University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The dynamics of instructional leadership & organizational structure in high performing urban schools

(USC Thesis Other)

The dynamics of instructional leadership & organizational structure in high performing urban schools

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT 1

The Dynamics of Instructional Leadership &
Organizational Structure in High Performing Urban Schools
by
Cathy R. Creasia

Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Education
Teacher Education in Multicultural Societies
Rossier School of Education, University of Southern California
May 2014
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT 2 2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my most heartfelt thanks to my family, friends, and colleagues all
of whom have helped me through this process and contributed to my academic, professionalism,
and personal growth. I would also like to thank my Dissertation Chair Dr. Pensavalle for her
guidance and encouragement. Thank you, Dr. Robert Turrill, for your continued mentorship and
participation in my committee. Further thanks to Dr. Kenneth Yates for his expertise and advice.
Thank you, to the three fantastic schools that participated in this study. You were open
with your experiences and generous with your time. The trampoline incident , symposium, and
fruit from the urban garden, truly made me feel like part of your community. The work that you
are doing is inspiring. Your professionalism and collaborative efforts in pursuit of academic
excellence for yourselves and your students is extraordinary.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT 3 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... v

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................... vi

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER I: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY .......................................................................... 9
Introduction ..............................................................................................................9
Context ...................................................................................................................12
Ideologies of Education ....................................................................................12
Socio-economic and Political ...........................................................................15
Organizing for Change .....................................................................................17
Problem Statement .................................................................................................19
Purpose of the Study ...............................................................................................20
Research Questions ................................................................................................21
Theoretical Framework and Methodolgy Preview ............................................21
Significance of the Study .......................................................................................22
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................23
Key Terms ..............................................................................................................25

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................27
Introduction ............................................................................................................27
The Socio-political context of Education .........................................................28
Urban Education and NCLB ............................................................................33
Organizational Theory .....................................................................................37
Leadership ........................................................................................................43

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY .............................................................................49
Introduction ............................................................................................................49
Sample and Population ...........................................................................................51
Site 1 ................................................................................................................52
Site 2 ................................................................................................................55
Site 3 ................................................................................................................56
Instrumentation .......................................................................................................59
Observations (RQ1) .........................................................................................61
Survey (RQ1 and RQ1a) ..................................................................................62
Interviews (RQ1 and RQ1a) ............................................................................62
Document Review (RQ1a) ...............................................................................63
Data Collection, Coding, and Analysis ..................................................................64

CHAPTER IV: DATA RESULTS AND FINDINGS .................................................69
Introduction ............................................................................................................69
First Impressions ..............................................................................................70
Research Question 1 (RQ1) ....................................................................................71
Observation Data .............................................................................................71
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT 4 4
Survey Data ......................................................................................................77
Interview Data ..................................................................................................79
RQ1 Data Analysis Summary .................................................................................87
Research Question 1a (RQ1a) .................................................................................88
Observation Data ..............................................................................................89
Survey Data ......................................................................................................89
Interview Data ..................................................................................................90
Document Review Data ....................................................................................91
RQ1a Data Analysis Summary ........................................................................92

CHAPTER V: ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS ................................................................93
Implications and Reflections ..................................................................................96

REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................101

APPENDIX A: QUALTRICS SURVEY .................................................................114
APPENDIX B: ELPS CODING PROTOCOL .........................................................115
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL .............................................................118
APPENDIX D: DOCUMENT REVIEW PROTOCOL ...........................................120
APPENDIX E: EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP POLICY STANDARDS ...........121
APPENDIX F: SITE 1 SURVEY STATISTICAL DATA REPORT ......................123
APPENDIX G: SITE 2 SURVEY STATISITICAL DATA REPORT ....................125
APPENDIX H: SITE 3 SURVEY STATISTICAL DATA REPORT......................127

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT 5 5

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1.1 Definition of Key Terms .........................................................................25

TABLE 3.1 School Site Selection Data ......................................................................58

TABLE 3.2 Methodology Synopsis ............................................................................67
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

6
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 2.1 Daft Organizational Structure Continuum..............................................43

FIGURE 3.1 Data Collection Schedule. ......................................................................65

FIGURE 4.1 Observation Data Results .......................................................................73

FIGURE 4.2 Survey Respondent Types ......................................................................77

FIGURE 4.3 Survey Data Summary ............................................................................79

FIGURE 4.4 Observed Organizational Chart ..............................................................92

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

7
Abstract
There are many discussions on what can best accomplish the daunting task of increasing
educational outcomes for all students, closing the achievement gap is of particular urgency. The
achievement gap is evidenced by the continued failure of urban schools to meet the No Child
Left Behind (NCLB) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) benchmark. AYP is measured in such a
way as to put urban schools at a disadvantage. The examination of exceptions to this
circumstance, specifically three successful urban high schools, provided insight into possible
explanations of this phenomenon.
Within educational reform literature, teachers, curriculum and pedagogy have been
discussed as possible solutions. Organizational management has debated the school
organizational structure (in the form of magnet, charter etc.) and leadership as possible solutions.
This study poses that the answer lies within the intersection of the two disciplines. The
Educational Leadership Policy Standards (ELPS) as developed by the National Policy Board for
Educational Administration (NPBEA) were used to qualify the presence of instructional
leadership characteristics. The organizational structure characteristics are qualified using
information from organizational theory and design as presented by Daft (2010). A review of
literature regarding educational reform and organizational design theory generated the following
research questions. RQ1: To what extent are ELPS demonstrated in high performing urban high
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

8
schools? RQ1a: How is the demonstration of ELPS influenced by school site organizational
structure in high performing urban high schools?
Data from this study re-found that NCLB exacerbates the achievement gap. Data findings
also infer that, empowered teachers, relevant curriculum, and pedagogy are key factors in student
achievement as measured by NCLB accountability standards. The three sites had key leadership
and organizational design characteristics in common. These findings emphasize systemic
inequities existing within NCLB and current reform strategies.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

9
CHAPTER I: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Global economic competition has heightened the urgency of improving our educational
system over the last few decades. This focus has increased the awareness of the achievement
gap. The achievement gap is the disparity in academic success between students of color and
white students. This disparity manifests itself in failure to meet federal accountability measures
as outlined by the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation, United States Congress (2002). The
collateral damage is the inability of non-white students to enjoy upward class mobility. They are
unable to break through economic class barriers and realize the American Dream. Education has
been considered the panacea for this. Unfortunately, the gap still exits despite policy efforts.
The definition of an urban school is critical to the parameters of this study. There are
various criteria the most prevalent (and relevant to this study) descriptors are that urban schools
have populations of students that are comprised of large proportions from disadvantaged groups
as stipulated/defined by NCLB. These groups are English Language learners (EL), economically
disadvantaged, under represented ethnic groups such as Black and Hispanic, and students with
disabilities. The success of schools is defined as meeting the NCLB stipulated Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP). There were very few schools that had disproportionately large populations of
the disadvantaged groups that were able to meet the AYP guidelines. There were several that met
most of them but very few that met all. It was extremely difficult to find any high schools in Los
Angeles County that met their AYP. It also bears mentioning that none of the larger districts met
their AYP either.
The achievement gap is the inability of disadvantaged students to achieve academic
success at the same rate as their non-disadvantaged peers. The answer to non-performing schools
has been a rise in alternative schools such as charters and magnets. These schools are products of
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

10
the reform process and take the place of traditional public schools. A school that is not
performing can be reformed or reconstituted to provide alternative choices to parents. “In effect,
those with options cope with miseducation as a personal tragedy by fleeing the major urban
districts in order to protect their loved ones from the contamination of miseducation” (Haberman,
2007, p. 180).
There is an abundance of literature regarding current issues in American public education
and consensus on the existence of an educational crisis that necessitates reform (Ball & Forzani,
2009; Gerstner, 2001; Haberman, 2007; Smarick, 2010). Where there is disagreement is in how
this reform should manifest itself in order to provide increased educational equity. There is a
sense of urgency in finding a way to ameliorate the problematic effects the implementation of
standards based accountability reform has had on urban schools (Harris, 2007; Hess, 2000; Linn,
2005; Mathis, 2003). A key failure of the reform movement manifested in the accountability
measures of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, has been the inability to close the
achievement gap (Braun, Wang, Jenkins, & Weinbaum, 2006; Robertson, 2008).
The disparity in academic success between minorities and their white peers is represented
by test scores, high school graduation rates, and disproportionate representation in special
educational programs (Hall, 2005; Valas, 1999). In fact, literature suggests that NCLB intensifies
the problem by putting urban schools at a disadvantage (Hall, 2005; Linn, 2005; McDonald,
2002). Urban schools typically contain high populations of students from one or more of the
following groups; economically disadvantaged, English language learners, disabled, and racial
minorities (Linn, 2005). This diverse population directly affects one of the major accountability
measures, the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). As defined by NCLB (United States Congress,
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

11
2002) AYP is based upon a composite of participation in statewide tests, student performance on
statewide tests, performance in the state’s accountability program, and graduation rates.
“The problems become far more difficult as the number of subgroups increases. A school
with a diverse population (and many subgroups) has many more opportunities to fail. Thus, the
diverse school, which faces greater challenges, is penalized” (Mathis, 2003, p. 683). The more
subgroups that have different target goals the more ways there are to fail to meet them. Urban
schools typically have all of these subgroups and therefore are at a disadvantage (Granger, 2008;
McDonald, 2002; McElroy, 2005). Linn (2005) highlights expectations, targets, state proficiency
levels, reporting, and the safe harbor provisions as key issues needing re-evaluation and
adjustments. The reporting conventions are challenging in that the disaggregation creates unfair
conditions (Linn, 2005).
Passing NCLB legislation is commendable in its efforts to focus attention on the
achievement gap. However, the effects on adequate yearly progress (AYP) are not viable in
raising the academic achievement levels of disadvantaged populations as defined by NCLB
(Mathis, 2003). Mathis also claims that it has not been verified that all students and all subgroups
of students can accomplish the rate of improvement needed to affect significant AYP gains per
the NCLB stipulations. Elmore (2002) states the policy and practice inconsistency is
“dangerous” (p. 31) and the testing system “is fraught with technical difficulties” (p.32).
Technical difficulties aside, there is also a question of ethics; “The values question is whether the
goals of the system, narrowly conceived as improved test scores, are the right goals for public
education in a democratic society” (Mathis, 2003, p. 683).

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

12
Context
Education has been shaped by socio-economic forces and corresponding political views
(Gerstner, 2001; Hursh, 2007). Consequently, developing policies and methods consistent with
our stated political ethos; to ensure equal access, quality, and opportunity for success via
education has been elusive. According to Tyler (1949) no one perspective is sufficient to decide
on objectives for curriculum and schooling. Given the variety of ideologies and their associated
educational goals and objectives for our schools, we have inconsistent results with school reform
(Gordon, 2010). Notably, the reform efforts are failing more often in schools that serve lower
socioeconomic populations (Granger, 2008).
Economies are systems that produce and distribute goods and services based upon the
organization and use of various forms of capital. A country’s economic system is reflective of its
society’s values and politics. In America, the construct is that all people have the opportunity to
gain wealth and achieve ownership commensurate with their abilities and efforts.
Among the novel objects that attracted my attention during my stay in the United States,
nothing struck me more forcibly than the general equality of condition among the people.
I readily discovered the prodigious influence that this primary fact exercises on the whole
course of society; it gives a peculiar direction to public opinion and a peculiar tenor to the
laws; it imparts new maxims to the governing authorities and peculiar habits to the
governed (Tocqueville, 1945, p. 3).

Ideologies of Education
Many of the problems with educational reform are rooted in the traditional debates on the
goal of education. Throughout the 20
th
century, there have been many ideological opinions for
the purposes of education influencing the substance of curricula and schools. These ideologies
have gone by many different names. The following synopsis uses the names most closely related
to the philosophical origins of the ideologies and have been the most enduring through the 20
th

century. The commonality in all of the ideologies is the fundamental purpose of ensuring
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

13
survival of the society’s culture. “Culture or Civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is
that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other
capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (Tylor, 1920, p. 1). These
collective societal norms represent the dominant culture of a society.
Education is the means used to pass down the prevailing culture of a society to the next
generation (Dewey, 1916; Tyler, 1949). As such, there is a great responsibility on those that
educate, to ensure that the curriculum and systems are true to the stated intentions (Tyler).
Critical race theory examines educational equity as a function of race and economics (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 1995). Education and economics are not independent of each
other (Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Delgado & Stefancic, 2001) and it is within the socio-economic
context that current school reform takes place. “The psychologist or educator who formulates
pedagogical theory without regard to the political, economic, and social setting of the
educational process courts triviality and merits being ignored in the community and in the
classroom” (Bruner, 1973, Chapter 6, para. 5).
Essentialism as promoted by Bagley (1938) promotes providing the learner with a
structured educational experience through a common core of academic studies which embody the
common culture. Bruner (1973) states; “You cannot consider education without taking into
account how a culture gets passed on” (Chapter 4, para. 2). This ideology seeks to create
academic curriculum that can answer the question: “How can the power and substance of a
culture be translated into an instructional form?” (Chapter 6, para. 10).This has been recently re-
born as the Scholar Academic ideology which states the goal of organizing instruction to “help
children learn the accumulated knowledge of our culture” (Schiro, 2008, The Scholar Academic
Ideology, para. 1).
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

14
The Learner Centered ideology advocates personal development. “The goal of education
is the growth of individuals, each in harmony with his or her own unique intellectual, social,
emotional, and physical attributes” (Schiro, 2008, Learner Centered Ideology, para. 1). The
theoretical base of this ideology is in the work of John Dewey (1916) who considered education
to be “in its broadest sense”, a process of, “social continuity of life” (p. 2). As the institution
where our society refers youth to learn and grow, it is critical to create experiences that are
commensurate with our cultural values “In directing the activities of the young, society
determines its own future in determining that of the young” (p. 46).
As its name implies, Social Reconstruction ideology supports education as a means of
creating a better society (Schiro, 2008, Chapter 5); “Education provides the means by which
society is to be reconstructed” (para. 1) and social injustices fixed. This ideology is based in the
social justice agenda of the Progressive educational movement “To my mind, a movement
honestly styling itself progressive should engage in the positive task of creating a new tradition
in American life – a tradition possessing power, appeal, and direction” (Counts, 1932, p. 4).
The industrial revolution not only changed our economy, there were corresponding
changes in organizational structures that influenced management theory and how organizations
operated in response to environmental (market) changes (Deming, 1994; Shafritz & Ott, 1996).
This is concurrent with the Social Efficiency ideology, which believes education is “learning to
perform the functions necessary for social productivity” (Schiro, 2008, The Social Efficiency
Ideology para. 1). Social Efficiency ideology is concerned with building curriculum that is
specifically aligned with the purpose of education (Schiro, 2008). This ideology is based upon
the works of Bobbitt (1918) and Tyler (1949). Bobbitt was of the opinion that the methods used
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

15
to revolutionize production could also be applied to education. Tyler built on this idea by
providing guiding questions and methods in creating curricula.
Socio-economic and Political
Similar to the Social Reconstruction Ideology is Critical Race Theory (CRT) which
brings attention to the political aspect of the educational process. This perspective assumes “that
the purpose of education is to facilitate the construction of a new and more just society” (Schiro,
2008, The Social Reconstruction Ideology, para. 1). Critical Race Theory (CRT) “not only tries
to understand our social situation, but to change it; it sets out not only to ascertain how society
organizes itself along racial lines and hierarchies, but to transform it for the better” (Delgado &
Stefancic, 2001, What is Critical Race Theory, para. 2).
Students of color do not have the advantage of walking into a classroom as individuals;
they walk in as black, brown, or red persons with all the connotations such racialization
raises in the classroom. They do not walk into a classroom where the curriculum
embraces their histories. (Zamudio, Russell, & Rios, 2011, p. 18)

Although the United States is a conglomeration of several cultures, our norms are
dominated by a White Male European perspective. Considering the common denominator of the
educational ideologies to preserve the culture, take into account that the dominant culture and
what its beliefs and values consist of are inherent in what is taught, how it is taught, and how we
assess what is taught (Zamudio et al., 2011).
Buchen (2003) proposes that education is currently being influenced by four major
themes/factors; decentralization and educational options, performance evaluation and success
measurement, changes in leadership and leadership roles, and reconfigurations in learning
spaces, places and times. At the essence of school reform are the questions of what to teach,
how to teach it and how to assess the success of curriculum implementation. The concept of how
to assess the effectiveness of education is a major driving force in educational reform.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

16
The current reform movement can be traced back to the Reagan Administration who
appointed the National Commission on Excellence in Education which developed the report A
Nation at Risk: the imperative for educational reform of 1983. This report placed a great deal of
focus on teacher quality as a method of improving student educational outcomes. Subsequent
reports such as What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s Future championed the trend toward
standardization of teacher and student outcomes as being a critical reform strategy of public
education.
In an urgent response to improve education following A Nation at Risk and the bipartisan
support for the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001(United States Congress, 2002),
Congress generated some consensus regarding the need for objective measures of success. “The
emphasis on ‘scientific,’ or research based instruction and standards was needed so that K-12
decision making would be influenced less by ideology and more by practical and proven
solutions to classroom dilemmas” (Gordon, 2010, p. 289). The cornerstone of the No Child Left
Behind Act (NCLB) is a performance based accountability system built around student test
results. This increased emphasis on accountability represents an important change from past
federal educational initiatives, which focused primarily on the provision of services (Stecher &
Kirby, 2004, p. xiii).
In raising the academic outcomes of students of color, we need to fully understand their
circumstance and context. What is a successful urban school? If we are going to use the inability
to meet NCLB accountability standards, of which standardized test score are a predominant
factor, how and who decides which schools warrant closure/reconstruction/reconstitution. Urban
schools are not the only schools failing to meet NCLB accountability mandates. In 2011
California reported the number of high schools statewide achieving AYP at 41% (Education
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

17
Data Partnership, 2013). Under NCLB, schools that continue to fail in meeting accountability
targets are reconstituted. In this study the terms reconstitution, re-structure, and take-over are
used synonymously.
Organizing for Change
To be sure, the fundamental task of management remains the same: to make people
capable of joint performance through common goals, common values, the right structure,
and the training and development they need to perform and to respond to change.
(Drucker, 2001, Chapter 1, para. 3)

Given the unlikelihood of extensive policy changes, it is necessary for urban schools to
develop ways to use existing resources to improve reform efficacy as evidenced by NCLB
outcome measures. Since, NCLB’s accountability measures were developed using private sector
organizational management theories (Schiro, 2008; Stecher & Kirby, 2004). Perhaps the answers
to effectively meeting the outcomes can come from an exploration of the intersection in classical
organizational management literature of organizational design and instructional leadership.
The accountability movement has focused attention on instructional leadership and the
principal’s accountability in students meeting NCLB performance criteria. There is consensus
regarding the importance of the principals role as an instructional leader however. However,
there is not a widely accepted definition of what instructional leadership is (Hallinger, 2005). A
comprehensive description of principals that have been considered effective instructional leaders
is that they are strategic problem solvers; they seek new answers that complement current
situations and they value stakeholder input in distinguishing those answers (Brewer, 2001). The
ability to use resources, adapt to the needs of the organization, and market shifts are critical
success factors as identified in leadership theory (Boleman & Deal, 2008; Hallinger & McCary,
1990; Northouse, 2010). Recent chronological narratives of instructional leadership literature
acknowledge the importance of the organizational context; “The context of the school is a source
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

18
of constraints, resources, and opportunities that the principal must understand and address in
order to lead” (Hallinger, 2005, p. 234).
Contingency theory claims that leadership is an integral factor in how complex
organizations navigate the causalities of environment, organizational structure and behavior
(Derr & Gabarro, 1972). There is literature to support the claim that schools are complex
organizations (Derr & Gabarro, 1972; Marzano, Waters, & McNulty, 2005; Rueda, 2011).
Literature also connects leadership to effective organizational management (Bennis, 2010;
Boleman & Deal, 2008; Marzano et al., 2005; Northouse, 2010). There is also an association
between effective school leadership in the form of a principal and effective urban schools
(Ishimaru, 2013; Jackson, 2005; Jackson, Logsdon, & Taylor, 1983). Social capital and
economic class have been related with educational equity and enabling upward economic
mobility (Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Yosso, 2005; Zamudio et al., 2011).
Classic management and organizational theory study leadership as part of the
management process when exploring effective complex organizations in the private sector. Daft
(2010) explains the differences and importance of vertically designed organizations compatible
with efficiency, versus horizontal organization design that is consistent with learning. The
horizontal organization is decentralized, collaborative, and employs a relaxed approach to
hierarchy and rules. They have a number of teams and communication is typically face-to face.
The vertically designed organization has specialized tasks, a strong hierarchy of authority and
rules with centralized decision making. There is a connection between organizational structure
and purpose. The role of management is to communicate purpose and ensure that resources
(capital and human) are aligned and allocation is consistent with that purpose (Deming, 1986;
Drucker, 2001).
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

19
In education, there is a gap in the literature regarding instructional leadership’s alignment
with school site organizational structure. Specifically, how the two work together in responding
to environmental factors. This study seeks to bridge that gap by using social-cognitive theory
based frameworks to analyze effective urban schools connecting literature on classical
organizational management and educational literature on instructional leadership. Promoting the
relationship as a means to leverage existing social capital of urban schools to more effectively
respond to NCLB accountability measures and increase educational equity.
Problem Statement
Few would argue that effective school reform is dependent upon high quality instruction
(Darling-Hammond & Sykes, 2003; Elmore, 2002; Rueda, 2011). The issue is ensuring that all
schools enable that. If education is the vehicle by which a culture transfers its cumulative
knowledge and values (Dewey, 1916; Tyler, 1949), and one of those values is educational equity,
then our organizational systems (schools) should have results that are reflective of that. All
students should be achieving similar outcomes regardless of socio-economic and/or racial factors
given equal educational opportunities and experiences.
The implementation of reform and its accountability system NCLB has had a negative
effect on educational equity as evidenced by its continued failure in closing the achievement gap.
Organizational management theory literature discusses how organizations evolve by leveraging
resources (human and capital), in response to environmental forces. There is a gap between
educational literature that connects instructional leadership and school organizational structure as
a collective resource. Existing forms of social capital such as educational leadership and
organizational structure can be leveraged as a success strategy in responding to environmental
forces.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

20
Purpose of the Study
In examining the literature, it has become evident that variations in ideology are not
sufficient in resolving the educational equity dilemma in public education. “However, it is also
possible to see each position as complementary to one another, speaking at once to different
needs in any complex educational context” (Schubert, 2010, p. 24). This perspective suggests
that the correlation between education, social order, and economic need, prescribes a
collaboration of philosophies in dictating educational policy and organizing schools (Schubert,
2010). A collaboration of ideas focuses on a balanced approach as opposed to a war of ideologies
waged with politics and public discourse (Gordon, 2010).
The purpose of this study is to examine successful urban schools to gain insight into the
dynamics of instructional leadership and organizational structure in leveraging existing capital of
urban schools to facilitate realizing NCLB accountability goals. O'Day (2002) discusses the four
major tenets of NCLB accountability: 1) emphasis on student outcomes as the measure of adult
and system performance, 2) a focus on the school as a basic unit of accountability, 3) public
reporting of student achievement, and 4) the attachment of consequences to performance levels.
Her main focus is on the school as the accountability unit. She argues that the combination of
administrative and professional accountability presents a much more promising approach for
implementing lasting reform than the more prevalent outcomes-based bureaucratic system
(O'Day, 2002). Data from this study can further inform the dialogue by contributing insights into
the types of administrative and professional qualities that enable success in the current reform
context.
Neither instructional leadership nor organizational construct alone can improve
educational outcomes in urban schools. In the urban school context there are certain types of
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

21
capital that need to be used more effectively. A reciprocal relationship between instructional
leadership and organizational structure can be used to leverage existing capital. Resourceful use
of these assets can empower schools to become effective learning organizations that increase
instructional outcomes for urban school populations. In his seminal work Murphy (1988) cites
the failure to examine instructional leadership within its organizational context as an issue; “In
studying instructional leadership, researchers have traditionally ignored the complexity of
schools as formal organizations” (p. 123).
The Research Questions Guiding this Study are:
1. To what extent are the Educational Leadership Policy Standards (ELPS),
demonstrated in high performing urban high schools? (RQ1)
a. How is the demonstration of ELPS influenced by school site organizational
structure in high performing urban high schools? (RQ1a)
Theoretical Framework and Methodology Preview
This is a mixed methods multisite study employing the following instruments;
observations, surveys, interviews, and document review. This enabled data comparison and
verification. Reviews of district accountability data facilitated selection of three similar school
sites. Sites chosen were urban high schools that successfully met AYP standards per NCLB
stipulations during for the 2011-12 year. Observations of professional development sessions
(PD) were conducted. Conversations were transcribed and physical information was recorded by
the researcher. A Qualtrics (2014) survey (see Appendix A), was created based upon the ELPS
framework. Survey links were emailed to participants of the PD’s. Participants were given the
option to interview. Documents that had evidence of organizational structure and information
flow were reviewed to corroborate observation, survey and interview data. Surveys and
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

22
interviews also disclosed staff impressions and perceptions of the school site organizational
structure. Observations disclosed verification of the instructional leadership characteristics per
the ELPS framework as well as disclosing themes regarding the dynamics between the
instructional leadership and the organizational structure as defined by Daft (2010). These
methods informed the study on the dynamics between instructional leadership and organizational
structure within the context of a high performing urban school. Employing these methods
allowed a more comprehensive view of the phenomena by examining its various aspects in
context (Maxwell, 2013).
Social Cognitive Theory provides the framework to analyze behavioral aspects of the
school organization leveraging instructional leadership and organizational structure in response
to the environment. Wood and Bandura (1989) apply the social cognitive theory to
organizational management. The key aspect of this theory is the causal structure, which contains
“three interacting determinants that influence each other bi-directionally” (p. 361). Behaviors
and consequently learning are dependent upon the interactions between an individual’s
“cognitive, other personal factors, and the external environment” (p.362).
Significance of the Study
The literature and public discourse clearly identify urban schools as not meeting
accountability measures at the same rate as sub-urban schools (Elmore, 2002; Linn, 2005). “It is
not uncommon for a school (or any other complex organization) to keep certain practices in
place and unchallenged for years and even decades simply because of their historical status”
(Marzano et al., 2005, Chapter 4, para. 6). Management organizational contingency theory
explains that complex organizational systems are subject to a triadic causality (Derr & Gabarro,
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

23
1972). Those organizations with structures and patterns of behavior that are, most closely aligned
with the environment and necessary tasks are more effective.
This study uses existing literature in organizational management theory to inform and
analyze the school site organization and instructional leadership connection. NCLB
accountability measures are based upon private industry practices. Organizational management
theory discusses leadership within the organizational structure. It therefore can inform the school
site organizational structure and instructional leadership connection. Literature discussed
negative factors affecting educational equity within the confines of the reform movement in
response to NCLB. Meeting the accountability measures is problematic within the urban school
environment. This study proposes that leadership and organizational structure of schools are
symbiotic and that relationship is critical in leveraging social capital within the urban community
to increase educational equity within the current reform context. Investigation of instructional
leadership in conjunction with school site organizational structure enables this study to provide
contextual data that will facilitate a better understanding of how to affect successful urban school
reform.
Limitations and Delimitations
Research should be designed to seek understanding not information that justifies an
opinion. “Your research questions formulate what you want to understand; your interview
questions are what you ask people to gain that understanding” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 101)
researcher bias can affect data validity. The researcher has preconceived assumptions based upon
their experience that can affect their perceptions of others.
The problem with using a highly structured interview in qualitative research is that
rigidly adhering to predetermined questions may not allow you to access participants’
perspectives and understanding of the world. Instead, you get reactions to the
investigator’s preconceived notions of the world. (Merriam, 2009, p. 90)
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

24

In considering an observation protocol it is important to understand how to best capture
evidence related to the topic, “First, observations take place in the setting where the phenomenon
of interest naturally occurs” (Merriam, 2009, p. 117). In order to capture authentic data, the
researcher chose to transcribe events and comments as they occurred. This ethnographic
approach ameliorated the possibility of only capturing data that fit a preconceived frame of
reference. Literature reflects a lack of consensus on the definition of instructional leadership
(Horng & Loeb, 2010; Murphy, 1988). The Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium
(ISLLC) educational leadership policy standards (ELPS) were converted into a coding protocol
(see Appendix B). Document review data was collected as organizational structure evidence.
Survey questions were structured to verify data from observations, solicit interview participants,
as well as being compared to document review data.
Limited knowledge of the site and time constraints affected the selection of what was
observed. The meetings and situations observed may not be representative of the normal
occurrences. Maxwell (2013) explains, “In many situations, selection decisions require
considerable knowledge of the setting of the study” (p. 99). The quality of documents can differ
across organizations and therefore may not be equal in their depth of content (Bogden & Biklen,
2003). Three school sites were studied limiting the ability to generalize the findings to a
substantially larger population. Additionally, how do we verify that the NCLB outcomes are
being met as a direct result of the instructional leadership and school site organizational structure
alignment? What other factors could account for outcomes being met? How do we draw a direct
connection from this alignment to outcomes? Data collection issues include; not all of the
observations were on the same topic, nor were they the same length of time in duration.
Transcription is imperfect because it is difficult to type at the speed conversations take place.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

25
Key Terms
Table 1.1

Definitions of Key Terms

Term Definition
Administrator An assigned, “leadership that is based on occupying a position in an
organization” (Northouse, 2010, Assigned Versus Emergent, para. 1)
leadership position in a school.

Critical Race
Theory
The examination of the relationships among race, racism, and power within
the context of economics, history, group- and self-interest in order to
transform it for the better. “Critical race theory questions the very
foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning,
Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law”
(Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, What is Critical Race Theory? para. 1).

Disadvantaged Sub-groups of the student population who are members of the specific
categories as defined by NCLB that are disaggregated within a schools
population in the calculation of annual yearly progress (AYP). These
populations as stipulated by NCLB are: economically disadvantaged,
English language learners, students with disabilities, and racial/ethnic
minorities (Linn, 2005; United States Congress, 2002).

Educational
equity
All children receiving the necessary quality of instruction to enable equal
access to increased social capital, meaningful competition, and participation
in the national economy and opportunities to accumulate wealth
(McDonald, 2002).

Educational
Leadership Policy
Standards (ELPS)
A set of six standards adopted by the National Policy Board for Educational
Administration (NPBEA). Developed by reviewing the research and
literature on education leadership of the last decade (The Council Of Chief
State School Officers (CCSSO), 2008).

Essentialism Educational ideology/philosophy that is also known as the scholar academic
ideology which promotes the use of an organized and hierarchical structured
curriculum based upon the formal academic disciplines. The essentialist
believes that the goal of knowledge is to instill understanding (Bagley,
1938; Kessinger, 2011; Schiro, 2008).

Instructional
leader
School leader that is able to influence others in the establishment of a shared
vision in which the school organization becomes a community focused on
learning. The major principles are; instructional practices, accountability,
integrity, continued improvement via professional development and shared
decision making (Brewer, 2001; Millward and Timperley, 2010; Northouse,
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

26
2010; Senge, 2010).

Learner centered Educational ideology/philosophy predicated on the needs and natural
abilities of the learner or student (Schiro, 2008). Student’s needs and
interests are the primary focus (Dewey, 1916). Curriculum is designed to
capitalize on learner’s interests and strengths. Students are the center of the
instructional environment and teachers create a context where they can
explore concepts (Rugg & Shumaker, 1928).

Organizational
structure
“The formal reporting relationships, groupings, and systems of an
organization” (Daft, 2010, p. 621).

Reconstitution A reform strategy for low performing schools that involves a restructure or
take-over and redesign of a school by closure and re-opening with a
substantial portion of the staff not returning to the site. This includes
schools converted to magnets and/or charters run by private or nonprofit
organizations. (Malen, Croninger, & Redmond-Jones, 2002)
Social capital The type or set of assets that facilitates the accumulation of wealth and
transition to higher economic status. Includes; social networks (formal and
informal), economic capital, parents’ education level, and socio-economic
level (Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Delgado and Stefancic, 2001; Zamudio et al.,
2011).

Social efficiency Educational ideology/philosophy that promotes the organization of
curriculum based upon what will be required of the student when they reach
adulthood. Curriculum is designed to give the student the experiences that
will result in the knowledge and behaviors necessary for what they will need
as adults. The curriculum is based upon the educational purpose of the
school and is scientifically organized to achieve behavioral objectives
(Bobbitt, 1918; Schiro, 2008; Tyler, 1949).

Social
reconstruction
Educational ideology/philosophy that begins with the premise that society is
broken and in need of fixing. Education is the means by which to fix it.
Situation and context define the program. It is not based upon a specific
goal but on improvement. It is about the common good of society not the
individual (Counts, 1932; Schiro, 2008).

Urban Descriptor of the population of a metropolitan school area, containing a
disproportionately large number of disadvantaged students (Linn, 2005;
Wamba & Ascher, 2003).

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

27
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
In order to explore reform efforts in urban schools, it is necessary to review the literature
on four major themes related to NCLB accountability measures effect on educational equity in
the urban school context. This review will examine literature on the following; the socio-political
context of education, the instructional leadership construct, urban education and NCLB, and
organizational structure. These themes are critical components informing the exploration of
instructional leadership and school organizational alignment within the urban context in response
to NCLB accountability measures. These themes provide the frameworks used to analyze
NCLB’s purpose of increasing educational equity in urban schools. These themes are consistent
with four key organizational factors as conceptualized by Boleman and Deal (2008). These
authors propose that there are four frames from which to analyze an organization’s efficacy;
“structural, human resource, political, and symbolic” (p.6).
In examining the organizational structures of the selected school sites, this study will use
organizational structure types as defined by Daft (2010). The instructional leader as defined by
the ELPS coincides with the basic assumptions in the human resource frame. At the individual
level of the political frame, the abilities of communicating vision, goal setting, and networking
(recognizing and leveraging social capital) are consistent with key instructional leadership
competencies. At the organizational level, the political frame conceptualizes the organization as
political arenas, or players and actors in their professional environmental context. The symbolic
frame represents the factors that make up an organizations culture and how culture (internal and
external) impacts organizational success.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

28
The Socio-political context of Education
A jaundiced view of politics constitutes a serious threat to individual and organizational
effectiveness. Viewed from the political frame, politics is the realistic process of making
decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and divergent interest. This
view puts politics at the heart of decision making. (Boleman & Deal, 2008, p. 189)

To answer RQ1 it is necessary to understand the environmental factors affecting
educational equity and urban schools. There have been several educational reform movements
throughout history. Each movement was fueled by the politics and economy of the time. As a
democratic and capitalist society, there is a symbiotic relationship between our economy and the
public policy of education. “Education directly enhances productivity, and thus the incomes of
those who receive schooling, by providing individuals with useful skills. Schooling also spurs
invention and innovation, and enables the more rapid diffusion of technological advances”
(Goldin, 1999, p. 1).
In the beginning, American education was focused on maintaining community, morality,
and social order without sacrificing individual liberty. White, Van Scotter, Haroonian and Davis,
(2010) explain that education had to give people a reason to work and invest in their new society.
There was a focus on the information necessary for contented life. Generally speaking, public
education moved from the purpose of socialization during the early formation of our nation, into
an institution that promoted and perpetuated innovation, invention and the educated consumer
via a work force prepared for the 21
st
century (Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Mershon & Schlossman,
2008; White et al., 2010; PBS, 2001).
During the time of the colonies, education’s primary concern was to maintain domestic
peace through educating citizens in how to be responsible contributors to the new republic. The
first educational law was a requirement by the Massachusetts General Court establishing the
obligation of parents to ensure that their children read and understood the laws of the time and
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

29
the basic tenets of religion (Applied Research Center, 2012; Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute
(CLPI), 2013). The education of children was left to parents. Consistent with the economy of the
time all children needed to know was how to take over the family farm or trade. The church
provided another avenue of education as did the possibility of apprenticeship for specific trades
essential to the economy at that time.
As the nation gained its independence, brisk economic changes followed. As the
economy shifted so did the roles of the family. “The expansion of capitalist production,
particularly the factory system as well as the continuing concentration of commercial capital,
undermined the role of the family as the major unit of both child-rearing and production”
(Bowles & Gintis, 2011, p. 157). What is critical about this shift is the loss of ownership of
production experienced by the common man. Instead of producing and selling, the common man
became the labor force of the new capitalists. They became wage earners instead of price setters
(Bowles & Gintis). As the family lost its ability to adequately prepare potential laborers, the
need for an efficient and uniform educational system became necessary. Bowles and Gintis also
explained how education became compulsory in response to the need for an industrial labor
force: “The further expansion of capital increasingly required a system of labor training which
would allow the costs of training to be borne by the public” (p. 158).
Critical Race Theory
Critical race theorist have a revolutionary attitude reminiscent of the pioneering
educational researchers that sought to create a body of knowledge with which to inform
instructional practices and school organizations in response to a rapidly changing society. The
field of educational research grew out of the necessity to change education to fit the new
economic paradigm of the 20
th
century. “The wellsprings of American educational research lay
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

30
in the country’s rapid industrialization and urbanization during the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries” (Mershon & Schlossman, 2008, p. 309). “Wealth and opportunity were
expanding, but there was no guarantee that these favorable trends would continue automatically.
Urban slums, class conflict, and other troubling realities revealed that material progress could
coexist with threatening new forms of social instability” (p.9). Progressives did not necessarily
reject capitalism, but they recognized the consequential inefficiencies and injustices and spoke
out for deliberate actions to mitigate the negative effects (Counts, 1932; Courtis & Packer, 1920;
Mershon & Schlossman, 2008).
“Critical race theorists view mainstream education as one of the many institutions that
both historically and contemporarily serve to reproduce unequal power relations and academic
outcomes” (Zamudio et al., 2011, p. 4). Critical theory applies a revolutionary construct
considering education as a means of change very much in line with the view of the Progressive
educator. Consider this prophetic statement from two early educational researchers who took the
perspective of education “as a war waged by society to gain control over its own evolution”
(Courtis & Packer, 1920, p. 5).
Using CRT as a frame to understand the effects of education on social class structures
presents one perspective of why reform has not been successful for urban schools. CRT proposes
that educational systems in American society are responsible for perpetuating class as opposed to
promoting upward social mobility. “Critical race theorists understand that legally banning the
most offensive treatment of students of color, however, does not mean schools no longer play a
role in fostering social inequality” (Zamudio et al., 2011, p. 4). Accepting the assumption that
education is the means by which societies values are perpetuated and transmitted to the next
generation, then the school must be accepted as the means by which we do that.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

31
According to the opponents of CRT, it is an attack on liberal law. “Critical race theorists
attack the very foundations of the liberal legal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning,
enlightenment rationalism and neutral principles of constitutional law” (Pyle, 1999). They
consider CRT to be a divisive force in the fight against racism that is not representative of the
total minority voice (Farber & Sherry, 1993; Pyle, 1999). Lack of upward social mobility is
attributed to a deficiency in education and resources, increased job complexity, and global
economic pressures (Pyle).
In the context of educational reform, Granger (2008) discusses the “inducement of fear
through spectacle and its baleful consequences for public education in a democracy” (p. 209).
Granger examines the discourse regarding the status of public education and its’ role in the
passage of NCLB. “A spectacle of conscience is thereby created, promoting a pervasive ‘group
think’ posture, and priming the onlookers to make quick, easy judgments based solely on the
surface text” (p. 210). In the creation of a spectacle, there are clear roles defined. In the arena of
school reform, the “good guy” is the collective of those politicians and policy makers. This
collective demands more rigorous standards in teacher and student performance. Who could
argue with increasing student performance or improving teacher quality?
Public Discourse and Policy
In the literature on educational reform, the influence of public opinion cannot be
discounted. Public opinion as evidenced by discourse is an integral part of school reform policy
formation. Each political group adopts a platform or opinion and markets it to the public. At
some point, reformers will ask the public to make a choice usually in the form of a vote (Shipps,
Fowlkes, & Peltzman, 2006). Politicians and organizations are adept at using words written and
text in order to promote their agenda’s.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

32
Government offices, corporations, and most activist NGOs already employ
communication specialists, designers, and legal analysts precisely to make sure that their
communications are effective. They strategize their own interests whether these are
internal communications or communications directed toward the public. (Scollon, 2012,
"Complex science, public policy", para. 5)

In designing the dialogue, reformers are making the changes easier to accept (Shipps, et
al., 2006). Many reformers also believe that parents and community members should thoroughly
debate the consequences of any change in urban school governance—a task greatly facilitated by
the media—before they are institutionalized” (p. 363). This idea of public discourse helping to
form policy is at the heart of Public Consultative Discourse Analysis (PCDA) (Scollon, 2012)
which is a strategy stakeholders should employ to analyze the messages in the media associated
with public policy changes.
The ‘bad guy’ would logically be anyone that disagrees with the accountability agenda as
proposed. The discourse shows the dismal performance of public education as a result of; large
numbers of unqualified teachers, the subterfuge in reporting of test scores for disadvantaged
student sub groups. The unfortunate implied racism in acceptance and expectance of lower
expectations for different subgroups becomes problematic.
Here, the fair and accurate criticism that people too often have lower expectations for
poor, minority, and disabled students as a result of stereotypes instantly becomes, in the
spectacle of NCLB, the presumption that society should have exactly the same
expectations for all students lest it abets the evils of intellectual, moral, and economic
decay. (Granger, 2008, p. 212)

In another discussion on the spectacle, Berliner (2005) discusses the specific rhetoric
regarding teacher quality. In his opinion, there is not enough evidence to support the assertion
that teachers as a group are not currently highly qualified. He asserts the possibility of mandates
being used to incite fear (Berliner). According to Berliner, quality is a value judgment. Quality
and good in one context, is not necessarily the case in another. “In the United States, we see
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

33
quality teaching taking on different characteristics in programs such as Success for All for inner-
city youngsters, in contrast to the schooling offered advantaged students in middle-class
suburbs” (Berliner, 2005, p. 206). NCLB mandated that each classroom would have a highly
qualified teacher. However, it left the definition or qualifications in the purview of the States
resulting in a variety of standards and no national consensus (Berliner, 2005; Granger, 2008;
Linn, 2005).
Granger (2008) then gives the context;
But like all other instruments of political spectacle, the punitive sanctions of NCLB
function mostly to assuage the public’s fears about failing schools and unqualified
teachers, yet ignore (or refiguring as private troubles) the more serious underlying social
problems- increasing poverty and segregation, continuing inequitable school funding, and
so on—instead fetishizing secondary, largely symptomatic problems-the reality of
significantly lower levels of achievement in many schools serving poorer districts and
students of color. The world-to-itself of spectacle is, after all, staged, theatrical, and there
can only be one outcome-that which maintains the current balance (or imbalance) of
powers. (p. 220)

Urban Education and NCLB
To answer RQ1a it is necessary to understand reform policies as directly related to the
urban school context. “Since organizations depend on their environment for resources they need
to survive, they are inevitably enmeshed with external constituents whose expectations or
demands must be heeded” (Boleman & Deal, 2008, p. 235).
History of urban schooling
Federal intervention in educational policy was limited up until the 1950’s at which point
U.S. Supreme Court Brown v. Board of Education decision held that separate schools for black
students were not equal to those of white students. The advancements of the Russian space
program, marked by a rocket sent to the moon during the cold war in 1958 created a sense of
urgency in creating schools that would educate future generations of workers enabling the U.S.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

34
to compete more effectively globally (Lytle, 2007). Also at this time, many Blacks were
immigrating to urban areas to take advantage of the jobs resulting from the industrial expansion
of World War II. At the conclusion of the war, many jobs were eliminated and unemployment
for black men rose.
In 1965 the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was passed. Its primary
purpose was to address student achievement inequities associated with segregation. ESEA
funded research and programs for students in high poverty schools to address the low level of
basic skills acquisition (Lytle, 2007). In 1974 these equity concepts were extended to students
with special needs and disabilities with the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA). Schools were federally mandated to serve “underachieving poor and minority
students, including those who did not speak English and those with special needs” (Lytle, p.
861).
Throughout the next two decades there were several attempts to address the fallout of
desegregation. Various housing incentives and highway programs created a situation in which
the white population moved to suburban areas. The changes in demographics and resulting
turmoil undermined school reform efforts. The crisis was exposed with the publication of A
Nation at Risk (National Commission On Excellence In Education, 1983) and as mentioned in
Chapter 1, this report set the stage for school reform education accountability and equity issues.
Ayers, Ladson-Billings, Michie, and Noguera (2008) describe the urban school reform
context; the urban school is expected to educate the neediest children with fewer resources than
those that support more affluent children. Also, urban schools and districts are subject to
criticism when students in urban schools do not perform at the same level as suburban students
as evidenced by state mandated tests. At a time when good teaching is considered to be of
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

35
paramount importance in delivering quality educational services, urban schools are put at a
disadvantage.
We pay teachers’ salaries that make it difficult to attract the top college students into the
profession, and we celebrate those who join programs such as Teach for America, as
though teaching in urban schools were like working for the Peace Corps or some form of
missionary work. (Ayers et al., 2008, Part III)

This deficit perspective contributes to the perpetuation of educational inequities between
urban students and their more affluent peers. The countless intervention curriculum programs
focus on raising test scores instead of the critical thinking skills necessary to compete in a 21
st

century global economy (Ayers et al., 2008).
NCLB and Educational Equity
Measurements of content standards achievement, assessments, and accountability are the
current yardsticks that determine if a school is successful or a failure (in need of reform)
(McDonald, 2002). In response to the claims in A Nation at Risk, that teacher quality is the most
influential variable on student outcomes, many experts have responded with research regarding
the connections between teacher quality and student achievement (Darling-Hammond & Sykes,
2003). The creation of accountability measures to ensure that all students have equal access to
the highest possible education and improve educational outcomes for all students and particularly
to narrow the achievement gap between disadvantaged students and their peers is a laudable
goal. The basic argument surrounding this mission; “Critics suggest that explicit standards may
exacerbate the performance gap while supporters suggest that requiring less than proficiency
from all would be the ultimate injustice” (McDonald 2002, p. 8). Ironically, it would appear that
NCLB has not only failed to meet this challenge but reform efforts such as vouchers and charter
schools have exacerbated the achievement gap. In discussing the achievement gap between
minorities and their nonminority peers, we must consider the socioeconomic and political
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

36
aspects. Equal access or the lack thereof based upon race or class is a civil rights issue according
to Josie Tinajero, dean and professor, College of Education, University of Texas-El Paso as cited
by Dolan (2011). Failing schools according to Ediger (2004) are generally located in poverty
areas where; low quality or inadequately prepared teachers, outdated educational materials,
inadequate resources and facilities, and principals that lack effective leadership qualities are
standard issues to overcome. The achievement gap between students of color and their white
peers has been extremely persistent (Hollins and Torres-Guzman, 2005).
Schools that are failing have been taken over by the State or local district and others are
given over to private management or Charter organizations (Buchen, 2003). The accountability
agenda is fueling the growth of Charter schools and other alternatives. However, these choices
although camouflaged as solutions may not be the answer. According to Gerstner (2001), the
objective should not be only to help a few select students by attendance at select schools, but to
help all students by fixing all schools for all children. “But, there is a big difference between
deciding which kids get a seat in a lifeboat, and saving the ship”(p. 8).
Lytle (2007) corroborates the “take- overs” issue and highlights the predicament of urban
schools in response to the reform movement. “One outcome of this shifting emphasis on
standards and assessment was the developing evidence that many urban schools and districts
seemed incapable of improvement”(Lytle, 2007, p. 4). According to Wamba & Ascher (2003),
“In most major urban areas, schools tend to be segregated by race and social class, with the
consequences that schools attended by minority and poor students are likely to have fewer
resources than those attended by more affluent nonminority students”(p. 463).
Social Capital
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

37
In opposition to the deficit model applied to urban schools, there are scholars that
consider the unique culture and community characteristics of urban environments as potential
leverage in raising academic outcomes for urban students. Yosso (2005) describes this approach
as “a commitment to develop schools that acknowledge the multiple strengths of Communities of
Color in order to serve a larger purpose of struggle toward social and racial justice” (p. 69).
Social capital as defined by Hanifan (1916);
I do not refer to real estate, or to personal property or to cold cash, but rather to that in
life which tends to make these tangible substances count for most in the daily lives of a
people, namely, good will, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social intercourse among a
group of individuals and families who make up a social unit, the rural community, whose
logical center is the school. (p. 130)

Hanifan goes on to describe the potential of such capital to improve the living conditions
of the total community. He describes how like industry, the accumulation of capital is necessary
to begin production of a product whose dissemination will profit the organization (Hanifan).
Critical Race theorist considers the comprehension and appreciation of such capital as
instrumental in the social justice function of education (Ayers et al., 2008; Bowles and Gintis,
2011; Freire, 1985).
Organizational Theory
Organization theory is a macro examination of organizations because it analyzes the
whole organization as a unit. Organization theory is concerned with people aggregated
into departments and organizations and with the differences in structure and behavior at
the organization level of analysis. Organization theory might be considered the sociology
or organizations, while organizational behavior is the psychology or organizations. (Daft,
2010, p. 36) A new approach to organization studies is called meso theory. Meso theory
(meso means “in between”) concerns the integration of both micro and macro levels of
analysis. Individuals and groups affect the organization, and the organization in return
influences individuals and groups. (Daft, 2010, p. 36)

Boleman and Deal (2008) “emphasize how structural design depends on an
organization’s circumstances, including its goals, technology, and environment” (p.44). The
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

38
alignment of instructional leadership and organizational structure (RQ1) is the structure of
analysis, and the circumstances (ability to meet NCLB accountability measures), goals
(educational equity), and environment (socio-political conditions) is what the urban school must
respond to (RQ1a). “Urban school systems are vastly more complex than businesses, yet the
knowledge about how to manage them is amazingly sparse” (Childress, Elmore, & Grossman,
2006, p. 56).
“Organization structure is more than boxes on a chart; it is a pattern of interactions and
coordination that links the technology, tasks, and human components of the organization to
ensure that the organization accomplishes its purpose” (Duncan, 1979, p. 59). In his seminal
work, Duncan uses decision tree analysis to enable managers to choose the most effective
organizational design in response to their environment. The determination of the environment is
in fact the first step in the process of designing organizational structure according to Duncan.
According to Wood and Bandura’s (1989) social cognitive theory of organizational management
environment is one of “three major interactants in the triadic causal structure—cognitive,
behavioral, and environmental” (p. 368).
Ultimately, the most important decision that managers make about structural design is to
find the right balance between vertical control and horizontal coordination, depending on
the needs of the organization. Vertical control is associated with goals of efficiency and
stability, while horizontal coordination is associated with learning, innovation, and
flexibility. (Daft, 2010, p. 125)

Organizational structures provide; 1) frameworks of responsibility, reporting
relationships, and groupings and 2) mechanisms for linking and coordinating organizational
elements into a coherent whole (Daft, 2010). Similarly, Boleman and Deal (2008) explain that
the structure of an organization must address these key questions: “How do we allocate
responsibilities across different units and roles? And, once we’ve done that, how do we integrate
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

39
diverse efforts in pursuit of common goals” (p.46)? These can be accomplished either vertically
or horizontally. Organizational designs provide either vertical or horizontal information linkages
based upon the information processing necessary to meet the organizational goal.
“The Power of Reframing, explains why: Managers often misread situations. They have
not learned how to use multiple lenses to get a better sense of what they’re up against and what
they might do” (Boleman & Deal, 2008, p. x). This multi-perspective approach is especially
important in urban school reform efforts. O'Day (2002) drawing on previous research discusses
the necessity “to take the school as the unit of accountability and seek to improve student
learning by improving the functioning of the school organization” (p. 239). This approach is in
response to the view that the school is a complex system and in need of a combination of
administrative and professional accountability in answering the challenges of the new
accountability era and achievement of true reform (O'Day). Jackson (2005) emphasizes one of
the complexities of the urban school context (leadership) by calling “on leaders in urban districts
to be leaders of learning” (p. 193).
Most of the information regarding organizational theory is specifically private or public.
Boleman and Deal (2008) suggest that the two worlds are merging “the public and private
sectors increasingly interpenetrate one another” (p. ix). In fact, the competitive environment
driving the emergence of charter and magnet schools, at the expense of public schools is such an
example of this private and public world collision (Dolan, 2011). The vacuum of federal and
state budget cuts has left the door open for private companies to fill the gap and align themselves
with schools and communities (Buchen, 2003). Of course, the biggest collision is the fact that
our current public educational accountability system in NCLB (United States Congress, 2002)
was developed based upon private-sector practices (Stecher and Kirby, 2005).
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

40
Literature on organizational design identifies three primary organizational structures;
functional, decentralized/divisional, and matrix. There are many variations/combinations of these
basic types represented in organizational design literature. The key is that they represent a
continuum of control v. flexibility and efficiency v. learning (Boleman & Deal, 2008; Daft,
2010; Duncan, 1979). The text book by Daft is an exhaustive consolidation and synthesis of
organizational design theory. Daft identifies six structures along the continuum; functional,
functional with cross-functional teams/integrators, divisional, matrix, horizontal, and virtual
network structure. These structures lie on a continuum from traditional / vertical to
contemporary/horizontal with traditional being more focused on control, efficiency, stability, and
reliability as opposed to contemporary which is most represented by coordination, learning,
innovation, and flexibility. At one end we have the characteristics of a classic bureaucracy at the
other end is the ideal learning organization. This framework provides a range of organizational
structures by which to analyze the selected school sites.
“In a functional structure, activities are grouped together by common function from the
bottom to the top of the organization” (Daft, 2010, p. 104). A functional structure works best
when efficiency is a primary concern. It is an effective design when deep knowledge and
expertise of one area is critical to meeting organizational goals. Efficiency is enhanced by
vertical control and hierarchy. Professional development of employees is promoted through in
in-depth skill development across a range of “functional activities within their own
departments”(p. 105). The disadvantage is that there is limited coordination across departments
as well as a slow response rate to environmental forces.
The next level along the continuum is a modification of the functional design. It is a
functional structure with the addition of horizontal linkages. In response to the rapidly changing
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

41
business environments of the 21
st
century global economy, very few organizations can survive as
strict functional structures. In order to compensate, “Managers improve horizontal coordination
by using information systems, direct contact between departments, full-time integrators or
project managers, task forces, or teams” (Daft, p. 106).
The defining element of the divisional structural type, is its organizational grouping
according to organizational outputs; “individual products, services, product groups, major
projects or programs, division, businesses, or profit centers” (Daft, 2010, p. 106). The advantage
over the functional structure is increased flexibility and decentralized decision making with lines
of authority converging at lower levels of the organization. In the functional structure, decisions
are centralized at the top level of the organization. Divisional organizations work well when
goals are accommodated around adaption and change in the business environment. It is
appropriate for rapid changes in an unstable environment. It works best when organizations have
many products or services and enough employees to staff all necessary functional units.
Matrix structures work for organizations that need to be focused on both product and
function or both product and geography. It is applicable when “technical expertise and product
innovation and change are important for meeting organizational goals” (Daft, p. 110). Daft
explains that matrix structures are required when; pressure exists to share scare resources across
product lines, environmental pressure exists for two or more critical outputs, and the
environmental domain is both complex and uncertain. The matrix seeks to balance the authority
between the functional and product units by formalizing the horizontal teams and respecting the
traditional hierarchy. According to Daft, this balance is difficult to achieve and usually one side
of the authority structure will dominate the other in practice. The key is that this structure
enables flexibility for larger organizations to create lines of authority that work best for their
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

42
environment. The disadvantage is that some staff members have multiple lines of authority to
respond to and must occasionally contend with conflicting demands. Due to the increased
communication lines staff must be adept at collaboration.
The horizontal structure is the design response to the extreme changes that have occurred
in the workplace and the business environment over last two decades as we become an
increasingly more global economy. The horizontal structure obliterates functional and
hierarchical authority constraints. Structure is created around cross-functional core processes
rather than tasks, functions, or geography. Self-directed teams are the basis of organizational
design and performance, not the individual. Processes are owned by staff members and
employees are given the tools, skills, motivation, and authority to make critical performance
decisions. They have the freedom to be creative in responding to new challenges. The
organizational culture is open, collaborative, and centered on continuous improvement.
Customer and employee satisfaction are considered success factors. Weaknesses of the
horizontal structure include; difficulties in defining the core processes for bringing value to
customers, traditional managers may not be comfortable to relinquishing power, and it is time
consuming to retrain employees to work effectively in team environments.
The last structural type is the virtual network and is defined by its outsourcing mode of
operation. In recent years many organizations have “extended the concept of horizontal
coordination and collaboration beyond the boundaries of the traditional organization” (Daft, p.
119). The virtual network subcontracts and outsources most of its major functions or processes to
outside partner companies. Critical processes remain in house as well as control over
coordination between the partners. Strengths of this structure are; even a small organization can
operate on a global level by taking advantage of resources and economies of scale, reduced
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

43
administrative overhead, and the ability of new companies to get products to market quickly
without huge capital investments for factories and technology. Disadvantages include; lack of
control when partners fail to deliver, employee loyalty can be weak due to difficulties in
establishing organizational culture, and it may be difficult to spot production problems that are
not in house.
These structures can be determined by using the levels of analysis proposed by Daft
(2010); external, organizational, group, and individual. The protocols for gathering data on the
organizational structure are based on these levels of analysis. “To explain the organization, one
should look not only at its characteristics but also at the characteristics of the environment and of
the departments and groups that make up the organization” (Daft, p. 35). Figure 2.1 below is a
graphical representation of the Daft continuum.

Leadership
In addressing the alignment of instructional leadership (RQ1a) to organizational structure
this review considers the literature contributing to the guiding definition of an instructional
leader from chapter one; School leader that is able to influence others in the establishment of a
shared vision in which the school organization becomes a community focused on learning. The
Figure 2.1 Daft Organizational Structure Continuum
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

44
major principles are; instructional practices, accountability, integrity, continued improvement via
professional development and shared decision making (Brewer, 2001; Millward and Timperley,
2010; Northouse, 2010; Senge, 2010).
In times of crisis we expect leadership from people in high places, and we are grievously
disappointed if they fail to provide it. But it is misleading to imagine that leadership
comes only from people in high positions. Such a view causes us to ask too much of too
few. (Boleman & Deal, 2008, p. 342)

Out of NCLB there grew much debate and research on whom or what could most directly
affect student outcomes. The two most compelling answers are; highly qualified teachers and
effective school administrators. Many different organizations weighed in on the qualities of the
highly qualified teacher (Bullough, Burbank, Gess-Newsome, Kauchak, & Kennedy, 1998).
Research in instructional leadership often focused on the traits that principles needed. The old
paradigm was that of manager and administrator. With the emphasis and need for students to
obtain 21
st
century skills, and the urgent need to narrow the achievement gap, school
organizations will need to adapt. Given the changes in demographics of our schools, and the still
predominantly homogenous ethnicity of our school teachers, issues of preparing teachers to work
with students from diverse cultures is of paramount importance (Weiner, 2002).
There are some success stories in urban reform albeit not many. The principle as a
community leader, distributed leadership, instructional leaders and strong commitment to quality
instruction are some consistent themes. The current bureaucracy of school reform enforces a top
down reconstruction attitude. In explaining his rationale for ceasing turnaround efforts and
embracing closure of urban schools, Smarick (2010) lists the lack of adult accountability as one
of the issues. “Failure in public education has had fewer consequences (for adults) than in other
fields, a fact that might contribute to the persistent struggles of some schools”(p. 25). In
opposition, Stein (2012) contends that there is enough research to suggest that “bona fide
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

45
educational leaders, supported by motivated and highly qualified teams of teachers and
administrators, are not only capable of transforming failing schools, they can make them
successful within three to five years” (p. 52).
There are a variety of leadership definitions according to Boleman and Deal (2008).
Literature from the leadership field constantly reinforces the edict that effective leadership is not
a solitary endeavor (Bennis, 2010; Boleman & Deal, 2008; Senge, 2010). The most effective
leaders are those that recognize and harness human capital and replicate it through a continuous
process of learning. “I knew that to succeed, I would have to become a public advocate and
recruit as many allies as possible” (Bennis, p. 147). “Implicitly, we expect leaders to persuade or
inspire rather than to coerce. We also expect leaders to produce cooperative effort and to pursue
goals that transcend narrow self-interest” (Boleman & Deal, 2008, p. 343). There are many
definitions of instructional leadership. Ishimaru (2013) describes the context and practices that
create a situation where school principals “share leadership with teachers and low-income Latino
parents to improve student learning” (p. 3). In one of the first studies to examine the descriptive
traits of the successful urban administrator it was found that; “These administrators were actively
involved in a variety of maintenance, discipline, and instructional areas. They were supportive of
teachers and students, with an emphasis on basic skills achievement”(Jackson et al., 1983, p. 63).
There are distinct differences between leadership, management, and power. According to
Boleman and Deal (2008) out of the three leadership is particularly socially and situation
dependent. Currently, administrators are viewed as the leaders in the school organization. The
traditional role of the administrator has closely resembled a manager in the private sector
(Millward & Timperley, 2010).
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

46
The domain of educational/instructional leadership has evolved since the 1980’s
(Hallinger & Heck, 1996). According to Murphy (1988) at that time there were areas in the study
of instructional leadership that were considered weak or problematic: “ (a) relying on a job
analysis approach to defining instructional leadership, (b) failing to adequately consider both the
micro and macro level contextual aspects of leadership, and (c) attributing causality to persons
rather than organizational conditions” (p. 117). In the 1990’s Hallinger and McCary (1990)
argued, “that research on instructional leadership must address the thinking that underlies the
exercise of leadership, not simply describe discrete behaviors of effective leaders” (p.89).
The research from the last 10 years has been influenced by various leadership models.
Marks and Printy (2003) integrated transformational leadership into the instructional leader
frame. Horng and Loeb (2010) discuss the organizational management aspects of instructional
leadership. Bush & Glover (2012) applied distributed leadership to school leadership teams.
There is a drive to move from administrative competencies into instructional leadership and
organizational management competencies or combinations thereof (Heck & Hallinger, 2005;
Jackson, 2005). Distributed leadership applied to the school site context is similar to the concept
of the learning organization (Senge, 2010). Distributed leadership implies that one person can
create the learning for others. The learning organization however, specifies that it is group
learning that makes the difference in sustained change (Senge, 2010). The collaborative nature of
instructional leadership implies a group think and effort consistent with a learning organization.
Traditionally instructional leadership is focused on teaching and learning. These aspects
are considered to be the responsibility of the principal or head administrator (Jackson et al.,
1983; Hallinger, 2005; Murphy, 1988). Administrators were considered instructional leaders if
they exhibited strong directive skills with a hands-on approach to curriculum and instruction
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

47
issues (Hallinger, 2005; Reed, 1982). They were coaches and collaborators with teachers and
observed classrooms frequently (Horng & Loeb, 2010).
Recently research has shown that “school leaders primarily affect student learning by
influencing teachers’ motivations and working conditions” (Horng & Loeb, 2010, p. 67). This
attitude is in line with the application of a distributed model of leadership with a focus on
instructional practices (Spillane, Halverson, & Diamond, 2004). The key in this application is
that leadership practice is a function of the leader, school staff and context (Spillane et al., 2004).
Instructional leadership is not limited to administrators. Instructional leaders are those that; have
1) “social capital in the form of networks and trust, working together with colleagues and
facilitating sharing of knowledge” (Spillane, Hallett, & Diamond, 2003, p. 8). 2) The people in
the school organization that coordinate distributed leadership are focused on improving
instructional practices at all levels within their current context. At the school site, instructional
leaders must leverage the human and social capital within the school to promote successful
instructional practices. If individuals do not have the formal power to change the institutional
structure at the district level, they must work within the social and human capital confines at the
school site level in order to affect change.
The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) has created a set of standards for
educational leadership based upon the past decade of dialogue and research on the topic. These
policy standards also address the evolution of educational policy in America. These policies were
adopted by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) and are
“intended to enhance the field by stimulating dialogue about a new conception of education
leadership that will improve policies and practices nationwide” (CCSSO, 2008, “Dear
Colleagues”).
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

48
The framework used to qualify the presence of instructional leadership is the Educational
Leadership Policy Standards (ELPS) as developed by the National Policy Board for Educational
Administration (NPBEA) ISLLC Steering Committee and produced for the Council of Chief
State School Officers (CCSSO). The ELPS were developed using several key studies on
educational leadership and student learning (CCSSO, 2008). There are six standards. 1)
Establishing shared vision for learning. 2) Creating a school culture and instructional program
that promotes learning and growth for students and staff. 3) Ensuring an effective, safe, and
efficient learning environment for the organization, 4) Collaborating with stakeholders enabling
appropriate responses to diverse community interests and needs, 5) Acting with integrity, and 6)
Demonstrating comprehension of the political, social, legal, and cultural environment and the
ability to take action within the context (CCSSO, 2008).

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

49
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
In the urban school context, there are characteristics that defy hierarchical structures and
methods of reform accountability and consequently reform has been largely unsuccessful
(Childress et al., 2006; Jackson, 2005; Lytle, 2007; Viteritti, 2003). This study examines the
dynamics of organizational structure and instructional leadership at successful urban high
schools. This proposal suggests that there is a dynamic between instructional leadership and
school site organizational structure that enables positive educational outcomes for students.
According to Gunter (2005) researchers that seek knowledge for the purpose of
improvements to “achieve a socially just and moral approach” must ask “how might power
structures act as a barrier to work? How do we work for learners and learning as a right and a
good in our society” (p. 171)? With this conceptualization in mind, it is necessary to look at the
relationship between the instructional leader and the site organizational structure.
Qualitative research is consistent with seeking to understand the phenomenon of the
instructional leadership and school site organizational structure dynamic in urban high schools
that are successfully meeting NCLB accountability measures. There are five intellectual goals of
qualitative research as described by Maxwell (2013). Two of them provided a frame from which
the research questions were developed. a) “Understanding the particular contexts within which
the participants act, and the influence that this context has on their actions” and b)
“Understanding the process by which events and actions take place” (p. 30).
This study is guided by the following research questions:
1. To what extent are ELPS demonstrated in high performing urban high schools?
(RQ1)
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

50
a. How is the demonstration of ELPS influenced by school site
organizational structure in high performing urban high schools? (RQ1a)
Effective leaders respond to the changing needs of their context. Indeed, in a very real
sense the leader’s behaviors are shaped by the school context. Thus, one resolution of the
quest for an integrative model of educational leadership would link leadership to the
needs of the school context. (Hallinger, 2005, p. 235)

This multisite case study is the examination of a specific phenomenon across multiple
similar bounded systems. It is designed to be ‘particularistic’. “Particularistic means that case
studies focus on a particular situation, event, program, or phenomenon (Merriam, 2009, p. 43).”
In this case the phenomenon is the dynamic of instructional leadership as defined by the
demonstration of the ELPS and the school site organizational structure within a successful urban
school in the current educational reform and accountability context.
Socio-cognitive theory is an applicable theoretical construct for this study because,
instructional leadership is the organizational response to the environmental constructs of NCLB
accountability measures within a critical race theory context. Instructional leaders are charged
with increasing positive educational outcomes for all students within the current accountability
era. Instructional leaders must be learner context sensitive. Instructional leaders understand their
learners’ needs and how to use capital (human, material and organizational) to maximize learner
cognition within the given context. Unlike socio-cultural theory the instructional leader is not
enabled to affect change on the environmental context. The instructional leaders must manage
resources to enable the learner to make sense of and respond to the environmental context.
This study was informed by an examination of literature on the political and economic
contexts of educational policy. Education has historically been viewed by the marginalized as a
vehicle that facilitates accumulation of social capital enabling ascendance of socio-economic
class levels (Wright, 2007). Critical race theorists propose that the educational system is
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

51
perpetuating inequalities as opposed to eliminating them (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001; Zamudio
et al., 2011). Analysis of the educational system through the forces that shape it, enable an
understanding in how reform policies have evolved into the current accountability era. This
necessitates evaluation of NCLB whose critics credit equity issues as its failure (Braun et al.,
2006; Linn, 2005; O'Day, 2002). Critical Race theory is the environmental context in which
NCLB accountability measures remain challenging.
This study applies a set of standards adopted by the National Policy Board for
Educational Administration (NPBEA) and published by the Interstate School Leaders Licensure
Consortium (ISLLC). These Educational Leadership Policy Standards (ELPS) as identified in
chapter two were informed by literature and research on education leadership from the last
decade. Instructional leadership presence at the school site should be demonstrated by
characteristics of the ELPS. The organizational structure at the school site will be examined
using the organizational types and characteristics as defined by Daft (2010) and explained in
chapter two. Use of multiple data collection methods enabled triangulation and corroboration of
evidence to answer the research questions.
Sample and Population
Urban high schools in Southern California are the population from which the sample was
chosen. The unit of analysis is the dynamic of instructional leadership and school site
organizational structure within a successful urban school. Criterion-based purposeful sampling
was used to identify three urban schools as participants for this study. This is an appropriate
strategy because the goal is to explore in order to gain better understanding (Merriam, 2009) of
how urban schools successfully meet NCLB accountability measures. Because the literature has
indicated that most urban schools are not successful, we can learn by studying what works using
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

52
NCLB success as criteria for selection. Urban as characterized by a disproportionately large
student population from underserved and/or disadvantaged sub groups as stipulated by NCLB.
Three successful urban schools as evidenced by their recorded accountability measures from
2011-12 are the selected sample population for this study. Specifically, these schools met their
AYP for 2011-12.
In order to protect the anonymity of the three sites, specific/individual school site
citations are not given. The data for the three schools was compiled from their School
Accountability Report Cards (SARCs) accessed via their individual websites, the California
Department of Education (CDE) DataQuest website (California Department Of Education,
2013), and Ed-Data (Education Data Partnership, 2013). The following demographic and school
accountability data enabled selection of sites meeting the following criteria;
 Met 2011-2012 AYP
 Urban senior high school – grade levels 9-12
 Urban as evidenced by;
o Minority population was greater than or equal to 70%.
o 50% or more of student population economically disadvantaged.
The schools meeting the above criteria are referred to in this study as Site 1 (S1), Site 2
(S2), and Site 3 (S3). Each school is located in a different Southern California school district.
S1
This high school was the result of a recommendation from a task force created by the
school district to alleviate overcrowding in the district high schools. It was opened in 1998. As a
public Magnet school, all students within the district are eligible to apply. Although
geographically located in a non-incorporated portion of Glendale called La Crescenta, the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

53
students come from all over the city of Glendale, CA. The estimated population of the city for
2012 was 192,750, the median household income was $54,369, and 12.9% of the people were
living below the poverty level (City of Glendale, 2014). The city of Glendale has some reported
census track annual median incomes at or above $100,000 contrasted against some tracks at
annual median incomes just above $17,000 (City of Glendale). In 2000 the significant non-white
ethnic groups residing in Glendale were; Armenian-27%, Hispanic-19%, and Asian-16% (Dity
of Glendale).
The school district of S1 is the Glendale Unified School District. It is a K-12 district
serving 27,000 students. There are 31 schools and 2,620 employees. The districts mission
statement as identified on the website is; “The Glendale Unified School District provides a high
quality education that addresses the unique potential of each student in a safe, engaging
environment” (Glendale Unified School District, 2014). There are five board members including
one student member. Each adult board member is assigned approximately 6 schools one of
which is a high school. The districts’ current expense for direct educational services per student
was $8,454 based on an average daily attendance of 25,340 students based on a total expenditure
reported as $214,234,083 (Ed-Data, 2013). As a public Magnet school, S1 receives funding
directly from the district per education code guidelines and consistent with that of the other five
high schools in the district. Total expenditure per student for S1 was reported at $4,973 for 2011-
12. S1 also has community partners whose monetary or material donations were not disclosed.
This is not a gifted magnet and the website is clear in explaining that S1 is not in any way
associated with the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) gifted magnet program.
The average class size for core academic courses ranged from 30.6 to 34.8. There are a
total of 46 teachers, all of whom have full credentials per NCLB standards. In 2011-12 there
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

54
were no teacher vacancies and 7 teachers teaching outside of their credentialed area. The average
number of years in service was 15.9, average number of years in the district was 14.7 and there
was 1 first year teacher and 3 second year teachers. Students are served by 3 additional support
staff, 2 Academic Counselors and a Library Media Teacher. There are 3 administrators.
Comparatively, the districts average number of years in service for teachers is 14.8 and average
number of years in the district is 13.1.
The curriculum for S1 is oriented toward science and technology, college prep and
career. There are four core subject themes. Math/Science and Engineer has a focus on non-
biological sciences and the associated math, physics and engineering course work. The
Technology Systems theme is focused on the hardware aspects of computer, programming and
network infrastructure. It includes subject matter regarding microcomputer operating systems,
maintenance and support, computer repair, computer science, technical report writing, Local
Area Network (LAN) administration, electronics, and applied physics. The more product
oriented Computer Applications strand emphasizes the results of technology use, including
computerized business applications, robotics, and Computer Assisted Design (CAD) and
presentation skills. The last theme is Digital Arts which is focusing on preparing students for a
career in the fields of animation, programming, graphic design, web site design and
development, with the skills needed to obtain entry level positions, cinematography and/or
placement in career development programs at the community college and university level.
Students are accepted through a lottery process. In order to participate in the lottery,
students must have earned a grade point average of 2.0 or better in middle school in core subjects
(English, Math, Science and Social Science). One hundred and fifty students will be admitted for
the 2014-15 academic year. Students must also be eligible to take algebra or higher by the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

55
completion of their 8
th
grade year. Satisfactory behavior, attendance, and grades are required.
Also, because of state standards, students from private schools must score above the 26
th

percentile on standardized tests. Students must make a commitment to remain at the school for a
minimum of one academic year. Students are required to complete community service hours as a
graduation requirement and there is no sibling preference for admission. There are no Special
Day Class programs.
S2
S2 is a public charter high school and opened in 2000. As a public charter school, all
students are eligible to apply there are no residency requirements. The school is located in the
city of Lawndale, CA. The estimated population of the city for 2012 was 33,122 and the median
household income was reported at $48,727. In 2000 the significant non-white ethnic groups are;
Black-12.1%, Hispanic-61.0%, and Asian-10.0%. Census data also reported 16.7% of residents
living below the poverty level.
S2 is the first high school within a growing network of free public schools in the
underserved communities of South Los Angeles. The network has a total of three schools which
were authorized for operation by either the Lawndale Elementary School District or the Los
Angeles County Office of Education. S2 is governed by a Board of Directors whose members
have a variety of professional skill sets and experiences. The stated mission of the network is to;
“Equip all students with the knowledge and skills to graduate from college, to inspire them to
discover their own sense of purpose, and to empower them to become quality stewards of their
community and world”. The network purposefully serves communities that have low levels of
educational attainment and high poverty levels. They use environmental service learning to
inspire students to find authentic meaning in their studies. As a public Charter school, S2
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

56
receives 90% of its funding directly from the state and federal government. Total expenditure per
student for S2 was reported at $8,189 for 2011-12. Other funding is through various grants and
donations the specific amounts of which were not disclosed.
The average class size for core academic courses ranged from 26.0 to 31.1. There are a
total of 25 teachers, 24 of whom have full credentials per NCLB standards. In 2011-12 there
were no teacher vacancies and 2 teachers teaching outside of their credentialed area. The average
number of years in service was 6.5, average number of years in the district was 3.0 and there was
1 first year teacher and 3 second year teachers. Students are served by 3 additional support staff,
an Academic Counselor, a Social/Behavioral or Career Development Counselor and a Library
Media Teacher. There are 2 administrators.
The curriculum at S2 emphasizes experiential, project based learning that prepares
students to be community leaders. The design principles include; small learning communities, a
challenging, interdisciplinary core academic curriculum including authentic challenges
culminating in service learning projects, as well as partnerships with the local community.
Students are admitted after filling out an application for enrollment, if there is not enough space
a public lottery is held.
S3
S3 is a dependent charter in the Hawthorne Unified School District and opened in 2003.
The Hawthorne School District’s stated mission is; “To maximize each student’s potential to
achieve educational excellence.” There are seven elementary schools, three middle schools and
one high school (S3) to service approximately 10,000 students pre-K through twelfth grade.
Students not attending S3 for high school attend high schools in the Centinela Valley Union
High School District. S3’s total per student expenditures for 2011-12 were reported at $5,197.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

57
S3 is located in the city of Hawthorne, Ca. The estimated population of the city for 2012 was
85,681, the median household income was reported at $44,906, and 18.9% of the people were
living below the poverty level. The significant non-white ethnic groups residing in Hawthorne
are Black-27.7%, and Hispanic-52.9%.
Students applying to S3 are admitted based upon openings in each grade level. They do
not exclude admission based upon geographic boundaries. Students and parents must attend an
information night to receive an application. If the number of completed applications exceeds the
openings then a random public drawing is held. Students that are accepted must take Algebra and
English Skills assessment exam as well as attend a summer bridge program. Students and
families that are accepted complete an interview, and must sign a compact that outlines
expectations.
The curriculum emphasizes math and science. Students are required to take four years of
math and science. Four years of math includes at least Geometry, Algebra II, and either Pre-
calculus or Trigonometry. This implies that Algebra I must be completed by the end of the 9
th

grade. Four years of laboratory science includes Biology and Chemistry. These are in addition to
the standard A – G requirements for graduation. Students are also required to take the PSAT,
SAT and the ACT.
The average class size for core subjects (math, English, Science, and History) ranged
from 28.7 to 33.8. During the 2011-12 year, S3 had 25 teachers who met all credential
requirements in accordance with state guidelines and 3 full time administrators. The average
number of years of service was 9.5, average number of years in the District was 6.8, there were
no 1
st
year teachers, and 1 second year teacher. One each of the following support staff services
students: Academic Counselor, Health Clerk, Security Guard and Teacher on special assignment.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

58
The following Table 3.1 is a summary of school demographic data related to the selection
criteria for the study and includes the mission statements for each selected school site.

Table 3.1

School Site Selection Data

Percent of Population

School

NCLB
Accountability

Number of
Students

Minority

English
Learners

Socioeconomical
ly Disadvantaged
S1

API of 920
met 18 of 18 AYP
criteria

1130 84.2* 20.4 49.8
The mission of ‘S1’ High School is to provide ethnically diverse students with the
knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in a highly competitive technological world.
‘S1’ graduates will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to pursue their
academic and career goals, to compete successfully in the world market, and to be
creative, critical, analytical, lifelong learners. S1 School Website (2013)
S2

API of 824
met 18 of 18 AYP
criteria

484 88.8 27.1 96.5
The ‘S2’ mission is to equip all students with the knowledge and skills to graduate
from college, to inspire them to discover their own sense of purpose, and to empower
them to become quality stewards of their community and world. S2 School Website
(2012)
S3

API of 894
met 14 of 14 AYP
criteria

595 83.2 23.9 79.3
‘S3’ is committed to creating a challenging, rigorous, standards-based curriculum for
all students, regardless of gender, ethnicity, primary language, or special needs status,
within a safe and cooperative learning community. S3 School Website (2013)
*This population is Armenian, although technically coded as ‘White’.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

59
Access
It was necessary to receive approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the
University of Southern California. The Hawthorne district was contacted regarding permission to
conduct research at the dependent charter. After receiving permission from the district, the
principal was contacted directly. Regarding sites 1 and 2, each principal was contacted directly
for approval.
Instrumentation
“Qualitative inquiry, which focuses on meaning in context, requires a data collection
instrument that is sensitive to underlying meaning when gathering and interpreting data”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 2). Multiple methods of data collection informed this mixed methods study.
“Basic research is motivated by intellectual interest in a phenomenon and has as its goal the
extension of knowledge. Although basic research may eventually inform practice, its primary
purpose is to know more about a phenomenon”(Merriam, 2009, p. 3). This study seeks to explore
the dynamic of instructional leadership and organizational structure within urban schools that
have successfully met NCLB accountability requirements specifically meeting their annual
yearly progress (AYP). It contributes knowledge to the literature gap within educational
leadership studies and urban school reform. Neither of which has investigated the
interaction/relationship between instructional leadership and the organizational structure at the
school site.
A review of high school performance and population statistics informed the selection of
school sites. Informed by the literature, the study sought urban high schools as characterized by
NCLB. These high schools would include disproportionately large amounts of students from
disadvantaged subgroups. The subgroups include; English language learners, students with
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

60
disabilities, racial minorities and the economically disadvantaged. The population sought public
schools serving grades 9 through 12 that met AYP for the 2011-12 academic year. It was
extremely difficult to find schools meeting all of the criteria within one district and it was
necessary to expand the search to include surrounding districts in Los Angeles County.
Accountability data from Los Angeles and surrounding counties yielded three sites whose
criteria fit within study parameters.
To answer RQ1 it was necessary to observe the instructional leadership practices of the
school site. Observations of school site professional development meetings were conducted to
determine the extent to which educational leadership is exemplified based upon the ELPS
framework. A survey was conducted to verify observation data and generate interview
volunteers. Interview volunteers were derived from surveyed staff at the school sites. There
were nineteen volunteers, only twelve were conducted due to limited time and schedule
constraints. After contacting the volunteers, interviews were conducted at the school sites.
Regarding organizational structure, documentation of the school site organizational structure was
compared to observation, survey and interview data to create a graphic representation of the
school site organizational structure. School site documents were reviewed for evidence of formal
organizational structures, accountability, and authority patterns. These patterns were compared to
classic organizational management theory designs and diagramed based upon Daft (2010). The
study then looked for commonalities across the three school sites regarding demonstration of
instructional leadership and its interactions with organizational structure to generate data for
analysis in response to research question RQ1a.
With regard to the use of multiple methods of data collection, for example, what someone
tells you in an interview can be checked against what you observe on site or what you
read about in documents relevant to the phenomenon of interest. (Merriam, 2009, p. 216)

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

61
Observations (RQ1).
Three observations were coded at each school site. The first meeting consisted of, a
discussion with administration and a tour. Parameters and procedures of the study were
discussed. The other two observations were professional development sessions. The length and
topics of the PD’s varied across the three sites. Professional development topic examples
included but were not limited to; grading procedures, common core curriculum adoption, funding
options, and curriculum design. Each observation was transcribed directly by the researcher
during the event. The ELPS coding protocol (see Appendix B) was designed to facilitate coding
of the ELPS characteristics as exemplified by the school site faculty and staff. “First
observations take place in the setting where the phenomenon of interest naturally occurs”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 117); the observable phenomenon of interest is instructional leadership. In
designing the protocol, common observable elements as identified by Merriam were considered;
physical setting, participants, activities and interactions, conversations, and subtle factors. The
first draft was intended for faculty meetings, professional developments, and classrooms. The
first draft of the protocol was piloted and altered based upon expert feedback. It was determined
that a more organic approach to the observations was necessary. The researcher decided to use a
more ethnographic approach by transcribing everything seen and heard during the observed
events. This study does not assume that the instructional leadership is isolated to administrative
staff, positions, or actions. The coding protocol was used to document any evidence or
occurrence of the ELPS characteristics by any faculty or staff member. Over the course of the
study, some sites had more observation opportunities than others. To protect the reliability of the
study the researcher coded the data from the 3 types of observation opportunities the sites had in
common.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

62
Survey (RQ1 and RQ1a).
An online survey was created and made available to all staff and faculty members present
at the observed events. The questions were designed based upon each of the ELPS
characteristics. The last question was an invitation to interview. Participants were contacted with
an email providing a web link were the survey could be completed. There are six evaluative
statements specifically designed to reflect the six ELPS areas of competency. Participants were
also asked to identify their position and invited to participate in an interview. The Qualtrics
(2014) online survey tool was used to design and implement the survey. The survey was made
available to all staff at the school sites. Staff members were informed of the survey availability
during the last observations. An email list of staff was generated from school websites. Hard
copies of the survey were available at the last observation and two emails were sent to each staff
at the school sites soliciting participation. There were 114 survey invitations 49% of which were
completed. The response rate for each site was 40% or above. Analysis of the survey results was
facilitated by the Qualtrics (2014) report functions.
Interviews (RQ1 and RQ1a).
The interview protocol (Appendix C) is also based upon ELPS characteristics, however
the specific behaviors that characterize each of the six competencies was addressed. Each
question is related to one or more of the research questions. Questions one and three also indicate
characteristics that describe the organizational structure of the school site. Collaboration with
experts enabled fine tuning to generate data that is triangulated with the document review and the
observations. “Your research questions formulate what you want to understand; your interview
questions are what you ask people to gain an understanding” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 101). Interview
questions were formulated to verify ELPS characteristics and to find out what the respondents
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

63
views and perceptions were of the school site organizational structure. Surveys solicited
volunteers from the staff at each site. All staff members that volunteered were interviewed
resulting in twelve interviews across the three sites. Staff members included administration,
teachers, and support staff at the school site. The questions were designed to produce narrative
responses. Interviews were 20-25 minutes in duration. Structured questions were avoided in
order to create rich data that is reflective of the participant’s point of view and limit influence by
researcher biases (Merriam, 2009).
The problem with using a highly structured interview in qualitative research is that
rigidly adhering to predetermined questions may not allow you to access participants’
perspectives and understanding of the world. Instead, you get reactions to the
investigator’s preconceived notions of the world. (Merriam, 2009, p. 90)

Document Review (RQ1a).
Document reviews presented visual evidence of the organizational structure based upon
explicit lines of authority and information communication. Document types included; PD
agendas, PD schedules, PD presentation materials, memos to staff from administration, parent
organization websites, school websites, and school marketing brochures. The availability of
document types varied across the school sites. To enable consistent analysis, the three most
common items available across the sites were chosen for review totaling nine reviewed
documents. Organizational design elements as evidenced by the data from the levels of analysis
as identified by (Daft, 2010) provided the framework to develop the document review protocol
(Appendix D). Organizational design elements are interconnected and influence one another.
According to Daft these five elements discern the organization striving for efficient performance
contrasted with those designed for continuous learning. They are; structure, tasks, systems,
culture, and strategy. “Organization systems are nested within systems, and one level of analysis
has to be chosen as the primary focus” (p. 35). These four levels are; external, organization,
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

64
group, and individual. Instructional leadership is the individual level considered for this analyses
and the structure is the organizational level. The Document Review Coding protocol has ten
statements; the even numbers indicate to what extent the organization is horizontal, the odd
numbers indicate to what extent the organization is vertical. Each pair of questions addresses the
five elements as identified by Daft.
According to Merriam (2009) finding relevant materials is a “systematic procedure that
evolves from the topic of inquiry itself” (p.150). In regards to the school site, information on
organizational design would be evidenced by memos showing lines of responsibilities and
authority. Instructional leadership will be evidenced by activities and actions identified on
documents. Professional development agendas and schedules as well as school websites were
closely examined and compared to observation and interview data in determining where the
organizational structure presented itself along the Daft (2010) continuum. Understanding that
organizations are rarely completely horizontal or vertical, the resulting diagrams reflect this
duality with a blend of circles indicating equality and rectangles, which indicate levels of
hierarchy.
Data Collection, Coding, and Analysis
With regard to the use of multiple methods of data collection, for example, what someone
tells you in an interview can be checked against what you observe on site or what you
read about in documents relevant to the phenomenon of interest. (Merriam, 2009, p. 216)

The process of organizing and analyzing data as it is collected (Merriam, 2009) is an
integral process of qualitative research. “Without ongoing analysis, the data can be unfocused,
repetitious, and overwhelming in the sheer volume of material that needs to be processed. Data
that have been analyzed while being collected are both parsimonious and illuminating”
(Merriam, 2009, p. 171). It is very important to review and revise your data and methods
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

65
throughout the process. Data was collected and coded according to the following schedule in
Figure 3.1.

“To perform analysis, a researcher can break apart a substance into its various
components, then examine those components in order to identify their properties and
dimensions” (Corbin & Strauss, 2008, p. 46). The process I used to analyze the data was color
coding by hand. I looked at the observations first because in order to answer the research
questions, the presence of ELPS characteristics must be established first. These 6 categories are
the basis for the themes used in coding the interview responses.
The primary construct used for coding is the ELPS.
An educational leader promotes the success of every student by:
1. Shared vision of learning
2. School culture conducive to student learning and professional growth
3. Effective management support
4. Collaboration with stakeholders in response to diversity issues
5. Acting with integrity
6. Socio-political awareness (CCSSO, 2008, pp. 14-15)

Coding by hand facilitated classification of situations and narratives into perceptions
related to the research question and theoretical frameworks. According to Merriam (2009)
coding is a simplified way to identify data for easy recovery.
S1 S2 S3
16-20 23-27 7-11 14-18 21-25 4-8 11-15 18-22 25-29 2-6 9-13 6-10 13-17 20-24
INTEVIEWS INTERVIEWS
INTERVIEWS
Figure 3.1 Data Collection Schedule
DOCUMENT REVIEWS
DOCUMENT REVIEWS
DOCUMENT REVIEWS
OBSERVATIONS
SURVEYS
SURVEYS
SURVEYS
OBSERVATIONS
OBSERVATIONS
OCT SEPT DEC JAN NOV
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

66
The interview responses were recorded and transcribed for color coding and were
substantive in that they were pulled directly from statements or actions of participants. In
analyzing the dynamics of instructional leadership and organizational structure, it was critical to
discern perceptions and reactions to instructional leadership and organizational structures. It was
necessary to connect actions and conversations to demonstrated instructional leadership
characteristics within the organizational structure at the site. These connections facilitate analysis
of how structural limitations and instructional leadership activities may have influenced each
other.
Documents were reviewed and coded in relationship to the organizational design
elements and a graphic representation of the structure at the school site was created. The
individual and organizational levels of analysis were the main focus. Evidence of the presence of
the instructional leadership characteristics observed and evidence of the design structure were
coded.
District accountability and performance data informed the selection of the sample from
the population. The sample was 3 urban schools meeting the research criteria of being successful
in meeting AYP for 2011-12. Observations of 2 professional development meetings and one
informational meeting at each site were conducted in order to identify the extent to which the
ELPS characteristics were present. Twelve interviews of staff and nine document reviews were
also conducted to generate data that further informed the analysis of the educational leadership
and organizational structure dynamic. The following Table 3.2 is a synopsis of the above
described methodology.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

67
Table 3.2

Methodology Synopsis

Method Analysis Rationale Function Implementation
Observations
RQ1
Compare one unit of
data with the next
looking for repeated
themes in the data
ELPS (Merriam, 2009)
Triangulation of data.
Examining the
phenomenon in its
natural environment to
gain knowledge
(Merriam, 2009).

To verify the extent to
which the ELPS
characteristics are
demonstrated at each
site.
Due to the variety of
interactions across the
three sites, 3 types that
occurred at all three
sites were chosen for
observation. 2
professional
development sessions
and 1 introductory
meeting were observed
at each school site.
Observations were
transcribed into a
computer. The ELPS
protocol was coded by
hand and used to
record the data in
preparation to compare
across the school sites.

Survey
RQ1
Surveys were forced
responses. Questions
were based on the 6
ELPS categories.
Qualtrics (2014)
reports were generated
for comparative
analysis across the 3
sites.
Triangulation of data.
Survey and
observation data will
be compared and used
to verify presence of
ELPS characteristics
and organizational
structure.
To capture perceptions
of staff regarding
instructional leadership
presence at the site.
Also, perceptions on
school site
organizational
structural
characteristics and
efficacy.

Staff members at each
school site were
invited to participate in
the survey. Email lists
were generated using
faculty and staff lists
from the school
website. 114 staff
members were invited
to participate. The
aggregate response rate
was 49%.
Survey links were
emailed to staff after
the 2
nd
observation.
Interviews
RQ1, RQ1a
Interviews were
recorded with
permission from the
participants and
transcribed and coded
according to ELPS
characteristics and
Daft (2010) themes.
Triangulation of data.
This is a primary
source of information
regarding the
instructional leadership
characteristics and
organizational
structure alignment
(Merriam, 2009)
To analyze the
relationship between
instructional leadership
and the school site
organizational
structure.
Interview participants
were solicited from
survey respondents. 12
interviews were
conducted. Interviews
were audio taped and
then transcribed into
the coding protocol.
Interviews were 20 -25
minutes in length and
conducted at the school
site per participant
preferences.

Document Review
RQ1a
Documents were
examined to
understand and
identify the
Triangulation of data.
To gain data on the
organizational
structure that is not
Look for
commonalities to
inform in school site
organization and
School publications
indicating authority
and instructional
practices were
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

68
organizational
structure of the school
sites.
observable (Merriam,
2009).
instructional leadership
practice alignment to
inform practices.
reviewed. Documents
included PD agendas
and schedules, school
websites and governing
organization memos.
SARCs were reviewed
for NCLB
accountability data.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

69
CHAPTER IV: DATA RESULTS AND FINDINGS
Introduction
This study examined successful urban schools in order to gain insight into the dynamics
of instructional leadership and organizational structure. NCLB’s failure to close the achievement
gap is evidenced by literature on urban schools and NCLB accountability measures. Specifically,
how measurement and attainment of AYP creates a disadvantageous situation for urban schools
and districts. There are a disproportionate number of urban schools failing to meet NCLB goals.
Consequently, they are more often sanctioned or subject to punitive reform strategies. One
example of these types of strategies is reconstitution. This strategy strips the social capital that
can enable schools to counter the negative effects of NCLB accountability measures. The right
form of organizational structure can protect the social capital that is instructional leadership.
Instructional leadership is instrumental in building and sustaining a positive school culture and
community relations.
This study seeks to confirm the importance of the dynamic between instructional
leadership and school site organizational structure by comparative analysis of schools that defy
the statistics. How does the dynamic between instructional leadership and organizational
structure enable maximum leveraging of existing social capital in urban schools to facilitate
achievement of NCLB accountability goals? In order to accomplish this purpose, it was
necessary to determine to what extent instructional leadership practices were present and
employed at the school sites. It was then necessary to determine the organizational structure in
place at the school site and to what extent this structure enabled or disabled instructional
leadership practices. Finally, comparative analysis of the data from the three sites qualified
verification of consistencies.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

70
First Impressions
The first impressions of S1 were the cleanliness and openness of the campus. The
neighborhood was quiet and free of graffiti. The school building was red brick. The blue of the
sky reflected off the green tinted windows presented a striking contrast. The school is located in
a suburban hillside community. There were pictures of technology and space themed media
covering the walls along with a picture of the mascot. There were students helping out in the
office. The secretary was engaging in small talk with student workers. The campus was also
clean of graffiti and trash. There were no students observed walking around in the hallways.
There were uniformed students at PE. There were several windows on the building and trees on
the school grounds. I did not need to be ‘buzzed in’ as I entered the office area. The office was
bright and had windows which gave a clear view of the hallway.
S2 is located in the middle of an urban neighborhood. Building structures are colorful and
blend in with the surrounding houses. Groups of small buildings amidst the plant life made it
look like a neighborhood garden rather than a school. It is within a mile of a major freeway and
boulevard. The campus was reminiscent of an arboretum. There were various types of plants
everywhere. The antithesis of a concrete jungle, the campus made use of all natural materials for
structures. It is an ecosystem consistent with the environmental mission of the school. The
common area used for presentations was a small outdoor area with flights of steps made from
rocks and mulch that served as the seating area. There were students working with plants in
various places. There were two security guards. No students were observed using cell phones or
any other recreational electronic device. Most of the classroom doors were open. Students and
teachers were observed engaging in discussions. Classrooms were very colorful. All of the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

71
exterior walls were covered with murals, most of which appeared to be social justice or
environmentally themed.
The 3
rd
school site is located in an urban area across the street from a police department.
It is within a half mile of a major avenue. The building was very different from the surrounding
houses. Once within the gates the culture of high expectations in behavior and academics is
evident. The office technician was dressed in scrubs and engaged in a phone conversation with a
parent regarding returning a cell phone that had been confiscated. School grounds were
organized, clean, and quiet. There were no students in the hallways, no locks on bike racks, and
there were several back packs sitting next to the bike rack area. Pictures of the space shuttle and
aerospace themed pictures were present throughout the hallways consistent with the school’s
academic theme. There were posters in the multipurpose room extoling the school’s academic
excellence record.
Research Question 1 (RQ1)
To what extent are ELPS demonstrated in high performing urban high schools?
In order to determine the extent to which instructional leadership is present, the
demonstration of ELPS was examined. The ELPS are comprised of six major categories. These
categories are what instructional leaders do to promote the success of every student. Each
category is evidenced by activities that enable supportive functions. Each category is numbered
and the corresponding functions are sub lettered (see Appendix E) for the complete list of ELPS
and associated functions.
Observation Data
Observations were conducted to identify to what extent instructional leadership was
demonstrated at the three school sites. The ELPS characteristics were used as the criteria.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

72
Although there were many opportunities for observation across the sites, the three occurrences
common amongst the sites were chosen for coding and analysis. There were three coded
observations for each site, one introduction /informational meeting and two professional
developments. Each ELPS category was color coded. The six categories broken down into
themes are as follows; 1-shared vision of learning(yellow), 2-school culture conducive to student
learning and professional growth(green), 3-effective management support(blue), 4-collaboration
with stakeholders in response to diversity issues(pink), 5-acting with integrity(orange), and 6-
socio-political awareness(purple).
Each school site had different professional development topics as well as differences in
time constraints. This did however provide interesting data because, despite the differences in
PD topics and their associated goals, the themes that emerged were consistent. Due to scheduling
constraints, S3 presented fewer opportunities for observation than S1 and S2. Consequently, the
researcher selected two PD’s from each of the sites for presentation to maintain an equitable
comparison. They were chosen based upon their similarity in duration of time and proportion of
faculty/staff present. Figure 4.1 is a visual representation of the coded observation data results. In
Figure 4.1 a indicates the ELPS theme, b indicates the number of coded observations for that
theme, c indicates the percentage b is of the total coded observations, and d is the rank order
from 1-most occurring to 4-least occurring. Each observation was color coded by hand with each
color representing one of the six EPLS themes (a). The color coded ELPS indicators from each
observation were then transferred to the ELPS coding protocol. As mentioned above, PD topics
and duration varied in scope across the three sites. To enable as fair and valid a comparison as
possible, each site’s three observations were analyzed collectively. To analyze to what extent
ELPS was present, the number of indicators for each of the six themes (b) was compared to the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

73
total number of indicators coded (c). Each theme was ranked from most to least occurring (d).
This process was repeated for each school site. Figure 4.1 shows the results of this process of the
three observations at each school site. Although all ELPS themes were demonstrated to some
extent at all three sites, there were consistencies in the most dominant observed themes.

All three school sites demonstrated a strong consistent sense of school culture. This was
represented by the largest proportion of coded data being evidence of ELPS2. ELPS2 is
“Advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to
student learning and staff professional growth” (CCSSO, 2008, p. 14). The types of activities
observed supported the following functions.
a. Nurture and sustain a culture of collaboration, trust, learning, and high
expectations
b. Create a comprehensive, rigorous, and coherent curricular program
c. Create a personalized and motivating learning environment for students
d. Supervise instruction
e. Develop assessment and accountability systems to monitor student
progress
f. Develop the instructional and leadership capacity of staff
g. Maximize time spent on quality instruction
h. Promote the use of the most effective and appropriate technologies to
support teaching and learning
a ELPS1 ELPS2 ELPS3 ELPS4 ELPS5 ELPS6
b 34 64 56 30 38 29
c 13.55% 25.50% 22.31% 11.95% 15.14% 11.55%
d 4 1 2 5 3 6
ELPS1 ELPS2 ELPS3 ELPS4 ELPS5 ELPS6
27 33 28 20 29 4
19.15% 23.40% 19.86% 14.18% 20.57% 2.84%
4 1 3 5 2 6
ELPS1 ELPS2 ELPS3 ELPS4 ELPS5 ELPS6
29 37 27 27 20 13
20.57% 26.24% 19.15% 19.15% 14.18% 9.22%
2 1 3 4 5 6
S1
S2
S3
Figure 4.1 Observation Data Results
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

74
i. Monitor and evaluate the impact of the instructional program
(CCSSO, 2008, p. 14)

ELPS2 was the most demonstrated at all three sites. S1 for example had one session of a
PD on development and implementation of a senior project assessment. All participants were
invited to provide feedback and suggestions that were discussed and evaluated collaboratively.
Student learning was supported by the collective development of an assessment that evaluated
student learning. Instructional leadership development of the staff was evidenced by teachers
leading teachers. This activity was also evidence of supervising instruction. Teachers were
observed developing a system of accountability to ensure that evaluation of student work was
meaningful and consistent.
At S2, this was demonstrated via a PD session on how teachers were integrating
sustainability into curriculum. Sustainability is a core concept of being environmentally focused.
The environmental theme is a core concept for S2 and it is evidenced everywhere. In concert
with this ideal is the presence of gardens at the school site from which staff and students are
encouraged to eat. This PD is supervising instruction and facilitating a conscientious effort to
create a coherent curriculum across all content areas consistent with the school vision. The
facilitator was playing environmentally conscious background music throughout portions of the
session. It should also be noted that the teachers chose the topics for the PD’s and created the
programs.
S3, which had the strongest demonstration of ELPS 2, demonstrated this theme by
collaboratively reconciling district and state accountability demands with their current practices
in preparation for a WASC visit. One discussion in particular was on how to, further develop the
process of communication across grade levels. This speaks to nurturing collaboration as well as
enabling a coherent curricular program.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

75
At each school site activities that indicated high expectations for student learning were
also observed. During one of the PD sessions at S1 it was explained that, in order to send a
consistent message to the students, deadlines for submissions would be strictly enforced. Sites 1
and 2 have culminating senior year tasks in which community members and teachers participate
in the assessment. S3 initiated a collaborative symposium to supplement the lack of adequate
and relevant PD topics provided by the district. Staff from S3 attended this symposium, whose
focus was; how high performing charter schools could improve beyond what they have already
accomplished. The observation data from this symposium was not included in this study
although it should be mentioned that staff from sites 2 and 3 attended.
At all three sites the administration was supportive and encouraging to the staff.
Administrators were observed passing out water, getting copies, as well as disseminating
information to the staff as needed. It was obvious that leadership development of the staff was
present. Without exception, all PD’s were led by the teachers and or other support staff, not the
administrators. There were also observations of both, grade level teams and content area teams.
Participants would shift the team configurations based upon PD topics and goals.
All teachers create and implement their curriculum. Sites 1 and 2 had instances of
interdisciplinary lesson units. These units were created, planned, and implemented by teachers of
two different content areas. It should also be noted that of the 3 sites, 1 and 2 were in complete
control of their PD scheduling. They had systems in place that enabled large blocks of dedicated
PD time, whereas S3 used district assigned times and was dependent upon the district to supply
substitutes.
There were observations that demonstrated more than one ELPS. Demonstration of ELPS
1 and 2 was evidenced by observed discussions on curriculum effectiveness. Teachers
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

76
collaborated with each other on how best to monitor and evaluate curriculum program
effectiveness. At S1 there is established communication between the content areas. English
teachers know what science teachers are doing and there were collaborative discussions on how
best to monitor and improve overall program effectiveness. At S2 there was a PD on the
effectiveness of the grading system and policies. At S3 there was a discussion of how to help
students adjust to the new computer based common core assessments. In all instances, the
discussions were well rounded; student, teacher and accountability issues were considered.
Firmly established cross curricular collaboration was observed at sites 1 and 2. The administrator
at S3 mentioned the development and implementation of this type of communication as an
immediate goal. He was observed explaining the benefits of this to the faculty and soliciting
ideas on how best to implement it.
Sites 1 and 2 shared the same top three demonstrated ELPS of vision stewardship,
sustaining school culture, and acting with integrity. These sites had close to identical rankings in
their demonstrated ELPS. S1’s second and third most demonstrated ELPS were themes 2 and 5
respectively. Whereas for S2, 5 was the second most demonstrated ELPS with theme 2 being
third. S3’s top demonstrated ELPS was also ELPS 1 however, unlike S1 and S2 the second most
demonstrated was ELPS 1, which was in fourth place for both S1 and S2. Based upon this data,
one could infer that S3’s staff feels that their school culture and curriculum are firmly
established.
The least demonstrated ELPS for all three sites was number six which is “Understanding,
responding to, and influencing the political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context”
(CCSSO, 2008, p. 21). The smallest demonstrated amount for ELPS 6 was S2, which also is the
only site that operates independently of a school district.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

77
Survey Data
The survey was created using the Qualtrics (2014) online survey tool. Survey questions
were created based upon the ELPS. Two questions were not associated with ELPS: one question
regarding respondent type and one requesting interview volunteers. The first survey question
ascertained the positions (respondent type) of the participants. Surveys were administered to all
staff at each site. The first invitation to participate in the survey was announced at the second PD
session. Email lists were generated from staff and faculty rosters on school websites. There were
2 follow up email requests sent to the sites. One hundred and fourteen staff members were
contacted and 56 completed the survey. The aggregate response rate was 49%. Sites 1 and 3 had
administrator participants. S2 had teacher and support staff participation only. S2 also had the
highest teacher participation rate at 87%. S3 had an administration participation rate of 17%. All
three schools had participation from counselors or other support staff. Teachers were the
predominant respondent type. Figure 4.2 below is a graphic representation of the respondent
types for the survey as evidenced by the response to question 1 of the survey.

The second question in the survey was a series of 6 statements based upon the ELPS
themes. Respondents were asked to qualify the extent to which each theme was demonstrated.
Response choices were None at all, Occasionally, More often than not, and Consistently well.
Figure 4.2 Survey Respondent Types
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

78
With numerical values ranging from 1 to 4. The responses with means closest to 4 would
indicate respondents felt the school performed consistently well in the associated ELPS theme.
The highest mean recorded was 3.90 for ELPS 5 at S1. S1 had means ranging from 3.14 to 3.90.
S2 had a range of 2.87 to 3.43 and S3’s range of means was 2.58 to 3.58. ELPS 2 concerning
school culture was among the highest two means at each school site.
Sites 1 and 2 recorded the top three means for ELPS 1,2, and 5 indicating a majority of
the respondents feel a predominance of clear mission/vison, strong sense of school culture, and
ethical behavior. These ELPS (1,2, and 5) also had modes of 4 across two or more of the school
sites. S3’s top 3 ELPS were 5, 2, and 3. This is evidence that respondents felt ethical behavior,
strong sense of school culture, and staff contributions to instructional decisions were prevalent.
The supportive function in ELPS 3 is also an indicator of the horizotal aspect of the school site
organizational structure. S1 had the strongest indicator with 57% of responses in the consistently
well category and 43% of responses in the more often than not category. One hundred percent of
the responses at S1 indicated that; administration solicits, values, and uses staff suggestions on
instructional practice as the standard (evidenced by combined category responses of more often
than not and consistenly well). Comparatively, the same statistic for S2 is 74% and 58% at S3.
The least demonstrated ELPS, as evidenced by the relatively lowest mean recorded at
each site, varied. S1’s survey responses indicated a mean of 3.14 for the question qualifying the
extent to which the school solicits and nurtures community relationships. This mean was
comparatively low to other responses; 57% of the responses were in the more often than not
category and 29% were in the consistently well category. S2’s lowest mean was a supportive
function of ELPS 6 which reflected to what extent respondents felt the school is able to react to
the socio-political needs of the community. Thirty-nine percent of the responses were in the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

79
more often than not category and 26% were in the consistently well category. In all of the survey
responses there was only one reported none at all. It was in this data set for S2 regarding ELPS
6.. In the case of S3, the lowest demonstrated ELPS theme as evidenced by lowest mean was
ELPS 1. Twenty-five percent of the responses to this question were in the consistently well
category. Most of the responses for this theme were in the occasionally category at 67%. This
question sought to ascertain to what extent staff members shared in developing, articulating, and
implementing a shared vision of learning. Figure 4.3 below is a summary of the survey data
indicating the most demonstrated ELPS (in red) as evidenced by the survey data discussed
above.

The last question in the survey asked for interview volunteers. At S1, 86% of those that
responded (N=7) to the question were interviewed. At sites 2 and 3 the percent of respondents to
this question that were interviewed was 38% (N=8) and 75% (N=4) respectively (see Appendices
F-H for complete statistical data reports).
Interview Data
Across the school sites observations and surveys indicated that all ELPS were
demonstrated. Interviews were conducted to learn specific information regarding the supportive
Figure 4.3 Survey Data Summary
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

80
functions observed and indicated on the surveys. The questions were designed to generate
narrative information on respondents views regarding how the school site performed the
supportive functions that demonstrated the ELPS. It should be noted that some responses
indicated demonstration of more than one ELPS. All interviewees were teachers except for one
administrator at S3 and a support staff member at S1 who also teaches. Responses were candid
and rich with information. All interviews were conducted at the school sites, most often in
respondents classrooms. Participants agreed to being recorded during the interviews. The
researcher took special note of the commonalities across the sites in how they demonstrated the
most predominant ELPS as indicated on the surveys. Names are not cited in the quoted responses
to protect the identity of participants. Responses are listed by school site only.
ELPS1: How do staff members share in facilitating the development, articulation,
implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all
stakeholders? One of the supportive function addressed in the interviews for this ELPS was how
collaborative development and implementation of a shared vision and mission happens.
Overwhelmingly, most respondents felt that their schools sites did this. Narrative ranged from
how they did it to why they thougth it was done well. Respondents that did not share this opinion
indicated that the administration takes great care in hiring people. Candidates are only hired if
administration feels they will buy into the mission as it is already established.
S1
“easier to do that because we are a smaller staff”

“I think that because it’s a smaller school means that teachers of different disciplines
interact more than they would at a larger school.”

“There is this feeling of I need to not just be a good teacher, I need to be an excellent
teacher..that culture is just present.”

S2
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

81
“It seems like they try to hire teachers who are on board with that or they envision fitting
in with that and being aligned with that.”

“We definitely do our best to continually remind ourselves of why we are doing what we
are doing wich ultimately relates to our vision and mission in regards to program
planning.”

“I think the way we all adhere to the mission of the school. I think we center around the
idea of creating, inculcating environmental stewardship and social justice awareness.”

S3
“We don’t get to talk as much together as we would like..theres no time built into our
schedule like at the elementary level where they get to do collaboration ..we don’t have
that luxury. Our principal is doing the best he can to get us that time…but we talk in the
lunch room, the hall..wherever we can to keep up with what each other is doing ..not only
at the subject level but at the grade level.”

“Since we’re a school that’s relatively new, that’s kind of easy to do because that was set
in place from the get go..the goal of the school as it was established was to be a college
prep high schoool with the goal to prepare kids to be successful in a four year university
and so the teachers that originally started the school set that standard and set that mission
that vision and everyone that’s come on board has bought into that idea.”

“The first time was a few years ago when WASC came out everybody brainstormed and
this time last spring the staff got together and started tearing it apart and it was a long and
painful process partly because a few of us are in higher ed programs and several people
really believe in that whole college for all..I think everybody deep down really does but
how do you articulate that ..how do you put in writing that everyone will have equal
access to certain things..your building the whole college going indentity..”

ELPS 2: How do you advocate, nurture, and sustain a school culture and instructional
program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth? Probing questions related
to the supporting functions involved; how instruction is supervised, how instructional leadership
capacity is developed, and creating a comprehensive, rigorous, and coherent curricular program.
S1
“I think that’s another advantage to having a lot of long term staff. When Mr. (Principal)
asks if you remember when we did this..someone here remembers. He is the institutional
memory par excellence.”

“A lot goes into the thinking of who’s being hired. Theres this trust ..until something
appears otherwise.. we’re trusted to do our good job”

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

82
“I don’t know about anybody else but I make it active get students involved…finding the
balance between giving them access to the content and actually giving them a chance to
grapple with it so they understand it.”

S2
“Teachers definitely play a role because for the most part we’re the ones that determine
curriculum y’know we do what we are required to do by the state..the standards and
everything but we decide as the individual teacher in collaboration with the other teachers
across grade levels, vertical alignment and that kind of thing. We decide what are the
critical, super critical grade level skills the students have to have as they move through
the grades.”

“I know that everybody can be a part of the process.. they have a grading committee.
They talk about how we grade students how we can come up with the best system school
wide. That either works for all subjects or like divide into like humanities versus math
and sciences.. make sure we are all aligned and on board with our grading policies.”

“All of our teachers write their own curriculum so I think that’s one of the key goals that
teachers know what ther’re teaching instead of somebody giving them a syllabus and
having them teach it wouldn’t make much sense because we want all of our experiences
to be true..that’s something..not only do we want the students to have fun learning, we
want the teachers to have fun teaching.”

S3
“..well the ideas of high expectation… once again the teachers who have been hired have
bought into that. It’s just the culture of the school as it has been established and so it’s not
that difficult to keep it going because you hire people who are on board with it to begin
with and you don’t have to fight that battle..so I’d say ..basically being very careful about
who they hire.”

“Try to get the department chairs involved as much as possible. Here is a piece of
learning..How do you think your staff will respond? Will they be receptive to it..getting
them to be leaders within their own departments.”

“yeah, I think that overall they want all of us to be leaders. I don’t think they’re targeting
anyone in particular. Everbody pretty much has the same PD. It’s just those people that
are willing to take on a little extra work become department chairs. But for the most part
everyone is encouraged equally to take a leadership role and everybody does. Everybody
whose a teacher here pretty much does some extra club or activity outside of the regular
teaching job.”

ELPS 3: How does staff contribute to management of the organization, operation, and
resources to ensure an efficient, and effective learning environment? Although primarily
logistical in nature, one of the supportive functions of this ELPS was distributive leadership
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

83
capacity development. The school sites again referenced how important the hiring process is in
maintaining the culture as well as teachers being involved and holding each other accountable for
instructional practice and student achievement.
S1
“I don’t know what happens except me saying that I think Mr. (Principal) is a very
intuitive person when sitting in an interview and getting a feel if that person will be a step
up person. We have a lot of step up type people here. Everyone wants to be a leader.
There are people willing to step up..even pull back to offer another teacher
opportunities.”

“When we have staff meetings we talk about efficient use of time and y’know comments
on random videos are quite pointed. Getting permission to watch videos.. be able to show
why your doing it.”

S2
“I feel like I’ve gotten a lot of support for the things I’ve signed up or volunteered for.
Several people check on me seeing if I need anything. Giving me reminders when I need
to do something. I don’t know if it looks like that for everyone I’m just a first year
teacher here.”

S3
“..we’ve had a couple of teachers working on admin credentials… not just giving them
something(leadership opportunities) but giving them something meaningful.”

ELPS 4: How does the faculty collaborate with the community? (In order to respond to
diverse community interest and needs, and mobilize community resources.) This particular ELPS
according to observation and survey data was not as prevalent. Interview data however, revealed
that the types of community interactions engaged in by the sites was a commonality worth
noting. Sites 1 and 2 have culminating projects for seniors. One of the respondents from S3
responded to an inquiry about senior projects; “..no senior project, I would like there to be, but
there isn’t.” Sites 1 and 2 use these projects as community outreach activities. Community
members and partners are invited to participate in the evaluation of the student work. One of
these sites invited the researcher to help preview the senior project papers and provide feed back
to students on their drafts.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

84
All three sites have annual events that take place on campus and all stakeholders are
invited and encouraged to participate. The interview data revealed strong ongoing community
relationships and an active effort to maintain them. The schools are very aware of the
communities in which they reside as well as those communities that their student populations
come from. One of the school sites recognizing the logistical issues families face in attending a
week night event, created a Saturday Expo which serves the same purpose as a traditional back
to school night.
Teachers are very active in creating curricular activities that involve community
businesses and partners. At S3 the Spanish teacher takes students to three different restaraunts in
the community to practice their spanish in a real life context. There are many activities like this
at all three sites this is just one example. All three sites also recognize the need to recruit students
and families through visits to local middle schools.
ELPS 5: How do school/staff activities ensure that the staff acts with integrity, fairness,
and in an ethical manner? This particular ELPS includes supportive activities that include
systems of accountability for student’s academic and social success. The modeling of self-
awareness, transparency and reflective practices. This also included a probing question on how
staff members promote social justice and ensure that individual student needs inform all aspects
of schooling. Teacher reflection was a very strong component of professional development
activities at all three school sites. Transparency is also a strong part of each sites school culture.
Respondents also explained how students are encouraged to be self aware by creating academic
activities that promote reflection. In regards to accountability there is a very strong mutual trust
and expectation of excellence between the staff and the students.
S1
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

85
“The administration goes around and talks to the kids before the state testing. Explaining
that if you put your name on something it should be your best work and not just for the
school but for you.”

“Anyone is open to others coming into their classrooms at anytime…. I don’t think the
administration suffers fools.. if they see that a person is not going to fit.. that time period
where you can get rid of someone.. that’s been done.”

“They go to elementary schools and middle schools and give lessons on smoking etc..
having students in those leadership roles .. helping other students have healthy schools
and lifestyles.”

S2
“We do a good job of keeping each other accountable. We try not to be..like.. where have
you been? More like, are you really busy… is there something I can hep you with?”

“We do things on our PD time. Ice breakers. Getting to know you sort of things. What
strengths we bring to the school, our classrooms as teachers. Goal setting. What are we
doing well? Informal conversations. Some of our administrators will come into our
meetings and ask how are you doing? What are you doing well? What are you struggling
with? How we measure up to our standards, our schools standards, our students
standards.”

“I feel like that is something all of the staff tries to reach for, for our students without it
needing to be said. I think for the most part..everybody that I’ve talked to so far has a true
dedication towards having students learn more about themselves before they go off into
college. Which is one of our biggest goals. To make sure all of our students get into four
year colleges. We have 95% of our students attending 4 years, which is ridiculous.”

“Make sure the experiences in the text reflect the students experience and their needs.”

“For me especially as an english teacher we look at text in a certain way. Even using
poetry and the writings of the 18
th
and 17
th
century. To try to talk about how those things
can relate in someway to the struggles we have for equality, justice.”

S3
“Making sure everyone is accountable for the students success. I try to get the students
thinking about ..why are you here? Why did you come to this school? Get them involved.
Everybody bringing up the fact that this is about trying to get you to that next level, and
working together because in a small school everybody has to do their part..and sometimes
somebody elses part too.”

“All or most of all the teachers put all of the grades online..that speaks to transparency. In
terms of reflection we do spend quite a bit of time. We just did this as a department chair
group..going through the common core and reflecting on what we were already doing and
what whe need to start doing.”
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

86

“We(Asst. Principal and Principal) go into the classroom…y’know I didn’t see this. Can
you tell me about this part of the lesson? How do you think that went? Did you try this?
Trying to get them(teachers) to open up out of their comfort zone a little bit. For the
teachers, that’s a lot of it. For the students we do the same thing actually. Why are you
here? What are your goals? Try to help them develop the next steps. We’re here to help
you.”

“The one thing that is pretty standard is that everybody is held accountable. Y’know the
concept of no excuses is throughout every department…every classroom really.”

ELPS 6: How does the staff understand, respond to, and influence the political, social,

economic, legal, cultural context? The supportive functions included; advocating for children,
families, and caregivers, being a model school, and the willingness to adapt leadership strategies
based on emerging trends and initiatives.
S1
“A lot of the things we’ve been doing, now everone has to do because of the common
core…HELLLOOO.. they think it’s a (S1) thing, but it’s not. Y’know we were just trying
to find a better way to do things. The other schools were big we were small so we had a
chance to do things differently. You can’t really blame them they are jugernaughts.”

“Whenever there is an instructional district planning committee, (S1) is always
represented in a leadership role.”

S2
“That’s a great question, and I think when I think about charter schools and what they
should be, I don’t know that charter schools should be a replacement for the local
community high school. I wrestle with the huge growth of charter schools personally, for
all the reasons everybody talks about it. But, at the same time I feel like we are doing
really good work here. Some of the things can be replicated.”

“I do think that people see us as a model. I think there is a lot more for people to learn
from us that have not been exposed to us yet, so that’s something the development
department is working on.”

S3
“They (the district) do look to us as leaders in certain areas.”

“Everyone is doing a lot and everybody is very passionate about what they’re doing and
it’s easy to burn out. So just being really careful, it may be an emerging trend but don’t
jump on it. How can we incorporate it? Is it something we’re already doing? Is there a
way for us to tweek what we’re already doing?”
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

87

RQ1 Data Analysis Summary
Research question 1 sought to explore to what extent the ELPS were demonstrated at the
school sites. Demonstration of each ELPS was based upon the occurrence of support activities.
According to the observation data, ELPS 2 was the most demonstrated theme at all three sites.
ELPS 3 was also in the top three demonstrated themes at all three sites. There were differences in
rankings of the sites 2
nd
and 3
rd
demonstrated ELPS. However, ELPS 3, 1, and 5 were among
those ranked. According to the survey data, ELPS 2 and 5 were in the top two ranking spots
across the three sites. The third ranked demonstrated ELPS was either 1 or 3. Based upon this
information, data suggests that high performing schools have strong school cultures with a firmly
established mission and vision regarding student learning. Staff members feel that they are able
to contribute to sustaining that vision and mission. The school site organization is efficient in
securing for teachers what they need to provide high quality instruction. There is also an implicit
ethos of high expectations as well as strong bonds of trust and respect.
Comparative analysis of the data presented may suggest that S3 is a statistical outlier in
some instances relative to S1 and S2. S1 and S2 had more data in common such as their top three
demonstrated ELPS in observations. What all three sites did have in common was the most
demonstrated ELPS theme 2. It should be noted that observation data shows that S3 had a
comparatively stronger demonstration the most demonstrated ELPS theme (2) relative to that of
S1 or S2. This would suggest that staff at S3 have a comparatively stronger sense of a firmly
established school culture conducive to student learning and professional development. It would
be necessary to disaggregate the coding of ELPS 2 for the sites to discern which specific
functions were evidenced. This information is present in the raw data but was not presented. It
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

88
should also be noted that S3 is more dependent upon their district for resources such as time
which directly impacts the ability to plan and implement professional development.
Survey data revealed that S2 was the only site to record modes in the Occasionally
category. Three out of the six demonstrated ELPS recorded modes of Occasionally in the survey
data for S3. In regards to ELPS 1, a mode of 2 would indicate that compared to other ELPS, staff
feel they do not share in development and implementation of a shared vision of learning. This
should be considered in conjucntion with the interview data, which explains that staff are only
hired if they have the ability to buy into the established vision. This could also substantiate the
data’s indication of a relatively stronger sense of culture at S3 compared to S1 and S2 noted in
the previous paragraph. This is a prime example in the value of triangulating data.
The data reported exhibits characteristics present at all three sites that are consistent with
high performing organizations and distributive leadership models. Interviews confirmed these
results in revealing the mutual practices the sites employed and commonalities in their cultures.
Data was organized by school site in order to facilitate the analysis process. Responses from the
three sites were very uniform in content. The researcher submits that it would have been
challenging to distinguish which site the data came from had it not been disclosed.
Research Question 1a (RQ1a)
How is the demonstration of ELPS influenced by school site organizational structure in
high performing urban high schools? In order to answer this question, it was necessary to
determine the organizational structure of each site. Information flow and decision-making
patterns reveal organizational structure. Who makes the decisions and with what information?
How is the information communicated? Organizational structure as defined by Daft (2010)
provided a framework for comparison.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

89
Observation Data
In the professional development sessions, there were three types of groups observed.
Staff met as a whole group (all contents and grade levels), by department (content) or grade level
depending upon the topic and purpose of the session. All three configurations were observed at
all three sites over the course of the study. Grade level teams were common for the two sites that
have senior projects. S1 met by whole group and department in order to examine their
instructional practice alignment with common core curricula standards. S2 was observed meeting
by grade level in order to facilitate a student project. This interdisciplinary project is completed
during intersession (winter break) and is organized by grade level. S3 grouped teachers
according to grade level to analyze data in preparation for WASC compliance. Break-out
sessions presenting instructional strategies and organized by department were also observed at
S1. There was a session on grading practices organized by department at S2.
The 2 sites that are affiliated with a district had topics in response to a district level
requisite. In the case of the independent school site, topics were based upon organizational needs
and teacher preferences. It should be mentioned that even though sites needed to respond to
district needs, administrators gave teachers autonomy in how to meet those needs. Teachers led
the professional development sessions at all three sites.
Survey Data
Although primarily an indicator of the supprotive functions for ELPS 1 and 3, the 1
st
and
3
rd
evaluated statements in survey question 2 were also direct indicators of leadership style. The
first statement evaluated the extent to which staff members shared in the development,
articulation, and implementation of a shared vision of learning. Data reports reflected that in the
case of sites 1 and 2, this was the 3
rd
highest mean. This suggests a collaborative process and
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

90
shared leadership. This was the lowest mean for S3, however as evidenced by interview data, the
vision was firmly established before staff members were hired. Revealing that this was not a
necessary function given that staff was hired based upon their alignment with the established
vision and mission. The third statement which is a supportive function of ELPS 3 asked staff
members to evaluate the extent to which administration solicits, values, and uses staff
suggestions on instructional practice. Indicating a shared leadership style consistent with a
horizontal organizational structure. This was S3’s third highest mean. It was the 4
th
highest
mean at S1 and the 5
th
highest at S2. This would suggest that the staff did not feel that their
instructional practice suggestions were solicited, valued or used. Given that teachers create their
curriculum at all three sites, that particular piece of data may be misleading if considered in
isolation.
Interview Data
Interview questions sought clarification and confirmation of the observation and survey
data. Teachers were asked to describe the organization as horizontal or hierarchical/vertical.
Without exception, responses reflected a predominantly horizontal structure. Respondents from
sites 1 and 3 explained that although the district mandates came through the administration in a
vertical fashion, the implementation decisions were primarily made horizontally.
S1
“The initial thing comes top down but then it spreads horizontally. “

“I think some things have to be vertical otherwise it’s completely unwieldy, but it’s about
as horizontal as you can get it and still run fairly efficiently. Yeah, I think it’s a really
good balance. We certainly get guidance and the information about what is expected of
us in a sort of vertical fashion. Y’know that comes from the administration but there’s a
great deal of horizontal in how we learn to do that or how we put that into practice.”

“There’s an effort to influence but there’s a big amount of trust that you decide to use
what’s best in your classroom.”

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

91
S2
“I think it’s somewhere in the middle. I don’t think it’s 100% democratic but I also don’t
feel like our administrators are making all of the decisions. It does feel like there is some
opportunity for input.

“It’s definitely not hierarchical. (Administrator name) is not any better than us of course
(administrator) is more someone that can make decisions. But (administrator) never
makes us feel like we can’t come up with our own ideas on whatever. It’s never been like
that. In fact, (administrator) encourages us. (Administrator) is the type of person that
would share ideas and you take it or leave it which is a great thing for me. Because I’ve
experienced working for other organizations and schools where somebody was definitely
dominant and if your ideas did not go in line with that person then it was a no go.”

S3
“I’d say it’s more horizontal. I mean we are given directives but for the most part we’re
allowed as departments to decide how we achieve our goals.”

“The former principal was very much more top down leadership. Some liked it and some
didn’t. (Current principal) is very much the shared leadership mindset. Again, some
people like it some don’t. The district sometimes wonders who’s in charge here. But you
have to build the leadership throughout the ranks because you can’t do it all.”

Document Review Data
There was great variety in the types of documents available at each site for review. The
most common items across the sites and chosen for review included; school websites,
professional development schedules and district or governing organization memos. The
document review protocol was designed to reflect a continuum of organizational structure.
According to Daft (2010), organizations are never purely vertical or horizontal due to their
inherent complexities. Each of the five aspects was reflected on the protocol. Odd numbered
items measured the extent to which an organization was vertical. The even numbers reflected the
extent to which an organization was horizontal. The vertical organization would have odd scores
closer to 5 the horizontal organization would have even scores closer to 50. Scores were
computed by calculating the mean for both categories and then determining the proximity to 5
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

92
(for odds) and 50 (for evens) by subtracting the means from 5 and 50 (odds and evens
respectively). In all three cases, the school sites were more horizontal than vertical.
RQ1a Data Analysis Summary
Observation data suggests that all three school sites have flexibility in grouping teams to
accomplish goals. This was confirmed by the survey data, which indicated staff members felt
involved in decision making processes. Although no two organizations are the same, patterns of
decision making and information sharing practices were similar across the three sites. Figure 4.4
below is an organizational chart reflective of this data. The interview further confirmed this
finding as well as edifying that teachers are responsible for creating curriculum at all three sites.
Furthermore, the curricula do not stop at meeting A-G graduation requirements. Each school
offers career themed electives aligned with the school’s academic theme and mission. Document
review scores confirmed that although vertical to some extent, sites are primarily horizontal in
responding to student needs and determining strategies in response to accountability obligations.
These findings suggest that school sites demonstration of ELPS and a horizontal organizational
structure coexist at the successful urban school.

Figure 4.4 Observed Organization Chart
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

93
CHAPTER V: ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS
Literature reviewed in Chapter II connected two primary frameworks regarding
instructional leadership and organizational theory and design. The Educational Leadership Policy
Standards (ELPS) were developed by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration
(NPBEA) ISLLC Steering Committee, and produced for the Council of Chief State School
Officers (CCSSO). They are used to qualify the presence of instructional leadership. The ELPS
were developed using several key studies on educational leadership and student learning
(CCSSO, 2008).
There was significant data reported confirming demonstration of ELPS at all three sites
answering RQ1. All ELPS themes were demonstrated at the three schools in the sample. The
most frequently demonstrated being a strong school culture with firmly established mission and
vision of learning. Observations revealed consistent demonstration in how the schools employed
instructional leadership practices as defined by the ELPS framework. Observations revealed
distributive leadership practices consistent with a horizontal organizational structure. The
teachers at these schools are empowered and confident.
There is a commonality of purpose, a shared vision, and understanding of how to
complement one another’s efforts. Individuals do not sacrifice their personal interests to
the larger team vision; rather, the shared vision becomes an extension of their personal
visions. (Senge, 2010, p. 217)

Daft (2010) explains that organizations must find a balance between vertical efficiency
and horizontal coordination. Commensurate with social cognitive theory, Daft employs a
relatively new approach in analyzing organizations that examines bidirectional influences
between individuals, groups and the organization. He further contends that organizations are
never purely vertical or horizontal and he has defined six structure types along this continuum.
The horizontal organization is very similar to the learning organization as defined by Senge
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

94
(2010). Divisional and Matrix organizations are hybrids maintaining aspects of both vertical and
horizontal structures. These school sites epitomize a learning organization construct in that they
are fluid. They continually seek to improve instructional practices and respond to changes in
population and environment, with the explicit shared goal of preparing students for the future.
All three sites enjoy a stable staff and leaders come from within that staff. Also, staff
members expressed that communication was facilitated by their size. These three sites were one-
fourth to one-third the size of neighboring high schools. Teachers are able to plan across content
and grade level enabling a coherent and relevant curriculum. The stability and size of the staff
enables a level of trust that propagates mutual accountability and high expectations. They are
able to depend on each other for professional expertise and leadership. Reform practices that are
detrimental to the development of social and intellectual capital should be questioned. The
practice of reconstitution should be further evaluated regarding its impact on school
communities.
But personal mastery is not something you possess. It is a process. It is a lifelong
discipline. People with a high level of personal mastery are acutely aware of their
ignorance, their incompetence, their growth areas. And they are deeply self-confident.
Paradoxical? Only for those who do not see that “the journey is the reward.” (Senge,
2010, p. 132)

Staff members are secure enough to hold each other accountable. Feedback is embraced
and not feared because continuous improvement is the objective. As lifelong learners
themselves, teachers promote the practices of reflection and continuous progress. Students are
college and career ready, lifelong learners not test scores. They work collaboratively and use
each other as professional resources. They are not treated as generic interchangeable parts,
questioning the current practice of reconstitution and the displacement of teachers, where many
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

95
displaced teachers are forced into positions they are not compatible with. Putting people in
positions they are unprepared for is setting them and the students up for failure.
All three school sites enable and promote teacher created curricula. Urban schools and
communities are largely defined by their populations according to NCLB. An urban school
typically has larger populations of ethnic minorities (Granger, 2008; McDonald, 2002; McElroy,
2005). This study reconfirms that NCLB exacerbates the achievement gap phenomenon. Critical
race theory contends that these inequities are reflective of inherent racial inequality still present
in American society (Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Delgado & Stefancic, 2001). Schools are largely
responsible for perpetuating our culture and societal norms (Dewey, 1916; Zamudio et al., 2011).
As such, schools must be the tools by which we counteract these social justice issues. They also
contend that social capital exists in urban schools and communities that can enable social justice
and upward economic mobility (Ayers et al., 2008; Bowles & Gintis, 2011; Delgado &
Stefancic, 2001; Freire, 1985; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Yosso, 2005; Zamudio et al., 2011).
Data findings from this study further confirm that efforts driven by NCLB have not been
able to fulfill the promise of increased educational outcomes for all children. The method used to
calculate AYP includes stipulations regarding certain subgroups of the student population.
Schools that have disproportionately larger numbers of students from several of these subgroups
are at a disadvantage and instead of raising academic achievement per its goal, students in these
subgroups and their communities are further marginalized. It is notable that these three sites did
not have significant populations of students with special needs. This is a disadvantaged subgroup
that continues to be less successful than its peers.
Culturally relevant pedagogy is one way of protecting the social capital that exists within
the urban community. Teachers design curriculum based upon student needs that meet standards
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

96
and are coherent with the school culture. This is a conscious decision to act inclusively and
honor diversity. Alternatively, NCLB attempts to standardize disadvantaged subgroups into the
dominant culture, which is problematic in an increasingly culturally diverse society.
These three sites established school cultures that overcome deficit perspectives of diverse
student populations. The organizational structure at these sites removed the systemic barriers and
enabled teachers to align culture with curriculum and pedagogy too increase student
performance. Teachers felt valued as professionals and were trusted to develop strategies to meet
student needs and respond to accountability mandates.
Implications and Reflections
The implications of the data findings in this study begin an overdue conversation
regarding the mismatch in what policy dictates a school should be and the systemic barriers
propagated by those same policies that prevent actualizing that goal. It contributes to educational
leadership and organizational theory literature by providing data that connects the two within the
current educational reform context.
These administrators and staff have established a culture that embraces performance and
growth. Administrators at each of the sites have enormous respect for their staff and create the
professional space for the development of high quality instruction. The high level of student
achievement in conjunction with this focus on instructional expertise would appear to support the
literature connecting student achievement with teacher quality. Teachers and students have high
expectations of each other. The culture of the school enables open communication regarding
assessment of instructional practice and student learning. This is consistent with the type of
accountability proposed by O'Day (2002) which is a combination of administrative and
professional. Teachers overwhelmingly see the potential for success in their students. Critical
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

97
race theorists often note the implied racism in acceptance of lower expectations for different
groups as problematic. These three urban schools embody the antithesis of that. The debate in
how best to prepare teachers to work with diverse populations could be informed by an in-depth
study in how these faculties have overcome deficit thinking.
Staff members were empowered to make decisions on core processes such as curriculum
development. Teachers at all three sites referenced the balance between the administration’s
ability to provide control and directives, and the horizontal nature in which they were allowed to
determine how things were done. School districts and school sites have been traditionally vertical
in structure. One benefit of the privatization of public education is the ability to create new types
of school sites and organizations. Further study should be conducted to determine how schools
decide which structure is best for the community and student populations they serve.
Teachers create curricula that are student centered and project based. Teachers at the
three sites collaborate in designing interdisciplinary units. This is consistent with Tyler (1949)
who explains the importance of multiple perspectives in designing curriculum. At one school site
there is an instance where the two teachers share the classroom and students from two different
content areas. Another site devotes a significant block of time for an interdisciplinary project for
students. Although less formal in structure, interviews at the third site revealed significant
interdisciplinary collaboration and instruction. Comprehensive reform strategies have not
included curriculum development at the school site. There is a plethora of scripted curriculum
programs mandated by districts. It would be interesting to study the core curriculums at the three
sites to see what they have in common with each other and furthermore how they compare to
some of the more popular scripted curricula.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

98
The leadership staff rises from within the organization. At one site in particular, all of the
principals had been teachers at that site before promotion to administration. Without exception,
professional development was organized and led by teachers. This is consistent with the major
principals of instructional leadership from the literature. Instructional practices, accountability,
integrity, continued improvement through professional development and shared decision making
(Brewer, 2001; Milward and Timperley, 2010; Northouse, 2010; Senge, 2010) were all recurring
themes at each of the school sites. “Inevitably, however, people in communities of practice share
their experiences and knowledge in free-flowing, creative ways that foster new approaches to
problems” (Wenger & Snyder, 2000, p. 140). Study in how to apply non-traditional
organizational theory to a bureaucratic system needs to be further investigated.
Staff members expressed that their schools were able to do many things by virtue of their
smaller size compared to traditional comprehensive high schools. Communication was greatly
enhanced by the smaller size of the school site. The smaller size enabled teachers to take
advantage of each other’s professional and interpersonal skills. There was a sense of family
enabling mutual trust and respect amongst staff members. The researcher had the opportunity to
attend a social event hosted by one of the school sites. There were current and former staff
members present as well as stakeholders from the community. This event took place at the home
of one of the teachers and the feeling of family was palpable. It was obvious how comfortable
this faculty was with each other. It would be valuable to learn how the school cultures developed.
Turnover of staff was at a minimum. Most of the teachers had been with their respective
sites for 5 years or more. These sites are able to take advantage of existing social capital due to
longevity of their relationship with each other and their community of stakeholders. This is
consistent with instructional leadership as described by Spillane et al. (2003) who described the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

99
networks and trust, working together with colleagues and facilitating sharing of knowledge as
social capital enabling successful instructional practices. There is a high level of effort in hiring
staff members that are aligned with the culture and philosophy of the school. The mission of the
organization is preserved through hiring new members that can meld into the existing culture of
the school site. “An organization’s intellectual capital is dependent on both individual
capabilities and the collective capabilities of the organization derived from organizational social
capital” (Holme & Rangel, 2012, p. 260).
Students are viewed as people not outcomes. Test scores were not discussed as main
goals, they were treated as byproducts of student centered, high quality instructional practices.
“The values question is whether the goals of the system, narrowly conceived as improved test
scores, are the right goals for public education in a democratic society” (Mathis, 2003, p. 683).
Data from this study further substantiates concerns regarding the narrow perspective of test
scores as driving forces of instructional practice. The efficacy of this study would be greatly
improved by expansion of the sample size. It would also be useful to include un-successful urban
schools and successful sub-urban schools for comparison.
Special education students are one of the disadvantaged subgroups included in urban
populations. The search for sample school sites became problematic in that there were no schools
with significant proportions of special education students that met their AYP. These three school
sites have very small populations of special education students. There are a multitude of issues in
evaluating how and why equality in academic achievement remains elusive for these students.
There is a need for research on this phenomenon. The process of applying to most alternative
schools creates a situation where students and families with special needs, self-select themselves
out of the process. Low basic literacy and math skills can be prohibitive in completing the
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

100
application process. The process of applying necessitates a level of parent involvement that is not
enjoyed by students in foster care or group homes, most of whom are in special education
programs. It is disconcerting that students with special needs may continue to be left behind,
even in settings such as these. This is a systemic issue. When test scores drive the market,
schools are motivated to use application and selection processes that may exclude certain student
populations. All three school sites expressed a desire to improve in providing services but the
current political context of public education is prohibitive to that effort. Policy changes resulting
from a re-evaluation of the efficacy of NCLB is desperately needed.
Among the novel objects that attracted my attention during my stay in the United States,
nothing struck me more forcibly than the general equality of condition among the people.
I readily discovered the prodigious influence that this primary fact exercises on the whole
course of society; it gives a peculiar direction to public opinion and a peculiar tenor to the
laws; it imparts new maxims to the governing authorities and peculiar habits to the
governed (Tocqueville, 1945, p. 3).

The data findings in this study offer a construct from which to expand research into
questions whose answers can ameliorate deficits within the current educational reform agenda
and efforts.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

101
References
S1 School Website (2013). 2011-12 School Accountability Report Card (SARC). Retrieved
October 11, 2013, from
http://www.gusd.net/cms/lib03/CA01000648/Centricity/Domain/3/SARC1112Clark.pdf
Applied Research Center (2012). Historical Timeline of Public Education in the US. Retrieved
March 17, 2013, from http://www.arc.org/content/view/100/217/
Ayers, W., Ladson-Billings, G., Michie, G., & Noguera, P. A. (Eds.). (2008). City kids, city
schools: more reports from the front row (kindle ed.). New York, NY: The New Press.
Bagley, W. C. (1938). An Essentialist's Platform for the Advancement of American Education.
Educational Administration and Supervision, 24(April), 241-256. Retrieved May 8, 2013,
from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=8&ved=0
CGAQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fedu224fall2010.pbworks.com%2Ff%2FBagley%2B
%2BAn%2BEssentialist's%2BPlatform%2B(1938).pdf&ei=aYCKUf_ZD6rCigLUioGA
CQ&usg=AFQjCNGjSabvBmb4WQBJeQauRlg2k66l3g&sig2=PYa_aegdOU0q2T0Ow
DpcvQ&bvm=bv.46226182,d.cGE
Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The Work of Teaching and the Challenge for Teacher
Education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497-511.
Bennis, W. (2010). Still Surprised A Memoir of a life in Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-
Bass.
Berliner, D. (2005). The near impossibility of testing for teacher quality. Journal of Teacher
Education, 56(3), 205-213. Retrieved February 24, 2013, from
nepc.colorado.edu/files/EPSL-0505-110-EPRU%5B1%5D.pdf
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

102
Bobbitt, J. F. (1918). The Curriculum. Chicago, IL: Franklin Bobbitt. Retrieved April 27, 2013,
from
http://books.google.com/books/reader?id=BIQYAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&out
put=reader
Bogden, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative Research for Education an Introduction to
Theory and Methods (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Group, Inc.
Boleman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing Organizations Artistry, Choice and Leadership
(4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (2011). Schooling in Capitalist America Educational Reform and the
Contradictions of Economic Life (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
Braun, H. I., Wang, A., Jenkins, F., & Weinbaum, E. (2006). The Black-White achievement gap:
Do state politics matter? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14(8), . Retrieved March
30, 2013, from http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/79
Brewer, H. (2001). 10 Steps to Success. Journal of Staff Development, 22(1), 30-31.
Bruner, J. S. (1973). The Relevance of Education (2 ed.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton &
Company Inc.
Buchen, I. H. (2003). Education in America: the next 25 years. The Futurist, 37(1), 44-50.
Bullough Jr., R. V., Burbank, M., Gess-Newsome, J., Kauchak, D., & Kennedy, C. (1998). What
Matters Most: Teaching for America's future? A Faculty response to the Report of the
National Commission on teaching and America's future. Journal of Education for
Teaching, 24(1), 7-32.
Bush, T., & Glover, D. (2012). Distributed leadership in action: leading high-performing
leadership teams in English schools. School Leadership & Management, 32(1), 21-36.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

103
California Department Of Education (2013). DataQuest. Retrieved October 19, 2013, from
http://data1.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
S2 School Website (2013, July 9). Retrieved from http://echslawndale.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/05/ECHS-SARC-Report-2012-English-Spanish.pdf
Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to Manage Urban School Districts.
Harvard Business Review, November, 55-68.
City of Glendale (2014, January). City of Glendale, CA Community Development. Retrieved
January 15, 2014, from http://www.ci.glendale.ca.us/planning/census2.asp
Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute (CLPI) (2013). Clpi.org EdHistory.pdf. Retrieved March 15,
2013, from http://www.cblpi.org/ftp/School%20Choice/EdHistory.pdf
The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) (2008). Educational Leadership Policy
Standards: Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) 2008. Washington,
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved May 11, 2013, from
http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Publications/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Standards
_ISLLC_2008_as_Adopted_by_the_National_Policy_Board_for_Educational_Administr
ation.html
Counts, G. S. (1932). Dare Progressive Education be Progressive. Progressive Education, IX(4),
257-263. Retrieved April 26, 2013, from
http://courses.wccnet.edu/~palay/cls2002/counts.htm
Courtis, S. A., & Packer, P. C. (1920). Educational Research. The Journal of Educational
Research, 1(1), 5-19.
Daft, R. L. (2010). Organizational Theory and Design (10th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western
Cengage Learning.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

104
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national Teacher Supply Policy for
Education: the Right Way to Meet the "Highly Qualified Teacher" Challenge.
Educational Policy Analysis Archives (EPAA), 11(33), 1-55.
Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical Race Theory An Introduction (Kindle ed.). New
York, NY: New York University Press.
Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the Crisis (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: The W. Edwards Deming
Institute.
Deming, W. E. (1994). The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education (Second ed.).
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Derr, C. B., & Gabarro, J. J. (1972). An Organizational Contingency Theory for Education.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 8(26), 26-43.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education
(Kindle ed.). Retrieved April 11, 2013, from
http://www.amazon.com/kindle/dp/B0082ZJ6WS/ref=rdr_kindle_ext_eos_detail
Dolan, T. G. (2011). A Look at NCLB in Its 10th Year. The Hispanic Outlook in Higher
Education, 22(1), 22-24.
Drucker, P. F. (2001). The Essential Drucker (Kindle ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins
Publishers, Inc.
Duncan, R. (1979). What is the Right Organizational Structure? Decision Tree Analysis Provides
the Answer. Organizational Dynamics, (Winter), 59-80.
Ediger, M. (2004). What Makes for Failing Schools? Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(2),
170-174.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

105
Education Data Partnership (2013). Ed-Data. Retrieved November 9, 2013, from http://www.ed-
data.k12.ca.us/Pages/Home.aspx
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Unwarranted Intrusion. Education Next, 2(1), 31-35.
Farber, D. A., & Sherry, S. (1993). Telling Stories out of School: An Essay on Legal Narratives.
Standford Law Review, 45(4), 807-855.
Freire, P. (1985). The Politics of Education, Culture, Power, and Liberation. Westport, CT:
Bergin & Garvey.
Gerstner, L. V., Jr. (2001). Status Report: Public Education in America. Executive Speeches,
15(4), 5-9.
Glendale Unified School District (2014, January). Gusd.net. Retrieved from
http://www.gusd.net//Domain/10
Goldin, C. (1999). National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). NBER Working Paper
Series on Historical Factors in Long Run Growth, 119, 1-79. Retrieved March 16, 2013,
from http://www.nber.org/papers/h0119
Gordon, D. T. (2010). The Limits of Ideologies: Curriculum and the Culture Wars. In F. W.
Parkay, E. J. Anctil, & G. Hass (Eds.), Curriculum Leadership Readings for Developing
Quality Educational Programs (9th ed., pp. 288-297). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Granger, D. A. (2008). No Child Left Behind and the Spectacle of Failing Schools: the
Mythology of Contemporary School Reform. Educational Studies: A Journal of the
American Educational Studies Association, 43(3), 206-228.
Gunter, H. M. (2005). Conceptualizing Research in Educational Leadersip. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 33(2), 165-180.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

106
Haberman, M. (2007). Who Benefits From Failing Urban Schools? An Essay. Theory Into
Practice, 46(3), 179-186.
Hall, D. (2005). Getting Honest about Grad Rates; How States Play the Numbers and Students
Loose. The Education Trust, (June), .
Hallinger, P. (2005). Instructional Leadership and the School Principal: A Passing Fancy that
Refuses to Fade Away. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 4(3), 221-239.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the Principal's Role in School Effectiveness: A
Review of Empirical Research, 1980-1995. Education Administration Quarterly, 32(1),
5-44.
Hallinger, P., & McCary, C. E. (1990). Developing the Strategic Thinking of Instructional
Leaders. The Elementary School Journal, 91(2), 89-108.
Hanifan, L. J. (1916). The Rural Community Center. Anals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science; New Possibilities in Education, 67, 130-138.
Harris, D. N. (2007). High-Flying Schools, Student Disadvantage, and the Logic of NCLB.
American Journal of Education, 113(3), 367-394.
Heck, R. H., & Hallinger, P. (2005). The Study of Educational Leadership and Management:
Where Does the Field Stand Today? Educational Management Administration &
Leadership , 33(2), 229-244.
Hess, F. M. (2000). Why urban school reform doesn't deliver. The School Administrator, 57(1),
42.
S3 School Website (2012). School Accountability Report Card. Retrieved July 8, 2013, from
http://hmsa-hsd-
ca.schoolloop.com/file/1298973463836/1332658744251/8149294800302436835.pdf
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

107
Hollins, E. R., & Torres-Guzman, M. (2005). Research on Preparing Teachers for Diverse
Populations. Studying Teacher Education: The Report of the AERA Panel on Research
and Teacher Education, , 477-548.
Holme, J. J., & Rangel, J. S. (2012). Putting School Reform in Its Place: Social Geography,
Organizational Social Capital, and School Performance. American Educational Research
Journal, 49(2), 257-283.
Horng, E., & Loeb, S. (2010). New Thinking About Instructional Leadership. The Phi Delta
Kappan, 92(3), 66-69.
Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing 'No Child Left Behind' and the Rise of Neoliberal Education
Policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493-518.
Ishimaru, A. (2013). From Heroes to Organizers: Principals and Education Organizing in Urban
School Reform. Education Administration Quarterly, 49(1), 3-51.
Jackson, J. (2005). Leadership for Urban Public Schools. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 192-
202.
Jackson, S. A., Logsdon, D. M., & Taylor, N. E. (1983). Instructional Leadership Behaviors:
Differentiating Effective from Ineffective Low-Income Urban Schools. Urban Education,
18(1), 59-70.
Kessinger, T. A. (2011). Efforts Toward Educational Reform in the United States Since 1958 A
Review of Seven Major Initiatives. American Educational History Journal, 38(2), 263-
276.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a Critical Race Theory in Education. Teachers College
Record, 97(1), 47-68.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

108
Linn, R. L. (2005). Fixing the NCLB Accountability System. CRESST (National Center for
Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing) Policy Brief, 8,.
Lytle, J. H. (2007). Urban School Reform: To what end? In W. T. Pink & G. W. Noblit (Eds.),
International Handbook of Urban Education (Vol. 19, pp. 859-882). :
Springer.doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5199-9_45
Malen, B., Croninger, D. M., & Redmond-Jones, D. (2002). Reconstituting Schools: "Testing"
the "Theory of Action". Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 113-132.
Marks, H. M., & Printy, S. M. (2003). Principal Leadership and School Performance: An
Integration of Transformational and Instructional Leadership. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 39(3), 370-397.
Marzano, R. J., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. A. (2005). School leadership that works: from
research to results (Kindle ed.). Aurora, CO: McRel.
Mathis, W. J. (2003). No Child Left Behind: Costs and Benefits. The Phi Delta Kappan, 84(9),
679-686.
Maxwell, J. (2013). Qualitative Research Design an Interactive Approach (3rd ed.). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
McDonald, D. (2002, September/October). No Child Left Behind Act Mandates Assessment
Measures. Momentum, 8-10.
McElroy, E. J. (2005). NCLB's unintended consequences. American Teacher, 89(8), 2.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research a Guide to Design and Implementation. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

109
Mershon, S., & Schlossman, S. (2008). Education, Sciency, and the Politics of Knowledge: the
American Educational Research Association 1915-1940. American Journal of Education,
114(3), 307-340.
Millward, P., & Timperley, H. (2010). Organizational learning facilitated by instructional
leadership, tight coupling and boundary spanning practices. Journal of Educational
Change, 11, 139-155.
Murphy, J. (1988). Methodological, Measurement, and Conceptual Problems in the Study of
Instructional Leadership. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(2), 117-139.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983). A Nation at Risk. Retrieved July 9,
2013, from http://datacenter.spps.org/uploads/sotw_a_nation_at_risk_1983.pdf
Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership Theory and Practice (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
O'Day, J. (2002). Complexity, Accountability, and School Improvement. Harvard Educational
Review, 72(3), 293-329.
PBS KCET (2001). School the Story of American Public Education. Retrieved March 8, 2013,
from http://www.pbs.org/kcet/publicschool/about_the_series/program.html
Pyle, J. J. (1999). Race, Equality and the Rule of Law: Critical Race Theory's Attack on the
Promises of Liberalism. Boston College Law Review, 40, 787-827.
Qualtrics (2014). Qualtrics. Retrieved November 1, 2013, from https://qualtrics.com/
Reed, R. J. (1982). Urban Secondary School Leadership: Contemporary Challenges. Education
and Urban Society, 15(6), 6-25.
Robertson, H. (2008). Eradicating the Achievement Gap. Black History Bulletin, 71(1), 35-38.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance Finding the Right
Solutions to the Right Problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

110
Rugg, H. O., & Shumaker, A. (1928). The Child-dentered school. New York, NY: World
Book.Retrieved May 11, 2013, from
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=13&ved=
0CDoQFjACOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2F203.200.22.249%3A8080%2Fjspui%2Fbitstre
am%2F123456789%2F3495%2F1%2FThe_Child_centered_Schools.pdf&ei=WsmOUYs
P5_CLAsqTgZAC&usg=AFQjCNGh-
Q4idiBi4vJOfawF8XhguuPkTQ&sig2=_wiGHdW_lnSlZYEMAwQ1cw&bvm=bv.4634
0616,d.cGE
Schiro, S. M. (2008). Curriculum Theory Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns (Kindle
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Schubert, W. H. (2010). Perspectives on Four Curriculum Traditions. In F. W. Parkay, G. Hass,
& E. J. Anctil (Eds.), Curriculum Leadership Readings for Developing Quality
Educational Programs (9th ed., pp. 20-24). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Scollon, R. (2012). Analyzing Public Discourse: Discourse Analysis in the Making of Public
Policy (Kindle ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Senge, P. M. (2010). The Fifth Discipline the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization
(Kindle ed., Rev.). New York, NY: Doubleday.
Shafritz, J. M., & Ott, J. S. (1996). Classics of Organization Theory (Fourth ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Shipps, D., Fowlkes, E., & Peltzman, A. (2006). Journalism and Urban School Reform: Versions
of Democratic Decision Making in Two American Cities. American Journal of
Education, 112(3), 363-391.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

111
Smarick, A. (2010). The Turnaround Fallacy. Education Next, 10(1), 21-26. Retrieved February
8, 2013, from http://educationnext.org/the-turnaround-fallacy/
Spillane, J. P., Hallett, T., & Diamond, J. B. (2003). Forms of Capital and the Construction of
Leadership: Instructional Leadership in Urban Elementary Schools. Sociology of
Education, 76(1), 1-17.
Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice:
a distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34.
Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. N. (2004). Organizational Improvement and Accountability Lessons for
Education from other Sectors. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. N. (Eds.). (2005). Organizational improvement and accountability:
Lessons for education from other sectors. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/publications/MG/MG136
Stein, L. (2012). The art of saving a failing school. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(5), 51-55.
Tocqueville, A. (1835-1840). Democracy in America (1st Eng ed.). New York, NY: Alfred A.
Knoff, Inc. c/o Random House Inc.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (Kindle ed.). Chicago, IL:
The University of Chicago Press.
Tylor, E. B. (1920). Primitive Culture Researches into the Development of Mythology,
Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom (6th ed.). New York, NY: G. P.
Putnam's Sons.Retrieved May 8, 2013, from
http://books.google.com/books/download/Primitive_Culture.pdf?id=TNcKAAAAIAAJ&
hl=en&capid=AFLRE72i7rpIosrKTbNDRRk4VktHluNgmThD4YYE2AggQ8lLse9H9g
oeZ_u9jafNPNxeBvXTNrSP3QNQwCfRsBioJovfb79Dgg&continue=http://books.googl
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

112
e.com/books/download/Primitive_Culture.pdf%3Fid%3DTNcKAAAAIAAJ%26output%
3Dpdf%26hl%3Den
United States Congress (2002, January 8). Public Law 107-110. Retrieved January 26, 2013,
from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
Viteritti, J. P. (2003). Schoolyard Revolutions: How Research on Urban School Reform
Undermines Reform. Political Science Quarterly, 118(2), 233-257.
Wamba, N. G., & Ascher, C. (2003). An Examination of Charter School Equity. Education and
Urban Society, 35(4), 462-476.
Weiner, L. (2002). Evidence and Inquiry in Teacher Education: What's Needed for Urban
Schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 254-261.
Wenger, E. C., & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of Practice: the Organizational Frontier.
Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139-145.
White, W. E., Van Scotter, R., Haroonian, M. H., & Davis, J. E. (2010). Democracy at Risk. In
F. W. Parkay, G. Hass, & E. J. Anctil (Eds.), Curriculum Leadership Readings for
Developing Quality Educational Programs (9th ed., pp. 25-32). Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Social Cognitive Theory of Organizational Management. The
Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 361-384.
Wright, S. (2007). Education for Liberation: Race, Class, Gender, and the History of Education.
Journal of Women's History, 19(2), 202-209.
Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community
cultural wealth. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69-91.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

113
Zamudio, M. M., Russell, C., Rios, F. A., & Bridgeman, J. L. (2011). Crticial Race Theory
Matters Education and Ideology (Kindle ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

114
APPENDIX A: QUALTRICS SURVEY

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

115
APPENDIX B: ELPS CODING PROTOCOL

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

116

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

117

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

118
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
(Based upon Educational Leadership Policy Standards)
Possible probing questions
 How long have you been on staff at this school site? What is your current position? How long
have you been in this position?
 Do you feel the organizational structure here is vertical/hierarchical or horizontal?
1. How do staff members share in facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and
stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by all stakeholders?
a. How do you collaboratively develop and implement a shared vision and mission?
b. How do you collect and use data to identify goals, assess organizational effectiveness,
and promote organizational learning?
c. What methods are used to create and implement plans to achieve goals?
d. How do you and other staff members promote continuous and sustainable improvement?
e. How is progress monitored and evaluated? If there is a need to revise plans how is that
facilitated?
2. How do you advocate, nurture, and sustain a school culture and instructional program conducive
to student learning and staff professional growth?
a. How do you nurture and sustain a culture of collaboration, trust, learning, and high
expectations?
b. How has the school created/supported a comprehensive, rigorous, and coherent curricular
program?
c. How do you and your colleagues create a personalized and motivating learning
environment for students?
d. Who supervises instruction?
e. How are assessment and accountability systems to monitor student progress developed?
f. How is the instructional and leadership capacity of staff developed?
g. How is time spent on quality instruction maximized?
h. How is use of the most effective and appropriate technologies to support teaching and
learning promoted?
i. How is the impact of the instructional program monitored and evaluated?
3. How does staff contribute to management of the organization, operation, and resources to ensure
an efficient, and effective learning environment?
a. How and who monitors and evaluates the management and operational systems?
b. How/who ensures that the school can obtain allocate, align, and efficiently utilize human,
fiscal, and technological resources?
c. How is the welfare and safety of students and staff protected and promoted?
d. How is the capacity for distributed leadership developed?
e. Who/how ensures teacher and organizational time is focused to support quality
instruction and student learning?
4. How does the faculty collaborate with the community? (in order to respond to diverse community interests
and needs, and mobilize community resources)
a. How is data and information pertinent to the educational environment collected and
analyzed?
b. How you promote understanding, appreciation, and use of the community’s diverse
cultural, social, and intellectual resources?
c. How do you build and sustain positive relationships with families and caregivers?
d. What current activities build and sustain productive relationships with community
partners?
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

119
5. How do school/staff activities ensure that the staff acts with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical
manner?
a. What is the system of accountability for every student’s academic and social success?
b. How do you model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice, transparency, and
ethical behavior?
c. How does the schools mission/vision safeguard the values of democracy, equity, and
diversity?
d. Are there staff discussions that consider and evaluate the potential moral and legal
consequences of decision-making?
e. How do you as a staff member promote social justice and ensure that individual student
needs inform all aspects of schooling?
6. How does the staff understand, respond to, and influence the political, social, economic, legal,
and cultural context?
a. How do you advocate for children, families, and caregivers?
b. Do you act to influence local, district, state, and national decisions affecting student
learning?
c. How do you assess, analyze, and anticipate emerging trends and initiatives in order to
adapt leadership strategies?

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

120
APPENDIX D: DOCUMENT REVIEW PROTOCOL

N
o
n
e

A
t

A
l
l

A

G
r
e
a
t

D
e
a
l

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1)
O O O O O O O O O O
2)
O O O O O O O O O O
3)
O O O O O O O O O O
4)
O O O O O O O O O O
5)
O O O O O O O O O O
6)
O O O O O O O O O O
7)
O O O O O O O O O O
8) O O O O O O O O O O
9)
O O O O O O O O O O
10)
O O O O O O O O O O
STRATEGY
SYSTEMS
STRUCTURE
Document has evidence indicating one person is in charge of the
decision making for this organization
Document shows evidence of information shared across all levels and
groups
Dcoument shows evidence of encouraging openness, equality,
continuous improvement and change
Evidence of routine tasks that do not require high levels of expertise
Evidence of employees encouraged and enabled to make decisions
about their work
Dcoument shows evidence of a strategy developed at the top level and
communicated to staff on how best to meet needs of stakeholders
Document shows evidence of input from staff regarding needs of
stakeholders and collaborative development of strategies
Document shows evidence of single source of information
even numbers determine how horizontal
odd numbers determine how vertical
DOCUMENT REVIEW
Document shows evidence of fixed values, norms, and a resistance to
change
Document has evidence indicating that more than two people are in
charge of decision making for this organization
TASK
CULTURE
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

121
APPENDIX E: EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP POLICY STANDARDS

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

122

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

123
APPENDIX F: SITE 1 SURVEY STATISTICAL DATA REPORT
(S1) Initial Report
Last Modified: 01/28/2014
1. Please choose the staff member title that best fits your current role/position
# Answer

Response %
1 Teacher

17 81%
2 Principal or Assistant Principal

1 5%
3 Counselor or other support staff

3 14%
Total 21 100%

Statistic Value
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.33
Variance 0.53
Standard Deviation 0.73
Total Responses 21

2. Evaluate the following statements.
# Question
None
at all
Occasionally
More
often than
not
Consistently
well
Total
Responses
Mean
1
To what extent do staff
members share in
developing, articulating
and implementing a
shared vision of learning?
0 1 5 15 21 3.67
2
To what extent do staff
members advocate,
nurture, and sustain a
school culture and
instructional program that
is conducive to student
learning and professional
growth?
0 1 4 16 21 3.71
3
To what extent does
administration solicit,
value and use staff
suggestions on
instructional practice?
0 0 9 12 21 3.57
4
To what extent does this
school solicit and nurture
relationships with the
community?
0 3 12 6 21 3.14
5
To what extent do you feel
this school acts with
integrity and practices
instruction in an ethical
manner?
0 0 2 19 21 3.90
6
To what extent do you feel
this school is able to react
to socio-political needs of
the community?
0 3 7 11 21 3.38

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

124
Statistic
To what extent
do staff
members
share in
developing,
articulating
and
implementing
a shared
vision of
learning?
To what extent
do staff members
advocate,
nurture, and
sustain a school
culture and
instructional
program that is
conducive to
student learning
and professional
growth?
To what extent
does
administration
solicit, value
and use staff
suggestions on
instructional
practice?
To what
extent does
this school
solicit and
nurture
relationships
with the
community?
To what
extent do
you feel
this school
acts with
integrity
and
practices
instruction
in an
ethical
manner?
To what
extent do
you feel this
school is
able to react
to socio-
political
needs of the
community?
Min Value 2 2 3 2 3 2
Max Value 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mean 3.67 3.71 3.57 3.14 3.90 3.38
Variance 0.33 0.31 0.26 0.43 0.09 0.55
Standard
Deviation
0.58 0.56 0.51 0.65 0.30 0.74
Total
Responses
21 21 21 21 21 21

3. If you would be willing to be interviewed by the researcher(Cathy Creasia) regarding the above
topics please provide your name and email below. All of your responses will be strictly
confidential and used only for research. No names will be mentioned in the study. Your
participation is greatly appreciated!
Text Response

Statistic Value
Total Responses 7

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

125
APPENDIX G: SITE 2 SURVEY STATISTICAL DATA REPORT
(S2) Initial Report
Last Modified: 11/09/2013
1. Please choose the staff member title that best fits your current role/position
# Answer
Response %
1 Teacher
20 87%
2 Principal or Assistant Principal
0 0%
3 Counselor or other support staff
3 13%
Total 23 100%

Statistic Value
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.26
Variance 0.47
Standard Deviation 0.69
Total Responses 23

2. Evaluate the following statements.
# Question
None
at all
Occasionally
More
often than
not
Consistently
well
Total
Responses
Mean
1
To what extent do staff
members share in
developing, articulating and
implementing a shared
vision of learning?
0 4 8 11 23 3.30
2
To what extent do staff
members advocate, nurture,
and sustain a school culture
and instructional program
that is conducive to student
learning and professional
growth?
0 1 11 11 23 3.43
3
To what extent does
administration solicit, value
and use staff suggestions
on instructional practice?
0 6 12 5 23 2.96
4
To what extent does this
school solicit and nurture
relationships with the
community?
0 6 11 6 23 3.00
5
To what extent do you feel
this school acts with
integrity and practices
instruction in an ethical
manner?
0 2 11 10 23 3.35
6
To what extent do you feel
this school is able to react
to socio-political needs of
the community?
1 7 9 6 23 2.87

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

126
Statistic
To what extent
do staff members
share in
developing,
articulating and
implementing a
shared vision of
learning?
To what extent
do staff
members
advocate,
nurture, and
sustain a
school culture
and
instructional
program that is
conducive to
student
learning and
professional
growth?
To what extent
does
administration
solicit, value and
use staff
suggestions on
instructional
practice?
To what extent
does this
school solicit
and nurture
relationships
with the
community?
To what
extent do
you feel this
school acts
with integrity
and practices
instruction in
an ethical
manner?
To what extent
do you feel this
school is able
to react to
socio-political
needs of the
community?
Min Value 2 2 2 2 2 1
Max Value 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mean 3.30 3.43 2.96 3.00 3.35 2.87
Variance 0.58 0.35 0.50 0.55 0.42 0.75
Standard
Deviation
0.76 0.59 0.71 0.74 0.65 0.87
Total
Responses
23 23 23 23 23 23

3. If you would be willing to be interviewed by the researcher(Cathy Creasia) regarding
the above topics please provide your name and email below. All of your responses will
be strictly confidential and used only for research. No names will be mentioned in the
study. Your participation is greatly appreciated!

Statistic Value
Total Responses 8

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

127
APPENDIX H: SITE 3 SURVEY STATISTICAL DATA REPORT
HMSA (S3) Initial Report
Last Modified: 11/14/2013
1. Please choose the staff member title that best fits your current role/position
# Answer
Response %
1 Teacher
9 75%
2 Principal or Assistant Principal
2 17%
3 Counselor or other support staff
1 8%
Total 12 100%

Statistic Value
Min Value 1
Max Value 3
Mean 1.33
Variance 0.42
Standard Deviation 0.65
Total Responses 12

2. Evaluate the following statements.
# Question
None
at all
Occasionally
More
often than
not
Consistently
well
Total
Responses
Mean
1
To what extent do staff
members share in
developing, articulating
and implementing a
shared vision of learning?
0 8 1 3 12 2.58
2
To what extent do staff
members advocate,
nurture, and sustain a
school culture and
instructional program that
is conducive to student
learning and professional
growth?
0 1 6 5 12 3.33
3
To what extent does
administration solicit,
value and use staff
suggestions on
instructional practice?
0 5 3 4 12 2.92
4
To what extent does this
school solicit and nurture
relationships with the
community?
0 5 4 3 12 2.83
5
To what extent do you
feel this school acts with
integrity and practices
instruction in an ethical
manner?
0 0 5 7 12 3.58
6
To what extent do you
feel this school is able to
react to socio-political
needs of the community?
0 3 7 2 12 2.92

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL ALIGNMENT

128
Statistic
To what extent
do staff
members
share in
developing,
articulating and
implementing a
shared vision
of learning?
To what
extent do
staff
members
advocate,
nurture, and
sustain a
school
culture and
instructional
program that
is conducive
to student
learning and
professional
growth?
To what extent
does
administration
solicit, value
and use staff
suggestions on
instructional
practice?
To what
extent does
this school
solicit and
nurture
relationships
with the
community?
To what
extent do
you feel this
school acts
with integrity
and
practices
instruction in
an ethical
manner?
To what
extent do you
feel this
school is able
to react to
socio-political
needs of the
community?
Min Value 2 2 2 2 3 2
Max Value 4 4 4 4 4 4
Mean 2.58 3.33 2.92 2.83 3.58 2.92
Variance 0.81 0.42 0.81 0.70 0.27 0.45
Standard
Deviation
0.90 0.65 0.90 0.83 0.51 0.67
Total
Responses
12 12 12 12 12 12

3. If you would be willing to be interviewed by the researcher(Cathy Creasia)
regarding the above topics please provide your name and email below. All of your
responses will be strictly confidential and used only for research. No names will
be mentioned in the study. Your participation is greatly appreciated!

Statistic Value
Total Responses 4

Abstract (if available)

Abstract There are many discussions on what can best accomplish the daunting task of increasing educational outcomes for all students, closing the achievement gap is of particular urgency. The achievement gap is evidenced by the continued failure of urban schools to meet the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) benchmark. AYP is measured in such a way as to put urban schools at a disadvantage. The examination of exceptions to this circumstance, specifically three successful urban high schools, provided insight into possible explanations of this phenomenon. ❧ Within educational reform literature, teachers, curriculum and pedagogy have been discussed as possible solutions. Organizational management has debated the school organizational structure (in the form of magnet, charter etc.) and leadership as possible solutions. This study poses that the answer lies within the intersection of the two disciplines. The Educational Leadership Policy Standards (ELPS) as developed by the National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA) were used to qualify the presence of instructional leadership characteristics. The organizational structure characteristics are qualified using information from organizational theory and design as presented by Daft (2010). A review of literature regarding educational reform and organizational design theory generated the following research questions. RQ1: To what extent are ELPS demonstrated in high performing urban high schools? RQ1a: How is the demonstration of ELPS influenced by school site organizational structure in high performing urban high schools? ❧ Data from this study re‐found that NCLB exacerbates the achievement gap. Data findings also infer that, empowered teachers, relevant curriculum, and pedagogy are key factors in student achievement as measured by NCLB accountability standards. The three sites had key leadership and organizational design characteristics in common. These findings emphasize systemic inequities existing within NCLB and current reform strategies.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

An examination of teacher leadership in public schools

PDF

Embracing the intersection of giftedness and disability: examining a standalone school model for twice-exceptional learners

PDF

A case study: school-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

Organizational structures and systems in high-performing, high-poverty urban schools: the construct of race and teacher expectations as mediating factors in student achievement

PDF

The role of principal leadership in achievement beyond test scores: an examination of leadership, differentiated curriculum and high-achieving students

PDF

School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools

PDF

School culture, leadership, professional learning, and teacher practice and beliefs: A case study of schoolwide structures and systems at a high-performing high-poverty school

PDF

Culturally relevant pedagogy strategies for preservice teachers in urban classrooms

PDF

A case study of student engagement in a high performing urban continuation high school

PDF

"Thinking in the middle" what instructional approaches are employed by urban middle school teachers to effect changes in African American students' learning outcomes and performances?

PDF

Teachers in continuation high schools: attributes of new teachers and veteran teachers in urban continuation high schools

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

The relationship between ethnicity, self-efficacy, and beliefs about diversity to instructional and transformational leadership practices of urban school principals

PDF

Factors including student engagement impacting student achievement in a high performing urban high school district: a case study

PDF

Organizational alignment in charter school settings: investigation of a three-tier model for linking leadership, culture, and change toward instructional improvement

PDF

Implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high performing, high poverty urban schools

PDF

The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams

PDF

Overcoming the cultural teaching gap: an evaluative study of urban teachers’ implementation of culturally relevant instruction

PDF

The continuous failure of Continuous Improvement: the challenge of implementing Continuous Improvement in low income schools

PDF

Teacher retention in an urban, predominately Black school district: an improvement study in the Deep South

Asset Metadata

Creator Creasia, Cathy R. (author)

Core Title The dynamics of instructional leadership & organizational structure in high performing urban schools

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Teacher Leadership

Publication Date 04/29/2014

Defense Date 03/06/2014

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

Tag educational equity,instructional leadership,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational structure,Urban Education

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Pensavalle, Margo (committee chair), Turrill, Robert (committee member), Yates, Kenneth A. (committee member)

Creator Email cat122602@gmail.com,creasia@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-404669

Unique identifier UC11295884

Identifier etd-CreasiaCat-2434.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-404669 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CreasiaCat-2434.pdf

Dmrecord 404669

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Creasia, Cathy R.

Type texts

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

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA