr, J., & Winger, A.
(2003). An impossible job? The view from the superintendent’s chair.
Seattle, WA: Center on Reinventing Public Education. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED480673)

Gallagher, C. W. & Ratzlaff, S. (2007, December). The road less traveled.
Educational Leadership, 65(4), 48-53.

Gandara, P., Rumberger, R., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Callahan, R. (2003). English
learners in California schools: Unequal resources, unequal outcomes.
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(36). Retrieved on November 13,
2006, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v11n36/

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice.
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Gilbert, S. (2002). Using state policy and a community partnership to fortify local
goals. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.

The Global Education Collaborative. (2007). The achievement gap. Retrieved
September 16, 2007, from
http://globaleducation.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=717180%3ABlogPost
%3A7221

Golde, C. M. (2006). Envisioning the future of doctoral education: Preparing
stewards of the discipline, Carnegie essays on the doctorate. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.

Griffith, J. (2006). A compositional analysis of the organizational climate-
performance relation: Public schools as organizations. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 36(8), 1848-1880.

182

Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.

Guskey, T. R. (2007). Using assessment to improve teaching and learning. In D.
Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform
teaching and learning (pp.15-29). Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

Haller, A. O., & Sharda, B. D. (2005). Theory of national development and societal
stratification. Population Review, 44(2), 1-23.

Hamilton, L. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education,
27. pp. 25-68.

Hannaway, J., & Rotherham, A. J. (2006). Collective bargaining in education:
Negotiating change in today’s schools. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education
Press.

Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Why public schools lose
teachers. Journal of Human Resources, 39(2), 326-354.

Hanushek, E. A., & Raymond, M. E. (2004). Does school accountability lead to
student performance? Cambridge, Mass: National Bureau of Economic
Research.

Hanushek, E. A. & Rivkin, S. G. (2007). Pay, working conditions, and teacher
quality. The Future of Children, 17(1), 69-86.

Hassel, E. (1999). Professional development: Learning from the best. A toolkit for
schools and districts based on the National Awards Program for Model
Professional Development. Oak Brook, IL: North Central Regional
Educational Laboratory.

Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of
school, family, and community connections on student achievement. National
Center for Family Community Connections with Schools: Southwest
Educational Development Laboratory. Austin, TX.

Hess, F. M., & Loup, C. (2008). The leadership limbo: Teacher labor agreements in
America’s fifty largest school districts. Dayton, OH: Thomas B. Fordham
Institute.

Hess, F. M., & West, M.R. (2006). A better bargain: Overhauling teacher collective
bargaining for the 21st century. American Enterprise Institute and The
Brookings Institution.

183

Hewitt, P. (2007). Bargaining within the school culture. Leadership, 26-32.

Hightower, A. M. (2002). Theory of instruction drives district’s decision making and
infrastructure. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Center for the Study of Teaching and
Policy.

Houston, P. (2001, February). Superintendents for the 21
st
century: It’s not just a job,
it’s a calling. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(6), 428-433.

Hoyle, J. R., Bjork, L. G., Collier, V., & Glass, T. (2005). The superintendent as
CEO. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Ingram, M., Wolfe, R.B., & Lieberman, J.M. (2007). The role of parents in high-
achieving schools serving low-income, at-risk populations. Education and
Urban Society. 39(4), 479-497.

Ingram, R.L. & Snider, B. (2008). An educator’s guide to contract negotiations.
Leadership, 30-34.

Johnson, R. S. (2002). Using data to close the achievement gap: How to measure
equity in our schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Johnson, S. M. (1996). Leading to change: The challenge of the new
superintendency. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Karoly, L. A., & Panis, C. W. A. (2004). The 21
st
century at work: Forces shaping
the future workforce and workplace in the United States. Santa Monica, CA:
Rand Corporation.

Kerrins, J., & Cushing, K. S. (2001). The classic mistakes of new superintendents.
School Administrator, 58(2), 38-44.

KewalRamani, A., Gilbertson, L., Fox, M., & Provasnick, S. (2007). Status and
trends in the education of racial and ethnic minorities. U.S. Department of
Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education
Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

LaFee, S. (2004, November). Outside the ropes: Superintendents from business and
military learn about system leadership informally and in seminars. The
School Administrator. American Association of School Administrators.
Retrieved on December 17, 2008 from:
http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetail.cfm?ItemNumber=1099

184

Lunenburg, F.C., & Irby, B.J. (2002). Parent involvement: A key to student
achievement. Annual Meeting of the National Council of Professors of
Educational Administration, Burlington, VT.

MacIver, M. & Farley, E. (2003). Bringing the district back in: The role of the
central office in improving instruction and student achievement. (Report No.
65). Baltimore, MD: Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed
At Risk, Johns Hopkins University.

Marsh, J. A. (2002). Broadening boundaries to build system capacity: The Highland
School District. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Center for the Study of Teaching and
Policy.

Martinez, M. & Klopott, S. (2005). The link between high school reform and college
access and for low-income and minority youth. Washington, DC: American
Youth Policy Forum and Pathways to college Network.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J., (2001). Classroom instruction that
works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works:
From research to results. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.

McFadden, B., & Delapp, T. (2007). ACSA Collective Bargaining Summit (2007).
PowerPoint presentation at ACSA Symposium.

McGehee, J. J., & Griffith, L. K. (2001). Large-Scale Assessments Combined with
Curriculum Alignment: Agents of Change. Theory into Practice, 40(2), 137-
144.

Meier, K. J., Doerfler, C., Hawes, D., Hicklin, A. K., & Rocha, R. R. (2006). The
role of management and representation in improving performance of
disadvantaged students: An application of Bum Phillips’s “Don Shula Rule.”
Review of Policy Research, 23(5), 1095-1110.

185

Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2003). Public management and educational
performance: The impact of managerial networking. Public Administrative
Review, 63(6), 689-699.

Metzger, C. (2003, November). Self/inner development of educational
administrators: A national study of urban school district superintendents and
college deans. Urban Education, 38(6), 655-687.

Miami-Dade County Public Schools. (2008). Discover M-DCPS. Retrieved April 6,
2008 from http://www2.dadeschools.net/discover/mission.htm.

Moe, T. M. (2001). Teachers unions and the public schools. In T. M. Moe (Ed.), A
primer of America’s schools. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.

Murphy, J., & Vriesenga, M. (2006). Research on school leadership preparation in
the United States: An analysis. School Leadership and Management, 26(2),
183-195.

National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (NCRTL). Learning to walk the
reform talk: A framework for the professional development of teachers.
Retrieved on December 14, 2008 from http://ncrtl.msu.edu/http/walk.pdf

National Council of Professors of Educational Administration. (2007, May). Factors
impacting superintendent turnover: Lessons from the field. Retrieved
December 18, 2008 from: http://cnx.org/content/m14507/latest/

National School Boards Foundation. 2001). Improving school board decision-
making: The data connection. Alexandria VA: National School Boards
Foundation.

National School Public Relations Association. (2002). Raising the bar for school PR:
New standards for the school public relations profession. Rockville, MD:
Author. Retrieved on December 16, 2008 from:
http://www.nspra.org/files/docs/StandardsBooklet.pdf

Neely, R. O., Berube, W., & Wilson, J. (2002, October). The entry plan. School
Administrator, 59(9), 28-30.

Nestor-Baker, N. S., & Hoy, W. K. (2001, February). Tacit knowledge of school
superintendents: Its nature, meaning, and content. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 86-129.

Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., & Hedges, L. V. (2004). How large are teacher
effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26(3), 237-257.

186

O’Day, J., Bitter, C., Kirst, M., Camoy, M., Woody, E., Buttles, M., Fuller, B., &
Ruenzel, D. (2004). Assessing California’s Accountability System:
Successes, Challenges, and Opportunities for Improvement. PACE Policy
Brief, 4(2). Retrieved August 21, 2006 from http://www-
gse.berkeley.edu/research/PACE/policy_brief.04-2.pdf.

Odden, A. R. (1998). How to rethink school budgets to support school
transformation. Getting better by design. Denver, CO: Education
Commission of the States. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED450478)

Odden, A. R. & Picus, L. O. (2008). School finance: A policy perspective (4
th

Edition). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Ormrod, J. E. (2006). Educational psychology: Developing learners. Columbus, OH:
Pearson.

Pan, D., Rudo, Z. H., Schneider, C. L., & Smith-Hansen, L. (2003). Examination of
resource allocation in education: Connecting spending to student
performance. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Lab. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED477353)

Parker, P. J. (1992). Let your life speak. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Perie, M., Moran, R., & Lutkus, A.D. (2005). NAEP 2004 trends in academic
progress: Three decades of student performance in reading and mathematics.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National
Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office.

Petersen, G. J. (2002). Singing the same tune: Principals’ and school board
members’ perceptions of the superintendent’s role as instructional leader.
Journal of Educational Administration, 40(2), 158-171.

Petersen, G. J. & Short, P., (2001). The school boards president’s perception of the
district superintendent: Applying the lenses of social influence and social
style. Educational Administration Quarterly. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

187

Popham, W. J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association of
Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Reed, D. (2003). The growing importance of education in California. San Francisco,
CA: Public Policy Institute of California.

Reeves, D. B. (2000). Accountability in action: A blueprint for learning
organizations. Denver, CO: Advanced Learning Press.

Reeves, D. B. (2001). Standards make a difference: The influence of standards on
classroom assessment. National Association of Secondary School Principals
Bulletin, 85(5), 5-12.

Reeves, D. B. (2002). The daily disciplines of leadership: How to improve student
achievement, staff motivation, and personal organization. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.

Reeves, D. B. (2005). Putting it all together: Standards, assessment, and
accountability in successful professional learning communities. In R.
DuFour, R. Eaker, & R. DuFour (Eds.), On common ground: The power of
professional learning communities (pp. 45-63). Bloomington, ID: National
Educational Service.

Reich, R. K. (1991). The work of nations: preparing ourselves for 21st-century
capitalism. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Robbins, P., & Alvy, H. B. (2003). The principal’s companion: Strategies and hints
to make the job easier. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and schools. Washington, DC: Economic Policy
Institute.

Salamon, L. M. (1991). Overview: Why human capital? Why now? In D. Hornbeck
& L. M. Salamon (Eds.), Human capital and America’s future (pp. 1-28).
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Scherer, M. (2007, December/2008, January). An answer for the long term.
Educational Leadership, 65(4), 7.

Schmoker, M. (1999). Results: The key to continuous school improvement.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

188

Schulueter, K. & Walker, J. (2008). Selection of school leaders: A critical
component for change. National Association of Secondary School Principals,
92(5), 5-17.

Senge, P. (2000). Schools that learn: A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators,
parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York, NY:
Doubleday Publishing.

Shatkin, G., & Gershberg, A. (2007). Empowering parents and building
communities: The role of school-based councils in educational governance
and accountability. Urban Education, 42(6) 582-615.

Shaul, M. S., & Ganson, H. C. (2005). Chapter 7: The No Child Left Behind Act of
2001: The Federal Government's Role in Strengthening Accountability for
Student Performance. Review of Research in Education, 29(1), 151-165.

Shulman, L. S., Golde, C. M., Conklin Bueschel, A., & Garabedian, K. J. (2006).
Reclaiming education’s doctorates: A critique and a proposal. Educational
Researcher, 35(3), 25-32.

Stanford, J. (1999). Victory in our schools: We can give our children excellent public
education. New York, NY: Bantam Books.

Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (2001). Chapter 8: Empowering relations of support between
students and school personnel. In R. D. Stanton-Salazar, Manufacturing hope
& despair: The school and kin support networks of U.S.-Mexican youth.
Teachers College Press, Columbia University.

Stecher, B., Hamilton, L., & Gonzalez, G. (2003). Working smarter to leave no child
behind: Practical insights for school leaders. Santa Monica, CA: Rand
Corporation.

Stiggins, R. (2007). Assessment for learning: An essential foundation of productive
instruction. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment
to transform teaching and learning (pp. 59-76). Bloomington, ID: Solution
Tree.

Stollar, S. A., Poth, R. L., Curtis, M. J., & Cohen, R. M. (2006). Collaborative
strategy planning as illustration of the principles of systems change. School
Psychology Review, 181(17), 1-11.

Takata, J. W., Marsh, D. D., & Castruita, R. (2007). The Broad Superintendents
Academy qualitative project: Final report. Los Angeles, CA: The Urban
School Leadership Institute.

189

Togneri, W., & Anderson, S. E. (2003). Beyond islands of excellence: What districts
can do to improve instruction and achievement in all schools. Washington,
DC: The Learning First Alliance and the Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007a). The
conditions of education 2007: Annual earnings of young adults, Indicator 20.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007b).
The conditions of education 2007: Public high school graduation rates by
state, Indicator 24. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007c). The
conditions of education 2007: Status dropout rates race/ethnicity, Indicator
23. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007d).
The Condition of Education 2007: Trends in the Achievement Gaps in
Reading and Mathematics, Indicator 14. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.

Walker, G. E., Golde, C. M., Jones, L., Conklin Bueschel, A., & Hutchings, P.
(2008). The formation of scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the
twenty-first century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Warner, L. (2002). Family involvement: A key component of student and school
success. Voices for Illinois Children: Chicago, IL.

Waters, J. T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30
years of research tell us about the effect of leadership on student
achievement. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and
Learning.

Waters, J. T., & Marzano, R. J. (2006). School district leadership that works: The
effect of superintendent leadership on student achievement. Aurora, CO:
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.

Watkins, M. (2003). The first 90 days: Critical success strategies for new leaders at
all levels. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.

190

Webb, L. D. & Norton, M. S. (2009). Human resources administration: Personnel
issues and needs in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education,
Inc.

Weiss, J. (2007). Conditions for student success: The cycle of continuous
instructional improvement. School finance redesign project. University of
Washington: Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs, Center on
Reinventing Public Education.

Werfhorst, H. G. (2004). Trends in the effects of education on occupational outcome
1972-2000: Differences between social class and earnings. ASSR Working
Paper Series. University of Amsterdam, Retrieved December 6, 2008 from
www.assr.nl/workingpapers/documents/ASSR-WP0402.pdf

White, S. (2007). Data on purpose: Due diligence to increase student achievement. In
D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform
teaching and learning (pp. 79-101). Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

Wiliam, D. (2007). Content then process: Teacher learning communities in the
service of formative assessment. In D. Reeves (Ed.), Ahead of the curve: The
power of assessment to transform teaching and learning (pp. 183-204).
Bloomington, ID: Solution Tree.

Williams, B. (2003). Closing the achievement gap: A vision for changing beliefs and
practices. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Wirt, F., & Kirst, M. W. (2005). The political dynamics of American education (3
rd

ed.). Richmond, CA: McCutchan Publishing.

Writ, J., Choy, S., Rooney, P., Provasnik, S., Sen, A., & Tobin, R. (2004). The
conditions of education 2004: Indicator 12 Education and health. U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Young, P. G. (2004). You have to go to school – you’re the principal! 101 tips to
make it better for your students, your staff, and yourself. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.

Ziebarth, T. (2002, September). The roles and responsibilities of school boards and
superintendents: A state policy framework. Education Commission of the
States. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

191

APPENDIX A:

The Urban School Leadership Institute House Model

192

APPENDIX B:

USLI House Model Reform Strategy Definition Chart

Strategy Reform
strategies
Definitions
Foundational
Elements
Strategic
Plan
The strategic plan defines the district’s mission, goals, and
vision. It also assigns performance indicators and work plans to
each of the district’s primary goals and serves as the guiding
document for district decisions and priorities.
Systemic
Improvement
Instructional
Alignment
Assessment Assessment activities enable districts to know whether students
are learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the
standards). Common, regularly-scheduled district-wide
assessments should connect directly with standards, the
curriculum, pacing guides, and professional development.
Curriculum Curriculum refers to the materials used to teach. Classroom
materials—textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etc.—should
address the scope and sequence of the district’s learning
standards.
Professional
Development
Professional development is any program or course intended to
improve teachers’ and principals’ effectiveness. It may center
on content (e.g., teaching about force in physics), instructional
techniques (e.g., Cornell note-taking), leadership (e.g., a
workshop for principals and assistant principals), or habits
(e.g., collaboration among teachers in the same grade-
level/subject matter). In many districts, professional
development topics are arbitrarily chosen. Successful districts
have an integrated professional development strategy that
centers on enabling teachers to detect when students aren’t
meeting a certain standard and to adjust their instruction
accordingly, or enables principals and teachers to improve their
knowledge and skills in areas of district focus.
Operational
Excellence
HR System
and Human
Capital
Management
Research indicates that teacher quality is perhaps the primary
influence on student achievement, yet many districts do a poor
job of attracting, selecting, and managing talent, whether at the
teacher, principal, or central office level. Improving the
recruiting and hiring processes for teachers and principals,
developing attractive compensation packages, and processing
applications and payments quickly—which a good HR system
should be able to do—can greatly improve the quality of
instruction in schools and classrooms across the district.
Districts then need to develop clever support and retention
strategies to keep talent in the district. Most importantly,
districts can proactively improve their capacity for providing a
quality education by examining and refining their selection
process.
Finance and
Budget
While student achievement is the ultimate bottom line, more
superintendents are fired for poor financial management than
for poor student achievement results. In addition to ensuring
that their budget is balanced and sustainable, superintendents
should closely align their budget with instructional priorities.
Some districts have adopted innovative budgeting approaches
such as “zero-based budgeting” and weighted student funding
to bring their budgets into closer alignment with their priorities.
Stakeholder
Management
Communicat
ions
Effective school districts need to showcase the great stories in
their district and to counteract misinformation or negative
news. Developing a public relations or communications office
staffed with experts on dealing with the media can enable the
district to communicate its vision to the public or proactively
build support for an important initiative.

193

USLI House Model Reform Strategy Definition Chart (continued)

Governance/
Board
Relations
Most districts are governed by boards elected from the local
population; others answer to appointed boards. school boards
are responsible for setting the policy direction for the district;
superintendents can take a supporting role in developing policy
but are mainly charged with executing it. Winning the support
of board members, especially elected ones, is a time-consuming
but critical task for most superintendents.

Labor
Relations
/Contract
Negotiations
Teachers unions, superintendents often need to build
relationships and negotiate with several other unions to which
various district staff belong. Success in working with unions
requires an upfront investment in building relationships and
understanding the priorities of union leaders. The content of
contracts also requires close attention. Contract language can
restrict or expand the superintendent’s options for replacing and
reassigning staff. This is particularly crucial with teacher
contracts, as teacher quality is one of the most significant
influences on student achievement.
Family and
Community
Engagement

All residents of a school district’s jurisdiction can be
considered its stakeholders, so ensuring everyone’s satisfaction
can be difficult. Districts should offer several ways for the
community and families to interact with the district, from
coordinating volunteer opportunities for parents to partnering
with local organizations in support of student success. It is also
important to gather feedback from the public on the district’s
performance. Several districts take surveys of parents of
children and of the community in general to determine how
they view the district and what their priorities for improvement
are. These surveys should be closely linked to the district’s
performance management system and data dashboard.
Increasing stakeholder satisfaction can lead to greater support
for bond measures for the district, significantly increasing its
financial resources.

APPENDIX C : Quality Rubric - Strategic Plan

Definition: The strategic plan defines the district’s vision, mission, and goals. It also assigns the performance indicators and
work plans to each of the districts goals and serves as the guiding document for the district decisions and priorities.

Components High (5)

Medium (3) Low (1)
Vision

The district’s vision is well articulated in the
strategic plan. It expresses the ethical code,
overriding convictions, and the moral convictions
of the district

The vision represents the personal values of those
vested in the organization and is easily understood

The district’s vision is somewhat articulated in the
strategic plan. To some extent it expresses the
ethical code, overriding convictions, and the
moral convictions of the district

Vision somewhat represents the personal values of
those vested in the organization and is moderately
understood

The district’s vision is not
articulated in the strategic plan. It does not
express the ethical code, overriding
convictions, and moral convictions of the
district

Vision does not represent the
personal values of those vested in the
organization and is not easily understood
Mission

The mission statement is a clear and concise
expression of the district’s identity, purpose, and
means

The mission statement is a bold declaration of what
the district will be and is known and understood by
most in the district

The mission statement is somewhat an expression
of the district’s identity, purpose and means

The mission statement somewhat states what the
organization will be and is known and understood
by some in the organization

The mission statement is a not
clear and lacks concise expression of the
district’s identity, purpose and means

The mission statement, to a
limited extent, is declaration of what the
organization will be. It understood by few
people in the organization
Objectives (Goals)

Objectives clearly commit to achieve specific,
measurable results

Objectives are very closely aligned with the
mission statement and they are district objectives
that are measurable and observable

Objectives moderately commit to achieve specific,
measurable results

Some objectives are aligned with the mission
statement; they are district objectives moderately
measurable and observable

Limited commitment to achieve
specific, measurable results

Few objectives are aligned with
the mission statement and few are district
objectives that are measurable,
demonstrated, and observable
Strategies

Full commitment to deploy any and all of the
districts resources-people, facilities, equipment and
funding- to execute the strategies to meet
objectives is clearly articulated

The strategies strongly indicate the districts
priorities and standards

Some commitment to deploy districts resources-
people, facilities, equipment and funding- to
execute the strategies to meet objectives

The strategies indicate moderate commitment to
the districts priorities and standards

Limited commitment to deploy
districts resources-people, facilities,
equipment and funding- to execute the
strategies to meet objectives

Few strategies indicates the
districts priorities and standards

194

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric - Strategic Plan (continued)

Components High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Action Plan

Specific reference to the strategy it supports

States the objective of the action plan itself

Has a detailed description of each step required to
complete the plan.

Indicates assignments and responsibilities

Includes a timeline for plan

Some reference to the strategy it supports

States some of the objectives of the action
plan

Has some description of steps required to
complete the plan.

Indicates some assignments and
responsibilities

Includes some timeline for plan

Limited reference to the strategy it
supports

Objective of the action plan not clearly
stated

Has a little description steps required to
complete the plan

Indicates few assignments and
responsibilities

Timeline for plan very limited
Theory of Action
□ Superintendent has a written “theory of action” that
clearly articulates structure; specifies what is
tightly managed and what decisions should be left
to school leaders
□ It is aligned with district context, capacity, &
system leader’s beliefs
□ Superintendent has a “theory of action”
that loosely articulates what is managed by
district and what decisions should be left to
school leaders
□ It is loosely aligned with district context,
capacity, & system’s beliefs
□ Superintendent does not have a “theory of
action.” What is managed by district and
decisions school leaders
□ It is aligned with district context, capacity, &
sups. belief system
Data Dashboard □ District has clearly identified several key indicators
that give district’s pulse
□ Indicators are aligned with district’s strategic plan;
accountability plan assigns responsibility for
achieving district goals to specific people/depts.
□ District has some indicators that give
district’s pulse
□ Indicators somewhat aligned with strategic
plan; accountability plan assigns some
responsibility for district goals to specific
people/depts.
□ District has few indicators that give district’s
pulse
□ Indicators not aligned with district’s strategic
plan; accountability and responsibility for
achieving district goals not clearly defined

195

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Assessment

Definition: Assessment activities enable districts to know whether students are learning what they are supposed to learn (i.e., the standards). Common,
regularly-scheduled district-wide assessments should connect directly with standards, curriculum, pacing guides, and professional development.

Components High(5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Summative Assessments

Full district-wide implementation of state
standardized assessments.
Full compliance to state and federal (NCLB)
requirements.
Moderate implementation of state
standardized assessments.
Compliance to state and federal (NCLB)
requirements.
Low district-wide implementation of state
standardized assessments
Low or no compliance to state and federal (NCLB)
requirements.
Formative Assessments

District-wide use of standards-based common
benchmark and curriculum-embedded assessments.
Common rubrics to review student work.
Assessment schedule and pacing guides developed
and utilized.
Moderate district-wide use of common
benchmark assessments. Some common
rubrics to review student work.
Assessment schedule and pacing guides
developed.
Low or no district-wide use of formative
assessments.
Low or no use of common rubrics to review student
work.
No or unclear assessment schedule and/or pacing
guides.
Data Management,
Information, and
Reporting
System/Technology
District-wide (Internet-based) infrastructure system
for assessment data collection, management, and
reporting.
Data collection every 6-8 weeks.
Easy system for entry/retrieval of assessment data
and results/reports.
User friendly data reports.
District/school staff technology trained, supported
and proficient.
Moderate infrastructure for assessment
data collection, management, and/or
reporting.
Periodic data collection.
System for entry/retrieval of assessment
data and reports.
District/school staff technology trained.
Low or no infrastructure for assessment data
collection, management, or reporting.
Low or no periodic data collection.
Limited or no district/school staff technology
trained, supported or proficient.

196

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Assessment (continued)

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Analysis, Interpretation,
and Utilization of
Assessment Data

District-wide analysis, interpretation, and
utilization of assessment data to improve instructional
practices, decision-making, and support for learning.
Meaningful feedback to identify areas of focus and
needs for student mastery of standards.
District-wide schedule for data analysis to plan and
improve curriculum, instruction, and student
achievement.
Moderate district-wide analysis,
interpretation and/or utilization of assessment
data.
Moderate feedback to identify areas of focus
and student needs.
Intermittent schedule for data analysis.
Low or no district-wide analysis, interpretation or
utilization of assessment data.
Limited or no schedule for data analysis.
Professional
Development (PD)

District-wide plan to ensure all district/school staff
have knowledge and receive support in:
District-wide assessments (summative and
formative)
Effective utilization of data management/reporting
system
Analysis/interpretation of assessment data, student
achievement and meeting of standards
Collaborative data teams to analyze/interpret data
and design next steps improve instruction and student
performance aligned to proficiency of standards.
Moderate district-wide plan for
district/school staff to receive training and
support in:
District-wide assessments
Utilization of data management/ reporting
system
Analysis/interpretation of student assessment
data and student achievement
Limited or no district-wide plan for
district/school staffs to receive PD and support on
district-wide assessments.
Limited or no PD for the utilization of data
management/reporting system.
Limited or no PD for the analysis/interpretation
of student assessment data.
Fiscal Support and
Resources

District-wide fiscal policies and resources support
systematic assessment plan and implementation
aligned to state and federal accountability measures
for student performance.
Fiscal resource allocation and policies
support district-wide assessment plan.

Limited or no district-wide fiscal policies and
resources in support of systematic assessment plan
and/or implementation.

197

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Curriculum

Definition: Curriculum refers to the materials used to teach. Classroom materials (e.g., textbooks, worksheets, pacing guides, etc.) should address the scope
and sequence of the district’s learning standards.

Components High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Alignment to
Learning Standards
& Assessments

□ The district has adopted and implemented a
curriculum that is based upon content standards and
frameworks, and is aligned to required assessments
of student learning
□ The district curriculum contains all of the essential
knowledge and skills students need master the state
and district learning standards
□ The district provides pacing plans in all content
areas that assist teachers in delivering the required
content during the academic year, aligned to
periodic assessments of student learning
□ The district has an adopted curriculum that is based
upon content standards and frameworks, and is
partially aligned to required assessments of student
learning
□ The district curriculum contains some of the
essential knowledge and skills students need master
state and district learning standards
□ The district provides pacing plans in some content
areas that assist teachers in delivering the required
content during the academic year
□ The district does not have has an adopted
curriculum that is based upon content
standards and frameworks, or aligned to
required assessments of student learning
□ The district curriculum contains little of the
essential knowledge and skills students
need master state and district learning
standards
□ The district does not provide pacing plans
that assist teachers in delivering the
required content during the academic year

Equal Access to
Learning Standards
□ The district curriculum optimizes all students’
opportunities to access content and learning
standards, including under-performing students,
students with disabilities, and ELs
□ The district curriculum provides many students
with opportunities to access content and learning
standards
□ The district curriculum provides few
students with opportunities to access
content and learning standards

198

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Curriculum (continued)

Fidelity in
Implementation
□ The district communicates the required curriculum
clearly and systematically with all stakeholders,
especially site administrators, teachers, students,
and parents
□ The district provides adequate funding for schools
to support professional development and full
implementation of the curriculum
□ The district demonstrates a systemic commitment to
long-term implementation of the curriculum
□ The district communicates the required curriculum
with site administrators, and teachers
□ The district provides some funding for schools to
support professional development and
implementation of the curriculum
□ The district demonstrates some commitment to
long-term implementation of the curriculum
□ The district does not fully communicate the
required curriculum to site administrators, teachers,
or other stakeholders
□ The district provides little or inadequate funding for
schools to support professional development and
implementation of the curriculum
□ The district demonstrates little or no commitment to
long-term implementation of the curriculum
Sufficiency of and
Appropriateness of
Materials
□ The district provides sufficient instructional
textbooks and curricular materials (including
intervention materials) for all students.
□ The district provides all schools with abundant
supplemental materials to support and enhance
implementation of the curriculum in all subject
areas.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to all
students
□ The district provides instructional textbooks and
curricular materials for all students.
□ The district provides schools with some
supplemental materials to support implementation
of the curriculum in some subject areas.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to many
students
□ The district does not provide sufficient
instructional textbooks and curricular materials for
all students.
□ The district provides schools with few or no
supplemental materials to support implementation
of the curriculum.
□ The district provides curricular materials are
appropriate for and culturally relevant to some
students
Clear and regular
procedures to
review and update
the curriculum
□ There is a system in place that provides for regular
review of the adopted materials for core subjects by
district and site administrators and teachers to verify
alignment and universal access
□ There is a system in place that provides for district
and site administrators and teachers to adapt
materials to ensure alignment and access
□ There is a system in place that provides for District
and site administrators and teachers to use
assessment results to determine what materials are
needed to supplement the adopted curriculum to
ensure that all key standards are mastered.
□ Key staff members periodically review the adopted
materials for core subjects to verify alignment
□ Key staff members periodically adapt materials to
ensure alignment and access
□ Key staff members periodically use assessment
results to determine what materials are needed to
ensure that all key standards are mastered.
□ Some district staff members may occasionally
review the adopted materials for core subjects to
verify alignment
□ Some district staff members may occasionally adapt
materials to ensure alignment and access
□ Some district staff members may occasionally use
assessment results to determine what materials are
needed to ensure that key standards are mastered.

199

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Professional Development

Definition: Professional development is any program or course intended to improve teachers’ or principals’ effectiveness. It may center on content (e.g.,
teaching about force in physics instructional techniques (e.g., Cornell note-taking), leadership (e.g., workshop for principals and assist principals), or habits
(e.g., collaboration among teachers in the same grade-level/subject matter). In many districts, professional development topics are arbitrarily chosen.
Successful districts have an integrated professional development strategy that centers on enabling teachers to detect when students aren’t meeting a certain
standards and to adjust their instruction accordingly, or enables principals and teachers to improve their knowledge and skills in areas of district focus.

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Designing
Professional
Development

LEA includes budgeted, coherent PD activities that
reflect the best available research-based strategies for
improved student achievement and focus on standards-
based content knowledge.
PD supports the district’s long-term plan and
identified goals.
Plan includes needs assessment process and goals
of PD include the following: improving all students’
learning, improving teacher effectiveness, setting high
standards for teachers, promoting continuous staff
learning, and enhancing staff intellectual and
leadership capacity.
Resources are designated and available to support
PD plan and specific personnel stay abreast of and
incorporate best practices into teaching, learning, and
leadership.
LEA includes PD activities but they do not reflect
the best available research-based strategies and may
focus on standards-based content knowledge.
PD minimally supports the district’s long-term plan.
Plan may include a needs assessment process may
include two or less of the following: improving all
students’ learning, improving teacher effectiveness,
setting high standards for teachers, promoting
continuous staff learning, and enhancing staff
intellectual and leadership capacity.
Resources are available to support PD plan and few
personnel stay abreast of best practices.
The LEA has little or no connection to PD
activities which do not necessarily focus on
standards-based content knowledge.
PD plan is not in alignment with district’s
long-term plan.
The plan does not include a needs
assessment process and goals of PD include
one or none of the following: improving all
students’ learning, improving teacher
effectiveness, setting high standards for
teachers, promoting continuous staff learning,
and enhancing staff intellectual and leadership
capacity.
Minimal resources are available to support
PD plan and little or not effort has been made
to identify personnel stay abreast of best
practices in teaching, learning, and leadership.

Implementing
Professional
Development

LEA’s organizational structures and policies
support the implementation of PD activities on the
individual, collegial, and organizational levels.
PD is integral to the district culture and promotes
inquiry.
PD plan includes “coaching model” and all staff
receives coaching support.
LEA ensures that resources remain available to
organize and implement PD.
Most LEA’s organizational structures and policies
support the implementation of PD.
PD is inconsistent across the district and may
promote inquiry and improvement.
Plan includes the “coaching model” and
participation is sporadic.
Some resources are available to support PD.
□ Minimal number of the organizational
structures and policies support the
implementation of PD.
□ PD is disconnected to classroom practices
and does not support and promote teacher
effectiveness in the classroom.
□ Plan does not include “coaching model.”
□ Minimal resources are available to support
PD.

200

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Professional Development (continued)

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Evaluating and
Improving
Professional
Development

LEA uses PD design goals to determine evaluation
measures and standards for success. Personnel for
collecting, analyzing, and reporting data and for
facilitating the “PD next steps” decisions are clarified.
Evaluation findings are used to make improvements
in PD plan and criteria include: 1) improved teaching,
improved student learning, 3) narrowing of student
achievement gaps.
LEA has a process for monitoring and documenting
the alignment of the school improvement plan(s),
professional development activities, and teacher and
student outcomes.
LEA has a plan to determine PD evaluation
measures but lacks clarity and specifics as to what
measures will be used as standards for success.
Minimal personnel are selected for collecting,
analyzing, and reporting data and developing next
steps (lacks depth).
Evaluation findings exist but are not used to make
improvements in PD plan.
Lack of alignment in the school improvement
plan(s), PD activities, and teacher and student
outcomes.

□ Little or no connection between PD design
goals and evaluation process. Personnel
have not been identified to collect and
analyze data.
□ Little or no connection between evaluation
findings of make improvements in PD plan.
□ The process for monitoring and
documentation of the school improvement
plan(s) exists but lacks alignment between
PD activities, and teacher and student
outcomes.
Sharing
Professional
Development
Learning

LEA has a plan to document professional
development learning (challenges and successes)
changes in order to sustain excellence when major
changes in personnel occur.
Records are kept to guide future PD decisions.
Implementation materials are organized and
available to serve as models of effective practice. This
strategy is essential for keeping staff, administrators,
parents, students, and community moving in the same
direction.
□ LEA has moderate documentation of PD learning
(challenges and successes).
□ Records are kept.
□ Some implementation materials are organized and
available to others to serve as models of effective
practices. Therefore, most of the staff,
administrators, parents, students, and community all
moving in the same direction.
□ LEA lacks documentation of PD challenges
and successes.
Few or no records are kept to guide future
PD decisions.
Little or lack of evidence to support that
implementation materials are organized and
available to others to serve as models of
effective practices.

201

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – HR System and Human Capital Management

Definition: Research indicates that teacher quality is perhaps the primary influence on student achievement, yet many districts do a poor job of attracting,
selecting, and managing talent, whether at the teacher, principal, or central office level. Improving the recruiting and hiring processes for teachers and
principals, developing attractive compensation packages, and processing applications and payments quickly—which a good HR system should be able to
do—can greatly improve the quality of instruction in schools and classrooms across the district. Districts then need to develop clever support and retention
strategies to keep talent in the district. Most importantly, districts can proactively improve their capacity for providing a quality education by examining and
refining their selection process.

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Recruitment,
selection and
placement of new
administrators
□ Achievement data, demographics, staffing, and
culture of the district are used to define qualities of
new administrators
□ District program in place to recruit outstanding
teachers as administrators
□ Achievement data, demographics, staffing, and
culture of each school are used to develop a
customized set of required principal skills at all
sites
□ Strongest principal leaders are placed at the most
underperforming schools
□ Some criteria are used when identifying
potential school leaders during the administrator
hiring process
□ Informal referral process is in place to
encourage in-house recruitment
□ Placement of principals is determined by district
personnel
□ Strong principals are encouraged to take on
underperforming schools
□ Hiring decisions have little to no connection to
student achievement
□ In-house recruitment program is nonexistent or
inconsequential
□ Placement is driven by availability or other
criteria
□ Performance of school is not considered in
placement
Recruitment of
highly qualified
teachers
□ Quarterly report to community regarding the
percentage of classes with HQTs
□ Compensation incentives are used to recruit HQTs
□ District and employee organizations work
collaboratively to recruit HQTs from high-
performing schools to teach in underperforming
schools within the district
□ Annual HQT reporting is completed as required
by law
□ Incentives limited to few curricular areas or
special circumstances
□ Strong effort made by district, without union
support, to encourage HQTs from high-
performing schools to teach in underperforming
schools
□ No reporting policy in place or inconsistent
reporting to community
□ No incentive policy in place to support
recruitment of HQTs
□ No or inconsistent efforts to recruit HQTs from
high performing schools to teach in
underperforming schools in the district

202

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – HR System and Human Capital Management (continued)

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Teacher support
and development
□ All teachers have access to ongoing PD that is
targeted at district achievement goals and delivery
of standards-aligned curriculum, instruction, and
assessment
□ District has established a new teacher support
system the promotes high-quality support and
resources
□ PD activities are strongly tied to board-adopted
district goals and objectives
□ District collects data to measure the effectiveness of
PD as it related to improved student achievement
□ Some teachers have access to ongoing PD that
is targeted at district goals and delivery of a
standards-aligned curriculum and instruction
program
□ District provides some site-level support for
new teachers through formal and informal
processes
□ PD activities are generally supportive of district
goals and objectives
□ Teachers are encouraged to measure the
effectiveness of PD as related to student
achievement
□ There exists little evidence that PD activities
are tied to district achievement goals or
specific curriculum objectives
□ New teachers receive the majority of
support through university teacher
preparation programs
□ No evidence of ties between PD and district
goals and objectives
□ No effort is made by the district to measure
the effectiveness of PD or impact on student
achievement
Salaries, wages, and
benefits
□ District and employee organizations work
collaboratively to ensure salaries, wages, and
benefits are sufficiently competitive to attract and
retain HQTs with an emphasis on math, language
arts, reading, and teaching ELs
□ District conducts quarterly analyses of recruitment
and retention data
□ The district has negotiated competitive salaries,
wages, and benefits as compared to surrounding
school districts
□ District conducts annual analyses of recruitment
and retention data
□ No evidence suggests a collaborative effort
on the part of the district and employee
organizations to attract and retain HQTs in
math, language arts, reading, and teaching
ELs
□ No evidence suggests analysis plans exist in
the district
Use of incentives □ Compensation incentives are used to recruit HQTs
and administrators to work in hard-to-staff schools
□ Incentives include: extra compensation,
opportunities for collaboration, reduced class size,
and recognition programs
□ Compensation incentives are used to recruit
HQTs in certain content areas at hard to staff
and/or underperforming schools
□ Limited monetary and non-monetary incentives
in use by the district to attract and retain HQTs
and strong administrators
□ Compensation incentives are not used to
attract HQTs / administrators to hard to staff
and/or underperforming schools
□ Incentives are not in place or in use to attract
and retain HQTs and/or strong
administrators

203

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric - Finance and Budget

Definition: While student achievement is the ultimate bottom line, more superintendents are fired for poor financial management than for poor student
achievement results. In addition to ensuring that their budget is balanced and sustainable, superintendents should closely align their budget with instructional
priorities. Some districts have adopted innovative budgeting approaches such as “zero-based budgeting” and weighted student funding to bring their budgets
into closer alignment with their priorities.

Component High (5)

Medium (3) Low (1)
Strategic Budget
Planning

Strategic plan is linked to the
superintendent’s goals and priorities, incorporates
measurable objectives and outcomes, and is used as
the basis of budget planning.

The budget is closely aligned to the
district’s mission, goals, and operational activities
and identifies who is accountable organizationally
for specified outcomes.

School budget is explicitly tied to the
district’s instructional goals and priorities.

Changes in district priorities are reflected
in the budget in a timely fashion.

Fiscal team understands the district’s past
fiscal issues, problems, challenges, and
accomplishments in order to gain perspective on
how to guide the district in the future.

District goals and priorities,
outlined in the strategic plan, are found in
budget priorities, but the links between the
strategic plan and the budget process are not
evident.

There is some evidence of the
district’s instructional goals and priorities in
the budget.

Changes in district priorities are
reflected in the budget, but not in time to
make meaningful decisions.

The budget is somewhat aligned to
the district’s mission, goals, and operational
activities but organizational accountability is
not clear.

The district’s past fiscal issues,
problems, challenges, and accomplishments
are not considered in planning process.

Strategic plan is not referenced in budget
planning.

Changes in district priorities are not
reflected in the budget.

The budget is not understood by
stakeholders.

Fiscal team has no historical perspective
of past fiscal issues.

204

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric - Finance and Budget (continued)

Components
High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Organizational
Culture

Expands participation in budget
process to include stakeholders and secure
buy-in by constituencies.

Presents audit findings & corrective
action plans to Board.

Establish a clear process to solicit
input from Local District personnel,
principals, and others on the annual budget
process and to pilot-test ideas before they are
rolled out to the field.

Participation in budget process
limited to upper and middle
management.

Board is made aware of audit
findings.

Processes for input from Local
District personnel, such as principals, is
not clearly established.

Little participation in budget
process outside of fiscal.

Audit findings are not sun-
shined.

Input from Local District
personnel, principals, and others on the
annual budget process is not solicited.
Operational
Procedures

Establishes effective controls to
ensure that the district’s resources are
managed properly, including monthly
financial reports for fiscal management &
decision-making.

Uses the district’s annual external
audit to improve district operations,
including— the timely review and follow-up
of findings, development of corrective action
plans, and implementation of corrective
actions.

Establish uniform comprehensive
financial procedural manuals for school sites,
Local Districts, and central offices and
conduct appropriate training for users.

Controls to ensure that the
district’s resources are managed
properly, including periodic financial
reports for fiscal management &
decision-making, are restricted to few
district personnel.

District’s annual external audit
is discussed only when produced and
not revisited in planning process.

Financial policies are not
readily available to school sites, Local
Districts, and central offices.

Financial reports for fiscal
management & decision-making are
only produced, or made available to
decision-makers, in times of crisis.

District’s annual external audit
is not used to inform decisions or future
policy.

No formal financial
procedural manuals are available.

205

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Communications

Definition: Effective school districts need to showcase the great stories in their district and to counteract misinformation or negative news. Developing a
public relations or communications office staffed with experts on dealing with the media can enable the district to communicate its vision to the public or
proactively build support for an important initiative.

Component High (5)

Medium (3)

Low (1)

Communications Plan □ Communications plan is aligned with district’s
strategic plan
□ Communications plan actively supports district
mission and vision
□ Communications plan tailored to reflect diversity
of district schools
□ Communications plan designed to seek community
input
□ Communications plan is up to date
□ Communications plan is understood by
district office and school staff
□ Communications plan addresses needs of all
stakeholders
□ Communications plan is out of date or missing
□ Schools are unaware of district
communications plan
□ Schools contact district office when
communications issues arise
Communications Office □ Communications office is integral part of district
decision making
□ Communications office maintains close liaison
with community
□ Communications office routinely consults with
district schools to ensure reporting of “great
stories”
□ Communications office is adequately staffed
□ Communications office consulted for input in
decision making
□ Communications office contacts schools and
community stakeholders with news of events
and decisions
□ Communications office is not functioning
□ Communications office is inadequately staffed
□ Communications office not routinely informed
of decisions affecting community stakeholders
Communication of
district vision to the
community
□ District meets with community leaders to discuss
district vision
□ Multiple interactive means are used to disseminate
district vision
□ District employees take a proactive approach to
telling honest district message

□ District communicates vision via periodic
releases in local newspapers
□ District notifies community organizations of
district vision
□ School leaders are required to maintain
coherence of district vision with school goals
□ District vision is not communicated to the
community
□ Mission and vision are displayed on district
home page
□ School bulletins and newsletters relay district
vision to homes

206

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Communications (continued)

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Build support for
district initiatives
□ Family and community members are
engaged as decision makers in
communicating district initiatives
□ District initiatives are communicated and
understood by community
□ District notifies community
organizations of initiatives
□ Key community leaders are informed of
district initiatives
□ School leaders are encouraged to
communicate information regarding
district initiatives with key personnel
□ Community is unaware of district
initiatives
□ Schools are given information concerning
district initiatives to send home in
newsletters
Two way
communications
with community
□ District and community feel involved and
engaged in their public schools
□ Focus groups and town hall meetings inform
community of district interests and activities
□ Staff members are involved in community
groups and organizations
□ Information concerning proposed legislation
that affects schools and communities are
tracked and disseminated by district
□ District publishes calendar and
transportation schedules in local
newspapers
□ Community organizations are routinely
notified of district events
□ Key community leaders are routinely
notified of district events
□ School leaders are encouraged to
communicate school activities via
newsletters and letters home
□ Community events and activities are
disseminated through schools
□ Community is unaware of district events
□ District communicates to community
primarily through schools
□ Community does not communicate
activities with district
□ Parents receive letters and newsletters
from their school announcing special
district events

207

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Governance/Board Relations

Definition: Most districts are governed by boards elected from the local population; others answer to appointed boards. In either case, school boards are
responsible for setting the policy direction for the district; superintendents can take a supporting role in developing policy but are mainly charged with
executing it. Winning the support of board members, especially elected ones, is a time-consuming but critical task for most superintendents.

Component High (5)

Medium (3)

Low (1)

Setting the
Direction for the
Community’s
Schools
□ The District’s vision, mission, value, and
priorities are focused on achievement and the
needs of all students are clearly known in the
school community.
□ The vision, mission, values, and priorities are
described in the LEA plan and visible at all
district sites and described as measurable
goals.
□ The District’s goals are measurable and
achievable being evaluated annually to
improve instruction and close the gap
between high and low achieving students.
□ The District’s vision, mission, value
and priorities may lack clear focus and
not necessarily focused on student
achievement and the needs of all
students are not well known at all
district sites.
□ The District’s goals are measurable and
possibly achievable but not evaluated
annually nor may be part of the LEA
plan.
□ The instruction is not necessarily
closing the gap between high and low
achieving students.
□ The District’s vision, mission, value, and
priorities lack focus or are non-existent.
□ There is very little to no information
available at any district site or in the LEA
plan.
□ The goals are not measurable or non-
existent and are not reviewed.
Establishing an
Effective and
Efficient Structure
for the District
□ The Board has established an organizational
structure that fully supports the district’s
vision while empowering the superintendent
and staff.
□ The Board approves policies and sets the
direction for adopting the curriculum.
□ The Board establishes budgeting priorities
on-time and consistent with the vision and
goals.
□ The Board has established an
organizational structure that partially
supports the District’s vision and may
not fully empower the superintendent.
□ Board policies are not adopted or
approved in a timely manner and there
is little input in the curriculum
adoption.
□ The budget may not fully reflect the
priorities and is not consistent with the
vision and goals.
□ The board has established an organizational
structure that may not support the district
vision and may not empower the
superintendent and staff.
□ Board policies are not adopted or approved
and there is little to no input in the
curriculum adoption.
□ The budget does not reflect the priorities and
is not consistent with the vision and goals.

208

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Governance/Board Relations (continued)

Components High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Providing Support
and Resources
□ The Board supports the superintendent and staff
and acts in a professional demeanor modeling the
District’s belief and vision.
□ The budget allocation aligns resources based on
instructional priorities and student needs and there
is concentrated evidence of providing additional
support to reform efforts that directly impact
student achievement.
□ The Board may support the superintendent and
staff and sometimes acts with professional
demeanor modeling the District’s beliefs and
vision.
□ The budget partially aligns resources to
instructional priorities and student needs and
there is some evidence of additional support to
reform efforts that directly impact student
achievement.
□ The Board rarely supports the superintendent
and staff and seldom models the District’s
belief and vision.
□ The budget allocation does not align resources
based on instructional priorities or student need
and there is no evidence of providing
additional support to reform efforts that
directly impact student achievement.

Ensuring
Accountability to the
Public
□ The Board establishes systems and processes to
monitor student achievement and communicates
the information to the school community.
□ The Board evaluates the superintendent and sets the
policy for the evaluation of all personnel.
□ The Board monitors program effectiveness through
assessments and requires changes to protect scarce
resources and monitors effectiveness through self-
evaluation.
□ The Board may have established systems to
monitor student achievement while
communication lacks consistency to the
community.
□ The Board evaluates the superintendent but
may not set policy for the evaluation of all
personnel.
□ The Board may monitor program effectiveness
through assessments and seldom requires
changes to protect resources and there may be
evidence of monitoring through self-
assessment.
□ The Board has not established systems to
monitor student achievement and rarely
communicates any information to the
community.
□ The Board marginally evaluates the
superintendent and does not set policy for
personnel evaluations.
□ The Board rarely monitors program
effectiveness to protect resources and there is
no evidence of its’ effectiveness through self-
evaluation.
Actions as
Community Leaders
□ The Board has involved the community in
appropriate, meaningful ways to allow for feedback
from stakeholders.
□ There is clear communication to community
members regarding district policies, district
educational programs, and the financial condition
of the district and progress of local goals or bond
information.
□ The Board allows the superintendent to share, as
appropriate, information with local constituency
groups.
□ The Board infrequently involves the
community in meaningful ways allowing for
feedback from stakeholders.
□ There may be clear communication to the
community regarding policies, programs and
the financial condition of the district but it is
not consistent.
□ The Board sometimes allows the
superintendent to share, as appropriate,
information with local constituency groups.
□ The Board has generally not involved the
community in any meaningful way and does
not readily accept feedback from the
community.
□ There is no clear communication to the
community and generally, district information
can be obtained only at district sites.
□ There is generally no sharing of information
with local constituency groups.

209

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Labor Relations/Negotiations

Definition: In addition to teachers unions, superintendents often need to build relationships and negotiate with several other unions to which various district
staff belong. Success in working with unions requires an upfront investment in building relationships and understanding the priorities of union leaders. The
content of contracts also requires close attention. Contract language can restrict or expand the superintendent’s options for replacing and reassigning staff. This
is particularly crucial with teacher contracts, as teacher quality is one of the most significant influences on student achievement.

Component High (5)

Medium (3)

Low (1)

Relationships,
Communications
and Trust
□ Both teams have solid trusting relationships,
credibility, political savvy, and model ethical
behavior by establishing core values
□ All bargaining members are provided with a
continuous meaningful training on traditional,
interest-based and core values bargaining
□ All key stakeholders informed of planning,
updates, modifications to proposals and
strategies, and tentative and final agreements
□ Both teams have moderate relationships,
credibility, political savvy, and model
ethical behavior by establishing core
values
□ All bargaining members are provided with
some training on interest-based and
traditional bargaining
□ Some information is disseminated
regarding planning, updates, modifications
to proposals and strategies, and tentative
and final agreements to some stakeholders
□ Teams have limited skeptical
relationships, lacking credibility, political
savvy, and ethical behavior need for core
values
□ There is a need for meaningful training
on traditional, interest-based and core
values bargaining
□ Only a few stakeholders are informed of
negotiation process and limited
information is distributed about tentative
and final agreements
Negotiation
Principles
and Objectives
□ Both teams have secure, established roles and
responsibilities
□ All teams use strategic plans, mission
statements, major goals and core values to
develop objectives
□ Teams work together collaboratively to
review existing contract language, to identify
problem areas, articulate community
concerns, and discuss the impact of current
language on student achievement and district
operations
□ Only one team has secure, established
roles and responsibilities
□ The district and other teams have limited
access to strategic plans, mission
statements, major goals and core values to
develop objectives
□ Each team works in isolation to review
existing contract language, and identify
problem areas, that impact of current
language on student achievement and
district operations
□ Both teams have secure, established roles
and responsibilities
□ All teams use strategic plans, mission
statements, major goals and core values
to develop objectives
□ Existing contract language is not
considered or discussed in reference to
the impact of current language on student
achievement and district operations

210

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Labor Relations/Negotiations (continued)

Components High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Strategies for
Negotiations

□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
developed in relation to the importance of the
district mission and bargaining success,
district verifies the proposal against district
philosophy, core values, financial resources,
community support and impact of student
achievement
□ District and union work together to determine
an overarching approach to negotiations with
considerations for distributive or integrative
bargaining or a combination of the two
□ There is a solid plan for impasse: meditation,
fact finding and post fact finding negotiations
□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
somewhat developed in relation to the
importance of the district mission and
possible bargaining success
□ District determines an overarching
approach to negotiations with
considerations for distributive or
integrative bargaining or a combination
of the two
□ Impasse results in breakdown in
communication, the district does not
have a plan for this process
□ Bargaining goals and objectives are
developed in relation to the importance
of each parties individual interest; the
district philosophy, core values, financial
resources, community support and impact
of student achievement are not the main
consideration
□ Each group determines an overarching
approach that benefits self-interest in
negotiations
□ There is a solid plan for impasse:
meditation, fact finding and post fact
finding negotiations
Fair and
Equitable
Outcomes
□ Equitable distribution of rights in evaluations,
assignments, health plan, calendars, staff
development, schedules, retirement etc.
□ A high value placed on all employees and
fully recognizes their impact on the successes
of district students
□ Within the context of core values and fiscal
ability, settlement provides a fair and
equitable compensation package

□ In many cases, management rights
override the distribution of rights in
evaluations, assignments, health plan,
calendars, staff development, schedules,
retirement etc.
□ Some value placed on employees and
there are small attempts to recognize
their impact on the success of district
□ At times, different groups consider core
values and fiscal impacts when
negotiating settlements and
compensation packages
□ Power struggles exist when deciding the
rights in evaluations, assignments, health
plan, calendars, staff development,
schedules, retirement etc.
□ Employees perceive that they are not
recognized for their impact on the
successes of district
□ Regardless of core values and fiscal
impact, groups demand unreasonable,
unaffordable compensation packages

211

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Family and Community Engagement

Definition: All residents of a school district’s jurisdiction can be considered its stakeholders, so ensuring everyone’s satisfaction can be difficult. Districts
should offer several ways for the community and families to interact with the district, from coordinating volunteer opportunities for parents to partnering with
local organizations in support of student success. It is also important to gather feedback from the public on the district’s performance. Several districts take
surveys of parents of children and of the community in general to determine how they view the district and what their priorities for improvement are. These
surveys should be closely linked to the district’s performance management system and data dashboard. Increasing stakeholder satisfaction can lead to greater
support for bond measures for the district, significantly increasing its financial resources.

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Parenting □ The district provides coordinated trainings, at
all levels, based on parent needs and local
context.
□ The district has a system or process in place
for appropriate and quality referrals.
□ The district ensures and supports schools in
educating all staff in working with parents as
equal partners, coordinates parent programs,
and builds ties between parents/ community
and the schools.
□ Schools organize trainings for parents on
a scheduled basis.
□ Schools provide appropriate referrals.
□ The district or school offers staff trainings
in how to work with the
parents/community.
□ Schools plan trainings upon request by
parents.
□ Schools provide referrals.
□ Schools receive little support from the
district in planning trainings for staff with
a focus on working with
parents/community.
Communication □ Information is provided in a language and
format that ensures participation for those
parents who lack literacy skills or whose
native language is not English.
□ A district-wide expectation of consistent and
effective two-way communication between
the home and school exists.
□ Schools provide key information
concerning the school program and its
activities, as feasible, in a language that
ensures participation for those parents
whose native language is not English.
□ Schools encourage consistent and
effective two-way communication
between the home and school.
□ Schools are inconsistent in providing
translated notifications. Few resources or
options are available for schools that need
translation assistance.
□ Schools do not regularly emphasize the
importance of communication between
the home and school.

212

APPENDIX C (continued): Quality Rubric – Family and Community Engagement (continued)

Component High (5) Medium (3) Low (1)
Volunteerism □ The district and school parent involvement
policy informs parents about opportunities for
volunteers and the rights for parents to be
involved in school and classroom
activities/events.
□ The district delineates specific measures that
are taken to increase parental involvement
and addresses various barriers.
□ The district and school parent
involvement policy informs parents about
opportunities for volunteers and the rights
for parents to be involved in school and
classroom activities/events.
□ The district and schools address major
barriers, such as language, transportation,
and need for childcare.
□ The district and school parent
involvement policy informs parents
about opportunities for volunteers and
the rights for parents to be involved in
school and classroom activities/events.
□ The district and schools do little to
address barriers to parent/community
participation.

Learning at Home □ The district supports schools in providing
techniques and strategies that parents may use
to improve their children’s academic success
and help their children in learning at home.
□ Schools provide techniques and strategies
that parents may use to improve their
children’s academic success and help
their children in learning at home.
□ Schools rely on teachers to work with
individual families on an as needed
basis.
Decision Making □ Parents are encouraged and actively recruited
to participate in undertaking governance and
advisory roles..
□ The district organizes opportunities for
parents/ community to be involved in the
joint development of the LEA plan, parent
involvement policies, parent needs
assessments, and school-parent compacts.
□ Parents are encouraged to participate in
governance and advisory roles.
□ Parents/community are involved in some
components of the development of LEA
plan, parent involvement policies, parent
needs assessments, and school-parent
compacts.
□ Schools do not have active parent
committees, and are provided little
support for taking corrective measures.
□ Parents/community are not consulted in
the development of the LEA plan,
parent involvement policies, parent
needs assessments, or school-parent
compacts.
Collaboration with
the Community
□ Community organizations and/or institutions
are highly involved in district and/or school
activities, working in collaboration with the
district.
□ Community organizations and/or
institutions are minimally involved in
district and/or school activities.
□ Community organizations and/or
institutions are not involved in district
and/or school activities.

213

214
APPENDIX C (continued): Implementation Rubric (All Reform Strategies)

Dimension High
5
Medium
3
Low
1
Challenges &
Concerns
The external challenges to
full implementation and
the concerns/ thoughts of
key players
□ No serious obstacle or
challenge.
□ Staff focused on
improving full use of
the reform strategy
and its impact on
student performance
□ Common commitment
to approach
□ Some obstacles and/or
challenges to
implementation.
□ Staff focused on thought
and actions needed to
improving the reform
strategy
□ Majority of staff
showing commitment to
approach
□ Serious external obstacles to
implementation
□ Staff focused on whether
approach to the reform
strategy is best design or is
feasible
□ Possible strong disagreement
about best direction
Fully Implemented in
Practice
The extent that each
component of the reform
strategy is fully
implemented in practice.
□ Full implementation
of all components of
the reform strategy
across the district
□ Best practices have
been established and
are communicated in
coordinated manner
□ Practice is reflected in
policy and procedures
□ Uneven and/or
inconsistent
implementation of the
reform strategy across
the district
□ Best practices are being
collected-with plans for
communicating these
across the district

□ Possibly some good ideas
about implementation of the
reform strategy
□ Little actual implementation
of the reform strategy beyond
minimal bureaucratic
requirements
Common Culture: Data,
Reflection, &
Continuous
Improvement
Shared understanding,
values, and desired
expectations, including
active use of data,
reflection and continuous
improvement of the
reform strategy itself.
□ Extensive use of data
and reflection about
the reform strategy --
its design,
implementation and
effectiveness in
supporting student
achievement.
□ Common and clear
expectations across
district
□ Extensive work on
continuous
improvement
□ Use of data and
reflection guides
decisions about the
reform strategy
□ Expectations
communicated across
the district
□ Moderately effective
continuous
improvement efforts
□ Little common understanding
of the reform strategy
□ No/little data collection
regarding the reform strategy
□ No/little reflection about how
to improve implementation of
the reform strategy
Sustainable Use:
Resources, Staff,
Regularization
Ad hoc vs. stability of
staff and fiscal resources
and a fit with the ongoing
organization.

□ Strong possibility of
sustainability
□ Strong and ongoing
staff and fiscal
resource commitment
□ Shared expertise and
capacity building
□ Inclusion in regular
way the district
operates
□ Moderate possibility of
sustainability
□ Moderate staff and
fiscal resource
commitment
□ District support and
expertise

□ Very tenuous approach to
implementation of the reform
strategy
□ Little chance of sustainability
in terms of staffing, resources,
or regularized patterns

APPENDIX D: Superintendent Interview Guide

Please log: Name, data/time of interview, contact information, documents to be
obtained after the interview, part of the interview guide that were not fully
covered, digital tape location.

Q# Question RQ:

1

Describe the overall status of the district when you assumed your position as
Superintendent?

What were the major strengths of the district? (ask for 3 most salient)

What were the major challenges facing the district? (ask for 3 most
salient)

What was the overall academic profile of the district?

1a

1a

1a

1a

2

Considering the context of the district when you arrived, what strategies did you
use to improve the overall condition of the district?

What specific strategies did you employ to improve student
achievement within your district?

Which participants were significantly involved in these strategies?

How would you describe the level of implementation you have
achieved for each strategy used?

1a/b

1a/b

1a/b

1a/b

215

APPENDIX D: Superintendent Interview Guide (continued)

3

Please describe key aspects of your previous background/experience
(Probe: Rate top 3 experiences in terms of importance)

How did your preparation and experience help you to select and implement
appropriate reform strategies designed to improve student achievement?
(Probe: TBA experience, non-TBA experience, K-12 background, degree
programs, work experience, etc.)

1c

1a/b/c

4

Please rate your previous professional experience with the following reform
strategies [On a scale from 1 = limited to 3 = extensive].
(Reform Strategies: Strategic Plan, Assessment, Curriculum, Professional
Development, HR System and Human Capital Management, Finance and
Budget, Communications, Governance and Board Relations, Labor Relations
and Contract Negotiations, and Family and Community Engagement)
(Probe: Identify her/his rationale for each rating)

1c

216

APPENDIX E: Key Player Interview Guide

Please log: Name, title, data/time of interview, contact information, documents
to be obtained after the interview, part of the interview guide that were not fully
covered, digital tape location.

Q# Question RQ:

1

Describe the overall status of the district when the Superintendent arrived (or when
the key player arrived if after the Superintendent)?

What were the major strengths of the district? (ask for 3 most salient)

What were the major challenges facing the district? (ask for 3 most
salient)

What was the overall academic profile of the district?

1a

1a

1a

1a

2

Considering the context of the district, what strategies did the Superintendent use to
improve the overall condition of the district?

What specific strategies did the Superintendent employ to improve
student achievement within the district?

What was your involvement in these strategies?

How would you describe the level of implementation achieved for each of
the reform strategies used?

(Note: Request documents mentioned).

1b

1b

1b

1b

217

APPENDIX F: Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide

Please log: Names, titles, data/time of interview, contact information,
documents to be obtained after the interview, parts of the interview guide that
were not fully covered, and digital tape location.

Q# Question

1

In this whole discussion, we want to focus directly on (the specific dimension)

What is your district currently doing with regard (name the dimension)? What
has been the superintendent’s specific strategies regarding this dimension?

Is your current strategy at all linked to improving student achievement—please
explain?

What has been your success in getting your current reform in this dimension
actually implemented and what challenges do you now face in this regard?

How does your current effort for this dimension differ from what you were
doing prior to when the current superintendent came to this district?

For your prior approach, to what extent was that approach fully implemented?

218

APPENDIX G: Specific Dimensions of Reform Interview Guide (Probes)

Questions
Strategic Plan:

What is your district currently doing with regard to (name the dimension)? What
has been the superintendent’s specific strategies regarding this dimension?

Is your current strategy at all linked to improving student achievement—please
explain?

What has been your success in getting your current reform in this dimension actually
implemented and what challenges do you now face in this regard?
Assessment:

What strategies or does your district have in place in regards to summative and
formative assessment to improve student performance?

What assessment practices are carried out both at the district-level and school-site
level to improve student achievement?

How does your district ensure that assessment policies and practices are carried out
throughout the district?
Curriculum:

What steps does the district take to ensure that the curriculum provides all students
with opportunities to access content and learning standards, (e.g., under-performing
students, students with disabilities, and English Language Learners)?

What steps does the district take to ensure fidelity of implementation of the
curriculum across all schools and classrooms?

What steps does the district take to review and update the curriculum and adopted
materials for alignment to learning standards and student learning needs?

219

APPENDIX G (continued)

Professional Development:

Describe how the district’s professional development plan includes emphasis on
improving student achievement, building teacher effectiveness, maintaining high
standards, and promoting continuous learning to enhance intellectual and leadership
capacity?

How are resources specifically designated and available to support the district's
professional development plan?

To what extent does the district's organizational structure and policies ensure the
implementation, evaluation, and monitoring of the professional development plan?
HR System and Human Capital Management:

What structures are in place to support the recruitment, selection, and placement of
new teachers and administrators?

What district policies and practices are in place to ensure teachers and administrators
build collective capacity to understand and respond to student achievement data?

How are incentives used to attract and retain highly qualified teachers and strong
administrators for hard to staff schools?
Finance and Budget:

Prior to the superintendent’s tenure, did the districts mission, vision, and value
statements align resources to the districts instructional goals and priorities?

Describe the process used to create an organizational culture which includes all
stakeholders in the development of district-wide budget and spending priorities?

220

APPENDIX G (continued)

What effective controls are in place to ensure the district’s resources are managed
properly, including financial reports for fiscal management and decision-making?
Communications:

What structures are in place to support communication of the district's vision to the
key stakeholder groups: (e.g., students, staff, and community members)?

What district policies and practices are in place to ensure district personnel build
collective capacity to "tell the story" concerning policies, activities, and events
employed to improve student achievement?

How is the communication plan used to inform the community of district interests
and activities?
Governance and Board Relations:

Describe how the districts’ vision, mission, value, and priorities are focused on the
achievement and needs of all students providing a coherent "road map" to success?

What procedures are in place and guide how the governance team
(superintendent/board members) works together to establish systems and processes
to monitor student achievement while communicating the information to the larger
community?

What district-wide policies, culture and practices are currently utilized which reflect
a commitment to implementing systemic reform, innovative leadership, and high
expectations to improve student learning and achievement?

221

APPENDIX G (continued)

Labor Relations and Contract Negotiations:

What processes are in place to build trust, foster relationships and ensure open
communication between the District and labor union negotiating teams?

What are the procedures for establishing principles and objectives for the negotiating
process?

What strategies are employed by the negotiating teams to ensure accountability and
fair and equitable outcomes for the District’s employees?
Family and Community Engagement:

How does the district support capacity building and encourage parents and
community members to participate in governance and advisory roles?

Please describe the district’s process for gathering information about
parent/community needs related to supporting their children’s education and how the
district responds to this information?

What kind of training or support is provided to administrators, teachers, and other
school staff in working with parents as equal partners in student academic
achievement?

222

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this study was to understand how a superintendent utilized reform strategies to create systemic change throughout the district to positively affect student achievement. Overall, this qualitative case study focused on the quality and level of implementation of ten specific reform strategies by the superintendent in order to create improvement in the district.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Reform strategies implemented to increase student achievement: a case study of superintendent actions

PDF

The superintendent and reform: a case study of action by the system leader to improve student achievement in a large urban school district

PDF

Systemic change and the system leader: a case study of superintendent action to improve student achievement in a large urban school district

PDF

The role of the superintendent in raising student achievement: a superintendent effecting change through the implementation of selected strategies

PDF

Promoting student achievement: a case study of change actions employed by an urban school superintendent

PDF

An urban superintendent's strategies for systemic reform: a case study

PDF

The sustainability of superintendent-led reforms to improve student achievement

PDF

Sustainable reform: a follow-up case study on one urban superintendent’s efforts to improve student achievement

PDF

Effective strategies superintendents utilize in building political coalitions to increase student achievement

PDF

A case study in reform: implementation strategies of one urban superintendent

PDF

Sustaining student achievement: Six Sigma strategies and successful urban school district superintendents

PDF

Reform strategies used by system leaders in education to impact student achievement: a case study

PDF

How successful urban superintendents in California improve student achievement

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Superintendents and Latino student achievement: promising practices that superintendents use to influence the instruction and increase the achievement of Latino students in urban school districts

PDF

Districtwide instructional improvement: a case study of a high school in the Los Coyotes High School District

PDF

Strategies employed by successful urban superintendents responding to demands for student achievement reform

PDF

Superintendents' viewpoint of the role stakeholders can play in improving student achievement

PDF

How urban school superintendents effectively use data-driven decision making to improve student achievement

PDF

Successful communication strategies used by urban school district superintendents to build consensus in raising student achievement

Asset Metadata

Creator Salazar, Roberto, Jr. (author)

Core Title Superintendent's leverage: a case study of strategies utilized by an urban school district superintendent to improve student achievement

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/09/2009

Defense Date 03/04/2009

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

Tag change levers,district systemic change,leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,reform strategies,school/district improvement,student achievement,superintendent

Place Name California (states)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Castruita, Rudy M. (committee chair), Marsh, David D. (committee member), Robles, Darline P. (committee member)

Creator Email robertos@usc.edu,rsalaz1@lausd.net

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m2072

Unique identifier UC1432570

Identifier etd-Salazar-2713 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-217226 (legacy record id),usctheses-m2072 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Salazar-2713.pdf

Dmrecord 217226

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Salazar, Roberto, Jr.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu